Ive used hops loose and bagged. But a hop spider is by is my new gold standard.
kettle is clean hops are unrestricted cleanup is a snap.
Gordon Strong always says “the BJCP guidelines are intended for judging competitions and nothing more” or words to that effect. If that were true, though, then the numbers wouldn’t belong in there at all. They all should be deleted. Only thing is… they’re not deleted. Instead, they’re tweaked and perfected over time. How much time and effort has gone into generating and maintaining all those damned numbers over the years, which are supposedly only “for the judges”?!
Methinks the BJCP actually condones that people everywhere are using the guidelines as the homebrewer’s bible, knowing very well that we design recipes based on it to the point of ensuring we nail the numbers.
They should really take the numbers out of there. They don’t belong there. Either that, or admit that the BJCP has had this secret goal of molding how each and every style under the sun is brewed for generations to come by at least all those who cares about “style” and “winning”. Like it or not, the BJCP has evolved to become something way bigger than their original intent. And thus far, it is apparent that their goals have actually evolved along with the unavoidable natural evolution of how the guidelines are used, and this appears to be truth regardless of their acceptance or refusal to admit it.
The above statements reflect facts and opinions as understood by me myself and do not necessarily reflect those understood by the BJCP organization. Furthermore, the above statements should be inferred neither to condemn nor to praise the BJCP organization. The writer of this post, who happens to be BJCP Certified, has developed conflicted thoughts and opinions surrounding the goals and conduct of this organization, his involvement in which he maintains has been a positive experience in net overall, regardless of any perceived criticisms, intentional or not. Now he’ll shut up, and if he wasn’t at work, he’d have a beer. Or actually probably a cider.
What you can do is just ignore the numbers. At the judging table I use a pencil, and my senses. Including common sense. I dont write things like “looks like 3 SRM” or “tastes like 37 IBUs”. The guideline numbers don’t bother me. But they can be a hindrance. Getting hung up on the numbers can be like never taking the training wheels off.
^^^^ THIS ^^^^
Thankfully there are no numbers for measuring things like hop aroma or roastiness.
We use terms like “moderate”, “faint”, or “potent” to indicate intensity.
But, those characteristics are all perceived in the context of the whole beer, so the keyword is PERCEIVED. For example, a Session IPA with 40 lab measured IBUs will likely have a much higher perceived bitterness than say an American Barleywine lab measured at 70 IBUs. The numbers are misleading in many of these cases. Common sense and your palate are what should prevail, not the numbers themselves.
I agree you can’t taste the numbers, but you still need them to make recipes repeatable, otherwise it’s hard to calculate hop additions and timings.
What might be helpful is an IBU scale based on perceptible increments. If human taste buds can only discriminate differences of 6, for instance, them a 36 IBU ale would be more helpfully defined as 6 IBUs.
I did this a few times and then gave up because (a) the various online calculators give wildly different figures, and (b) the creators of the recipes I was using presumably didn’t bother making the adjustment at their end, so it was pointless me doing it.
I do wonder how accurate IBU levels could possibly be if alpha acids decline in storage as fast as people say. Getting the right bitterness consistently might actually be impossible for homebrewers. Hopefully someone will tell me otherwise.
^^^^^ this is what I was getting at
I am not a BJCP judge and do not know one who I could ask to evaluate my beers and tell me if they are remotely close to being in range. So like a lot of homebrewers I rely on not only what I personally like to formulate a recipe, I also rely on scales such as the IBU ranges that are calculated with great programs like beersmith to help guide me
I love my late hopped huge ass whirlpool editions, however I laugh whenever beersmith calculates my IBUs at over 200.
Lately, I have been trying to hit my target “BJCP guideline” IBU level all from the bittering edition and not even counting my later editions. It would be nice to have a reliable scale
But then again, to each his own…
From a BJCP judging perspective, the guideline descriptions go with ranges based on low, moderate, high (and in between) solely based on perception. As Steve pointed out, that perception is going to also be influenced by other factors which have nothing to do with raw IBUs. A 70 IBU barleywine may come of as moderate-low bitterness due to the balance of the malt sweetness whereas a 70 IBU pale ale may be highly bitter. IBUs and color are really more of an afterthought and listed in the very bottom of each style along with the commercial examples.
The only time I ever really pay attention to the IBU scale on Beersmith is when I input a recipe the first time and brew it.
I make adjustments from there based on my own tastes.
Sometimes my recipes are <GASP!> not to style.
As far as trying to calculate IBU loss over time, I feel like that’s a total stab in the dark. Unless you do a lab analysis it’s total voodoo, and who’s doing that? There are simply too many variables.
Brew it. If you think your hops are too old, throw in some more.
For years I have assumed losses for alpha acids based on a swag, not using calculators but attempting to allow for a little common sense based on my own experience. In real life experience, it seems to me that perception of bitterness is not nearly as bad as any calculators put out. If for example I have hops that started at 6.0% alpha acid, and I stored them in my refrigerator for 12 months, and a calculator says there should be a loss of 50% of the original so that it would go down to 3.0% alpha acid remaining, I know from experience that if I assume the 3.0% that a calculator provides, my beer will turn out WAY too bitter. If I instead swag that “meh… maybe it goes down to 5.0% after a year”, I have gotten more accurate results, but even in those cases, more often then not, the beer still turns out a little too bitter. So, either alpha acid is way more stable then people tell us, or else the beta acid takes over at some point and offsets part of the alpha loss. For some reason I thought I read someplace that as beta acids age, they develop compounds that are MORE bitter instead of less bitter like alpha acids do. So there might in fact be some sort of balancing act going on. I can’t recall where I picked that up, I’m sure it will be Googled by somebody else. But anyway, my point…
It’s probably impossible to actually use any calculators to try to determine loss of perceived bitterness of hops due to age. Way too many variables. You can swag it if you like, but my experience says that the perceived bitterness probably only changes by a maximum of about 0.5% alpha acid equivalent per 12 months, somewhere in that ballpark anyway. It’s not as bad as anyone without experience will tell you, I do know that.
All makes sense and I think you’re right.
As a rule of thumb, too bitter doesn’t bother me as much as under bittered. Ageing can fix a beer that’s too bitter, but there’s nothing you can do to fix an insipid beer. So my tendency these days is to err on the side of too much and not worry so much about post boil steeps.
And once again I agree with all the above
Not only that, but each lot of hops from each field has a different HSI (hop storage index). Without knowing that, you really can’t calculate loss.
I don’t filter my wort so I certainly use muslin bags.
I used reusable bags for a while but ditched them once they got worn out as I didn’t care for cleaning them.
When I use over 2 oz of hops in a recipe I switch to a large paint straining bag that I feel allows the hops to freely move around (for the most part) in the kettle during the boil. I then continue to add my hop additions to the bag throughout the remainder of the boil. At the end, when the beer is cool (enough) I remove the hop bag and continue chilling all the way down.
I use a 10" diameter SS spider which lets hops circulate freely but acts as a good filter. I stir the hops in the spider periodically during the boil and feel there is little to no loss in utilization as compared to dumped in loose.
man I had the opposite experience, using both a 300 and 400 micron SS spider. particulate (I’m assuming proteins/break) would clog the holes/windows in the screen and I could literally lift the spider entirely out of the boil and the liquid level inside the spider would not change similar to if it were a solid bucket, i.e. there was no osmosis back and forth.
the paint strainer bags seemed to work well when I used propane, but I’m electric, so I’d be scared of a bag, and thus I’ve abandoned spiders altogether.
Wow, I’ve never had that issue. Mine is a 400 micron IIRC. I boil 70 mins for most beers - the first 10 mins I skim the break foam, then add the spider and 60 min boil hops. I’m assuming that must help because I can lift the spider out and it drains slowly. All I know is that my IPAs don’t lack for bitterness.
yeah - there may have been process fixes that I didn’t experiment with. in my trial and error while breaking in my new system, I settled on the hopblocker and whirlpooling, and haven’t looked back since.
if anyone wants to buy my spider (either 300 or the 400) PM me.
I think that stirring inside the spider several times during the boil really helps, too. Sort of ‘forced osmosis’.