Just a thought to spur conversation: Lately (and in the past), I’ve seen an aversion to late hop additions in a tip of the hat to tradition or historical accuracy.
I’ve been using 1/3 at 60 and 2/3 working backwards from 5,10,15,… until I get the estimated IBU(s) I’m looking for.
Lately, I’ve even starting at 5 min with certain styles and working backwards (10,15,…) until I hit the estimated IBU(s) I’m looking for.
My thought is preservation of flavor and aroma while adding the IBU(s).
I guess my question is what do you do when you’re designing your recipes and in particular your hop schedule?
Are (estimated) IBU(s), IBU(s) regardless of when they’re added?
Unlike some, I believe in the IBU, at least as estimated by the Tinseth equation.
Keep in mind that not all beer styles need to taste particularly hoppy. For these beers I use a single addition at beginning of the boil, old-school.
For beer where I don’t mind some hop flavor, I may design a hop charge anywhere in the last 2-15 minutes to get the IBUs I want while trying to keep hop amounts rounded to the nearest 0.25 oz or whatever. This could have a traditional bittering hop addition as well, but optional.
For APA or IPA, the key I think is to add basically all the hops in the last few minutes or in whirlpool after the boil. I find whirlpool additions to give about the same IBUs as if they had been boiled for half as long. Typically would aim for maybe 50 to 90 IBUs total, depending on desires for bitterness but this is totally up to the brewer of course. I am sure there are tasty hoppy 20 IBU beers out there and that’s cool too.
So obviously there is no one right way to do hop additions. Do what you like, it’s all good.
Most of my beers get FWH only. Not just to be true to the authentic methods used in the classic German and occasionally British styles I brew (I assume that homebrewers may need to use different means to replicate the ends achieved on professional systems,) but because it works best for me in terms of full, balanced, hop character, even if that’s counterintuitive to some. I’ve been considering the idea of a small, I mean small, 15 minute addition again (possible homebrew adaptation to replicate commercial results, worth exploring.) But right now I’m drinking a beer where, for the sake of scientific comparison, I added 1/3 of the hops at 15 minutes. Compared to the previous couple of otherwise similar batches with FWH only, this beer has more perceived bitterness but far less flavor and aroma than the FWH only beers. And a far less elegant, balanced, and integrated-with-the-whole-beer sort of hop character. So I learned what I wanted to with this experiment, I’ll probably stick to (mostly at least) FWH as experience has taught me. (And this is still a beer I’ll drink, I’ll just try to drain the keg as quickly as possible and move on. [emoji6] )
I guess I should edit the above by striking thru 60 and replacing with FWH because that’s usually what I consider ’60’.
…and I guess I should say I am drinking what turned out to be pretty good pint of ‘Americanized’ Schwarzbier (base + med crystal + choc) that I used FWH and 30 min addition. (Man, it’s a dangerously easy drinker.)
But the MyBock on deck has a blasphemous 50+% addition (by weight) of 10 min Saaz. …and it’s tasty!
I just find myself looking at 5, 10, and 15 min additions more and more.
Wouldn’t it be cool if we could figure out what variables, that we probably ignore thinking they’re irrelevant, give different brewers different results with what looks like the same thing… or is anything other than finding what actually works for us just a distraction?
Mostly lagers here, so bear that in mind… I add at FWH and flameout, rarely whirlpooling.
For most ales, it’s FWH, 10 or 15 min addition and 0.
I have to be diligent when I alter the schedule and more than once I’ve missed the late boil add and just went with the knockout addition…I will mess with type and amount from time to time.
For IPA and APA I usually do FWH, 60, maybe either 5 or flameout. I no longer whirlpool hop deciding I prefer dry hopping. For something like German pils I do FWH, 60 and maybe flameout.
For a German Pils I will do 60, 30, 15/10. I’ve seen many a German manufactured brewing system that has three vessels that are loaded with hop pellets, and those are added at programed times.
For a Helles I might do a bittering/FWH charge and a small addition at 15.
Cream Ale? All the hops go into the whirlpool.
IPAs are all all over, depending on which one.
A new to me hop? I use Vinny Cilurzo’s “Hop 2 It”, which has a set number of additions at set times, but the bittering charge is adjusted up/down to give a 40IBU (IIRC) calculation.
Actually, that’s kinda what I do. I know I want FWH and maybe a later addition, so after eeeeing what I get from those I adjust the 60 addition to the IBU goal.
So it sounds like you guys kinda do what I do WRT Tinseth or any other “calculations” – don’t believe the actual numbers they generate, just take them as a tool for consistently portioning out the hop additions in recipes, and based on experience an indication of how much bitterness we’ll perceive in our own beer?
Here is my thinking on why homebrewers shouldn’t expect to get the same results from the same hop schedule a commercial brewer uses, and why, in particular, hop additions made during the boil (i.e. other than FWH and whirlpool) are particularly ineffective for us (me.)
The reason FWH is so surprisingly effective at contributing flavor and aroma, and equally so on any scale system, is that the long steep allows the hydrocarbons to be converted to permanently soluble forms before they can be driven off, still in more volatile form, by the boil. This takes significant time on heat, but the same would apply in the whirlpool. With boil additions in a homebrew setting, with a very large surface area to volume, there is insufficient time for this solubilization to occur before the circulating action of the boil allows the volatiles to be evaporated at the surface. So those 30, 10, 5, etc. additions are not very effective for adding flavor and aroma, only (inefficiently) contributing to bitterness. On a commercial system, with a high volume to surface area (even a few-barrels-sized rig will make an enormous difference,) some solubilization of oils will occur before the entire wort volume is exposed at the surface, though these additions will still not be as effective or efficient at either bittering or adding flavor and aroma as other possible schemes. (Stan has written about some German brewers who are going with FWH and whirlpool with no middle additions.)
Therefore, no matter what larger breweries may be doing, a homebrewer is probably best advised to skip the middle and late hopping and just use FWH and knockout/ whirlpool additions, with a nice, efficient, 60 minute addition if additional bittering is needed, and apportioning those additions so as to achieve the desired result in balance of bitterness, flavor, and aroma.
Lautering takes me at least an hour, and then maybe another 20 minutes to boiling. So up to 90 minutes? Commercial breweries can expect anywhere from 2-3 hours. But Denny may be right, I don’t have any firm answer on just what the minimum time required is. I would expect that the benefits of FWH over a simple start of boil addition would be apparent even if you are doing no sparge BIAB with a short ramp to boil. But I don’t have numbers.