# Water Profiles: Burton On Trent



## peas_and_corn (16/1/11)

What styles are best suited to a Burton on Trent water profile?

Cheers,
Dave


----------



## manticle (16/1/11)

From my reading only - traditionally IPA (UK) but I would guess that profile to be less in use now without some kind of treatment.


----------



## goatherder (16/1/11)

I'd say almost none - a historically accurate EPA/IPA would be about it.

According to the Burton profile in Beersmith, it has 700+ ppm of sulphate, 300ppm of calcium and 300ppm bicarbonate. These are very high numbers - particularly the sulphate level which is above the taste threshold. Sure, sulphate accentuates the hops but an overly minerally profile can be unpleasant.

If you are thinking about using a Burton water profile for a PA or IPA, my advice would be to tone it down a bit. Get the calcium & bicarbonate in the right range so your mash pH is OK and add enough sulphate to help bring out the hops - maybe 200ppm tops.

I see some historical water profiles as being unsuitable for brewing - the brewers at the time had to resort to various tricks and hacks to make drinkable beer. As a homebrewer, particularly in Australia where most of our water is quite soft, we have the advantage of being able to get the right water for the style of beer most of the time. Blindly copying famous water profiles takes away that advantage.


----------



## peas_and_corn (16/1/11)

Hmm yeah, that's far too high. I wouldn't be surprised if brewers in that area RO'ed their water


----------



## carrobrew (13/1/21)

Reviving an old thread. Would you use this profile for an ESB? I have a recipe that suggests it but throws my PH out (down to 5.16)


----------



## MHB (13/1/21)

ESB is mostly a London beer, rather than a Burton. So not a chance in hell.
There is lots said about Burton water, a fair fraction of it is BS or at a minimum not very historically accurate. Another point worth considering is that brewers have always modified their water, boiling, slaking or aerating all act to change the water that brewers get handed.
In Burton there were over a hundred years three separate water sources used, the river, shallow wells and deep wells (referred to as above and below the Marl - a clay layer that separates two water tables), all very different, which one made Burton famous?

Would need to see it to believe a reading of 5.16pH to believe it, there simply isn't enough phosphate in a grain bill to get you down that low. Mind you there is some work being done on mashing lower than that (<5.1pH), kills of Lipoxygenase one of the big beer staling processes. Probably of more interest to low body lightly hopped yellow pissy fizzy than bigger beers.

Mate do a bit more reading up on Water Chemistry, have a look at some of the better calculators and see what they recommend for an ESB, just don't go adding 700 ppm of Sulphate and expect anything other than a very minerally beer.
Avoid people that tell you to add carbonate to anything that isn't black as and if you really care get a pH meter.
Mark


----------



## kadmium (13/1/21)

MHB said:


> ESB is mostly a London beer, rather than a Burton. So not a chance in hell.
> There is lots said about Burton water, a fair fraction of it is BS or at a minimum not very historically accurate. Another point worth considering is that brewers have always modified their water, boiling, slaking or aerating all act to change the water that brewers get handed.
> In Burton there were over a hundred years three separate water sources used, the river, shallow wells and deep wells (referred to as above and below the Marl - a clay layer that separates two water tables), all very different, which one made Burton famous?
> 
> ...


Lactic acid well get yah well below 5.16 

Agree with all the above. Also adding that much sulfates can give you the runs!


----------



## MHB (13/1/21)

I think its the Mg that leads to skid marks, mind you there is a ridiculous amount of that in some Burtonised water.
Lactic acid is rarely regarded as a salt (smartarse).
Lactic Acid will get you so low you could try mashing with Gama Amylase, the lost little brother to Alpha and Beta, only works around 2.5pH, strangely that's about about the pH of grain that's been wet and warm long enough for the lacto bacteria to go troppo. Isn't evolution a bitch.
Mark


----------



## carrobrew (13/1/21)

Not sure if it will actually get to 5.13 this was just going off the software, which is what I have let do all my water calculations based off my source water report.

I get the basics of water chemistry (Sulphate to chloride ratio etc) and I just let the software do the rest and add what it tells me to get to the target profile. Not at the stage of getting a PH meter yet. I figure Brewfather will get me close enough.

Reading this and other posts I think I will steer clear of the burton Profile, 700ppm seems ridiculous compared to any other profile I’ve used. What would you recommend for an ESB?


----------



## kadmium (13/1/21)

carrobrew said:


> Not sure if it will actually get to 5.13 this was just going off the software, which is what I have let do all my water calculations based off my source water report.
> 
> I get the basics of water chemistry (Sulphate to chloride ratio etc) and I just let the software do the rest and add what it tells me to get to the target profile. Not at the stage of getting a PH meter yet. I figure Brewfather will get me close enough.
> 
> Reading this and other posts I think I will steer clear of the burton Profile, 700ppm seems ridiculous compared to any other profile I’ve used. What would you recommend for an ESB?


I targeted Amber Dry on bru'n water, which is about 150 sulphate to 50 chloride. I liked it. Too much so4 can give a minerally bite which some people enjoy in beers, I don't.


----------

