From a Czech grist perspective, I can’t make sense of it at all (Vienna feels out of left field). My only guess is that he’s trying to select a basemalt to go with the Munich that’s very low in diastatic power to try and keep the fermentability low despite the mash rests, so it’s focused on achieving the low fermentability result of a U Fleku-style Tmave vs. the authenticity of the grist. He also mentioned that if you can get it and are going to use a decoction, go ahead and use floor malted Weyermann Bohemian Pilsner malt that will be lower dp than other pilsner malts. (Gordon’s low OG hides the relatively low FG a little bit, I think.)
This has confused me for a while, and I figured that someone on here might actually have the background and know.
It looks like Cory Emal won gold with an only slightly modified version of Gordon’s recipe at last year’s NHC with a bigger 1.057 OG and a correspondingly higher FG vs. Gordon’s of 1.016, so I feel pretty good about my guess that the Vienna is there to drop the mash’s diastatic power to lower fermentability.
It’s just so weird to see a grist from Gordon Strong that is so outside of the tradition and then the reason for the Vienna malt isn’t given. This kinda stuff drives my OCD crazy; lol!
I think I had Cory Emal’s beer, he is in our homebrew club.
This is closer to what I do. The Weyermann Floor malted grains can be hard to find, which is a reason to use Vienna if you can’t get them. I can find the Floor Malted ones at Hop Craft Supply in MI most times.
I suspect that the version by Gordon is tending toward the traditional style of this type. I just made a Czech Dark with Weyermann Floor Malted Dark Malt with a Lovibond in the neighborhood of a darker Vienna/light Munich malt. I have messed with malts on this style quite a bit and scored pretty well on occasion in competition. My current version is hitting an FG of 1.017 - again, I am shooting for the more traditional flavor profile, rather than the drier modern versions many make.
Yep, that’s exactly what he says he’s doing.
When we say “traditional style”, we’re talking about the “old, U Fleku, higher FG/ sweeter versions”.
It’s nice to hear someone else coming to the same conclusions.
@Jeff Rankert Agreed, getting the Weyermann Bohemian ANYTHING malts is very hard right now (I tried to get CaraBohemian for my Tmavy and I couldn’t find it either).
My understanding is that Weyermann is mostly making all the “Bohem” line of malts to comply with the Regional Appellation requirements for “Czech beer” that require a certain percentage of the grist be Czech-grown and Czech-approved varieties, so I’m not super surprised that there’s not a big market for it in the US.
-I need to go through my note again, but I’d swear I heard an interview with the current U Fleku brewer where he said he used Weyermann malts because they’re so much more consistent vs. Czech brewers. Maybe that’s changed since the “Czech beer” RPI became a thing, though…
Jeff Alworth’s “Secrets of Master Brewers” has a super strange mash schedule for U Fleku with pretty short total time in the Amylase enzyme ranges that I think I might try next time. (I’m thinking that even with a decently high diastatic power Pilsner malt, that mash schedule would keep the attenuation down low enough to hit the 4.1P FG that a pro-brewer who went to Prague in the past 12 months told me that it finishes at…)
Hitting 4.1P finishing with even a 1.057 OG, I’m finding to be quite difficult and it seems to take drastic measures.
The fact that Weyermann doesn’t publish actual diastatic power specs instead of their “Enzyme Activity: medium” or “Enzyme Activity: High” doesn’t help matters, either. I’ve messaged them twice trying to see if they can share ACTUAL diastatic power specs -even typical ranges and I get “ghosted” every time I ask about specific malts’ diastatic power.
It’s weird they provide QR codes with specs for specific BAGS of malt but never publish even a statistical RANGE for diastatic power. (My only complaint with Weyermann.)