Beer Aging Question

[Village_Taphouse]

@erockrph

@Village_Taphouse

@ynotbrusum

The other thing to include in the analysis here is the bias toward oxidation, meaning, many folks have oxidized examples of European beers that become the “standard” for replication of a style or expected commercial example.  For those who have traveled to Europe - you probably had fresh examples and may have noticed a difference between fresh from the tap in Europe and staled by the trip to the US.  I have never been there, but I have had fresh examples brought back to me by visitors over there…the difference is often very noticeable between fresh brews and those that “survived” the ocean freighter trip.

Oxidation may present in many ways, including a simple sweetness that exceeds expectations.

This is very true.  I have had fresh draft beer in Vienna, Brataslava, Prague, Munich and Frankfurt.  They do their best to get the stuff over to us in as good of shape as possible but they’re playing by the same rules we are.  The fresh draft beer you get over there is insane and it’s one of the reasons why there has been a low-oxygen push in homebrewing (I’m not attempting to support the low-oxygen brewers any more than I’m trying to advocate for the beer that is brewed that way).  Some beers have a character to them that could be from oxidation and we associate that flavor with that beer.  Pilsner Urquell over there is delicious but over here for some reason it DOES seem oxidized but also I pick up quite a bit of diacetyl in both cans and bottles of it… cans are worse.

Tangent - So does PU not have diacetyl when tasted fresh in Europe? I’ve always heard that a bit of diacetyl is allowable, if not desirable (yuck), in a Bo Pils. Is this yet another example of something that is being done solely because we get bad examples of the style over here?

Honestly, I’m not sure.  When I was younger and got PU in green bottles I don’t ever remember getting diacetyl but at that time I may not have known what diacetyl was.  I have had it here in the US in cans, bottles and on draft.  I remember being at the race track once with my wife and I got a PU on draft.  A little later she came over to me and said, “Hey, I saw Pilsner Urquell on draft over at the bar!” and I gave her my cup and she put it up to her nose and winced.  It was loaded with diacetyl.  But when we had it all over Europe you did not taste that.  Not a hint.  I found some 16oz cans here in Chicago (cool artwork from old PU logos throughout the years) and those cans were also loaded with diacetyl.  I have some brown bottles of PU where the diacetyl is present but lower.  Also, we drank other Czech beers when we where there including Gambrinus, Staropramen, Bernard, Budvar and a small local brewery called Pivovar U Tri Ruzi (three roses?) and NONE of those beers exhibited any diacetyl.  We also went to U Fleku for the dark lager… no diacetyl.

[denny]

How does bottle conditioned beer fit into the equation? Just finished off last years Xmas beer that was over a year old. It was a dry hopped American strong ale. I was pleasantly surprised with how well it held up.

But it was different that it started out, wasn’t it?  That’s what happens with me.  Still good, but in a different way due to oxidation.  I once won a comp with a 5 year old barleywine , and the judge’s comment was “oxidation has been kind to this beer”.  I agree.  The beer was better after 5 years of oxidation.  So, there’s a difference between a beer that’s improved by oxidation and one that isn’t,  but it still changes.

[goschman (Iliff Ave)]

@denny

How does bottle conditioned beer fit into the equation? Just finished off last years Xmas beer that was over a year old. It was a dry hopped American strong ale. I was pleasantly surprised with how well it held up.

But it was different that it started out, wasn’t it?  That’s what happens with me.  Still good, but in a different way due to oxidation.  I once won a comp with a 5 year old barleywine , and the judge’s comment was “oxidation has been kind to this beer”.  I agree.  The beer was better after 5 years of oxidation.  So, there’s a difference between a beer that’s improved by oxidation and one that isn’t,  but it still changes.

To me the change was minimal throughout the year but that could be in my head.

My main question was regarding bottle conditioned beers vs not.

[TXFlyGuy (Bel Air Brewing)]

@erockrph

@Village_Taphouse

@ynotbrusum

The other thing to include in the analysis here is the bias toward oxidation, meaning, many folks have oxidized examples of European beers that become the “standard” for replication of a style or expected commercial example.  For those who have traveled to Europe - you probably had fresh examples and may have noticed a difference between fresh from the tap in Europe and staled by the trip to the US.  I have never been there, but I have had fresh examples brought back to me by visitors over there…the difference is often very noticeable between fresh brews and those that “survived” the ocean freighter trip.

Oxidation may present in many ways, including a simple sweetness that exceeds expectations.

This is very true.  I have had fresh draft beer in Vienna, Brataslava, Prague, Munich and Frankfurt.  They do their best to get the stuff over to us in as good of shape as possible but they’re playing by the same rules we are.  The fresh draft beer you get over there is insane and it’s one of the reasons why there has been a low-oxygen push in homebrewing (I’m not attempting to support the low-oxygen brewers any more than I’m trying to advocate for the beer that is brewed that way).  Some beers have a character to them that could be from oxidation and we associate that flavor with that beer.  Pilsner Urquell over there is delicious but over here for some reason it DOES seem oxidized but also I pick up quite a bit of diacetyl in both cans and bottles of it… cans are worse.

Tangent - So does PU not have diacetyl when tasted fresh in Europe? I’ve always heard that a bit of diacetyl is allowable, if not desirable (yuck), in a Bo Pils. Is this yet another example of something that is being done solely because we get bad examples of the style over here?

I have had Pils Urquell on tap at the brewery in Pilzen, Czech Republic. No diacetyl. None.

[TXFlyGuy (Bel Air Brewing)]

@denny

How does bottle conditioned beer fit into the equation? Just finished off last years Xmas beer that was over a year old. It was a dry hopped American strong ale. I was pleasantly surprised with how well it held up.

But it was different that it started out, wasn’t it?  That’s what happens with me.  Still good, but in a different way due to oxidation.  I once won a comp with a 5 year old barleywine , and the judge’s comment was “oxidation has been kind to this beer”.  I agree.  The beer was better after 5 years of oxidation.  So, there’s a difference between a beer that’s improved by oxidation and one that isn’t,  but it still changes.

To me the change was minimal throughout the year but that could be in my head.

My main question was regarding bottle conditioned beers vs not.

To “join the crowd”, makes no difference. O2 is going to get in regardless of conditioning method.

[TXFlyGuy (Bel Air Brewing)]

@Village_Taphouse

Sounds like you have convinced yourself regardless of the responses. I do that a lot myself.

Sometimes you just have to see for yourself.  I’m guilty too.

No. As we get within a day or two of dropping off the entries, a bottle will be sampled and compared to the same beer on draft.

If there is any evidence of O2 affecting / degrading the overall flavor, the beer will be re-bottled with fresh draft.

Time will tell.

[goschman (Iliff Ave)]

@TXFlyGuy

@denny

How does bottle conditioned beer fit into the equation? Just finished off last years Xmas beer that was over a year old. It was a dry hopped American strong ale. I was pleasantly surprised with how well it held up.

But it was different that it started out, wasn’t it?  That’s what happens with me.  Still good, but in a different way due to oxidation.  I once won a comp with a 5 year old barleywine , and the judge’s comment was “oxidation has been kind to this beer”.  I agree.  The beer was better after 5 years of oxidation.  So, there’s a difference between a beer that’s improved by oxidation and one that isn’t,  but it still changes.

To me the change was minimal throughout the year but that could be in my head.

My main question was regarding bottle conditioned beers vs not.

To “join the crowd”, makes no difference. O2 is going to get in regardless of conditioning method.

To what extent is that true? I’m looking for comparisons between different methods not an all or nothing. I guess I made an assumption that bottle conditioned beer would be more stable due to refermentation scrubbing out O2. I can start a separate thread.

[goschman (Iliff Ave)]

@TXFlyGuy

@Village_Taphouse

Sounds like you have convinced yourself regardless of the responses. I do that a lot myself.

Sometimes you just have to see for yourself.  I’m guilty too.

No. As we get within a day or two of dropping off the entries, a bottle will be sampled and compared to the same beer on draft.

If there is any evidence of O2 affecting / degrading the overall flavor, the beer will be re-bottled with fresh draft.

Time will tell.

Definitely. I guess I don’t understand why you wouldn’t just bottle a couple of days before if that’s something you plan to do if there’s an issue. Keep us posted!

[TXFlyGuy (Bel Air Brewing)]

@TXFlyGuy

@denny

How does bottle conditioned beer fit into the equation? Just finished off last years Xmas beer that was over a year old. It was a dry hopped American strong ale. I was pleasantly surprised with how well it held up.

But it was different that it started out, wasn’t it?  That’s what happens with me.  Still good, but in a different way due to oxidation.  I once won a comp with a 5 year old barleywine , and the judge’s comment was “oxidation has been kind to this beer”.  I agree.  The beer was better after 5 years of oxidation.  So, there’s a difference between a beer that’s improved by oxidation and one that isn’t,  but it still changes.

To me the change was minimal throughout the year but that could be in my head.

My main question was regarding bottle conditioned beers vs not.

To “join the crowd”, makes no difference. O2 is going to get in regardless of conditioning method.

To what extent is that true? I’m looking for comparisons between different methods not an all or nothing.

Yes, I understand. But, it is beer. Conditioned in a keg, or bottle conditioned. The laws of physics do not care which method you employ. Thus O2 will migrate through the cap, into the bottle and into your beer. And over a month or 6 weeks, have an impact (mostly negative) on the beer flavor. This is one reason we never bottle beer, except for a competition where we have no choice.

Does a bottle conditioned beer have a higher CO2 PSI? Or is the bottle pressure the same for all beers, bottle conditioned or otherwise?

[goschman (Iliff Ave)]

@TXFlyGuy

@TXFlyGuy

@denny

How does bottle conditioned beer fit into the equation? Just finished off last years Xmas beer that was over a year old. It was a dry hopped American strong ale. I was pleasantly surprised with how well it held up.

But it was different that it started out, wasn’t it?  That’s what happens with me.  Still good, but in a different way due to oxidation.  I once won a comp with a 5 year old barleywine , and the judge’s comment was “oxidation has been kind to this beer”.  I agree.  The beer was better after 5 years of oxidation.  So, there’s a difference between a beer that’s improved by oxidation and one that isn’t,  but it still changes.

To me the change was minimal throughout the year but that could be in my head.

My main question was regarding bottle conditioned beers vs not.

To “join the crowd”, makes no difference. O2 is going to get in regardless of conditioning method.

To what extent is that true? I’m looking for comparisons between different methods not an all or nothing.

Yes, I understand. But, it is beer. Conditioned in a keg, or bottle conditioned. The laws of physics do not care which method you employ. Thus O2 will migrate through the cap, into the bottle and into your beer. And over a month or 6 weeks, have an impact (mostly negative) on the beer flavor. This is one reason we never bottle beer, except for a competition where we have no choice.

Does a bottle conditioned beer have a higher CO2 PSI? Or is the bottle pressure the same for all beers, bottle conditioned or otherwise?

I guess I made an assumption that bottle conditioned beer would be more stable due to refermentation scrubbing out O2. I can start a separate thread to others takes.

[TXFlyGuy (Bel Air Brewing)]

@TXFlyGuy

@Village_Taphouse

Sounds like you have convinced yourself regardless of the responses. I do that a lot myself.

Sometimes you just have to see for yourself.  I’m guilty too.

No. As we get within a day or two of dropping off the entries, a bottle will be sampled and compared to the same beer on draft.

If there is any evidence of O2 affecting / degrading the overall flavor, the beer will be re-bottled with fresh draft.

Time will tell.

Definitely. I guess I don’t understand why you wouldn’t just bottle a couple of days before if that’s something you plan to do if there’s an issue. Keep us posted!

Yes, will do. I just happened to have bottles, and have a new beer gun, so wanted to experiment with it. Good thing, as the first go around was a disaster!

Two sets of three beers bottled (6 bottles) already. I’ll have another entry, maybe two, that will be bottled near entry time.

[TXFlyGuy (Bel Air Brewing)]

@TXFlyGuy

@TXFlyGuy

@denny

How does bottle conditioned beer fit into the equation? Just finished off last years Xmas beer that was over a year old. It was a dry hopped American strong ale. I was pleasantly surprised with how well it held up.

But it was different that it started out, wasn’t it?  That’s what happens with me.  Still good, but in a different way due to oxidation.  I once won a comp with a 5 year old barleywine , and the judge’s comment was “oxidation has been kind to this beer”.  I agree.  The beer was better after 5 years of oxidation.  So, there’s a difference between a beer that’s improved by oxidation and one that isn’t,  but it still changes.

To me the change was minimal throughout the year but that could be in my head.

My main question was regarding bottle conditioned beers vs not.

To “join the crowd”, makes no difference. O2 is going to get in regardless of conditioning method.

To what extent is that true? I’m looking for comparisons between different methods not an all or nothing.

Yes, I understand. But, it is beer. Conditioned in a keg, or bottle conditioned. The laws of physics do not care which method you employ. Thus O2 will migrate through the cap, into the bottle and into your beer. And over a month or 6 weeks, have an impact (mostly negative) on the beer flavor. This is one reason we never bottle beer, except for a competition where we have no choice.

Does a bottle conditioned beer have a higher CO2 PSI? Or is the bottle pressure the same for all beers, bottle conditioned or otherwise?

I guess I made an assumption that bottle conditioned beer would be more stable due to refermentation scrubbing out O2. I can start a separate thread.

Maybe so. But at some point the yeast is done. And that is when the pesky O2 will continue it’s dirty work.

[goschman (Iliff Ave)]

Yes. That’s a given.

[Village_Taphouse]

If a beer was bottled with a beer gun or straight from a tap, etc. I think that is very different from a beer bottle conditioning and carbing in the bottle using a priming solution, etc.  I have no data but I’m sure there is some data somewhere.  The live yeast in the bottle combined with the priming solution should help to continuously scrub/metabolize some amount of that O2 until it no longer needs it… and at that point the bottle of beer would be subject to the same thing as the bottle filled straight from the tap.  So maybe you buy yourself a short amount of time with a bottle-conditioned beer?

[erockrph]

@TXFlyGuy

@TXFlyGuy

@denny

How does bottle conditioned beer fit into the equation? Just finished off last years Xmas beer that was over a year old. It was a dry hopped American strong ale. I was pleasantly surprised with how well it held up.

But it was different that it started out, wasn’t it?  That’s what happens with me.  Still good, but in a different way due to oxidation.  I once won a comp with a 5 year old barleywine , and the judge’s comment was “oxidation has been kind to this beer”.  I agree.  The beer was better after 5 years of oxidation.  So, there’s a difference between a beer that’s improved by oxidation and one that isn’t,  but it still changes.

To me the change was minimal throughout the year but that could be in my head.

My main question was regarding bottle conditioned beers vs not.

To “join the crowd”, makes no difference. O2 is going to get in regardless of conditioning method.

To what extent is that true? I’m looking for comparisons between different methods not an all or nothing.

Yes, I understand. But, it is beer. Conditioned in a keg, or bottle conditioned. The laws of physics do not care which method you employ. Thus O2 will migrate through the cap, into the bottle and into your beer. And over a month or 6 weeks, have an impact (mostly negative) on the beer flavor. This is one reason we never bottle beer, except for a competition where we have no choice.

Does a bottle conditioned beer have a higher CO2 PSI? Or is the bottle pressure the same for all beers, bottle conditioned or otherwise?

The carbonation level would vary based on the amount of priming sugar used, but it would still typically be the same ranges as force-carbonated beers. And none of this would have any bearing on O2 ingress (partial pressures, yada yada)

[denny]

@denny

How does bottle conditioned beer fit into the equation? Just finished off last years Xmas beer that was over a year old. It was a dry hopped American strong ale. I was pleasantly surprised with how well it held up.

But it was different that it started out, wasn’t it?  That’s what happens with me.  Still good, but in a different way due to oxidation.  I once won a comp with a 5 year old barleywine , and the judge’s comment was “oxidation has been kind to this beer”.  I agree.  The beer was better after 5 years of oxidation.  So, there’s a difference between a beer that’s improved by oxidation and one that isn’t,  but it still changes.

To me the change was minimal throughout the year but that could be in my head.

My main question was regarding bottle conditioned beers vs not.

See, that’s what we’re up against when comparing any aged beer to fresh, whether ours or the age old argument of “is this year’s Celebration as good as last year’s?”  There’s really no way to know. All you have is your memory or year old beer to compare to.

[goschman (Iliff Ave)]

@denny

@denny

How does bottle conditioned beer fit into the equation? Just finished off last years Xmas beer that was over a year old. It was a dry hopped American strong ale. I was pleasantly surprised with how well it held up.

But it was different that it started out, wasn’t it?  That’s what happens with me.  Still good, but in a different way due to oxidation.  I once won a comp with a 5 year old barleywine , and the judge’s comment was “oxidation has been kind to this beer”.  I agree.  The beer was better after 5 years of oxidation.  So, there’s a difference between a beer that’s improved by oxidation and one that isn’t,  but it still changes.

To me the change was minimal throughout the year but that could be in my head.

My main question was regarding bottle conditioned beers vs not.

See, that’s what we’re up against when comparing any aged beer to fresh, whether ours or the age old argument of “is this year’s Celebration as good as last year’s?”  There’s really no way to know. All you have is your memory or year old beer to compare to.

I’m not trying to argue that the beer didn’t change. All I said was that was surprised how well it held up over a year in the bottle. That’s it.

[BrewBama (Dwain)]

@TXFlyGuy

@Village_Taphouse

Sounds like you have convinced yourself regardless of the responses. I do that a lot myself.

Sometimes you just have to see for yourself.  I’m guilty too.

No. As we get within a day or two of dropping off the entries, a bottle will be sampled and compared to the same beer on draft.

If there is any evidence of O2 affecting / degrading the overall flavor, the beer will be re-bottled with fresh draft.

Time will tell.

I recommend you bottle one or two more than than you’ll send in. Set it aside without refrigeration. Then, if you know the date of the judging you can taste the beer yourself on that same day to see what the judges are getting.

[Village_Taphouse]

@BrewBama

I recommend you bottle one or two more than than you’ll send in. Set it aside without refrigeration. Then, if you know the date of the judging you can taste the beer yourself on that same day to see what the judges are getting.

Oh, that’s good.

[TXFlyGuy (Bel Air Brewing)]

@BrewBama

@TXFlyGuy

@Village_Taphouse

Sounds like you have convinced yourself regardless of the responses. I do that a lot myself.

Sometimes you just have to see for yourself.  I’m guilty too.

No. As we get within a day or two of dropping off the entries, a bottle will be sampled and compared to the same beer on draft.

If there is any evidence of O2 affecting / degrading the overall flavor, the beer will be re-bottled with fresh draft.

Time will tell.

I recommend you bottle one or two more than than you’ll send in. Set it aside without refrigeration. Then, if you know the date of the judging you can taste the beer yourself on that same day to see what the judges are getting.

Great idea! I will do that!
Thanks.