30 replies to this topic

[Big Nake]

I've had a number of conversations with brewers about using American 2-row instead of pilsner malt. I know of a few people who are fans of this (George is one) and a few that do not like it. I will admit right now that I use a lot of domestic malts... Briess, Rahr, Great Western, Brewer's Choice, etc. I get some specialty grains from Weyermann, but most of my base grains are American. So the question is... are there certain styles where it doesn't matter? Could someone... who is a fan of using European pilsner malt... tell the difference between a beer made with pils and a beer made with 2-row? BryanH recently chastised me (in a friendly way) for using American 2-row in a Kölsch. Here's one... last summer I was at a local supply house that I don't get the chance to go to often. I asked them for some Durst Pils and I made my Bases Loaded Blonde Ale with it. That particular batch of beer came out very nicely. I have made that beer many times and that may have been the best version. But was it the Durst Pils? It could've easily been the fresh yeast or the fresh hops or the particular makeup of the water on that given day. It also could've just been my tastebuds. What say you?

[dondewey]

Haven't done enough testing to tell you anything about flavor. It does seem that pilsener is much more likely to form chill haze (I pretty much just do single infusions).

[cavman]

There does seem to be a certain taste to pils malt, but not sure how easy the difference would be to taste in well made beer.

[brewskee]

I wanna say I read that Pilsner is slightly sweeter, but don't quote me...P.S. If you're looking for freshly made specialty grains, PM me!

[Big Nake]

I'll add this... I made a nice "summer lager" with American 2-row, some wheat, flaked corn and Tettnanger & Hallertau Mittelfruh hops (this is the beer I posted a picture of in a recent thread) and 2124 Bohemian lager yeast. It was a light beer, maybe 4.8%, SRM 3-4 and IBUs around 22 or 23. It came out crystal clear and delicious with the 2-row. Would it have been better with the pilsner malt? Not sure, but this beer was a good test because the malt was center stage.

[3rd party JKor]

I haven't done the tests either, but the tastes are clearly different. Whether one is "better" than another for a certain beer has more to do with style guidelines than taste, IMO. In competition, you might get knocked for using Domestic 2-row in a Kölsch, but if you put it in front of a group of blind tasters it might win out over the pilsner malt version every time.It would be a fun test to make up a few small batches with Am 2-row, Continental Pils, Maris Otter, etc. and do a taste test of the different base malts.

[Big Nake]

It would be a fun test to make up a few small batches with Am 2-row, Continental Pils, Maris Otter, etc. and do a taste test of the different base malts.

Yeah, I think it would be a fun test. I would bet that there's someone out there who has a nice recipe where pilsner is used... but somewhere along the line they only had American 2-row and just used that and ended up doing an involuntary experiment. It would be good to know the results.From another angle, I would think that in some cases it wouldn't matter. I would think something "gold" or lighter would show the differences more and that something darker or more flavorful (flavors coming from ingredients other than the pale malt) would not show the difference as much.

[ncbeerbrewer]

I try to keep a good stock of American 2 Row and German Pilsner malt on hand for a lot of the beers that I brew. I tend to use up more 2 Row than Pils but I have often times substituted Pilsner malt for 2 Row in American recipes. I brewed an IPA with a Pilsner base of 10lbs of a 13lb beer with no ill effects. I know IPA is heavily hopped but it still turned out and noone commented that any malts tasted off. I do agree though that in a beer such as a Kolsch or any lightly hopped or light beer that the right malt would be the best choice. I brewed a Maibock in spring that was 50% German Pilsner with some Vienna and Munch added and it was outstanding on my half and based on feedback from others too. Of course going by the book is personal preference as well when it comes to what should be used in a beer style or recipe. Hey its homebrewing so you can Do as YOU LIKE also but I do feel that Pilsner and American 2 Row are great malts that have their own set of tastes contributed too.Edit: How about brewing up a lightly hopped beer around 1.050 and fermenting side by side, same hops, same yeast, same fermentation temp. All the same variables except base malts. Just use the same equivalent in base malt for each beer and do a side by side taste test, see what you get.

[3rd party JKor]

Edit: How about brewing up a lightly hopped beer around 1.050 and fermenting side by side, same hops, same yeast, same fermentation temp. All the same variables except base malts. Just use the same equivalent in base malt for each beer and do a side by side taste test, see what you get.

I was thinking no hops. Just base malt around 1.050 (or, 1.040, and use them as starters for another beer). Ferment it out with a clean yeast, maybe wlp001 at ~65F.

[ncbeerbrewer]

I was thinking no hops. Just base malt around 1.050 (or, 1.040, and use them as starters for another beer). Ferment it out with a clean yeast, maybe wlp001 at ~65F.

+1. An even better idea. Just do a straight base malt beer and see the direct flavor contributions. US-05 1056 WLP001. Anything clean. Would be a great way to get those flavors nailed down. Brew up 3 gallons too since its an experiment.

[VolFan]

Interesting thread. I too always have Pils, 2-Row and MO on hand. I have subbed Pils for 2-Row but not the other way around. I tend to always have Kolsch on hand for my German friend. I'd be curious of I used 2-Row if he would ntice the difference.

[stellarbrew]

I do know that people win blue ribbons with pilseners made with American 2-row, rather than pilsener malt, which defies conventional wisdom...but there you have it.

[MtnBrewer]

I don't really have anything to contribute to this thread but I just wanted to thank Ken for starting it. I think it's an interesting discussion and I'll be monitoring it for my own edification. I hardly ever use domestic pale malt and so I would never have a reason to sub it for pilsner. But as I said, it's a good question.

[Deerslyr]

Interesting thread. I too always have Pils, 2-Row and MO on hand. I have subbed Pils for 2-Row but not the other way around. I tend to always have Kolsch on hand for my German friend. I'd be curious of I used 2-Row if he would ntice the difference.

THIS would likely answer the question! I say brew up a Kolsch with 2 Row, but don't tell your friend. If it is noticeably different, I'm sure he would say right away (or at least upon a prompting of "what do you think?").

[Humperdink]

To me a good German Pilsner malt, like from Weyermann, is definitely the way to go in a traditional german style lager. I believe there to be a difference in taste as well as price. To me the minut taste difference though isn't enough to justify me spending 2X the amount on a sack of grain. If I was trying to produce the best example, say for comp, of a traditional style I don't believe there to be any question which I would use. For my own consumption however the American 2-row produces a fine quality drink, one which I don't feel I have sacrificed on quality in the least. I just haven't made the most traditional example of whatever style I am going for. To me there is no right or wrong in which is better, just more traditional. Everything after that is personal preference.

[BrewerGeorge]

I do know that people win blue ribbons with pilseners made with American 2-row, rather than pilsener malt, which defies conventional wisdom...but there you have it.

I have done exactly this.

To me a good German Pilsner malt, like from Weyermann, is definitely the way to go in a traditional german style lager. I believe there to be a difference in taste as well as price. To me the minut taste difference though isn't enough to justify me spending 2X the amount on a sack of grain. If I was trying to produce the best example, say for comp, of a traditional style I don't believe there to be any question which I would use. For my own consumption however the American 2-row produces a fine quality drink, one which I don't feel I have sacrificed on quality in the least. I just haven't made the most traditional example of whatever style I am going for. To me there is no right or wrong in which is better, just more traditional. Everything after that is personal preference.

I'm like you. The exact correct malt may be a tiny bit better, but it's not worth being twice as much $$ to me. Also, I'm not convinced that it would be enough better that most people would be able to pick it out in a triangle test.The exception to this is vienna and munich. As far as I've been able to determine, there is no substitute. (I'd be ecstatic to find one if anybody knows of it...)

[VolFan]

THIS would likely answer the question! I say brew up a Kolsch with 2 Row, but don't tell your friend. If it is noticeably different, I'm sure he would say right away (or at least upon a prompting of "what do you think?").

To be honest, I have brewed enough batches of Kolsch (probably 10+ in the last 3 years) that I think I would be able to tell the difference. My batches are 10 gl so I have consumed quite a few of them.Yes, we go through a lot of that style.

[Big Nake]

I think this latest beer I have on tap is one reason I started thinking about this. You can't really call it a pilsner... it has some wheat in it along with the 2-row (no pilsner malt) so I suppose it's just an American Standard or American Premium made with 2124. I may head up to that local supplier over the weekend and pick up some more Durst Pils (where is this made, btw? Is it American?) and make another batch of this blonde ale or even this American Standard and see if my tastebuds pick it up.

[ThroatwobblerMangrove]

I have done exactly this.I'm like you. The exact correct malt may be a tiny bit better, but it's not worth being twice as much $$ to me. Also, I'm not convinced that it would be enough better that most people would be able to pick it out in a triangle test.The exception to this is vienna and munich. As far as I've been able to determine, there is no substitute. (I'd be ecstatic to find one if anybody knows of it...)

I can't speak to all malts but I def agree that munich is unique. I heart munich...

[Big Nake]

I should have mentioned that I agree with Criscose and George's philosophy. While I want my beers to be good (okay, great!), I don't necessarily expect everything that I brew to be a perfect work of art. I don't enter comps and my beers are meant for general consumption for me, my wife, friends, family and neighbors. I don't really place my beers on a stage with a spotlight on them... they're meant for drinking.