The Diminutive Belgian Golden Strong

With Thanksgiving around the corner and the fact that we will have plenty of guests visiting come Turkey day, this weekend I broke out the brew kettle so I could be ready with fresh beer on tap. In searching for what beer to brew, I kept coming back to one of my favorite recipes – a Belgian Golden Strong (BGS) which has won me several awards. However, keeping everyone’s cup full of a 9% ABV beer is wanting for trouble. So what about trying to shrink the recipe down for a more sessionable Belgian Pale Ale (BPA)?  That could prove to be an entertaining experiment and (hopefully) a good beer to boot. 

Using Tom’s two prior posts on making big beers smaller as reference, I went about modifying the recipe for my BGS into a BPA. If I could get the similar flavor profile and dry finish, the end result would be excellent. I was fortunate in that the recipe is fairly simple and straight forward. Tom had mentioned his trouble with modifying our Wheat Wine Braggot recipe, which had a complex list of ingredients (multiple wheat malts, two types of honey, etc). For the BGS, there were only three ingredients which I am hoping will simplify the scaling process. 

For the BPA malt bill, I did not change the amount of either specialty grains (Wheat, Melanoiden) from the original BGS recipe.  Only the base malt was modified.  Additionally, the BGS calles for 2 lbs of sugar to be added, which was dropped.  Lastly, I dropped the number of IBU's a bit to make sure the bitterness stayed in balance.

The brew day went off well with the only trouble being the gusty winds that knocked over everything except the brew kettle. Reflecting back after the brew day, there were to modifications to the recipe that I am conflicted on. The first was that the local homebrew shop did not have the yeast I wanted (WLP570), so I had to take a substitution (WLP500). Secondly, I kept going back and forth with whether to leave the beer color the golden hue that the BGS would have been, or to modify it so that it was within the color ranges of the BJCP guidelines (which makes it more of an amber beer). I’m still gritting my teeth about it, but I did add 2 oz of Weyerman’s Carafa Special II to darken the SRM color.  The Carafa should add minimal flavor contributions, so I'm hoping the only effect is on the appearance.

While the beer is not an exact translation of my favored recipe, I did enjoy the recipe modification exercise and I’ve got a beer bubbling away in the fermentor to look forward to. Below is the recipe I ended up brewing – I’ll be sure to report back on how it turned out in a future post.

Belgian Not-so-Golden, Not-so-Strong Ale

Recipe Specifics
-----------------
Batch Size (Gal): 5.5
Total Grain (Lbs): 11.13
OG: 1.050
FG: ?
SRM: 9.2
IBU: 24.6 (Rager)
ABV: 5% (target)
Brewhouse Efficiency: 73%
Wort Boil Time: 90 Minutes

Grain/Extract/Sugar:
---------------------
10.0 lbs German Pilsner Malt
0.50 lbs Melanoiden Malt
0.50 lbs White Wheat Malt
2.0 oz Carafa Special II Malt

Hops
------
All hops are pellet hops
1.1 oz Sterling (6% AA) at 60 minutes

Yeast
-------
WLP500 - Trappist Ale Yeast (2L starter)

Mash Schedule
----------------
60 min at 152° F

Notes
--------
Brewed on 11/12/2011 by myself.

After the boil was complete, chilling was accomplished with an immersion chiller.  Being a little lazy on brew day, I let the wort chill for 2-3 hours before racking it into the fermentor.

Aeration was accomplished via an aquarium pump and diffusion stone, run for 30 minutes.

Aerated wort was placed in the fermentation chamber at around 60° F.  The beer was allowed to free rise up to 67° F, where the temp controller kicked in to maintain a 67° C fermentation temp.

Fermentation activity kicked off within 24 hours of pitching.

Slainte!

-JW


"It is not 'just beer', it is a noble and ancient beverage which, like wine, food, and television advertising, can be extraorinarily good or unmercifully bad."
-Stephan Beaumont

Does Glassware Change Our Perception of Beer?

Basic Brewing Radio (BBR), a podcast I have listened to for more than four years, and Brew Your Own Magazine (BYO), a publication I have read for just as long, have joined forces to conduct homebrewing experiments.  The concept is that homebrewing culture supports a fair number of theories that are spread through the community by word of mouth.  Some of these theories are based on fact, at least partially, while others are better classified as "old wives tales."  Using the large audiences between their media outlets, BBR and BYO decided to organize experiments to prove, or disprove, some of the theories.  While the size of their data sets might not be statically accurate to the standard of academic journals, the trends they present are interesting and worth noting.  The results of each experiment are published in BYO and discussed on a BBR podcast.

The seventh BBR-BYO Collaborative Experiment seeks to answer the question "Do different styles of glassware really affect your perceptions of the beer that is in them?"  Chris Colby, the editor of BYO, developed an experimental method that includes a surprising number of data points for the experiment.  The experiment seeks to collect data on each glass used (volume, diameter, etc.), perceptions of the beer in each glass, and even a method to count the bubbles.

I received a Chimay chalice glass as part of a beer sampler I got for Christmas a number of years ago.  So, I elected to purchase a bottle of Chimay Cinq Cents (a tripel) to try it in the glass designed to go with the beer.  To contrast the chalice, I selected the most different glass I own, a tall and thin pilsner glass.  My wife and I sat down tonight to complete the experiment and our results are listed below.

Chimay Chalice
Volume: 400 mL
Diameter: 2.75"
Head Height: 0.25"
Pour Time: 17 seconds
Beer Volume Poured: 350 mL
Bubble Count: 350

Pilsner Glass
Volume: 500 mL
Diameter: 3.5"
Head Height: 2"
Pour Time: 18 seconds
Beer Volume Poured: ~350 mL (best estimate)
Bubble Count: 225

Our general impressions were that the chalice glass presented the best aroma, which was a light citrus character overlayed by a rich yeasty character.  This could well be due to the wider beer surface that the chalice presented to our noses, compounded by the thicker pilsner glass head.  The pilsner glass preserved the fine-bubbled beer head throughout the entire drinking session, while the courser chalice head dissipated within a few minutes.  The beer color was slightly darker in the chalice glass, which makes sense given the thicker fluid column.  The other notable difference was mouthfeel, which grew more distinct as the beer warmed.  The pilsner glass developed a smooth rich mouthfeel that became almost silky at the end, while the chalice glass presented a courser more abrupt mouthfeel.  In the end, both of us preferred the pilsner glass presentation over the chalice that was designed to serve the beer.

It was surprising how the different glasses impacted the beer, with everything except flavor differing between the two.  I recommend you give this experiment, one of the quickest BBR-BYO Collaborative Experiments so far, a try and send your data along.  The deadline for accepting experiment data is May 15, 2011.  It will be interesting to see if this craft brewing/homebrewing theory is validated by our data.

Cheers,

TW

Midnight Mini-Wheats

Back in April, I posted an article about how to make a big beer smaller, but still keep the flavor.  The basic idea was to take a high alcohol beer recipe, in this case, our Midnight Wheat - Wheat Wine Braggot, and make a version of it that was lower in alcohol.  The base recipe is one of my favorite beers that Jeff and I have done together, but at 11% alcohol by volume (ABV), it is not a daily drinker.  Using some techniques I described in the previous article, I hoped to make a session beer with much of the same flavor as the original.  The recipe, entitled Midnight Mini-Wheats, can be found at the bottom of this post.

My friend, John, my wife, and I recently had an opportunity to taste the two beers side-by-side (wheat wine braggot is on the left in the picture).  This is the best way to compare similar beers, as it is easier to compare subtle differences when the flavor and aromas are so fresh in your mind.

Midnight Wheat - Wheat Wine Braggot (10.8% ABV)
Appearance:  The braggot pours extremely clear deep amber color, with a thin white head.  The carbonation bubbles are very fine, almost like champagne.

Aroma:  The braggot has a complex sugar aroma that is very apparent.  It contains hints of brown sugar, toffee, caramel, and even a bit of molasses.  The sugar character is also mixed with the sweet aroma of alcohol.

Flavor:  The braggot tastes much as it smells, with a layered complex sugar character.  Molasses is the key dominant character, and reminded the tasters of shoofly pie.  There were also elements of brown sugar and caramel in the flavor.  The tasters compared the braggot to a commercial beer, Lagunitas Brewing Company's Brown Shugga.

Midnight Mini-Wheats - American Wheat (3.8% ABV)
Appearance:  The beer pours a hazy deep amber color, with a thin white head.  The carbonation appears lower than the braggot.  The tasters suspect that the beer has not aged as long as the braggot and has not had a chance to drop out some of the malt fines, which makes it cloudy.

Aroma:  The beer is very neutral in smell, with a very faint malt aroma, but little else.  The tasters noted the lower carbonation level between the two recipes, which could prevent as much aroma development.  Additionally, braggot's higher alcohol may well have driven its complex and layered aroma.

Flavor:  The beer has a distinctive grainy character, much like one can get from straight pilsner malt.  The beer also has a slight bitter and sour edge to it, which was even more noticeable when the beer was younger and less carbonated.  The beer lacks any of the sugar complexity that makes the wheat wine braggot so interesting.  On flavor alone, they are very different beers and, as my wife said, the drinker would likely have no idea they were related unless told so.


In conclusion, the experiment to get the interesting flavors of the wheat wine braggot into a session beer failed.  While the Midnight Mini-Wheats is a good beer, it was definitely found lacking.  However, I am going to take some of the lessons I learned here and try again in the future.  For one thing, I will only try to get down to 6% ABV, as the braggot's alcohol contribution is so important.  The braggot also had a much larger honey character, so I will try to boost the honey percentage in the next batch, while increasing mash temperature to keep a solid body to the beer.  The next batch will also receive a higher level of carbonation.

Cheers,

TW

-------------------

Midnight Mini-Wheats

Recipe Specifics

-------------------

Batch Size (Gal): 5.0

Total Fermentables (Lbs): 8.5

OG: 1.039

FG: 1.010

SRM: 11

IBU: 29 (Rager)

ABV: 3.8%

Wort Boil Time: 60 Minutes

Grain/Extract/Sugar

---------------------

3.25 lbs Maris Otter Malt

2.25 lbs White Wheat Malt

0.75 lbs Torrified Wheat

0.90 lbs Caramel Wheat Malt (46 L)

0.33 lbs Caramunich Malt (56 L)

1.00 lbs Honey

0.50 lbs Rice Hulls

Hops

-----

0.75 oz Perle Pellet Hops (7.7% AA) at 60 minutes

0.75 oz Williamette Pellet Hops (5.6% AA) at 15 minutes

0.75 oz Hallertau Pellet Hops (5.0% AA) at 15 minutes

Extras

-------

1.0 Tab Whirlfloc at 15 minutes

1.0 gram Chalk in mash

1.0 gram Calcium Chloride in mash

2.0 grams Baking Soda in mash

1.0 gram Chalk in boil

1.0 gram Calcium Chloride in boil

32 drops of Foam Control in the boil

Yeast

-----

11 grams – Safale US05, Dry Yeast

Mash Schedule

-------------

60 min at 156°F