Author: Malcolm Frazer
Not all chemicals are bad. Without chemicals such as hydrogen and oxygen,
for example, there would be no way to make water, a vital ingredient in beer.
~Dave Barry~
This is a follow-up to the first water chemistry xBmt where 2 batches of the same German Pilsner, each mashed with 
water profiles consisting of different mineral and pH levels, were distinguishable by a significant portion of participants. As a lover of all things H2O, I was excited to return to this topic! I’ve delved rather deeply into the subject and learned a ton from noted experts such as John Palmer, Colin Kaminski, Martin Brungard, Kai Troester, and of course, the guy they all quote, AJ Delange. Since the beginning, I’ve truly believed water matters in brewing– how could it not when it makes up nearly 90% of the beer we drink? Plus, chemistry is fun and really works wonders as a first date conversation topic!
It is generally accepted that higher amounts of sulfate (SO4) will lead to a crisper, drier finish that accentuates hop bitterness and bite, while increased chloride levels produce a smoother, rounder finish with accentuated malt expression and perhaps more perceived sweetness. While I believe my own private experience is inline with this, I’ve never actually blindly compared 2 beers of the same recipe mashed with water consisting of different mineral levels, which means by belief is really based on assumptions, things I’ve read, and information relayed by others. Given the fact my first encounter with Marshall occurred when he happened upon an instance of me rebuking some brewing dogma in an online forum, how could I justify my self-confirming bias towards water’s impact without putting my assertions to the test?
| PURPOSE |
To evaluate the effect different mineral additions have on 2 beers of the same recipe. Two separate batches of the same Dry Irish Stout were produced simultaneously, one was brewed with water that was adjusted in a manner that would be typical of a dark malty beer, while the other was brewed with a water that was adjusted in a manner typical for a hoppy pale ale.
| METHOD |
A similar experiment performed by John Palmer at the 2007 National Homebrewers Conference supported the notion that manipulation of water chemistry made a noticeable difference between similar beers produced with and without brewing liquor adjustments. Inspired by these results, I designed an xBmt with a few differences, namely that data would be collected using a blind triangle test rather than a side-by-side comparison. Furthermore, rather than creating water profiles with different mineral makeups and pH levels, similar to Marshall’s prior xBmt, I was interested in isolating the effects of mineral additions alone, thus acid was used only to bring each mash to a similar pH. My intent was to pick water profiles at the opposite ends of the spectrum in order to emphasize the organoleptic qualities that are believed to be brought about by differences in certain mineral levels.
Dry Irish Stout Recipe
| Batch Size | Boil Time | IBU | SRM | OG | FG | ABV |
| 5.5 gal | 70 min | 39 | 35 | 1.045 | 1.010 | 4.75 % |
Fermentables
| Name | Amount | % |
| Maris Otter | 6 lbs | 67% |
| Flaked Barley | 2 lbs | 22% |
| Roasted Barley (550L) | 1 lbs | 11% |
Hops
| Name | Amt/IBU | Time | Use | Form | Alpha % |
| East Kent Goldings | ~39 IBU | 60 min | Boil | Pellet | 5.0% |
Yeast
| Name | Lab | Attenuation | Ferm Temp |
| WLP004 Irish Ale Yeast | White Labs | 69-74% | 66°F |
Separate mashes were required for this xBmt since that’s where manipulation of the variable was to occur. I carefully measured the grains, ensuring both batches received precisely the same amounts, and did some milling.
I chose to utilize the batch sparge method and used Bru’n Water in conjunction with BeerSmith to determine mineral and acid additions for each batch. While the differences between Pale Hoppy and Dark Malty water profiles in Bru’n Water are relatively drastic, I focused solely on the sulfate (SO4) to chloride (Cl) ratio, keeping total ion levels moderate and using only a single salt for each mash– CaSO4 (Calcium Sulfate or Gypsum) for the Pale Hoppy water batch and CaCl2 (Calcium Chloride) for the Dark Malty water batch.
My municipal tap water is fairly well suited for Pale Ale in terms of natural mineral content, requiring only minimal acidification for alkalinity reduction and a small addition of gypsum (~2 grams) to achieve my preferred SO4:Cl of ~2:1.
I’ve found a mash pH of 5.4 works well for many styles and settled on that as my target for these beers. It took the addition of an extra 0.8 ml of lactic acid over what Bru’n Water predicted to reduce the pale hoppy water mash to 5.41 pH.
Pale Hoppy Water Profile
| Ca | Mg | Na | SO4 | Cl | HCO3 | SO4:Cl |
| 90 | 16 | 36 | 167 | 67 | 149 | 2.5 |
Since my goal was to keep the relative magnitude of each mineral approximately the same between the batches, I diluted my municipal source with 30% distilled water so I wouldn’t have to add high amounts of CaCl2 to reach my desired ratios. To this tap/distilled blend I added 2.2 grams of CaCl2 and 0.5 ml of 88% lactic acid, which resulted in a SO4:Cl ratio of .44 and a mash pH of 5.37, close enough to my 5.4 pH target.
Dark Malty Water Profile
| Ca | Mg | Na | SO4 | Cl | HCO3 | SO4:Cl |
| 82 | 11 | 25 | 55 | 123 | 86 | .44 |
It was time to mash! I staggered the start of each batch by 15 minutes in hopes of making the brew day less hectic.
Oddly, I came in a bit low on my mash temp for the first batch, hitting 145°F instead of my planned 151°F. This was easily remedied by using my handy bucket water heat stick to raise the temp in a matter of just a few minutes. In order to maintain consistency between the batches, I heated the second batch of strike water to the same temp as the first, achieving the same initial mash temp, then used my heat stick to bring the temp up.
Both pre-boil gravities were slightly lower than BeerSmith’s predicted 1.034 SG, with the Dark Malty profile batch hitting 1.032 and the Pale Hoppy profile wort clocking in at 1.030. I wondered if having false bottoms from different manufacturers or the use of the heatstick inserted some variables. Both worts were boiled for 70 minutes, 10 more than planned to make-up for the lower pre-boil SG, receiving a single dose of EKG at the 60 minute mark and a tab of Whirlfloc with 15 minutes left.
Post-boil hydrometer measurements revealed a .001 SG difference between the batches, with the Dark Malty profile wort at 1.047 SG and the Pale Hoppy profile wort at 1.048 SG.
The worts were chilled, transferred to 6 gallon Better Bottle carboys, and hit with oxygen for 90 secs, after which I placed them in my fermentation chamber and pitched 1L of WLP004 starter into each.
Both beers reached target FG of 1.010 after 6 days of fermentation.
A few more days in the chamber and the beers were transferred to kegs where they were chilled then fined with gelatin. They were ready for sampling a few days later.
| RESULTS |
I am massively grateful for the support I received from the homebrew and craft beer community when I sought participants for this xBmt, the turnout was incredible, with local breweries and restaurants graciously allowing me to host the tasting sessions at their establishments.
In addition to all the local support, James Spencer and Steve Wilkes of Basic Brewing Radio also participated.
A diverse assortment of 29 participants lent their senses to this xBmt including Certified and National BJPC Judges, BJCP judges in training, a few professional brewers, a craft beer restaurant owner, some die-hard beer geeks, impassioned homebrewers, and even a couple casual beer drinkers. Each taster was blindly presented with 1 sample from the Dark Malty profile batch and 2 samples from the Pale Hoppy profile batch and then asked to identify the beer that was different. At the given sample size, 14 (p<0.05) tasters would have had to accurately select the different beer to reach statistical significance. In this case, 18 (p=0.001) participants correctly identified the beer that was different. From this, we can deduce that the participants’ ability to distinguish between the 2 different beers is most likely not due to random chance, but rather a function of the differences in mineral content of each batch’s brewing liquor.
Side-note: we recently revamped the survey in hopes of collecting more interesting data. One of the biggest changes involves revealing the nature of the xBmt to those who are incorrect on the initial triangle test then allowing them a second chance, the purpose being to gauge whether knowledge of the independent variable has an impact on perception. This data will not be combined with data from the initial triangle test! We also ditched the comparative evaluation, as we found that data to be largely subjective and inconsistent.
Those participants who were correct on the first triangle test were then asked to select the beer they preferred. Interestingly, there was no clear preference, which goes to show that while water certainly seems to make a difference, how that difference is perceived is still subjective.
Once the nature of the xBmt was revealed to those who were initially incorrect, only a single participant changed their selection to the correct answer, not nearly enough to suggest knowledge of the variable significantly impacted perception.
There appeared to be some agreement among participants regarding perception of the Pale Hoppy profile beer as more roasty and bitter than the Dark Malty profile beer, which was perceived by a few tasters as being sweeter with a more noticeable ester profile. Please bear in mind this data is not conclusive and based on the responses of only those who clearly identified the sample they were referring to when commenting.
My Impressions: I have no doubt my involvement in the process tainted my ability to approach tasting from an unbiased perspective. For one, I was aware of the nature of the xBmt and hence knew what differences to look for. Also, being involved with the beer throughout the process, tasting and sampling along the way, is akin to asking a mum to tell her own twins apart. A few panel members wondered if I’d be able to tell the difference if served semi-blind; when I assured them I could, I was put on the hot-seat. In each of these 3 separate trials, I was able to correctly identify the different beer, twice based on aroma alone. So yeah, to me, the beers were absolutely different, especially as they warmed. Prior to packaging, I perceived the Pale Hoppy profile beer as almost soapy and harsh in comparison to the nearly porter-like Dark Malty profile beer. However, after the beers were fined with gelatin and given some time in the keg, the delta decreased and each became enjoyable in its own right. The Pale Hoppy profile beer was unidimensional, mostly roasty with only hints of what I feel a stout should be. Still, I enjoyed how easy this beer was to drink, it finished clean with a snappy hop finish. To me, the Dark Malty profile beer was well layered, almost as if the malt bill was more complex than I knew it to be. I picked up notes of chocolate, smooth roast, light cinnamon coffee, low caramel, and a fuller body. Despite finishing at the same SG as the Pale Hoppy profile beer, the Dark Malty profile beer lingered on the finish and felt thicker with more perceived sweetness. Which one do I reach for most often? Both! I like to blend them.
| DISCUSSION |
Chalk another one up for water chemistry! As we continue down this path of homebrew experimentation, I’m left wondering about the recommendation I’ve heard many times that homebrewers should make water their last focus, especially since making adjustments is so easy. Despite my predilection for water chemistry and belief it makes a difference, I’m not yet prepared to claim water is more important or has a greater impact than any other aspect of brewing, ingredients or otherwise. But goodness, with the fact both water chemistry xBmts have produced statistically significant results, I’m comfortable claiming it’s at least as important! Beer is mostly water, after all, perhaps it is worthy of more attention than many of us have given it.
Support Brülosophy In Style!
All designs are available in various colors and sizes on Amazon!
Follow Brülosophy on:
FACEBOOK | TWITTER | INSTAGRAM
| Read More |
18 Ideas to Help Simplify Your Brew Day
7 Considerations for Making Better Homebrew
List of completed exBEERiments
How-to: Harvest yeast from starters
How-to: Make a lager in less than a month
| Good Deals |
Brand New 5 gallon ball lock kegs discounted to $75 at Adventures in Homebrewing
ThermoWorks Super-Fast Pocket Thermometer On Sale for $19 – $10 discount
Sale and Clearance Items at MoreBeer.com
If you enjoy this stuff and feel compelled to support Brulosophy.com, please check out the Support Us page for details on how you can very easily do so. Thanks!
41 thoughts on “exBEERiment | Water Chemistry: Impact Different Mineral Profiles Have On A Dry Irish Stout”
Great write up! I only just started playing with water chemistry myself. While my experiences are purely anecdotal, what I can say is when I began bringing beers to my homebrew club where I had adjusted water chemistry, they started receiving much more praise than when I was not adjusting.
Had very similar experiences. My entire brewing process was (hopefully) also improving when I started with water, so it’s difficult to really say any one thing was the cause, but as I better understood water my beers started scoring better and with more consistency. Only reason I bring that up is because it’s different, IMO, then saying “I feel they got better” or “All my friends said the beer was better”. These were judges tasting blind and in several different regions.
Similar story here. We’ve only been at all grain for about 7 batches thus far and worked on the process of brewing first, once we got that down, we moved on to water treatments. First batch is still fermenting but the most notable difference was that our efficiency shot up about 15 to 20% as we were able to hit a better mash pH. Our water is exceedingly hard (bicarbonate is nearly 500) so we mix a lot of DI water with our filtered (not RO, just filtered) tap water. I’m sure some of the efficiency improvement is that we have our process down – zero brew day issues the last couple of times – but I think it was mostly due to not using our messed up tap water.
Wow, 500ppm HCO3. That’s high. If I were you guys I’d probably use RO and either add CaSO4 or CaCl.
There is a great BeerSmith episode (Jun 19, 2013) where Brad Smith interviews Bob Hall (Water Treatment Expert and Grand Master Judge). It may benefit you because he lives in a very hard water area and explains how he deals with it.
Bob Hall also gave a presentation at NHC. If you are an AHA member you can access the 2013 presentations and listen/ see.
If you are not an AHA member – why not?!
I’d like to know more about the use of the Bucket Water Heater. These are ok to use in the mashtun? How long to raise a 5 gallon mash from 145 to 150F? Do you stir it around in the mash tun while its heating? Difficult to clean?
Once they heat up they can really get cranking. I went from 145F to 151F in about 10-12 minutes. That was in the recipe above so about 10-12 lbs of grain and 4-5 gals or so of water.
The key is to keep the heat stick moving or you have the potential to locally scorch some grain.
They can be a PITA to clean IF you allow it to scorch (guess how I know…) I cleaned mine with super hot PBW and a stiff brush. Turned it on in the PBW mix & came back after a while and scrubbed off the most stubborn bits.
I use mine in a mash tun to heat up strike water all the time. There is a stainless steel cover around it that keeps the element from touching anything. Never used it in the mash, though.
I use mine for both. I use it in conjunction with a temp controller to set and forget in order to preheat my strike water. In rare cases I use it to dial in my mash temps if I screw up. Usually on days my garage is very cold or warm so BeerSmith is off due to extreme ambient changes – can cause mash tuns, grains, paddles etc to be big heat sinks etc
Because there’s so many variables with beer making, have you tried making the same batch (grain bill, hops, and yeast) side-by-side and seeing if the tasters can tell the “identical” batches apart? That may be an interesting xBMT in and of itself? If they can’t (significantly), it would give a bit more relevance to the results of tinkering with water chemistry. i.e. With the same grist, hops, and yeast, the tasters couldn’t tell the beers from the two “identical” batches apart, but when water chemistry was altered, they could….
Regardless, great job as usual.
I understand where you’re coming from – “why not perform a control?”. However, considering that several of the previous xBmts have shown that many of the beers were statistically indistinguishable, I’m not sure it’s needed. Even this one – 11 people out of 29 could not tell.
I assure you such comments will be discussed and considered by the contributors as we value your inquires. Please keep ’em coming and keep reading!
IMO, water adjustments are the difference between a great beer and a world-class beer. Until you’re consistently making great beer it’s probably best to focus on bringing your technique and processes up before you worry about making world-class beer.
No sense in caulking the windows if you’re leaving the door open!
Nail down the primary “ations”. Sanitation, Fermentation, (recipe) Formulation, Documentation.
I generally agree with this, to the point of “a spoon of gypsum will do” however… If you are someone with moderate to hard water (if you get while stuff in your kettle) then you want to be thinking at least about alkalinity reduction for pales quite soon. In my experience once you get over an alkalinity of 50-70 ppm as CaCO3 the mash PH just wont reach an acidic enough point to stop some pretty harsh hunky flavors getting in to the beer.
I love all your Exbmts. I have to say I check my water chemistry once every 10 or so batches so I don’t tend to geek out on it as some do in home brewing. Part of it is knowledge, how do I really get it where I want with additives. Part of it is laziness i.e. I have two kids and doing beers with starters and whole grain milling etc etc is taking me away from my family enough already. Now do I have spend another hour or two each brewing cycle making sure my water is spot on while it seems to be fine right now? Please send me a brewers assistant to help me with this!
I’m an advocate of having 2..3 max water profiles for a few given beers. Figure them out once. Use them. Take some measurements the first few times. STOP. Haha.
Keep using those adjustments until the beers change. Maybe occasionally take a pH reading etc.
It does make a difference. I once forgot to add gypsum to a great IPA recipe that I have brewed before and since. It had a harsh, sharp bitterness that bit through all the lovely tropical flavors and aromas normally found in the beer. Funny thing is, some people loved it! Of people who’ve had both the gypsum and non gypsum version I’d say maybe 1/3 preferred the non-gypsum (this is strictly anecdotal on my endl). They’re the kind of ppl who drink IPA’s only for the bitterness. That’s not me but more power to em. I have a good friend who has a coffee porter that’s his house beer. I always thought it was good but was never wowed by it. I tried it one time and said. “man this is really good! Its got a deep roasty malt complexity without being acrid or harsh at all. Did you do anything different?” His reply, “Yep, I used the london porter water profile instead of just straight city water.”
brewtrekker, The first time you do it, it might take some time but now it only takes me a few mins to take care of my water. bru’n water is great but I use EZ water calculator (do a google search both will pop up immediately and are free downloads) less info that Bru’n but much easier to navigate IMO. Find 3 water profiles (hoppy, neutral, malty) buy your self some Calcium Chloride, Gypsum, Baking Soda and Epsom salt and figure out how much you need with one of the above calculators. Like I said for me its no more than 5 mins each brew day and it makes a world of difference IMO.
Good stuff as usual. Your articles are showing quite a bit of polish as of late!
Drinking less while writing? 😉
Cheers!
Possibly stupid question. I have been adding water additions with the FWH, is there a particular reason to add it to the mash? Seems like if it was important to have it in the mash then you really need to add it to the water so that all of the water is treated before it hits the grain. I was treating it as a flavoring ingredient but if the change is in how the enzymes work on the malt then I’m doing it wrong.
Love these experiments, they have been really useful. Knocking 30 min of the boil has made by double batch brewing a bit saner.
Pragmatic Me would say: “If you like your beer keep doing what you’re doing”.
If you wanted to adjust your mash pH and utilize what the minerals (Calcium) do in that regard then yes – I would add them to the mash. If you use any of the common spreadsheets, online tools, or calculators they should have you adjust for the volume of the water used for mashing – often 4-6 gallons for a 5.25 gal batch using 8-15 lbs of grain (assumes 1.25-1.5 qts/ lbs).
If you add most mineral salts directly to the water beforehand they won’t readily dissolve and you’ll seem them essentially end up at the bottle of your hot liquor tank. I add them as I am adding the last half of the water and grain during “dough in”.
I should state that you’ll also need to add additional minerals during sparge and/ or into the kettle if you add additional sparge water. Some people add all the water at once (One Step Batch Sparge Method or BIAB). I add set amt for the mash. After the sac rest I drain. Then add more water and any minerals/acid needed to maintain the desired ratios (I use Bru’n Water and it calcs it for me). Stir. Drain again.
I’m always pragmatic ;~) I may try addin the minerals to the mash since that would be just as easy and see what if anything changes. I was adding the ph 5.2 powder to the mash, but I wasn’t noticing a difference when I didn’t. The water here is pretty neutral so that may be why. Maybe next batch I will pull out the ph meter and really see what is going on. I feel pretty happy with my brewing, I like it and I keep getting hit up to brew for gatherings so others seem to be happy also. But every little bit helps.
As others have mentioned I am very convinced that adding the right minerals can have a definite positive impact on the beer. I tried it once and was convinced. I don’t always add minerals since my water is actually a good fit for some brews, but probably 90% of the time I’m adding some. For me it’s a hoppy profile, the malty one and adding nothing for a neutral one. I actually use two different malty ones. After reading the experiment I may push those a bit more.
Sorry if you answered this already…What statistical test do you use with the triangle test? A 1-proportion Z-test with p = 0.33?
I’m pressed for time right now, here’s a copy/paste explanation of the stats involved:
Cheers!
Could you go into a little more detail about why you wanted to keep your SO4:Cl ratio so low? The “Pale Hoppy Water Profile” you chose doesn’t seem like that much of a significant difference in comparison to the 50:1 SO4:Cl Burton profile Palmer gives in How to Brew.
Thank you so much for all your experimentation, I absolutely love reading your research.
“Could you go into a little more detail about why you wanted to keep your SO4:Cl ratio so low? The “Pale Hoppy Water Profile” you chose doesn’t seem like that much of a significant difference in comparison to the 50:1 SO4:Cl Burton profile Palmer gives in How to Brew.”
Sure Paul,
I go into this a little bit in the Basic Brewing Podcast interview. I do not care for or recommend trying to emulate the water profiles of the famous brewing cities. I would suggest giving a listen to the Brew Strong podcasts (The Brewing Network) in which Jamil Z and John Palmer interview Martin Brungard. The episodes are labeled as “Water Regions” (March 16, and April 13 of 2014).
Quick version – the brewers may use different water than you think, they may be treating the water in ways we are unaware of, water is rarely stagnant and those reports are a snapshot in time, and lastly – that water has a very long time to naturally get to those concentrations and the ions are working in concert and in a manner that’s hard, if not impossible, to replicate via chucking some salts into a HLT or Mash Tun. You can end up with salty harsh mineral water.
So I recommend experimenting with levels that work for you. Perhaps you end up cranking the Sulfate hardness up that high and like it. Greg Noonan does an interview (Basic Brewing Radio, June 6, 2006) in which he talks about insane (to me) levels of sulfate – but he felt it worked for him, his beers, his processes – he’s a highly regarded brewer and author. I prefer to have my total ion concentration as low as possible, make as few adjustments as possible, and still get the desired effects.
My 3 step method – 1) Balance the SO4:CL for the beer and the desired impact of the water on that beer. 2) Hit the desired Ca levels (50-100 ppm). Often achieved in concert with step one. 3) Then use acid if neutralizing alkalinity is required for mash pH (5.2-5.4).
Two final reasons for the profile:
One, if we “proved” that a 50:1 ratio (from Burton) vs a “Dark Malty Water” (1:2) showed a difference at such extremes then that might’ve begged the question “what about more moderate water….”. Instead we targeted a middle ground. Since this xBmt showed significance then it’s relativity safe to assume that even more extreme water would also show a significant result, potentially even more so. Two, I wanted to be able to drink the beers and have the panelists enjoy them.
Hi Malcolm. Thanks for the detailed response.
I appreciate attempting to find a more moderate ratio to test against, and since your results showed a difference, I’m glad you did.
It would be really interesting to see how a similar set of ratios would do with a higher IBU recipe… or just a clean profile vs individual salt additions… or ranges of each salt… or… So many variables and potential experiments! I don’t know how you choose!
Next book on my list is the water guide by Kaminski and Palmer.
Cheers.
Hi Marshall. My name is Cameron. I am a Culligan Man in Mansfield, OH. Thus I really enjoy your topics on water. I also enjoy your sarcasm. I started brewing 5 gal batches last Nov. I went straight to all grain and kegging with the help of my brother in Batavia, IL and BIAB. My most recent 5 gal batch was of a Bell’s Best Brown Ale Clone. Since I’m in the water treatment business I thought it would be cool to start with Di-ionized water (clean slate). This water was so absent of any solids that it is measured in Meg Ohms. It tested 17< Meg Ohm which means H2 & O and that's it. I then used Bru'n Water using Brown Balanced. I don't have PH meter as of yet to test results of the additions so I don't know how mash PH turned out, but I know his spreadsheet is the bomb. I will get one at some point to verify. But wow what a difference between my last batch of the same recipe and this one. Thanks for all that you do for my sponge of a brain for this great hobby ! Prost !
That sounds awesome, Cameron, thank you sharing your experience! I’d love if my tap water was that clean.
These articles go to show how water composition makes such a difference. Ph being a big factor in achieving a more pleasing/balanced beer whereas the minerals achieve a taste that can be adjusted to a particular individuals preferences.
Malcolm, it’s great you chose to do a dry stout for the experiment. My dry stout is practically the same recipe (Jamil’s?) and over the last 5 or 6 brews I’ve been messing with the water profile. I actually enjoy the higher sulfate version. The crisp dryness is very drinkable. Although this last one I made I leaned towards chlorides and I feel it’s more appropriate for the style. Not sure why I think that? Trying to fit the norm I guess? I’d love to get a stout faucet and pour each version to see which one I preferred then.
Great articles!
Steve,
This recipe was actually from a friend who took gold in our local competition (http://trashcompetition.org/). His Dry Irish Stout was also 2nd in Best of Show. After taking his recipe, adding it to BeerSmith and adjusting it for my system, I went on the interwebs and looked around and also referred to Brewing Classic Styles – sure enough – it IS very close to JZ’s.
Well, other than my horrendous mispronunciation of “facilitate/ facilitator” (nerves?!…I’ll go with that) and of course bc of bad diction it kinda sounds like I say “nu-cu-lar” vs nuclear (major faux pas) I don’t sound any dumber than normal.
Go have a listen on Basic Brewing Radio.
OK been looking into EZ water thingy and Bru n water. Bru n water is totally too much for me to grasp. If I was running a full on micro I would get that in depth. EZ seems more my style. However some peeps here have said you can set up profiles? I don’t see it but do they mean just doing slight adjustments to make a more malty profile vs hoppy?
Go find a water profile that you want to use. They are all over the internet. Brewer’s Friend has a catalog of them that I like. Put in your city water profile, you can find this on the internet as well, or zeros across the board if using RO water. Then play around with the different minerals and get as close as you can to the desired profile. Watching this video should help. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fC921jpLbEU
Whatever floats your boat…both are good tools. Personally, I truly feel that if you step through the Bru’N Water once or twice and read the knowledge tab then you actually have an understanding of what is going on vs plugging in some numbers and getting some PFM (Pure F’n Magic) numbers out. EZ is a decent tool but I don’t care for magic boxes b/c I’ll never truly understand the process and that will keep me up at night. Bru’n water allows you to set up custom profiles and I think Brewer’s Friend’s Calculator does as well if you register – I cannot recall so am not 100% sure.
Sorry Dude yeah its not that I dont want to know its just us Brewers with kids dont have the time to work out formulas on sliderules. sliderules. Plus it takes away from drinking time too ????
Brewtrekker,
No need to apologize to me! haha. Sometimes simple is exactly what someone needs or what someone wants. Maybe it’ll be your gateway into the process. But really, if you’re getting the results you like – great! EZ Water is popular for good reason.
I thought this experiment was an interesting read.
However, I think if you did the xBmt with a pale ale rather than a stout, you would be able to demonstrate the effects of various water treatments better. For example, take a reasonably simple hoppy pale ale (SNPA like) and reduce the alkalinity to around say 25-30ppm for both samples and use a Cl:SO4 ratio of 1:2 for one sample, and Cl:SO4 ratio of 3:1 for the other sample. This should really show the how salt additions affect a profile where the alkalinity is kept the same and in the proper range.
The first sample should hopefully bring out the hop flavours, whilst the second should bring out the malty characteristics with less hop astringency.
Maybe this could be Part 3!
JG,
Thank you for taking the time to read and respond.
We taste such suggestions into account so we appreciate the response. Here are my replies –
“However, I think if you did the xBmt with a pale ale rather than a stout, you would be able to demonstrate the effects of various water treatments better.”
Better? Differently perhaps. But the results were significant with the stout. Certainly the style of beer, as you suggest, will alter HOW the differences are expressed.
If you follow the links provided in the article, John Palmer’s demonstration DID use both a pale ale and stout. We opted for only one beer for concise data collection (one triangle vs two) and since the previous xBmt (Water Chem pt 1) used a hoppy beer we decided to go with stout for this one.
Redacted
“Take a reasonably simple hoppy pale ale….reduce the alkalinity to around say 25-30ppm for both samples and use a Cl:SO4 ratio of 1:2 for one sample, and Cl:SO4 ratio of 3:1 for the other sample. This should really show the how salt additions affect a profile where the alkalinity is kept the same and in the proper range.”
I feel the results DID really show how salts affect a beer – stout in this case. I would love to re perform the xBmt with a pale hoppy beer just for funsies, but we need to keep the basis of the xBmts varied for all readers and keep the panelists on their toes. We choose 2:1 ans 1:2 for reason discussed here:(http://www.reddit.com/r/Homebrewing/comments/36d4k1/water_chemistry_pt_2_messing_with_minerals/)
“The first sample should hopefully bring out the hop flavours, whilst the second should bring out the malty characteristics with less hop astringency.”
That’s more or less what occurred here but with the twist being a dark beer. Since Dry Irish Stout is a relatively hoppy beer (bitterness vs aroma) it had the effect of altering two aspects.
Thanks again, Malcolm
Very cool experiment. It would also be great to see one comparing the flavor impact of regulating the ph with lactic acid vs citric acid.
That’s a great idea! I’m actually curious in differences using acid malt, phosphoric, citric, and lactic. Cheers!
I agree. i would love to do a lactic acid vs acid malt and/ or phosphoric vs lactic. Would perhaps need to live in the edge a little and use close to the reported flavor threshold of lactic.