BYO Blogs

It’s that time again. Time for James Spencer (host of Basic Brewing Radio) and me to announce another BYO/BBR Collaborative Experiment. This time around, we’ve got an experiment that should be of great interest to all-grain homebrewers -- how does your lautering method affect your homebrew? 

After mashing, brewers separate the sweet wort from the spent grains in a process called lautering. In homebrewing, there are many different ways of doing this. Perhaps the four most commonly used are:

James Spencer (host of Basic Brewing Radio)  and I are happy to announce the fourth BYO/BBR Collaborative Brewing Experiment. This time around, we’re asking the question, “How much difference do wort clarifying fining agents such as Irish moss and whirlfloc really make?”

Irish moss and whirlfloc are two clarifying agents that brewers add to their kettles near the end of the boil. The idea is that these fining agents will stick to potential haze-causing molecules in the hot wort, drop out of solution and be left behind when the wort is racked from the kettle. But, how well do they really work? Is one better than the other? Do they also reduce the body or certain flavors or aromas in the finished beer? Do they work equally well with all beer styles (for example, pale beers vs. dark beers)? These are some questions we hope to answer in the fourth BYO/BBR Collaborative Brewing Experiment — and, as usual, we’re hoping that some of you join James and I in performing this experiment.

To answer all these questions, we’ve designed a straightforward experiment with a few different options. The basic experiment would be to brew two beers, identical in every way except that in one you add the recommended amount of Irish moss or whirlfloc and in the other, you do not add a fining agent. (If you don’t want 10 gallons of the same beer, consider brewing two half-sized batches.) As an option, you could brew three beers, one with Irish moss, one with whirlfloc and one with no fining agent added in the kettle. Or, you could brew two batches — Irish moss vs. whirlfloc.

We’re hoping to get a number of homebrewers, brewing a  variety of different styles, to brew two beers with us and then compare them, looking for differences in clarity and in flavor. Here’s the basic experimental protocol, with the data we’d like to collect:

As my last entry outlined, we (BYO and BBR) are looking for homebrewers willing to participate in our pitching rate experiment. The deadline for getting your results to us is September 30th, so you'll need to brew your beers in the next few weeks if you want to participate.

I outlined the basics of the experiment in my last post, but James and I are adding a twist to the experiment by each using the same yeast (US-05), but brewing different beers. I'm brewing a pale ale and he's brewing a barley wine. If possible, we'd like to get at least one other pair of brewers to try the same thing with an English yeast (S-04, Nottingham, Windsor, etc.). If you're interested in brewing one of those, drop either James or me a line at  This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .

I brewed my experimental beer yesterday. I made 11 gallons of pale ale. My grain bill was 16 lbs. of 2-row pale malt, 5 lbs. Vienna malt and 1.75 lbs. crystal malt (60 °L). I bittered the beer with Summit hops and used Cascade for the late additions. The brew day went well. Here's a picture of the teig (the protein "goo") sitting on top of my mash after recirculation and some sparging.

In this blog, I’m happy to announce a collaboration between Brew Your Own, Basic Brewing Radio (www.basicbrewing.com) and homebrewers who are interested in science. We haven’t thought of a cool name for it yet, but it’s a series of experiments designed to put some basic homebrewing wisdom to the test.

For each in the series, we’ll explain the experiment on Basic Brewing Radio and in this blog. Interested homebrewers can then perform the experiment and report their results to us. (We'll be doing the experiment, too.) We’ll compile everyone’s data and present the results in the magazine and on the podcast.

James Spencer (Basic Brewing Radio) and I will choose the experiment each time around, looking for experiments that are relatively easy to do and have the potential to yield a clean, unambiguous result. (We’ll favor experiments that rely on comparing objective data -- OG or FG readings, comparisons of color, etc. -- versus highly subjective types of tasting data.) If you have an idea, please contact us and we’ll consider it.

We realize that most homebrewers don’t have a science lab in their house. Neither will most want to participate in experiments that take tons of work or tie up all their equipment. So, we’ll try to make the experiments quick and doable. As such, sometimes there will be a compromise between the best possible experimental design and our experimental design.

In real science, scientists perform quickie, exploratory experiments all the time, often to determine whether conducting the full-blown experiment will be worth it. In cases where you expect one of the experimental variables to show a big effect, a quickie experiment will often give you a usable result. (We’ll also give you science-types an explanation of how to improve on our basic experiment.)

Experiment 1
Our first experiment was suggested by Brain Glenn from Cleveland, Ohio. He wanted to test whether leaving your batch sitting on the yeast in primary for an extended amount of time caused off flavors. Many sources claim that the yeast will autolyse and give your beer rubbery/sulfury off flavors. Other homebrewers dismiss this idea.

 Below I give three quick ways to test this experiment. The first is the easiest, and should yield good results if the extra time on the yeast has a pronounced effect on the beer. The second two versions of the experiment address shortcomings in the "quicky" experiment. If you feel like participating and are willing to put in a little more effort, please give one of these a try.

One Carboy Experiment
For the easiest version of the experiment, you only need to brew one batch of beer. The style and recipe are your choice. Let the beer ferment as you normally would. Once it has finished, rack half of the beer to your bottling bucket or keg. Return the air-lock to your carboy and let the remaining half sit for two weeks on the yeast. Then package the second half of your beer. (Be sure to label which bottles contain which beer.) After a couple weeks of conditioning, take the final gravity (FG) of each beer. Also, taste them side by side. Can you tell the difference? That’s the experiment. If letting beer sit on yeast does cause a change in the beer, this experiment should demonstrate this.

See the forms at www.basicbrewing.com/experiment for more detailed instructions and what data to report to us.

Two Carboy Experiment
Ideally, in an experiment, the only difference between different trails should be the experimental variable. In our case, this would be the contact time with the yeast. But, if you look at the design of the first experiment, this isn’t exactly the case. Half of the batch gets packaged before the other, giving it more time to condition. Additionally, the first half will experience some oxygen exposure that the second won’t. With a little extra effort, we can control for these variables. All you need is an extra carboy and a little extra time.

It's been awhile since I've updated my blog, so here's a rundown on what I've been up to.

I judged a couple flights at this year's Austin ZEALOTS Homebrew Inquisition. This is my homebrew club's competition. I was on the panel for this year's special category, which was "Viagra beers." These were wood-aged beers and there were a couple that were very good. I also judged meads, and therefore got to taste the mead that ended up winning best of show.

A couple weeks later, at the annual ZEALOTs picnic, they announced the winners of the Inquisition. One of my beers won a silver medal. My winner was "Dethbier," which I entered in the Big and Boozy category. (The Inquisition is not a BJCP-sanctioned event.) Dethbier was really a bottle of BYO's 10th Anniversary Ale that I brewed back in 2005. I've still got a few bottles left and it has aged into an amazing complex beer.

A few weeks after that, I spoke at the Alamo City Cervezafest. I gave a talk on designing homebrew experiments, which reminded me of my planned continuous vs. batch sparging experiment that I haven't started yet. During the talk, I made one offhand reference to growing hops in Bastrop and most of the question and answer period revolved around growing hops in Texas. I was surprised at the number of hop growers in the room and we had a really good discussion of the challenges of growing hops in the south. We spoke about the heat, differences in day length and the need for some experimentation to be done to figure out how to grow quality hops down here. (Growing hops is no problem, getting cones that don't smell grassy is.) Luckily, a couple of the growers were interested in experimenting. (I'll probably delve into this in later blog entries, especially next year, as I had a number of ideas.)