Vienna Lager water profile question

[The_Bishop]

This question is mostly directed at @mabrungard or @ajdelange, but feel free to chime in.

Brewing a Vienna Lager today. Using Bru'n Water spreadsheet, was wondering what profile would be most appropriate for it? I was leaning towards the 'amber balanced' profile.

Thanks for any guidance.

 

[mabrungard]

The surprising thing about the water supply in Vienna, is its seemingly high sulfate level. With about 60 ppm sulfate and 15 ppm chloride, it seems counter-intuitive that the brewers there could make a seemingly malty beer there. But that is the anachronism that is sulfate. It does not prevent you from making a malty beer. In some ways, having an adequate sulfate level helps a brewer create a malty beer that is still drinkable since that beer is more likely to have a more drying finish. In fact, Burton on Trent brewers were known for their Burton Ales, which were very malty, high gravity beers. Not the hop-focused beers that most correlate with Burton. They did use the sulfate-rich Burton waters and they did produce malty beers that were treasured...probably because they finished cleanly due to the sulfate content.

When you review the description of what a Vienna lager should taste like, an important thing should jump out. "Fairly dry finish" is right there in the flavor description and essentially parroted in the mouthfeel description. For that reason, you are likely to find that employing that elevated sulfate content that comes straight out of the Danube River, is an appropriate consideration. I suggest that the boiled Vienna profile is an appropriate guide for your water additions. Do recognize that the Danube water is fairly alkaline that far down river and even after boiling or lime softening, it would still have that modest alkalinity that will require some form of lactic acid addition to neutralize. Many breweries in Germany faced with alkaline water, employ a continuously-operating sauergut fermenter to supply them with Reinheitsgebot compliant soured wort that is added to the water.

As with any fine lager, keeping the calcium content low, is an important factor for improving yeast performance. The roughly 30 ppm Ca content of the boiled Vienna profile is appropriate, although it can be good to have 40+ ppm in the mash to help with oxalate removal.

 

[The_Bishop]

Thank you, sir. Using the 'Boiled Vienna' profile, tweaked just a touch to get to 30ppm Ca.

 

[The_Bishop]

Throwing this out there for future reference:

Bru'n Water projected mash PH: 5.40
Measured Mash PH: 5.42

I'm impressed.

 

[SEndorf]

May I resurrect this thread for a related question?
I think I read somewhere that Martin did not recommend sulfate over 20ppm on a Vienna Lager.
Using pure RO water I've managed to adjust Bru'nwater to:
Calcium 42.4
Mag 0.00
Sodium 8.0
Sulfate 20.2
Chloride 63.1
Am I on the right track? This lager poses a confusing profile.
Odd that the finishedSO4/CL ratio indicates 0.3 - Not the 'very dry' we're looking for.

 

[The_Bishop]

I used the 'boiled vienna' profile as a guideline, but did not add any bicarbonate (alkalinity) to it.

It calls for 60ppm Sulfate and 15ppm Chloride, with trace Mg and Na.

The resulting beer turned out very well.

 

[ajdelange]

Vienna is a lager and like most lagers seem better with low sulfate because of the well known adverse reaction with the finer hops varieties used with these beers. Fix recommends (in his monograph) < 25 mg/L and in no case > 50. The city of Vienna is, and always has been, very proud of its water which is derived from alpine springs. They are low in sulfate (9 - 24 mg/L for the First Spring and 1 - 9 from the Second) but even lower in chloride. Most of the calcium in their water is in the form of the bicarbonate and as the latter would clearly have to be removed before brewing at least down to the practical limit of 1 mEq/L so presumably would the former.

When I do this beer I use calcium chloride at 70 mg/L which gives me the 1 mEq/L calcium (20 mg/L) and 34 mg/L chloride. That's higher chloride than the water of Vienna so I might be tempted to use gypsum. At 70 mg/L gypsum I'd have 16 mg/L Ca but 39 mg/L sulfate which would make me nervous. So I guess I'd recommend starting with 70 mg/L CaCl2 (1.32 grams/5 gal). That has always made tasty Vienna's for me.

I should point out that I really don't like what sulfate does to the fine hops but in general I do like what chloride does to the body, mouthfeel and sweetness of beers so I will, always, err on the side of chloride. But what I like isn't important - it's what you like so I would still recommend starting with the low CaCl2 but then tasting the beer with additions of sulfate in the glass. If you think that sulfate improves it then brew it with sulfate next time.

 

[McKnuckle]

Odd that the finishedSO4/CL ratio indicates 0.3 - Not the 'very dry' we're looking for.

That's where this ratio business falls apart. The raw concentrations of both minerals are so relatively small that it doesn't matter. You could have 4 ppm SO4 and 1 ppm Cl and that would be "very dry" - but it would be meaningless.

In fact to me, the supposed dichotomy between dry/crisp/hoppy and soft/rounded/malty is a bit false. These are qualities that can complement each other, enhancing various ingredients in a complex way as the beer goes over the tongue and down the gullet. They are not necessarily opposing forces.

 

[mabrungard]

Vienna is a lager and like most lagers seem better with low sulfate because of the well known adverse reaction with the finer hops varieties used with these beers. Fix recommends (in his monograph) < 25 mg/L and in no case > 50. The city of Vienna is, and always has been, very proud of its water which is derived from alpine springs.

Interesting, but reportedly not accurate. The Dreher brewery was located near the Danube River in Vienna where they had their wells for a supply of cheap water for both brewing and malting. The Vienna lager was developed in 1840.

It was not until the 1860's that the first aqueduct was built to supply the city from an alpine spring. The second aqueduct was built in the early 1900's. While I can't say with certainty that the brewery continued to use its Danube wells after the other sources of water came into being, we can safely assume that the other water sources would have come at a higher cost. A successful businessman would probably continue with the source that brought the initial success.

The likelihood that the original Vienna lager was brewed with somewhat elevated sulfate is quite high in my observation. In addition, my experience has proven to me that modest sulfate content does not degrade the flavor or perception of fine hops. Sulfate does dry out the beer finish and that would remove the cover of malt that hides those hop flavors. Possibly that is the perception that AJ does not prefer? In any case, sulfate does not degrade hop flavor or perception, but it will change it. I'll leave the judgement of which option is better, to the beer drinker.

 

[ajdelange]

Vienna is a lager and like most lagers seem better with low sulfate because of the well known adverse reaction with the finer hops varieties used with these beers. Fix recommends (in his monograph) < 25 mg/L and in no case > 50. The city of Vienna is, and always has been, very proud of its water which is derived from alpine springs. They are low in sulfate (9 - 24 mg/L for the First Spring and 1 - 9 from the Second) but even lower in chloride. Most of the calcium in their water is in the form of the bicarbonate and as the latter would clearly have to be removed before brewing at least down to the practical limit of 1 mEq/L so presumably would the former.

Interesting, but reportedly not accurate.

So which parts of this are inaccurate?
Is Vienna not a lager?
Do lager beers not, in general, benefit from low sulfate?
Did George Fix not recommend low sulfate levels for these beers?
Are the citizens of Vienna not proud of their water?
Do they not get most of it from alpine springs?
Are they not low in sulfate?
etc.

The likelihood that the original Vienna lager was brewed with somewhat elevated sulfate is quite high in my observation.

Ah, the Reverend Bayes!

p(H1|r) = p(r|H1)p(H1)

where H1 is the hypothesis being tested and r is the observable. What is the observable here?

In addition, my experience has proven to me that modest sulfate content does not degrade the flavor or perception of fine hops. Sulfate does dry out the beer finish and that would remove the cover of malt that hides those hop flavors.

No, it only proves that for you this is the effect of sulfate.

Possibly that is the perception that AJ does not prefer?

I try to keep an open mind and it's been a while since I did any tasting so I just went and put a pinch of sodium sulfate in a Vienna style beer. It did not 'dry out' the finish and it did not 'remove the cover of malt' and it did not bring out hop flavors. What it did was turn a very nice beer into a harshly bitter one that I did not enjoy drinking (but I choked it back anyway). Note that I haven't the temerity to claim that what I experienced will be what everyman experiences but as I said in my last post, I am definitely not alone.

Fix references Terry Foster as having commented on the sort of things Martin is talking about as being true for the East Anglian hops used in beers traditionally made with water high in sulfate.

In any case, sulfate does not degrade hop flavor or perception

Certainly does for me.

I'll leave the judgement of which option is better, to the beer drinker.

I think that's best and is why I always suggest that brewers do what I did in effect this evening: brew it with low or no sulfate and then taste it with. Ok to ruin a half pint but I certainly would not have wanted to brew 3 kegs of that beer with any sulfate in it!

PS: The Bayes theorem stuff is just clowning.

 

[mabrungard]

You did catch me with not being precise enough in my selection of your quote and my dispute. It was the fact that Vienna water did not come from alpine springs at the time when the Vienna style was created and for years following. Sorry about that.

However, I appreciate your obfuscation when presented with alternative evidence! Its interesting that you chose to conduct your sulfate experiment with sodium sulfate when its well-known that elevated sodium and sulfate levels in beer create poor flavor. For those of us that typically obtain their sulfate addition from gypsum, the results can be favorable. I also need to alert readers about the concept of 'dose'. While we might add a pinch or two of a mineral salt to gallons of water or wort, adding a pinch of that salt to a glass of beer might be overdosing the beer. Trying to draw a conclusion from a flawed experiment proves very little. Warning: Hydrogen hydroxide is deadly when consumed in large quantities!

I'll reiterate my contention: sulfate at modest levels is not a detriment to even malty beer styles.

 

[ajdelange]

Trying to draw a conclusion from a flawed experiment proves very little.

It wasn't a flawed experiment. It wasn't an experiment! I was a reality check on what I well know to be true for a large population of drinkers: sulfate, be it paired with calcium, magnesium or sodium, does not do well with beers that use the noble hops varieties. I shall repeat the 'experiment' tonight with calcium sulfate.

I also need to alert readers about the concept of 'dose'. While we might add a pinch or two of a mineral salt to gallons of water or wort, adding a pinch of that salt to a glass of beer might be overdosing the beer.

I'll ask the readers to think. If I add a pinch of a sulfate salt to a glass of fine tasting beer and it becomes unpleasant, will adding half a pinch or a quarter of a pinch or an eighth of a pinch make it better?

I'll reiterate my contention: sulfate at modest levels is not a detriment to even malty beer styles.

It has nothing to do with the malt. It is the hops. If you are using the fine hops there is a good possibility you are not going to enjoy the results if there if there is even a modest amount of sulfate present. Martin seems to think that I should donate my palate to Walter Reed but I am not alone. If I don't like sulfate in these beers and George Fix didn't like it and Kunze didn't like it and Terry Foster didn't like it there is a pretty fair chance you, dear reader, won't like it. You should, therefore, IMO, act with caution as regards sulfate. If you DO turn out to like it that's fine. I'm not going to tell anyone who likes it not to use it.

 

[Gavin C]

...fascinating stuff.

...fascinating stuff also.

Once again I have stumbled upon a great thread. Learning a great deal from you both here. (As I'm sure others are too).

Thanks.

No Vienna on hand but I do have a Marzen and Pils on tap at the moment. I may just try this experiment (or whatever it should be called) with some gypsum later in the week to see what effect if any I notice.

I really like Vienna lagers so this is a topic that interests me greatly.

I think making up a small solution of Calcium Sulphate of known concentration might be a better way to approach this. Easier to add a few ml of this to a glass before pouring a beer.

 

[McKnuckle]

Just to add a related anecdote, try adding exactly FOUR of those tiny Calcium Chloride "balls" to a single glass of beer, especially a pale and/or bitter style. It will significantly round out the perception of this beer on the tongue, and is enlightening in terms of what CaCl does for the end product.

A similar experiment can be done with baking soda and sharp tasting dark beers, although the dosing is difficult since it's a fine powder. (Hence the CaCl experiment is easier to conduct)

 

[ajdelange]

I think making up a small solution of Calcium Sulphate of known concentration might be a better way to approach this. Easier to add a few ml of this to a glass before pouring a beer.

That's definitely what you want to do when doing a real quantitative experiment. For example if you are working with EKG where the sulfate does make an improvement you will eventually get to the 'too much of a good thing' point and you want to know, quantitively, where that point is.

The little round 'balls' are called 'prills'.

 

[The_Bishop]

This question certainly sparked some debate.

The keg is beginning to run a bit low, maybe it's time to re-brew with an inverse mineralization to compare it to the current incarnation, see how it compares.

For what it's worth, the current beer turned out well. I feel it's slightly under hopped but everyone who has sampled it gave it favorable reviews. It's currently being entered in a local competition, so it should be interesting to see what the feedback is.

 

[The_Bishop]

As a followup: This beer placed 3rd in a local competition and the feedback was all positive. Considering that it's my first lager, I'm very happy about that - The competition was pretty stiff.

 

[Gavin C]

As a followup: This beer placed 3rd in a local competition and the feedback was all positive. Considering that it's my first lager, I'm very happy about that - The competition was pretty stiff.

Congrats. Great result.

I've been using ever softer profiles for my malty lagers on foot of this and other similarly helpful threads.

This is one I used for a Dunkel last week. (softest so far). Hopefully it pays off.

Not sure how applicable it is to the discussion at hand being a Dunkel

 

[The_Bishop]

Thanks!

 

[MSK_Chess]

Today I brewed with slightly elevated sulphate and low calcium. I added very small amounts to get the following mash profile which is pretty close to the Vienna boiled profile in Bru'n'water. It finished just above 1050. Hopefully it will be good. The colour is amazing. Fingers crossed