Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Swaen Malts


  • Please log in to reply
43 replies to this topic

#41 Big Nake

Big Nake

    Comptroller of Forum Content

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 53518 posts

Posted 17 December 2017 - 08:39 AM

Suspicions confirmed: I went to a Christmas party last night and felt compelled to bring some beer. I had some hoppy blonde that I bottled a couple of months ago but I also grabbed my keg of Cashmere Pale Ale (only about 3 weeks since I brewed it), connected a cobra tap and sampled it. Good. I bottled up 6 big 750ml bottles, put them in the fridge and brought those along with 7-8 bombers of blonde ale (which was made with a different malt). The Cashmere is just fine but it doesn't have any real depth to it. Everyone who drank it liked it and there were some people who appeared to be beer snobs here. But I kept thinking that the beer was on the one-dimensional side. The better base malts create a better POP! and this beer (similar to the Goldings APA that I mentioned) has less of it. On the Amber Ale that I made yesterday I added 2 pounds of Munich 1 and I just went and took a hit off the airlock and I'm getting a much better character from it. So for those who choose to use this malt... mash a little higher, be careful with your sulfate level (I think it should be lower) and maybe supplement the base malt with some Vienna or Munich. I was hoping the Cashmere might be better because it was fermented with 1469 (lower attenuation) but it didn't really help much.

#42 neddles

neddles

    No Life

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 16523 posts

Posted 17 December 2017 - 09:01 AM

Cashmere the hop lacked depth? Or, the pale ale made with Cashmere lacked depth because of the Swaen pale ale malt in it?

#43 Big Nake

Big Nake

    Comptroller of Forum Content

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 53518 posts

Posted 17 December 2017 - 09:11 AM

Cashmere the hop lacked depth? Or, the pale ale made with Cashmere lacked depth because of the Swaen pale ale malt in it?

The hops are fine... the beer itself lacked depth because of the malt. That said, I don't find the hop to be so fantastic that I'll be searching for them again. They're just fine and they were fresh and aromatic, etc. but I wasn't WOWED by them.

I had a blonde ale in mind and I was planning on using the West Coast yeast for it. Now that I have a feel for this malt I would probably use Vienna with the Swaen Pale Ale and also add calcium chloride to the mash but NO gypsum... in an attempt to "malty up" the beer. These beers just ended up being very dry-tasting and the only thought I have is that the flavor profile of the malt is a little shallow. It's not a "bad" flavor (like we have talked about dirty-tasting beers), it's just a lack of depth. Next time I need a malt like this it will probably be Rahr Pale Ale.

#44 MyaCullen

MyaCullen

    Cheap Blue Meanie

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 68748 posts
  • LocationSpokane, WA

Posted 17 December 2017 - 10:42 AM

The hops are fine... the beer itself lacked depth because of the malt. That said, I don't find the hop to be so fantastic that I'll be searching for them again. They're just fine and they were fresh and aromatic, etc. but I wasn't WOWED by them.

I had a blonde ale in mind and I was planning on using the West Coast yeast for it. Now that I have a feel for this malt I would probably use Vienna with the Swaen Pale Ale and also add calcium chloride to the mash but NO gypsum... in an attempt to "malty up" the beer. These beers just ended up being very dry-tasting and the only thought I have is that the flavor profile of the malt is a little shallow. It's not a "bad" flavor (like we have talked about dirty-tasting beers), it's just a lack of depth. Next time I need a malt like this it will probably be Rahr Pale Ale.

add some special roast, or some biscuit




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users