Irish Red

[LarryBrewer]

Here are some examples of my recent brews, straight from the batch stats section under my account:

Racer 5 clone from last November - 82% apparent attenuation, mashed at 150F. OG was 1.055, FG was 1.010 with Wyeast 1272 American Ale II, fermented at 66F. Pitch Rate: 0.75 (M cells / ml / ° P)

Basic pale ale from last month - 76% attenuation, mashed at 154F, OG was 1.050, FG was 1.012, with US-05 at 62F. Pitch Rate: 0.75 (M cells / ml / ° P)

My "Snifter Grade IIPA" from December - 74% attenuation, mashed at 158F, OG was 1.074, FG was 1.019, with BRY-97 (first time using that yeast), fermented at 65F. Pitch Rate: 1.0 (M cells / ml / ° P)


It occurs to me that yeast pitch rate may be a factor in your case.
http://www.brewersfriend.com/yeast-pitc ... alculator/

 

[Foster82]

Here are the results of my side by side 24hr FFT with left over second sparge wort.

WLP001 achieved 73.5% attenuation and US-05 achieved 67% attenuation(05 is getting on the old side). As for the first FFT sample of actual wort that showed 70% attenuation after 24hrs with WLP001, now after 48hrs with the addition of US-05, attenuation is at 78%. I stop the test due to the fact my WLP001 FFT showed that this particular batch of yeast is healthy which was may concern, and I believe the WLP001 is responsible for the 78% on the original FFT. This whole experiment started when the yeast in the first test flocculated at around 18hrs.

I would have continued the test another 24hrs but my wife is running short on tolerance when in comes to yeast jars on her counter top for the past week.

Bottom line is I jumped the gun and tested my first FFT to soon, and the fermentables appear to be right were they should be.

It occurs to me that yeast pitch rate may be a factor in your case.
http://www.brewersfriend.com/yeast-pitc ... alculator/

As for the pitch rate, the calculator is showing that I pitch at .55m, which is not the pro rate but I was not sure my starter would climb out of my 1l flask (I am already looking to upgrade), so I only did 500ml with a 12 day old vial.

There are even enzymes available that will lower it more.

For the enzyme route I would only try that preboil, because enzyme are nasty little things that will not stop until the job is done (ie all sugars become fermentable) or they are denatured (Boiling). But then again if you wanted a strong dry beer. Could be a good experiment with not using any of very few bittering hops.


Is it bad that I enjoy experimenting with yeast just as much as I enjoy brewing beer?

For those that are interested, here is a great page on attenuation.
http://braukaiser.com/wiki/index.php?title=Understanding_Attenuation

 

[Foster82]

The Red is in the bottle! At this point it taste decent and looks promising. Another 3-4 weeks and I will see what I really have on my hands.

 

[Foster82]

So I just crack the first bottle of this brew (I know, why to early to know what the final product will taste like). There is not much aroma until you take the first sip, then there are strong notes of earth and pine. It is almost like you can't smell it until you take a drink, then you don't so much taste it as smell it. Initial notes fall off quickly with little to no after taste. I do plan on brewing this again with Glacier for bittering, and Fuggles for flavoring and aroma. Lastly I might back the roasted barley off a bit as the color is a little dark.

 

[TheZel66]

i've heard you should usually use chocolate malt instead of roasted barley for the dark grain. smoother.

 

[Foster82]

Well wish this brew luck! It just got mailed off today to the Ohio Brew Week competition in Athens Ohio. Should have the results by 22 July (judging is on 22 June). I will post the results when I get them

 

[Foster82]

Just got my judging sheet back. It didn't win any awards, but it did come in as acceptable. Any suggestions based on the judging sheets? I am thinking backing the roasted barley down to 4oz, and adjusting the second addition hops to .75 oz at 10 min, and flame out hops to .75 or maybe a dry hop instead of flame out (maybe both). I did miss my FG by 10 points, and it was slightly under attenuated at 72% (was going for 76-78),

Here is the link for recipe again so you don't have to go hunting for it. http://www.brewersfriend.com/homebrew/recipe/view/37141/american-red-ale

 

[Nosybear]

Where do you think the oxidized note mentioned by all three judges came from? Astringency is generally a result of sparging too hot.

 

[Foster82]

Where do you think the oxidized note mentioned by all three judges came from?

I am not quite sure, by the judging date the beer was just over 3 months old. It could have been some hot side oxidation as I have never really gave it any thought, and that brew was BIAB so there was a lot of pouring the running's from one pot to another. Other than that I believe my process was fairly decent, and I don't use a secondary. Maybe some oxygen absorbing caps would be in order from my beer that gets sent off to competition.

All in all I was fairly pleased considering it was my 1st attempt at a recipe I built from scratch and the 1st brew of said recipe.

 

[Nosybear]

The scores were solid and I didn't see anything too damning in the comments. "Astringency" seems to be beer judge speak for there's something I don't like but I can't say what it is. One judge didn't mention it at all. The biggest thing I can see is it was off style - hop-forward rather than malt-forward, as one would expect. My advice: Take a look at the process and try to figure out where oxidation came in, check the sparge temperature (never more than 170°) and, once you're satisfied there were no flaws in the process, tweak the recipe more toward the style, if you're going to compete with it. If you're going to drink it and like it as it is, screw the judges and enjoy.