can you add packaged candi syrup directly to fermentation?

[denny]

@denny

I’d like to know where you read that because I don’t believe it’s the case.  AFAIK, Westmalle tripel (for instance) was around and using sugar well before that.

I’m almost certain that Westmalle Tripel has remained essentially unaltered (save for matters of supply for ingredients, etc.) since pre WWII

Yep.  That was my point.  As hard as it may be to believe, I was attempting to be slightly diplomatic.  Obviously, I’m not very good at it!

[system]

@denny

@denny

I’d like to know where you read that because I don’t believe it’s the case.  AFAIK, Westmalle tripel (for instance) was around and using sugar well before that.

I’m almost certain that Westmalle Tripel has remained essentially unaltered (save for matters of supply for ingredients, etc.) since pre WWII

Yep.  That was my point.  As hard as it may be to believe, I was attempting to be slightly diplomatic.  Obviously, I’m not very good at it!

Read you loud and clear. Just providing a bit of backup to the point.

[a10t2]

Pardon my asking, but why would you want to dump sugar/candy in beer? No, it’s not something we would do as we strictly adhere to the German Purity Law. Guess we are old fashioned!

500 years is but an eye blink in the history of zymurgy. Leave it to the Germans with their new-fangled ideas… :

[fredthecat]

@denny

@fredthecat

re: belgian use of sugar - i remember reading, probably common knowledge now, that based on old samples of belgian beers from the 70s they had very little if any sugar/candi sugar added, i think 5% or less.  so its not a strictly belgian “tradition” if a tradition at all

re: reinheitsgebot. that only applied to bavaria from 1516 until a time in the 20th century really

"The Bavarian order of 1516 formed the basis of rules that spread slowly throughout Germany. Bavaria insisted on its application throughout Germany as a precondition of German unification in 1871. The move encountered strong resistance from brewers outside Bavaria, and imperial law of 1873 taxed the use of other ingredients (rather than banning them) when used by Northern German brewers.[6] It was not until 1906 that the law was applied consistently across all of Germany,[6] and it was not formally referred to as Reinheitsgebot until the Weimar Republic.[20]

In 1952, the basic regulation of the Reinheitsgebot were incorporated into the West German Biersteuergesetz (Beer Taxation Law). Bavarian law remained stricter than that of the rest of the country, leading to legal conflict during the '50s and early '60s.[20] The law initially applied only to bottom-fermented (“lager”) beers, but brewers of other types of beer soon accepted the law as well. "

Considering it guarantees a certain baseline quality for my beloved pilsners/bocks/weisses etc, i do like it, but only because I can choose from the beer of so many other countries. if i had to live under it… phew, ya no thanks

I’d like to know where you read that because I don’t believe it’s the case.  AFAIK, Westmalle tripel (for instance) was around and using sugar well before that.

https://www.beeretseq.com/chimay-all-malt-or-virtually-in-1969/

Philippe Mercier - Trappist Beer Production in the Monastery
“This tells us the three breweries were essentially all-malt in 1969, with a grist of two forms of “amber malt”, up to 5% black malt or caramel malt, and up to 2% glucose. The glucose was probably used to adjust original gravity to the required level, as needed.”

[system]

@fredthecat

@denny

@fredthecat

re: belgian use of sugar - i remember reading, probably common knowledge now, that based on old samples of belgian beers from the 70s they had very little if any sugar/candi sugar added, i think 5% or less.  so its not a strictly belgian “tradition” if a tradition at all

re: reinheitsgebot. that only applied to bavaria from 1516 until a time in the 20th century really

"The Bavarian order of 1516 formed the basis of rules that spread slowly throughout Germany. Bavaria insisted on its application throughout Germany as a precondition of German unification in 1871. The move encountered strong resistance from brewers outside Bavaria, and imperial law of 1873 taxed the use of other ingredients (rather than banning them) when used by Northern German brewers.[6] It was not until 1906 that the law was applied consistently across all of Germany,[6] and it was not formally referred to as Reinheitsgebot until the Weimar Republic.[20]

In 1952, the basic regulation of the Reinheitsgebot were incorporated into the West German Biersteuergesetz (Beer Taxation Law). Bavarian law remained stricter than that of the rest of the country, leading to legal conflict during the '50s and early '60s.[20] The law initially applied only to bottom-fermented (“lager”) beers, but brewers of other types of beer soon accepted the law as well. "

Considering it guarantees a certain baseline quality for my beloved pilsners/bocks/weisses etc, i do like it, but only because I can choose from the beer of so many other countries. if i had to live under it… phew, ya no thanks

I’d like to know where you read that because I don’t believe it’s the case.  AFAIK, Westmalle tripel (for instance) was around and using sugar well before that.

Chimay: All-Malt or Virtually in 1969 – Beer Et Seq

Philippe Mercier - Trappist Beer Production in the Monastery
“This tells us the three breweries were essentially all-malt in 1969, with a grist of two forms of “amber malt”, up to 5% black malt or caramel malt, and up to 2% glucose. The glucose was probably used to adjust original gravity to the required level, as needed.”

Without reading the paper, I’d be hesitant to agree with the blog author. He seems to make a big leap from Mercier talking exclusively about Chimay being basically all-grain, to then asserting that all three of the breweries in question used no sugar.

I looked for the Wallerstien Lab publication this morning and couldn’t find it, although i’ll keep digging because it seems like an interesting read.