Sugar would help it attenuate if you had subbed some sugar for base malt. But if it’s having problems attenuating, adding sugar will jsut raise the gravity and exacerbate the problem.
I don’t recall the impact on gravity, but I do know it imparted flavor. I did not care for it, haven’t done it since. Probably was the early 2000s when I tried it.
You could be right - I have only used it to bottle condition a well aged monster (Lord Fatbottom from NB), where the original yeast was just plain spent after 3 months aging in the secondary. It finished off the BW nicely, but maybe it just carbed the brew and that made the difference in the perception of the cloying-ness drop…so, I withdraw the champagne yeast suggestion for all but carbonation purposes with these big boys.
Good to know all! I will try to post back how it turns out, but with Barleywines I don’t expect that to be soon.
With proper technique a barley wine can be ready in less time than a lager. It will be fresh, but enjoyable. If you want those aged flavors, that does take time.
+1
That’s about where I would expect a good barleywine/Burton ale to end up, hopefully (and properly) with a mildly sweet finish.
I also wouldn’t even consider drinking it until it’s aged at least one year (or preferably longer)…all the more reason to brew it more often. ;D
I recommend starting the English Barleywine off with 002, then pitching a small active starter of 001 after about 75% attenuation to help it finish a little drier. This will give you the English ester profile, while also allowing the beer to finish a little drier through use of the Chico strain. The best of both worlds in one beer.
Why not just use WLP007?
I think a lot of people don’t get this. The common thought is that adding sugar dries out the beer. Thats only half right. If a certain grain bill is going to leave 10 points of unfermentable sugars, ADDING cane sugar does not SUBTRACT those 10 points. If you subtract those points from the grain bill and replace them with cane, you end up with less unfermentable sugars at the end, but still the same OG. Therefore, not the same plan as “add sugar to dry it out”
+1 - It should be phrased as “SUBSTITUTE sugar to dry it out”
+2
That too!
And to add to this, if your yeast are maxed out and you add more sugar you may not even convince the yeast to push through all that extra sugar and then you’ll end up with more sweetness rather than less.
Interesting, so what you are saying is that if I add a pound of cane sugar into a recipe of say 12# of maris otter that resulting beer will not be perceived as drier than a beer from the 12#'s alone?
not significantly. there will be slightly more alcohol and should be no perceptible change otherwise. now, if you added say 5 lbs of sugar to the 12 lb of MO you would end up with a noticably higher alcohol sensation and a very difference beer, and the FG might well be slightly lower than the 12# MO alone because alcohol is less dense than water or sugar solution.
I can’t guess what another person will perceive. I’m just saying that it will still have the same unfermented sugar. One would be (for example) a 1.060 beer that finished at 1.015 then the one with sugar added would be like 1.070 but still finishing at 1.015. If you did that same set of beer but substituted instead of adding… both OGs would be the same but the one will sugar substituted for grain woul finish much lower.
I have not seen anyone claim that you will ferment those leftover sugars by adding simple sugar. Merely that apparent attenuation will increase, which will increase the alcohol, which will increase the perception of dryness. FG without knowing OG is a very difficult means by which to assess how dry a beer might be. Apparent attenuation can give you a really good idea.
A pound of sugar in my example would/could increase the abv from say 6% to 7%, which I would say is significant(I’m a lightweight), and would create a different beer- drier for instance. Hence the use of simple sugar to help “dry out a beer”.
Am I missing something here?
i don’t perceive a 7% beer with a 1.015 FG as any drier than a 6% beer with an FG of 1.015. in fact, I find higher alcohol content to taste sweeter rather than drier. I have at home a wheat wine that started at 1.104 and finished around 1.007 because of 3 lb of simple sugar. it tastes quite dry indeed but the alcohol still provides a very nice sweetness even as it evaporates off the tongue.
what we are trying to say is that a 6% beer made with all malt and a 6% beer made with malt and table sugar will have significantly different perceived dryness/sweetness. While a 6% beer and a 7% beer can taste quite difference because of the alcohol, if the extra alcohol comes from table sugar alone the perception of sweetness will not change significantly.
Adding simple sugar to a recipe is good for
a) bumping gravity and therefore ABV with minimal flavor/body change. this is the case when you simply ADD sugar to your recipe.
b) lightening body without change in ABV. this is the case when you SUBSTITUTE sugar for some of the malt as in a belgian beer.
take a belgian blonde around 6% and compare it to an american amber at about 6%. It will seem as if the belgian blonde is much lighter and dryer. More digestible as the belgians put it. while the Amber will be quite sweet and malty in comparison.
What Mort said… that pretty much covers it.
So you are saying that alcohol does not lead to a perception of dryness?
If I make a margarita too sweet, I can dry it out by adding more tequila. No?