183 replies to this topic

[neddles]

so you are saying to lump the 10 and 0 min additions into a WP hop? and maybe add another 0.5oz to that?

is WL002 still the preferred yeast for this? I've never used it but I should be able to get it. In the past I've mostly used wyeast but now my LHBS only carries WL and dry yeasts.

Yes on the hops as thats how I did it and it was great. Yes on 002. 1968 will come out basically the same.

ETA: its not going to be a hop bomb as we know them these days but it will be a very hop forward low abv pale ale with a lot going on. To me galaxy is very complex and delicious and there will be enough malt coming through to keep it interesting here.

Edited by neddles, 07 February 2016 - 08:36 AM.

[positiveContact]

sounds great to me and different than anything I've made before.

[cavman]

GP will be fine in this, and I agree on using the last 2 hop additions at whirlpool. 002/1968 is preferred as it is key to he beer not ending up too dry.

GP will be fine in this, and I agree on using the last 2 hop additions at whirlpool. 002/1968 is preferred as it is key to he beer not ending up too dry.

Or you could just hop as the original recipe, not every hoppy beer has to be done the same way.

[neddles]

If you have other new hops you want to try you could always split your 10 gallons into 2 boils and do one with galaxy and one with something else. Just taking advantage of the 10 gallon brewhouse. Just a thought.

[Brauer]

Or you could just hop as the original recipe, not every hoppy beer has to be done the same way.

Good point.  The original was a delicious beer.  I'm sure the whirlpool version would be tasty, too, and get the most flavor out of those precious Galaxy hops. I make a lot of similar beers and I have moved to splitting the hops between 5' and the whirlpool, and find I prefer it slightly over 10' and whirlpool, but there were no faults in the original version. 

[positiveContact]

how do you guys define WP hopping btw?  everyone seems to do something slightly diff.

 

eta:  when I do it, it's a hop stand.  hops added to wort that's been partially chilled (I've tried diff temps, 140-170F) and then held (more accurately left to sit and probably slightly cool off) at that temp for about 30 mins before resuming chilling.

Edited by Evil_Morty, 07 February 2016 - 12:31 PM.

[cavman]

how do you guys define WP hopping btw?  everyone seems to do something slightly diff.
 
eta:  when I do it, it's a hop stand.  hops added to wort that's been partially chilled (I've tried diff temps, 140-170F) and then held (more accurately left to sit and probably slightly cool off) at that temp for about 30 mins before resuming chilling.

I chill to about 180 then add the hops and walk away for 30 minutes or so.

[Brauer]

how do you guys define WP hopping btw?  everyone seems to do something slightly diff.

I used to add the hops after flameout and let it sit, or start cooling it just to try to get it a little below boiling then let it sit.

 

Now, I put it in a water bath to bring it down to ~175F (without shooting past like it has with the immersion chiller), then add the hops, stir, cover and let it sit. The latter seems to extract more flavor (maybe) and extract less extra bitterness than an extended flameout rest.

 

When I did this yesterday, I checked the temperature after the stand and I think it was 128F or 138F (should have written it down). I don't imagine that a larger batch would cool that much in 30' just sitting on the counter...

[cavman]

I have taken to the thought of no flavor additions when whirl pooling as it draws out more bitterness from those additions. So either a huge wp addition or staggered additions and only a short wp.

[positiveContact]

I have taken to the thought of no flavor additions when whirl pooling as it draws out more bitterness from those additions. So either a huge wp addition or staggered additions and only a short wp.

 

I typically do all of the kinds of additions.  on this one I thinking a small amount at flameout, chill to 170F and then dump in the rest for a 30 min hop stand.

[neddles]

I cool to 170F and toss them in. Let sit 20 minutes then finish chilling. I have done longer than 20 min. and I don't think I get anything more from it. 

[Brauer]

I have taken to the thought of no flavor additions when whirl pooling as it draws out more bitterness from those additions. So either a huge wp addition or staggered additions and only a short wp.

I think that's a great point and suggestion. I've been calculating the 5' addition as a 10 minute addition for determining IBUs, when I do a whirlpool. That seems to give me the bitterness I'm expecting (if not an accurate IBU).

 

I typically do all of the kinds of additions.  on this one I thinking a small amount at flameout, chill to 170F and then dump in the rest for a 30 min hop stand.

I've also been calculating any flameout additions as 5' additions, when added before a hop stand.  Like I said, it may be complete bull or I may be compensating for perceived bitterness from the hop flavor or increased tannin extraction, but it seems to be giving me predictable results. I haven't tried this over a broad range of hop quantities, though, and I use a lot less hops than most of you.

[Brauer]

I cool to 170F and toss them in. Let sit 20 minutes then finish chilling. I have done longer than 20 min. and I don't think I get anything more from it. 

I've tried 15', 30' and 1 hour, but never in a direct side-by-side. They seem reasonably comparable. Close enough that I don't watch the clock terribly closely while they're steeping. I think I prefer the slightly longer hop stand just because it gives me enough time to walk away and actually get something else done.

[neddles]

I've tried 15', 30' and 1 hour, but never in a direct side-by-side. They seem reasonably comparable. Close enough that I don't watch the clock terribly closely while they're steeping. I think I prefer the slightly longer hop stand just because it gives me enough time to walk away and actually get something else done.

Yeah some of my longer hop stands were not by design. I generally just make sure I get 20 minutes out of them and then move on if I can.

[positiveContact]

cav, do you recall what your chloride and sulfate levels typically are when you brew this?

[cavman]

I am not sure exactly, but my water is very clean and I add 4gm of gypsum

[positiveContact]

so mostly sulfate I guess.  My water is also relatively low in most things.  I have to wonder if a beer like this might benefit from a little chloride for a nice soft/full character to the malt.  maybe not.

Edited by Evil_Morty, 08 February 2016 - 09:23 AM.

[neddles]

so mostly sulfate I guess.  My water is also relatively low in most things.  I have to wonder if a beer like this might benefit from a little chloride for a nice soft/full character to the malt.  maybe not.

Go with something balanced. Maybe SO4~60, Cl~60, get your CA to 50+

[HVB]

Go with something balanced. Maybe SO4~60, Cl~60, get your CA to 50+

I had told Morty that I was going to shoot for something like160/95 (SO4/Cl).  I think I may play with the hop amount too and most likely use 1318 because that is what I have on hand.

[neddles]

I had told Morty that I was going to shoot for something like160/95 (SO4/Cl).  I think I may play with the hop amount too and most likely use 1318 because that is what I have on hand.

Got it, I didn't know you were making this too.