# What Makes Megaswill Just So Crap?



## sponge (21/4/08)

Hey

Last nite i was in sydney and on a very tight budget (went up with a few mates and stayed at 1-bunk bed room to sleep four of us.... it was a room about 2x3, and just had enough room to walk past the bunkbed. all in all, it was a good nite sleep haha) but I had tooheys new for the first time in a hellova long time, and was just wondering... why are these megaswill beers just so crap? I struggled to finish my beer which im not really used to saying, but its true

Is it that theyre just made with under-quality ingredients? no late hopping for aroma and flavour? bad yeast? what is it?

Im just curious to see what is the real reason....


Sponge


----------



## razz (21/4/08)

Evening sponge. I can't comment on their ingredients but I have a bit of a theory about the beers storage properties. The big brewery beers don't appear to travel very well, kegs fair a bit better than smaller glass and aluminium. The beer is probably not to bad when "brewery fresh" as they say in the ads but given the rigors of our weather conditions and transport I think they go down hill very quickly. Have you ever driven past a pub bottlo and noticed pallets of booze sitting in the sun for hours at a time ? I have, and you generally don't have to look to far.


----------



## Fatgodzilla (21/4/08)

razz said:


> Evening sponge. I can't comment on their ingredients but I have a bit of a theory about the beers storage properties. The big brewery beers don't appear to travel very well, kegs fair a bit better than smaller glass and aluminium. The beer is probably not to bad when "brewery fresh" as they say in the ads but given the rigors of our weather conditions and transport I think they go down hill very quickly. Have you ever driven past a pub bottlo and noticed pallets of booze sitting in the sun for hours at a time ? I have, and you generally don't have to look to far.



The late great Beer Hunter Mike Jackson summed it up perfectly well when he said (paraphrasing) australian beer was primarily tasteless lagers made for no other purpose but to get the locals drunk. Sponge, we have now spoiled you. You are drinking beers with flavour. Razz, you are too kind, but probably true. We don't cherish our beer. Look at the average beer truck - its not refrigerated, its made for mass transport. 

Cherish the micros, cherish us homies. May your beer be fresh and have flavour.


----------



## Screwtop (21/4/08)

The difference is 3 things.

Colour

Flavour

And

Aroma

Thats all! :lol:


----------



## Muggus (21/4/08)

I have a secret theory that they purposely brew it to be quite horrible to prevent binge drinking....obviously my theory is flawed...


----------



## wabster (21/4/08)

Muggus said:


> I have a secret theory that they purposely brew it to be quite horrible to prevent binge drinking....obviously my theory is flawed...



The theory is sound, it's horrible to drink - If you let it get warm! So people drink it fast to avoid tasting it. Ever tried a schooner that's been left sitting for a while, even on a moderately warm day? Aussie beer is served cold enough to preclude tasting it. So people drink fast and furious, therefor binge drinking!

Conversely a nice homemade ale will develop aromas/flavours and actually taste better when consumed just above the temp it was served at. And the smell is a teaser to a great taste experience to come.

That's my corollory to your theory Muggus  Hahaha Cheerz Wab.


----------



## kabooby (21/4/08)

My theory is that we now have an educated palate. Im sure we all used to drink it at some stage, and we used to love it  

We all didnt start drinking chimay's now did we

Kabooby :icon_cheers:


----------



## Barramundi (21/4/08)

kabooby said:


> My theory is that we now have an educated palate. Im sure we all used to drink it at some stage, and we used to love it
> 
> We all didnt start drinking chimay's now did we
> 
> Kabooby :icon_cheers:




what he said , to the letter almost ..


----------



## AlwayzLoozeCount (21/4/08)

Im gonna have to admit that I drink VB on almost a daily basis, not because I like the taste but because at the local I drink at dosn't serve much of anything. Anything in a 330ml bottle seems to be considered premium and attracts a price tag that isn't worthy of the product and is out of date any way because I am the only person that would buy somthing like it. As somone mentioned before cold tastless but it gets you drunk, gonna have to say if it didn't get me drunk no way in the world would I drink it. If the pub is a clean one then the beer lines should be washed quite regulary and this makes a huge difference, sour beer probably means your drinking from a slack pub with no pride for thier job at all.
I just feel sorry for the people when they are leaving, they always go up to the bar and say "can I get a few roadies please"
I cant remember the last time I asked for roadies. Anyway If I did want roadies I'd just go 50m up the road and get somthing nice from Dan Murphy's for half the price. I'd rather drink my own brew than anything lion nathan or cub makes.
This is QLD im lucky we arn't all force fed xxxx (barbed wire) anymore.


----------



## Thirsty Boy (22/4/08)

They are very dry, very light bodied, brewed with very lightly flavored malts, use a fair proportion of sugar adjunct in the brewing process, are brewed at quite high temperatures for beers that are "technically" lagers and are bittered either with purley ISO hop extract or a combination of that and a high cohumulone/high Alpha hop.

So they have very little malt flavour, very little residual sweetness, very low body, no hop character to speak of and a relatively harsh bitterness.

All of that adds up to fairly easy to drink in large quantities beer - if its ice cold. Which is a suitable beverage for mass consumption in a hot climate. Let it warm up and there are no pleasant flavours for the harshness to hide behind, so it just tastes harsh.

I personally think that the "nasty" aspect of Aussie mega brew is a direct result of it being the product of an almost exclusively hot country. The mega brew from every tropical or mostly hot country (at least the ones I have had) is actively unpleasant if allowed to warm up.. because you are meant to get it into you ice cold ; and therefore some of the niceties of flavour don't really matter and are ignored by the brewer. Drink it the way its supposed to be drunk and you wont taste it anyway. 

Now look at the megaswill in countries where it gets properly cold .... Germany springs to mind, but the US is probably a better example. Their mega brew isn't like ours, it might be bland, boring, watery etc etc.... but it isn't nasty. Because in a colder climate people might not be so fast to chug down a glass of ice cold beer, and the beer has to be able to stand up to being a little warmer on consumption. So while they aren't flavour explosions, at least they don't taste actively bad.

That my theory anyway.

Thirsty


----------



## matti (22/4/08)

I intend to agree with TB with Australian is a hot country and a cold drink for a "drinker" is more appealing.

That includes yours truly on a hot day.

Pumpys words of wisdom is probably closer to the mark.
You have developed a palate now and plain old "megaswill doesn't tickle your fancy.

matti


----------



## blackbock (22/4/08)

One thing that noone has mentioned: Lots of pubs in Australia don't know what it means to keep their beerlines clean! I actually think that megaswill usually tastes better from bottles, at least you know that it hasn't travelled through tens of metres of crud to reach your mouth.


----------



## bonj (22/4/08)

My opinion, is that it's not the quality of the ingredients that is questionable. It's the product. It has very little depth because it doesn't need to. It's slammed down fast at freezing temperatures, and the breweries know it. So they don't make a product with depth, just a simple pale malt, around 20-30% sugar... as a result, it gets nasty when it warms up. Add to this, the non-existant flavour and aroma profiles (no depth), and the low bitterness ( <=20 IBUs), means it's a very simple beer, but has no room to move.


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (22/4/08)

It has got something to do with the preservatives and iso-hop extract...I think...

Try this or an experiment


Go to the pub that serves Coopers


Buy a schooner of Megaswil, and a schooner of Coopers..

Leave them in the sun for 1/2Hr

Now sample both...one is drinkable...the other will make you gag...

The sunlight has some sort of affect on MegaBeers...


----------



## geoffi (22/4/08)

Ducatiboy stu said:


> It has got something to do with the preservatives and iso-hop extract...I think...
> 
> Try this or an experiment
> 
> ...



I'd say it's more to do with the temperature. Is there anything on Earth as revolting as warmed-up megaswill?


----------



## Fents (22/4/08)

What makes it crap is the fact they charge $40 for 9Litres of bullshit beer when i can produce 23Litres for around the $20 which shits on any of their crap.

Edit - if they only charged $10 a slab it would hurt alot less imo.


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (22/4/08)

Geoffi said:


> I'd say it's more to do with the temperature. Is there anything on Earth as revolting as warmed-up megaswill?




UV light definatly has an affect...I remember reading somewhere that UV affects Isohops in particular, causing the sulpher type flavour & smell


----------



## ibast (22/4/08)

Two things make Australian main stream beer crap:
1. *Can sugar*. It makes the beer thin. Breweries use it because it's a cheap way of getting alcohol levels up. It's illegal to put can sugar in wine, why should it not be illegal to do so with beer?

2. *Pride of Ringwood hops.* Breweries use it because they can get the maximum bitterness for the minimum amount of ingredient, due to it's high bitterness. It also helps cover up the thinness of the can sugar mentioned above. The problem is it's bitterness comes at the expence of flavour.

Tooheys have a third problem in that their yeast is just plain terrible. It's what gives their beers that soapy taste.

Add to this commercial practices are underhanded. I believe when a brewery introduces a new beer that make it to a relatively high standard. After a certain cycle where they now have regular drinkers, they then start cutting costs over a long period of time. The result is, over a long period, their very ordinary product becomes just plain rubbish.


----------



## petesbrew (22/4/08)

Fents said:


> What makes it crap is the fact they charge $40 for 9Litres of bullshit beer when i can produce 23Litres for around the $20 which shits on any of their crap.
> 
> Edit - if they only charged $10 a slab it would hurt alot less imo.


Plus the fact you see New/Draught every now and again at the $40 mark!!!, and slightly better Euro-megaswill available for only a few $ difference, Is there any choice to be made?
So happy that I homebrew. I'd have one of my half-arsed not-to-style k&k attempts over a new anyday.

I had that Boags Classic Blonde on the weekend. It was... well, you know. At least it was cold.


----------



## shonky (22/4/08)

ibast said:


> Tooheys have a third problem in that their yeast is just plain terrible. It's what gives their beers that soapy taste.



Not sure I agree with that (can't believe I am defending Toohey's New  ) It is my understanding that James Squire Pilsner is brewed using Toohey's New yeast (and their Ale's using Toohey's Old). Can't be all bad as their Pils has just taken out the Gold medal in the World Beer Cup in the Bohemian Pils category.

If you want to taste the light struck flavour take a bottle of vb, pour into a clear glass and leave out in the sun for 8 minutes. Rebottle and put in the fridge overnight - Uggh :angry: . It tastes more like cat's p*ss (the yanks say it smells exactly like skunk). I tried the same experiment with green glass and the result, to me, tasted like Stella - go figure! Turn your VB into Stella (the imported, long shipping, poor handled version) by putting it in the sun for 8 mins!

Leave the megaswill on the shelf and support your local micro!


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (22/4/08)

ibast said:


> 2. *Pride of Ringwood hops.* Breweries use it because they can get the maximum bitterness for the minimum amount of ingredient, due to it's high bitterness. It also helps cover up the thinness of the can sugar mentioned above. The problem is it's bitterness comes at the expence of flavour.



WHOA....Tony will have kittens when he reads this..

I wouldnt be blaming POR...I have made several beers ( and Coopers make Pala & Sparkiling with this hop ) and they are fine..and I dont mind it as a Hop by itself.....


----------



## geoffi (22/4/08)

POR seems to fit the saying, "A good servant but a poor master".


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (22/4/08)

Geoffi said:


> POR seems to fit the saying, "A good servant but a poor master".




A good brewer can make POR rich...


----------



## floppinab (22/4/08)

shonky said:


> If you want to taste the light struck flavour take a bottle of vb, pour into a clear glass and leave out in the sun for 8 minutes. Rebottle and put in the fridge overnight - Uggh :angry: . It tastes more like cat's p*ss (the yanks say it smells exactly like skunk).



Prolly a fair bit of oxydisation using that method as well shonky. If you want to sample "pure" lightstrike grab a bottle of that light ice or extra dry stuff, anything Aussie made in a clear bottle. Leave it in the sun for a day, chill it down and sample. We tried this during the BJCP study sessions last year, you could smell it coming from the glass a metre away, just think what that fluro light in the bottle shops is doing to this stuff. :icon_vomit:


----------



## Julez (22/4/08)

On the whole I agree with the gist of everyone's comments, but I still enjoy a nice, cold Carlton Draught on tap. It's quenching and has that nice, nutty flavour that is very distinctive and a lot different to the bottled product. As for the beer tasting crap warm - who cares, it's not meant to be consumed warm!! Would you chill an English Bitter to lager temps before drinking it? 

Obviously craft-brewed beer is going to be nicer to someone that truly appreciates a good brew. It's like instant coffee vs. brewed. But to compare megaswill to craft-brewed alternatives, the difference is a mass-produced, cost-cutting, volume-based product, compared to a small batch, niche-based, premium-priced one - No brainer! Those with more educated palates should feel fortunate. I assume you all ONLY eat grain-fed beef, drink French Champagne and eat home-baked bread with fresh butter as opposed to margarine too! Unless you only consume the best of everything, then I am quite sure every one of us puts away plenty of mass-produced crap in one form or other!


----------



## darrell.wallace (22/4/08)

I could hardly finish the last commercial beer that i had but there were plenty people around me who enjoyed the same product immensly.

If i was going into a business to make money i would make sure i produced a product that took the biggest slice of the market possible. This i guess is the difference with micro's. they are deliberately aiming for a niche market because it is soemthing they feel pationately about.

Having worked in pubs for many years it never ceased to amaze me the amount people could drink in one night (or morning or afternoon) any time of the day really. The business managers at CUB and the like have done a great job in marketing their products and ensuring the continued success of their business.

I brew because i would much prefer a beer with style and flavour but it is not for everyone.


----------



## BoilerBoy (22/4/08)

Ducatiboy stu said:


> A good brewer can make POR rich...



Totally agree, I'm a convert, 

As far as "megaswill goes" Someone on this site a while back and I can't remember who it was described most commercial breweries as "Manufactures of beer" rather than brewers.

Designed by accountants,
Sold by clever marketeers.
To the utterly ignorant.

Cheers
BB


----------



## peas_and_corn (22/4/08)

Thirsty Boy said:


> They are very dry, very light bodied, brewed with very lightly flavored malts, use a fair proportion of sugar adjunct in the brewing process, are brewed at quite high temperatures for beers that are "technically" lagers and are bittered either with purley ISO hop extract or a combination of that and a high cohumulone/high Alpha hop.
> 
> So they have very little malt flavour, very little residual sweetness, very low body, no hop character to speak of and a relatively harsh bitterness.
> 
> ...




Certainly! However, there's one aspect which worries me, but seems to be the case- _many Australians don't really like the taste of beer._ The problem is that the breweries push for large market stuff, which means that they do what has been mentioned earlier- make stuff that tastes all right at 0C. this forum is abound with stories of seeing people at bars turning their noses up at craft beers and then downing a couple of XXXX.


----------



## Julez (22/4/08)

nird99 said:


> Having worked in pubs for many years it never ceased to amaze me the amount people could drink in one night (or morning or afternoon) any time of the day really. The business managers at CUB and the like have done a great job in marketing their products and ensuring the continued success of their business.



That's an interesting comment - I'd be interested to know the rate of alchohol abuse comparing consumers of mass-produced beer to craft-brewed beer. Logically, people who would drink the craft-brewed stuff would "appreciate" the beer more and therefore consume it more moderately, one would assume...All depends of the objectives of the drinker - save money, get blotto or actually enjoy the beer!


----------



## Thirsty Boy (22/4/08)

ibast said:


> Two things make Australian main stream beer crap:
> 1. *Can sugar*. It makes the beer thin. Breweries use it because it's a cheap way of getting alcohol levels up. It's illegal to put can sugar in wine, why should it not be illegal to do so with beer?
> 
> 2. *Pride of Ringwood hops.* Breweries use it because they can get the maximum bitterness for the minimum amount of ingredient, due to it's high bitterness. It also helps cover up the thinness of the can sugar mentioned above. The problem is it's bitterness comes at the expence of flavour.
> ...




Sorry ibast, gonna have to disagree with you there.

Can't talk for Tooheys, can for the other side.

1 - Its not purely cane sugar. The levels of sugar are (as someone else mentioned) around 20% of the fermentables, and only around half of that is sucrose. Plus its not really to lower costs because the sugar is "cheaper" its to increase throughput of the plant by allowing a higher kettle volume with a smaller malt charge and therefore a smaller mash-lauter tun and a faster mash - lauter time. Oh and largely its to achieve a deliberate lightening of the body of the beer because the mainstream Australian palate doesn't actually like a full bodied beer. Anyway - nothing wrong with sugar, the belgians use a high proportion of it to some sucess I notice.

2 - People keep banging on about the POR hops. Firstly as a few people have said already... nothing wrong with the hops. Coopers tastes fine and its all POR. Secondly - think of the a (non Tooheys) widespread mega brew ... whichever one it was, chances are there weren't any damn POR hops in it. Not a single pellet, Its all done with ISO. Don't _know_ about tooheys, but I strongly suspect that they are the same. Oh and beers made with ISO are less likely to get lightstruck than if they were made with actual hops... its one of the reasons its used. It still skunks, but not as quickly/severely.

3 - sorry, but your last point is just plain wrong. Doesn't happen like that. I've been a brewery worker for 19 years and it just doesn't go that way.


People need to remember - doen't matter what your homebrew refined sensibilities tell you - this is a market economy. The beers taste the way they do, because thats the sort of beers that sell well. Unfortunately, the vast majority of people who drink beer in this country and indeed the world like that sort of beer... and billion dollar companies are in the business of giving their customers what they like.

Doesn't mean we have to though - craft beer, homebrew - buy it, make it, spread the message.


----------



## PostModern (22/4/08)

Julez said:


> On the whole I agree with the gist of everyone's comments, but I still enjoy a nice, cold Carlton Draught on tap. It's quenching and has that nice, nutty flavour that is very distinctive and a lot different to the bottled product. As for the beer tasting crap warm - who cares, it's not meant to be consumed warm!! Would you chill an English Bitter to lager temps before drinking it?
> 
> Obviously craft-brewed beer is going to be nicer to someone that truly appreciates a good brew. It's like instant coffee vs. brewed. But to compare megaswill to craft-brewed alternatives, the difference is a mass-produced, cost-cutting, volume-based product, compared to a small batch, niche-based, premium-priced one - No brainer! Those with more educated palates should feel fortunate. I assume you all ONLY eat grain-fed beef, drink French Champagne and eat home-baked bread with fresh butter as opposed to margarine too! Unless you only consume the best of everything, then I am quite sure every one of us puts away plenty of mass-produced crap in one form or other!



I eat Helga's or local bakery bread, no margarine. Sure we have some canned items in the pantry, but mostly we eat fresh veg, often from our own garden. When it comes to plonk, I could be drinking anything from $3 cleanskins to Henschke, depending on the occasion and yes, I even sometimes buy Aussie megaswill, but not often, sometimes, it's a cheap source of bottles  

Sure we all have some mainstream mass produced products from time to time, but some of us don't seek them out.


----------



## ibast (22/4/08)

shonky said:


> Not sure I agree with that (can't believe I am defending Toohey's New  ) It is my understanding that James Squire Pilsner is brewed using Toohey's New yeast (and their Ale's using Toohey's Old).



Yep and I could taste it when they went over and I stopped drinking their product at that point.


----------



## Fatgodzilla (22/4/08)

Thirsty Boy said:


> People need to remember - doen't matter what your homebrew refined sensibilities tell you - this is a market economy. The beers taste the way they do, because thats the sort of beers that sell well. Unfortunately, the vast majority of people who drink beer in this country and indeed the world like that sort of beer... and billion dollar companies are in the business of giving their customers what they like.
> 
> Doesn't mean we have to though - craft beer, homebrew - buy it, make it, spread the message.



I don't think its necessarily that everyone likes the beer for its tastes. The market has been "conditioned" by advertising and availability to drink the beers that are readily available. The beer they get in cans / on tap is what they are used to having and in true human style, they are comfortable with it. They don't want to change cos they feel safe with their product. That's why 90% of the people who drink your homebrew cringe cos it doesn't taste like VB or XXXX or New. Most will cringe at Coopers for goodness sake. The other 10% might feel happy to drink something new, but 90% of them will go back to the pack. As a rule its people like us that move away from the midstream. We are the exceptions.


----------



## Jazzafish (22/4/08)

I think the following recipe specifics have a lot to do with it:

Little to no specialty malt
Up to 40% sugar in fermentables
Final gravities below 1.008 (test for yourself)
Hop extract instead of hops 
Polyclar strips a lot of flavour... along with chill haze
Fast ferments... 1 week lagers
Pasteurisation


----------



## ibast (22/4/08)

Thirsty Boy said:


> The beers taste the way they do, because thats the sort of beers that sell well. Unfortunately, the vast majority of people who drink beer in this country and indeed the world like that sort of beer... and billion dollar companies are in the business of giving their customers what they like.



No, beer tastes the way it does because breweries can get away with it and it costs more to do otherwise. Australians believe their beer is strong, but in reality it is a thin beer that is heavily hoped with a very unsubtle hop. The hops is used to hide how low the malt level is.

The big two breweries are in the buisness of making money not beer. Beer is just a means to getting the money.

And I disagree with your stretch to the world. The rest of the developed world, and some underdeveloped countries are capable of making good beer without producing the piss that our major breweries do.

Oh and 20% sugar is criminal.

Fortunatly I think Australians are slowly waking up. It'll take a few generations.


----------



## shonky (22/4/08)

floppinab said:


> If you want to sample "pure" lightstrike grab a bottle of that light ice or extra dry stuff, anything Aussie made in a clear bottle. Leave it in the sun for a day, chill it down and sample.



I thought that the light-ice and extra dry were hoppped with 'tetra' a reduced isomerized hop product added post fermentation, but could well be wrong. Tetra doesn't tend to produce the light-struck phenomena. Some of the other staling compounds in beers such as aldehydes can be highlighted by storage under extremes of temperature maybe this was what you could taste?

VB was used in the experiment that I was party to as it apparently DOES use real hops!!

Cheers


----------



## bonj (22/4/08)

ibast said:


> No, beer tastes the way it does because breweries can get away with it and it costs more to do otherwise. Australians believe their beer is strong, but in reality it is a thin beer that is heavily hoped with a very unsubtle hop. The hops is used to hide how low the malt level is.
> 
> The big two breweries are in the buisness of making money not beer. Beer is just a means to getting the money.
> 
> ...


The mega lagers are in no way "heavily hopped". I wouldn't call 20 IBUs heavily hopped. Thirsty Boy is right. Whether the public want crap beer because that's what they've been trained to like isn't the issue anymore.


----------



## Julez (22/4/08)

ibast said:


> No, beer tastes the way it does because breweries can get away with it and it costs more to do otherwise. Australians believe their beer is strong, but in reality it is a thin beer that is heavily hoped with a very unsubtle hop. The hops is used to hide how low the malt level is.
> 
> The big two breweries are in the buisness of making money not beer. Beer is just a means to getting the money.
> 
> ...



I'm sure their goal is profit, rather than beer making, per se, but their profitability demonstrates their success. As you say, "they get away with it". That means people like it!! Otherwise, they wouldn't buy it. Just because YOU don't like it...

People make their buying decision not just on flavour and quality anyway. There are many other factors - pricing, product availability, brand alignment, drinking it because their mates do....


----------



## maltedhopalong (22/4/08)

"The hops is used to hide how low the malt level is."

Don't know that I necessarily agree with this. If anything, more hops mutes the maltiness even more. I.e. if they wanted to hide how little malt flavour there was, you would think they would try to accentuate it by DECREASING the hops.

I +1 to the idea that the hops profiles they use are to portray local beer as being "strong" (tough, etc.) when in fact it is (in relative terms) very light flavoured. Like has been mentioned, the hops levels they use are apparently quite low (i.e. rarely above 25, 26) but it dominates the taste profile due to the low maltiness.


----------



## mfdes (22/4/08)

The idea that we drink mainstream brand beer styles because they're essentially pushed on us is pretty ludictous. The beer industry in Australia has gone through major changes (it originated as an extension of what was happening in England in the 19th century), and these changes have been largely consumer driven. A new beer consumers like will sell well and gain market share (VB in the 70s). A new beer that consumers don't enjoy will lose market share and sink into oblivion (many come to mind).

People who blame POR for bad tasting beer don't know how to use them.
Those who blame adjuncts have not tasted Belgian beers.

It is what it is and it sells well because people like it. Whether this is conditioning or free choice is irrelevant. It just IS.

MFS.


----------



## Fents (22/4/08)

PostModern said:


> sometimes, it's a cheap source of bottles



$35-40 is cheap for 24 bottles? :huh:


----------



## the_fuzz (22/4/08)

Thirsty Boy said:


> Not a single pellet, Its all done with ISO. Don't _know_ about tooheys, but I strongly suspect that they are the same.



They are still using pellets and ISO at the same time - depending on the beer.

They are actually using this as a differentiator within the industry "We are Tooheys and we still use real hops, CUB doesn't use real hops anymore" But give it 6 months and I would say no more pellets


----------



## the_fuzz (22/4/08)

ibast said:


> Yep and I could taste it when they went over and I stopped drinking their product at that point.



Where did they go over to? Or where did they come from?


----------



## mfdes (22/4/08)

When you say CUB no longer use hops, what do you mean?
Many CUB beers are hopped with pellets and even late hopped, and being very familiar with the hop industry, I can tell you they sell a lot of hops to the breweries. 
For example Cascade Premium is late hopped with (I think) Tassie hersbrucker. Their (crap tasting) carbon-neutral fad Cascade green is hopped with very nice Galaxy hops. Cascade first harvest use this year a new, unnamed cultivar for flavour and aroma. 
Best to be specific and not generalise one's experience from one or a few beers to the industry in general.

MFS.


----------



## the_fuzz (22/4/08)

ibast said:


> No, beer tastes the way it does because breweries can get away with it and it costs more to do otherwise.



Or they produce the beer that the market will buy - which is exactly what is happening. 



ibast said:


> Australians believe their beer is strong,



It is strong, in regards to Alcohol content - compared to the yanks we have very strong beer




ibast said:


> The hops is used to hide how low the malt level is.



That makes no sense



ibast said:


> The big two breweries are in the buisness of making money not beer. Beer is just a means to getting the money.



Is that not how every business works? You have a business to make money, you sell a product - this is just the means to get the money




ibast said:


> The rest of the developed world, and some underdeveloped countries are capable of making good beer without producing the piss that our major breweries do.



Name of the other Megabreweries that produce outstanding beer

BTW if Aussie Megaswill is so crap on the international stage, why do they keep winning awards in international comps (Real comps)




ibast said:


> Fortunatly I think Australians are slowly waking up. It'll take a few generations.



That would not be indicated by the sales of the megswills - they are selling more then ever..........

It just sounds like you have a gripe against the Big Breweries. Even thou must of us here would have gotten our taste for beer from beers like New, VB, XXXX. But hey, some people just hate seeing large companies succeeding


----------



## the_fuzz (22/4/08)

mfdes said:


> Best to be specific and not generalise one's experience from one or a few beers to the industry in general.
> 
> MFS.



TB works for CUB.........

And from an exec at Tooheys, he told me that CUB also do not use any pellets any more

Cascade may obviously be an except - I think TB was refering more to the stock CUB beers, VB, draught etc


----------



## ibast (22/4/08)

Whats_Wrong_with_Hahn said:


> Where did they go over to? Or where did they come from?



Not "where", "when". James squire started using it some time after they were bought by Lion Nathon. I didn't know they had been bought out. I tasted it a few years ago and thought "this has changed. it tastes like Tooheys dishwater" then did a bit of a google to find out they had been bought out a not that long before.


----------



## the_fuzz (22/4/08)

ibast said:


> Not "where", "when". James squire started using it some time after they were bought by Lion Nathon. I didn't know they had been bought out. I tasted it a few years ago and thought "this has changed. it tastes like Tooheys dishwater" then did a bit of a google to find out they had been bought out a not that long before.




LOL, ok........


----------



## bonj (22/4/08)

ibast said:


> Not "where", "when". James squire started using it some time after they were bought by Lion Nathon. I didn't know they had been bought out. I tasted it a few years ago and thought "this has changed. it tastes like Tooheys dishwater" then did a bit of a google to find out they had been bought out a not that long before.


Uhh.... they've always been owned by Lion Nathan... they just got more popular and had to shift production to a larger brewery. Ever wondered how Hahn Brewery (which was bought by Lion Nathan) and James Squire started in the same building?


----------



## ibast (22/4/08)

Whats_Wrong_with_Hahn said:


> It just sounds like you have a gripe against the Big Breweries. Even thou must of us here would have gotten our taste for beer from beers like New, VB, XXXX. But hey, some people just hate seeing large companies succeeding



No I have a problem with the c-grade product they spew out. I believe it is the direct result of the Duo-duopoly they hold on the market.

I got my taste for good beer with products other than those made by CUB & Lion Nathan.

Australian beer is like Bert Newtons 20 to 1. People only watch it because there is nothing else on. Until recently (say 10 years ago) better beer was significantly more expensive than mainstream swill.

This meant that the Australian palate has become used to it. It doesn't mean it's good.

People still buy McDonalds, not because they prefer it to a burger with the lot from the local, but because it is cheap and convenient and the marketing is strong.

CUB and Lion Nathan products are the McDonalds and Hungry Jacks of the beer world.


----------



## Julez (22/4/08)

ibast said:


> No I have a problem with the c-grade product they spew out. I believe it is the direct result of the Duo-duopoly they hold on the market.
> 
> I got my taste for good beer with products other than those made by CUB & Lion Nathan.
> 
> ...



picture millions of Australians with pegs on their noses and wrinkled faces, despising every drop of mass-produced Australian beer that passes their lips...yep, they are hating every minute of it... Did you ever stop for a second to think, that maybe these people are happy with their own choices??


----------



## ibast (22/4/08)

Bonj said:


> Uhh.... they've always been owned by Lion Nathan... they just got more popular and had to shift production to a larger brewery. Ever wondered how Hahn Brewery (which was bought by Lion Nathan) and James Squire started in the same building?




OK, that wasn't my understanding. All the same there was a point where some of their products changed yeasts. Their product was definitely inferior after that.


----------



## ibast (22/4/08)

Julez said:


> picture millions of Australians with pegs on their noses and wrinkled faces, despising every drop of mass-produced Australian beer that passes their lips...yep, they are hating every minute of it... Did you ever stop for a second to think, that maybe these people are happy with their own choices??



When you are a teenager you think masturbation is the best thing in the world.

Then you get a blow job.


----------



## pokolbinguy (22/4/08)

ibast said:


> When you are a teenager you think masturbation is the best thing in the world.
> 
> Then you get a blow job.



hahaha so true!!


----------



## AUHEAMIC (22/4/08)

I was raised on VB and drank it exclusively for 25 years until I started home brewing. For me it was the best beer in the world and no one could tell me any different. Now that my taste has been changed I can no longer drink VB and to me it tastes like crap. So in answer to your question What Makes Megaswill Just So Crap? I would have to say for me home brewing.


----------



## geoffi (22/4/08)

Whats_Wrong_with_Hahn said:


> It is strong, in regards to Alcohol content - compared to the yanks we have very strong beer



Beg to differ. AFAIK, standard American lagers are around 5% abv. That's stronger than the current crop (or crap) of Aussie ms.

It's their jihad against anything resembling a beer-like flavour that has made US mass-market beers seem weak and watery. But they do tend to contain alcohol.


----------



## Hutch (22/4/08)

Peels said:


> What Makes Megaswill Just So Crap? I would have to say for me home brewing.


Well said!
I have to say that I've always thought VB / Draught etc. taste like sh1t, and struggled to get used to drinking this filth in my late teens, as is expected of a young Aussie male. I started brewing when I was 18, in the hope that I could try to make beer that was like the imported stuff, which for a Uni student was just too much $$$.

I'm a firm believer that Aussie megaswill is indeed vile, and no amount of expensive advertising could ever convince me otherwise. We're all forced to drink the stuff on odd occasions (weddings, parties, etc.) so we are constantly reminded of how bad it is - seems to get worse every time!

I think a large proportion of the drinking public would also agree, however we are "expected" to drink the stuff, and not say a bad word about it, for fear of being branded a "snob", a "yuppy" or a "poof". This is more to do with the Aussie bloke mentality and drinking culture than it is to do with buying the cheapest product on the market.


----------



## Fatgodzilla (22/4/08)

Julez said:


> picture millions of Australians with pegs on their noses and wrinkled faces, despising every drop of mass-produced Australian beer that passes their lips...yep, they are hating every minute of it... Did you ever stop for a second to think, that maybe these people are happy with their own choices??




Julez you aint wrong, but you are missing the point. They have their own free will to choose, its just that they cannot see the full market. The main philosophy of advertising is to condition consumers minds that what they associate with in the advert is the best thing for them. For the average Australian they see these brilliant commercial advertisements and select the product accordingly. Its not rocket science. With the mass produced beer, they see they want. They are conditioned to that beer. They see the "premium" brands - eg Crown Lager and say "this costs more, it must be better". They are happy with their choices. Its only when they find there really is a better choice do they become homebrewers.

And I wiill say, there is nothing wrong with megaswell. It's just not my first choice of tipple for all of us here on this site.


----------



## shonky (22/4/08)

Bonj said:


> Uhh.... they've always been owned by Lion Nathan... they just got more popular and had to shift production to a larger brewery.



They did, but no James Squire beers are made at Lidcombe anymore.

I believe that the Pils, the IPA, the porter are all made at Camperdown again, (maybe why their pils tastes great again and winning the gold at the WBC seems to attest to this). The Amber and the Golden are brewed at the Adelaide brewery I think :unsure: .

I have it on reasonable authority that they still use the Toohey's new yeast to make the Pils at Campderwdown, and probably always have done. It could be the fermentaion management rather than the yeast strain, or perhaps aspects of the 'hot-side' of production which resulted in the beer being below-par when brewed at Lidcombe.

My view is that it wasn't as hoppy and the bitterness was harsher before production moved back and it didn't have the same malty mouthfeel as it does again now.


----------



## maltedhopalong (22/4/08)

Just putting this out there (knowing that many will disagree).

Fact: Many many Aussie's actually enjoy megaswill, otherwise there would not be the HUGE brand loyalty out there that there is.

Subjective Fact based on above: Breweries don't just throw any old ingredients in and market the hell out of it. Any marketer worth their salt believes product is just as important. They may be catering to uneducated tastes, but their beer is deliberate.

Further subjective fact: Megaswill is relatively "smooth" in that it's not interesting, doesn't have floral overtones, doesn't have a strong taste of anything (hops, malt, etc.).

I believe these facts are 100% correct, though I'm sure some will disagree.

To those that AGREE, do you think there's a big difference between saying megaswill TASTES disgusting and saying it is bland/thin/etc.???


My view is that commercial beer is brewed to be unoffensive and I find it such. My tastes have seriously changed with homebrewing, but if I'm deadly honest with myself, megaswill goes down fine, it's just not interesting.

To illustrate, I enjoy freshly squeezed juice. But I have no problems drinking a glass of water with a slice of orange in it. You wouldn't hear me saying "I couldn't even choke down a glass of water with an orange slice in it, not since i've had real orange juice".

Just my opinion and please don't mistake it for anything other than self-indulgence, i am a narcisist.


----------



## Julez (22/4/08)

Fatgodzilla said:


> Julez you aint wrong, but you are missing the point. They have their own free will to choose, its just that they cannot see the full market. The main philosophy of advertising is to condition consumers minds that what they associate with in the advert is the best thing for them. For the average Australian they see these brilliant commercial advertisements and select the product accordingly. Its not rocket science. With the mass produced beer, they see they want. They are conditioned to that beer. They see the "premium" brands - eg Crown Lager and say "this costs more, it must be better". They are happy with their choices. Its only when they find there really is a better choice do they become homebrewers.
> 
> And I wiill say, there is nothing wrong with megaswell. It's just not my first choice of tipple for all of us here on this site.




Agree with all your comment! Didn't miss the point though, just trying to demonstrate that it's a bit mad to assume just because you and I like something, that everyone who likes something else is wrong! As the saying goes, ignorance is bliss - we all have different realities! The marketing is only the bait, it is not the be-all and end-all. The punters still like the product.


----------



## boingk (22/4/08)

Right on - I mean, its still technically beer. And there aren't any bad beers, just some that are better than others. I'll rag on my mates at uni for drinking cruisers or ordering vodka rasberrys at the bar, but couldn't care less if one chooses a Tooheys/VB/XXXX/Carlton over a CPA/LCPA/Stella/Red Oak. At least they aren't drinking an alcoholic soda...wait...


----------



## schooey (22/4/08)

Ducatiboy stu said:


> Buy a schooner of Megaswil, and a schooner of Coopers..
> 
> Leave them in the sun for 1/2Hr
> 
> ...






Geoffi said:


> I'd say it's more to do with the temperature. Is there anything on Earth as revolting as warmed-up megaswill?



The temperature will, if it gets really hot, but that 'skunky flavour' is due to the UV, or photooxidation..



> _Beer photooxidation (lightstruck reaction) creates the well-known intensely flavor-active compound 3-methyl-2-butene-1-thiol (3M2B1T). The sensory threshold for 3M2B1T is 1.25 to 4.4 ng/L in beer. The chemistry of the formation of 3M2B1T is known. The pathway involves photo-degradation of isoalpha-acids to form 3-methyl-2-butenyl radicals, which in turn combine with sulfydryl radicals produced from the photo-degradation of a sulfur-containing source such as amino acids. Using solid-phase microextraction and GC-olfactometry, we discovered two previously unidentified compounds of the 3M2B1T family in lightstruck beer. The aromas of the two compounds are indistinguishable from the "skunky" or "foxy" aroma used to describe 3M2B1T. One of the two compounds was tentatively identified by mass spectroscopy as methyl (3-methyl-2-butenyl)-disulfide. The major ion fragments of the other compound have been identified (m/z 41, 69, 101, and 115) but the compound structure has not been elucidated. This study contributes to the understanding of beer photooxidation, showing that three compounds rather than one are responsible for beer's lightstruck aroma._



:blink: Takes some re-reading hey?





ibast said:


> 2. *Pride of Ringwood hops.* Breweries use it because they can get the maximum bitterness for the minimum amount of ingredient, due to it's high bitterness. It also helps cover up the thinness of the can sugar mentioned above. The problem is it's bitterness comes at the expence of flavour.





Nothing wrong with POR, it has it's place... <_<


----------



## geoffi (22/4/08)

boingk said:


> Right on - I mean, its still technically beer. And there aren't any bad beers, just some that are better than others. I'll rag on my mates at uni for drinking cruisers or ordering vodka rasberrys at the bar, but couldn't care less if one chooses a Tooheys/VB/XXXX/Carlton over a CPA/LCPA/Stella/Red Oak. At least they aren't drinking an alcoholic soda...wait...




Only problem with that is that while ever bland megaswill dominates the market, it will be cheap(ish) and the good stuff that we all prefer will be dear.

So I for one would be very happy to see a big swing away from kegged cat's piss to high-quality beer.

But I ain't holdin' my breath...


----------



## geoffi (22/4/08)

As for the temp vs UV thing, of course if you leave the stuff in the sun, it will be transformed into an even viler concoction than it is normally.

But even without UV exposure, warming it will unleash its full satanic potential.


----------



## ibast (22/4/08)

maltedhopalong said:


> "The hops is used to hide how low the malt level is."
> 
> Don't know that I necessarily agree with this. If anything, more hops mutes the maltiness even more. I.e. if they wanted to hide how little malt flavour there was, you would think they would try to accentuate it by DECREASING the hops.
> 
> I +1 to the idea that the hops profiles they use are to portray local beer as being "strong" (tough, etc.) when in fact it is (in relative terms) very light flavoured. Like has been mentioned, the hops levels they use are apparently quite low (i.e. rarely above 25, 26) but it dominates the taste profile due to the low maltiness.



I think their base malt levels are low. They make up the alcohol with adjuncts. As for Belgium beers being high in adjuncts, well there are two reasons they can get away with it. Firstly they have a high level of malt before they add the adjuncts, secondly their high final alcohol levels add to mouth feel.

With the low level of alcohol in Australian beers they need all the malt they can get to get good mouth feel and maltiness.

A good beer has a good balance of malt and hops. But Australian beers are so low in malt that if you hoped them to the right level they would be very tasteless. Think Amsterdam Marina beer. I think most people on this forum would agree this a very bland beer.

So to disguise this blandness the major breweries compensate by adding hops flavour. So whilst they are not high in bitterness, they still have too much hop flavour for the malt structure.

As for POR hops, you probably can make a good beer from it, but I think on the average Australian grown POR, grown for the big two and used the way the big two use it, is not a good hop.


----------



## dr K (22/4/08)

oh dear..


> I think their base malt levels are low. They make up the alcohol with adjuncts. As for Belgium beers being high in adjuncts, well there are two reasons they can get away with it. Firstly they have a high level of malt before they add the adjuncts, secondly their high final alcohol levels add to mouth feel.


So what do Australian MS beers have before they add adjuncts.???
The use of Candy Sugar and such in Belg Beer is to to lighten the mouthfeel, to dry the beer out.



> With the low level of alcohol in Australian beers they need all the malt they can get to get good mouth feel and maltiness.



What happened to the High ABV mouthfeel statement?? And to top that, it is thought by some (see above) that the malt levels are low anyway.



> A good beer has a good balance of malt and hops. But Australian beers are so low in malt that if you hoped them to the right level they would be very tasteless. Think Amsterdam Marina beer. I think most people on this forum would agree this a very bland beer.



No arugument about the balance of malt and hops ...I was under the impression though that in order for a beer to be balanced then as the malt level increased so should the hops, thus hopping up would increase the bitterness (at the boil point) or the aroma (at the late stage). So what then is the right level of hop (IBU, Aroma whatever) for a lowly malted beer?? And does an increase in hopping make it more tasteless, or more balanced....



> So to disguise this blandness the major breweries compensate by adding hops flavour. So whilst they are not high in bitterness, they still have too much hop flavour for the malt structure.



I do not work in or for and do not know the process of adding hop flavour, in fact I am at a loss to even describe what "hop flavor" is.
My personal notes from the big megas would be that they all have an easy drinking balance, some have a more robust hop character than others but absolutely none, zero, have too much hop flavour.

K


----------



## sponge (22/4/08)

Impressive... i came back after uni to look at if anything had been said and a nice few pages popped up. Interesting read too. Just thought id tell a little story to back up the whole "aussies have grown up on it and dont know better" 

I was talking to my uni mates about homebrewing, and one of them asked me if it was better then VB?


I said yes, well.... hopefully, or else i fail at life 

Then a few of them asked what it tasted like. Trying to explain how aromatic and hop flavoured beers, and as has been stated many times before, beer made with malt instead of sugar (even if its just LME, sorry AG kids , fingers crossed ill get there), was pretty hard. 

Theyre coming over in a few weeks for pre-drinks before heading out for my bday, but I have a feeling that with them being so accustomed to megaswill, they wont like homebrew all that much. Luckily i havent brewerd an IPA to show them or else theyd probably never get back into homebrewing


But I have to agree with a lot of people, its crap because they dont know about the better beers. They see whats on all the taps around the locals and drink that (VB, new... etc... ) They enjoy it, its their choice, but god dammit im trying to help them in the right direction haha 



Cheers, Sponge


----------



## boingk (22/4/08)

ibast - whathehellyoutalkinbout?

The level of alcohol in Australian beers isn't low, rather it is comparably low when compared to classically stronger brews. It is considered full strength generally, being over 4.5%.

Also, alcohol DOES NOT contribute to mouth feel, rather, it strips it away. This is because alcohol is much less dense than water or malt extract. The body and moutfeel of a brew are contributed by the residual solids from the malt extract and any other adjuncts added to the brew [ie: maltodextrin, lactose].

Additionally, a beers amount of hopping is always relative to the amount of malt character it has. ie: more malt character = more hopping required to make a balanced beer. I would argue that for the most part Australian beers are either only slightly underhopped, or quite underhopped/bittered with little aroma or flavour.

Furthermore, breweries make no attempt to disguise the 'low malt levels' of their brews by adding hop flavouring as this would have the opposite effect: one would be drinking hop flavoured, mildly alcoholic carbonated water instead of the balanced product we call beer. They add low bittering levels to apease the market and even less flavouring and aroma so that it can be "bolted down fast" - the way the market demands.

Meandering on some more I'll tell you that its not a low malt level per se that makes a beer taste watery, rather it is the use of certain yeasts/enzymes/adjuncts to lower the final gravity of a brew. This has several effects: it reduces mouth feel. It increases alcohol. It robs the beer of malt character. 

Lastly, POR is fantastic for classic Ausralian-style bittering, but crap for anything else. Thats what it was developed for - a bittering hop with high alpha acids so that it may save the breweries a buck on buying hops.

You did get one thing right however: adjuncts other than malt are added to the brews to increase alcohol content, produce a lighter bodied beer [in the case of simple sugars such as glucose or sucrose], save cost to the brewery and increase profit.

Goddamn.... - boingk


----------



## PostModern (22/4/08)

Fents said:


> $35-40 is cheap for 24 bottles? :huh:



3 bottles for $11 (Boags Draught/Tasman Bitter) is cheaper than 1 bottle for $15 (Chimay). Just ask my Mrs


----------



## sponge (22/4/08)

Just a question about this.... I went to dan murphys and just grabbed sum aussie beers i hadnt tasted before. Got a few ipas, ales, lagers, wheat beer, etc... And noticed that they all seemed to be less carbonated then megaswills. Well im really only comparing this to getting a tap beer from the local, which seems to have a lot of CO2 bubbles buzzing around in the beers (schooner), but at home, they dont seem to have anywhere near as many (also drank from a schooner). I cant compare them side by side because i dont have any megaswill in the fridge (i know... my parents are more wine/scotch drinkers then beer drinkers, so we dont often have any) so im only running off memory


----------



## the_fuzz (22/4/08)

ibast said:


> As for POR hops, you probably can make a good beer from it, but I think on the average Australian grown POR, grown for the big two and used the way the big two use it, is not a good hop.



Who are the big 2 that use POR? 

1 = CUB

but who is the other? Or, as per everything else to have said, do you just think something - so it must be true <_<


----------



## dr K (22/4/08)

> but who is the other? Or, as per everything else to have said, do you just think something - so it must be true



seems to be a rather consistent thread in the fabric 

K


----------



## Thirsty Boy (23/4/08)

mfdes said:


> When you say CUB no longer use hops, what do you mean?
> Many CUB beers are hopped with pellets and even late hopped, and being very familiar with the hop industry, I can tell you they sell a lot of hops to the breweries.
> For example Cascade Premium is late hopped with (I think) Tassie hersbrucker. Their (crap tasting) carbon-neutral fad Cascade green is hopped with very nice Galaxy hops. Cascade first harvest use this year a new, unnamed cultivar for flavour and aroma.
> Best to be specific and not generalise one's experience from one or a few beers to the industry in general.
> ...




Sorry - I wasn't being as clear as I thought I was. Certainly you are right and many CUB/Fosters beers do indeed use actual hops in pellet form. I don't make Cascade premium, but the Prem Light IS late hopped, with Hallertau - from Germany. Or at least thats what the label on the box says.

BUT - the _big_ "megaswill" culprits from the CUB side, use extract only. Thats what I was getting at.

ibast - although you are almost certainly unconvincable. You are also mostly some distance from being totally right. Just as one example - guess what... there isn't any attempt whatsoever being made to cover up the lack of maltiness in our beer - none - we actually use the adjunct to _deliberately dilute the maltiness_, we even tailor the malt itself to not be too "malty" because when you make malty beers in Australia, no one likes them. You also don't seem to know the difference between hop flavour and bitterness. The vast majority of Aussie mega beers have no hop flavour at all. And they aren't very bitter. So even if we were trying to "hide" the lack of malt in the beer with hop flavour, we are apparently failing dismally. The beers are patently not hoppy and also not malty - exactly as they are intended to be.

You seem to think that the product we produce is the result of a lack of care, or quality of process, or quality of ingredients. Sorry mate, but if you personally put in 10% of the effort to ensuring those things in your beer, that we do in ours, you are a rare bird indeed. It takes a hell of a lot of effort and some pretty damn dedicated and talented brewers to make the "megaswill" that has been so maligned (by me too remember) in this thread.

Make no mistake - that beer is the way it is as a result of extreme attention to quality, of both ingredients and method. It tastes _exactly_ the way it is _intended_ to taste; and that taste is carefully designed to please the palates of the majority of beer drinkers in Australia.

If its not to your taste - fair enough, its not to mine either. But to think its because of bad brewing ... sorry, but I am personally insulted. You don't know what you are talking about.

And as for everybody assuming that people haven't got enough of a handle on their own preferences that they have somehow been "tricked" by marketing into liking these sorts of beers.... just how much smarter and better than 90% of the rest of the population do you think you are?? Seriously its just rampant arrogance and elitism. People drink what they do because thats what they prefer, not because they are too dumb to know better. Jeezus.

I like craft beer - I like Homebrew - I like a lot of great imported Beer - I dislike many domestic mega brews: Surely thats good enough?? why does there have to be a series of conspiracies and vile hidden motives behind it? Are people so frightened of being different that they need to spout rubbish in order to prove that while they are in the minority they are still nonetheless "right"

If you must come up with fantasies that are insulting to the people who actually brew the beer you are talking about, at least try to get your facts right, it would make a pleasant change.

Drink the beer you enjoy, hate the beer you hate and leave the other 9 in 10 people to do the same. Me personally, I'm going to have a homebrew, cause thats what I prefer and I need a drink after this thread.

Thirsty


----------



## Thirsty Boy (23/4/08)

sponge said:


> Just a question about this.... I went to dan murphys and just grabbed sum aussie beers i hadnt tasted before. Got a few ipas, ales, lagers, wheat beer, etc... And noticed that they all seemed to be less carbonated then megaswills. Well im really only comparing this to getting a tap beer from the local, which seems to have a lot of CO2 bubbles buzzing around in the beers (schooner), but at home, they dont seem to have anywhere near as many (also drank from a schooner). I cant compare them side by side because i dont have any megaswill in the fridge (i know... my parents are more wine/scotch drinkers then beer drinkers, so we dont often have any) so im only running off memory




Sponge,

A lot of mega lagers are highly carbonated to help dispell the watery mouthfeel that their lack of malt character leaves. The bubbles give the beer a more full and creamy texture in the mouth, but then when you swallow... there are none of the thick, lingering, cloying attributes that a beer with a natively full body or high maltiness might have.

The other beers you had most likely didn't need that helping hand to stop them feeling watery in your mouth. Although wheat beers are usually pretty highly carbonated for just the same reason.... 

TB


----------



## SpillsMostOfIt (23/4/08)

I *can* enjoy a Carlton Draft out of a well-maintained tap if necessary. Having plummeted down the slippery slope of craft beer, I usually prefer not to.

Others in this thread (and occasionally in others that crop up from time to time) have drawn analogies between the Australian megabeers and food from the golden arches, etc. Others again have spoken about commercial success and critical acclaim. There are not too many Australian products that have achieved such commercial success overseas as the dreaded Fosters Lager. If you are prepared to ignore the current marketing conspiracy theory as to why that might be, perhaps it is not just Australian palates that are wrong, but also those of a large number of people overseas.

Australian car companies cannot achieve success like this (are you a Holden or a Ford man?) - not too many Australian manufacturing industries can (or at least none that come to my mind atm).

So, I would argue that Australian *professional* brewers can be proud of what they do.

Imagine how uniformly good homebrew would be if every homebrewer were as critical of their own beer as some are of the professionals'...

Edit: language dickheadery.


----------



## ibast (23/4/08)

boingk said:


> i
> Additionally, a beers amount of hopping is always relative to the amount of malt character it has. ie: more malt character = more hopping required to make a balanced beer. I would argue that for the most part Australian beers are either only slightly underhopped, or quite underhopped/bittered with little aroma or flavour.



The thread is not "why is megaswill good?" but "why is it crap". My answer is "Australian megswill beers are not balanced".



boingk said:


> Lastly, POR is fantastic for classic Ausralian-style bittering, but crap for anything else. Thats what it was developed for - a bittering hop with high alpha acids so that it may save the breweries a buck on buying hops.



This is a circular argument. The "Australian style" is crap because it uses poorly grown POR. To stop making crap beer you stop making the "Australian style". Get rid of the crap imputs and the result is the new"Australian Style"

and yes I was comparing alcohol levels to European lagers and Pilzners. In my mind I thing they are examples of what Australian beer could be. Anthing less than 5% is a mid-strength beer in my mind.


----------



## beersom (23/4/08)

Whats_Wrong_with_Hahn said:


> It is strong, in regards to Alcohol content - compared to the yanks we have very strong beer
> 
> 
> 
> That would not be indicated by the sales of the megswills - they are selling more then ever..........



Our megaswill is not stonger than US megaswill
VB = 4.9
Bubweiser= 5
Tooheys = 4.6
Coors = 5
millers = 4.6
XXXX = 4.8


As far as sales goes, domestic mainstream beer sales are almost flat (1-3%) domestic premium and import (crown, stella etc) are an impressive 15-17% growth. Craft beer growth reports vary (hard to get good figures) but seem to be in the order of 23% !!! Yikes!!!


----------



## Hutch (23/4/08)

ibast said:


> The "Australian style" is crap because it uses poorly grown POR. To stop making crap beer you stop making the "Australian style". Get rid of the crap imputs and the result is the new"Australian Style"
> 
> and yes I was comparing alcohol levels to European lagers and Pilzners. In my mind I thing they are examples of what Australian beer could be.


If they were to start brewing beers to a similar standard as to the Euro lagers/Pilsners etc. then it would cost as much (or more) to produce than the imported megaswill (better grain bill, imported hops, water treatement, cold fermentation, extended lagering, etc. etc.), and would consequently not sell. There would be no "premium imported" label, and therefore impossible to sell at the inflated price. Unfortunately we're stuck with the substandard quality they churn out in order to maximise turnover, and therefor profit.

Like you, I wish it could change overnight, but I don't think this is ever likely to happen.


----------



## ibast (23/4/08)

Thirsty Boy said:


> You seem to think that the product we produce is the result of a lack of care, or quality of process, or quality of ingredients. Sorry mate, but if you personally put in 10% of the effort to ensuring those things in your beer, that we do in ours, you are a rare bird indeed. It takes a hell of a lot of effort and some pretty damn dedicated and talented brewers to make the "megaswill" that has been so maligned (by me too remember) in this thread.
> 
> Make no mistake - that beer is the way it is as a result of extreme attention to quality, of both ingredients and method. It tastes _exactly_ the way it is _intended_ to taste; and that taste is carefully designed to please the palates of the majority of beer drinkers in Australia.
> 
> ...



I don't think I've every personally attacked the brewers, suggested the processes used are not the best they can be or that the effort of the brewers are less than 100%.

I will withdraw the accusation about recipe fiddling from this thread as it has clearly produced an emotive responce. The comment was aimed at the companies not the brewers.

I do believe the ingredients used are being driven too much by economic reasons and the brewers are doing everything they can with them.

As for marketing the brew, the big two are very careful to cast in a negative light any non-Australian style beers.

The Carlton draught adds are very much about this. The "made from beer" slogan is very much saying any beer that emphasizes ingredients or quality is a wankers beer.

Same with the latest Hahn "man skating" adds. they are very much saying "real men drink Australian style beers".



Thirsty Boy said:


> If you must come up with fantasies that are insulting to the people who actually brew the beer you are talking about, at least try to get your facts right, it would make a pleasant change.



I haven't made any personal attacks in the thread but there have been a few aimed at me.

Once again the thread is "why is magaswill crap". Written above is based on what I taste when I taste megaswill.

Perhaps the brewers should be taking something from it rather than going on the attack.


----------



## ibast (23/4/08)

Hutch said:


> If they were to start brewing beers to a similar standard as to the Euro lagers/Pilsners etc. then it would cost as much (or more) to produce than the imported megaswill (better grain bill, imported hops, water treatement, cold fermentation, extended lagering, etc. etc.), and would consequently not sell. There would be no "premium imported" label, and therefore impossible to sell at the inflated price. Unfortunately we're stuck with the substandard quality they churn out in order to maximise turnover, and therefor profit.
> 
> Like you, I wish it could change overnight, but I don't think this is ever likely to happen.



It's a sad state of affairs, and there is truth in what you say. But premium beers are not that much dearer these days and some of those are being imported.

So the price difference is not as great as it used to be. Even if they weren't to change over night it would be nice to see them moving in the right direction.


----------



## justsomeguy (23/4/08)

ibast said:


> The thread is not "why is megaswill good?" but "why is it crap". My answer is "Australian megswill beers are not balanced".
> 
> This is a circular argument. The "Australian style" is crap because it uses poorly grown POR. To stop making crap beer you stop making the "Australian style". Get rid of the crap imputs and the result is the new"Australian Style"



I'd hazard a guess that there would be a few POR hop growers out there who do not think they are poor growers of hops. I'd also doubt that the grain and adjunct growers are sending crap produce to the breweries either. Quality control at the breweries would, I expect, be quite high in this respect. If the quality of the inputs varied too much then the brewery would have to do a lot of blending/modifications to be able to produce a consistent product, which is what the customer wants in the end.

For a lot of customers they want a consistent product, regardless of where they purchase it. This is one of the reasons that fast food outlets such as McDonalds, KFC and Hungry Jacks are so successful. Their product may not taste the best but the customer knows that whereever they are, the product will taste the same.

As an example, when I was travelling overseas on business a lot, I'd sometimes stop at a McDonalds for food. Not because I like the stuff, mind you, but because I wanted to eat something without having to worry too m uch about what it was going to taste like.

gary


----------



## Julez (23/4/08)

justsomeguy said:


> I'd hazard a guess that there would be a few POR hop growers out there who do not think they are poor growers of hops. I'd also doubt that the grain and adjunct growers are sending crap produce to the breweries either. Quality control at the breweries would, I expect, be quite high in this respect. If the quality of the inputs varied too much then the brewery would have to do a lot of blending/modifications to be able to produce a consistent product, which is what the customer wants in the end.
> 
> For a lot of customers they want a consistent product, regardless of where they purchase it. This is one of the reasons that fast food outlets such as McDonalds, KFC and Hungry Jacks are so successful. Their product may not taste the best but the customer knows that whereever they are, the product will taste the same.
> 
> ...



That's a really good point and if you look at the CUB plant at Yatala in QLD, they produce literally millions of litres a week - the consistency of finished product is mind-blowing when you see it in this context.


----------



## the_fuzz (23/4/08)

ibast said:


> As for marketing the brew, the big two are very careful to cast in a negative light any non-Australian style beers.
> 
> The Carlton draught adds are very much about this. The "made from beer" slogan is very much saying any beer that emphasizes ingredients or quality is a wankers beer.



You seem to misunderstand the marketing - CUB and Tooheys have been taking the piss out of each other for a very long time. Their adds are generally aimed at each other. Carltons add is taking the piss out of tooheys adds, by saying "they just have beer, you can go and make an expensive add which almost has nothing to do with beer, but we just have beer"




ibast said:


> Same with the latest Hahn "man skating" adds. they are very much saying "real men drink Australian style beers".



Once again, you read way to far into it - they are just taking the piss out of pre-mixed drinks. Basically real men drink beer - nothing else...........


Tooheys and CUB have gone with the funny adds for a while as Australians respond to these types of adds, nothing to do with putting down international beers - especially with the fact that the big 2 generally have the BUL for them and are a good seller for them.

Interesting fact: In the Toohey's New add where the Stagg and women are catapulted into the sky and it rains beer - Tooheys received numerous complaints about the add - they were actually expecting complaints about the add and were prepared in advance the withdraw the add, based on the fact that women were catapulted into the air.

However, they received over 1000 complaints - all bar 2, where complaints about the fact that a poor animal was shot into the sky.......... I personally thought that was hilarious.


----------



## the_fuzz (23/4/08)

Julez said:


> That's a really good point and if you look at the CUB plant at Yatala in QLD, they produce literally millions of litres a week - the consistency of finished product is mind-blowing when you see it in this context.



That is why I love walking through the Tooheys Plant at Lidcombe - it really is mind blowing when you see the size of it and the fact that everything is so controlled - I have problems with 46 litres being consistent, these guys are churning out roughly 120000 litres every 4-6 hours and it tastes the same every time.


----------



## shonky (23/4/08)

> If they were to start brewing beers to a similar standard as to the Euro lagers/Pilsners etc. then it would cost as much (or more) to produce than the imported megaswill



I'm not sure I agree with this statement, the cost of production is minimal compared to excise, distribution, packaging and marketing. I would be very surprised, for example, if crown lager cost any more to produce than vb (seeing as it comes from the same wort stream), possibly a tiny bit more for hops, but in terms of a case of beer you are probably talking about a few cents here and there as a difference between all large breweries beers not the $10-30 price difference us consumers have to bear. Of course if grain and hop prices continue to rise quickly this may become a factor over time.

The price of the beers are ultimately what the customers are prepared to pay IMO.

Cheers


----------



## Julez (23/4/08)

Whats_Wrong_with_Hahn said:


> That is why I love walking through the Tooheys Plant at Lidcombe - it really is mind blowing when you see the size of it and the fact that everything is so controlled - I have problems with 46 litres being consistent, these guys are churning out roughly 120000 litres every 4-6 hours and it tastes the same every time.



Yep, it's phenomenal! I know this is a slight tangent to the topic, but I just dug this up from a quick Google search - adds some interesting perspective to the discussion, if nothing else...

"Carlton & United Beverages division of the Foster's Group has completed its 170 million expansion of the Gold Coast-based Yatala Brewery. The Brewery will now produce 450 million litres a year, which translates into more than 1.4 billion stubbies. The plant's capacity can be increased to 540 million litres annually. The Yatala Brewery has been expanded to lift its annual output to 25 per cent of Australia's beer production. The wide range of brands being brewed and packaged at Yatala includes Victorian Bitter, Carlton Mid-Strength, Crown Lager, Fosters Lager and Powers Gold."​That certainly puts the "mega" in megaswill !!!! ​​​


----------



## maltedhopalong (23/4/08)

Taking the fast food analogy further, many people (myself included) love mcdonalds because it's always there and we're always eating it. We're conditioned to like it, it's not a conspiracy theory, sure maccas wants us to like it, but in the end it's the nature of it. 

I DO like Macdonalds. That's not to say I don't appreciate a big juicy grain-fed steak and vegies 1000 times more.

Nonetheless, McDonalds make meals that are meticulously designed to be unoffensive, and enjoyable to eat (conversely, no attempt is made to cook food aimed at food critics). It may not be the highest quality in terms of coinosseurs, but they DO NOT take their burgers out the back and rub them in the dirt to deliberately make them taste disgusting (that's what the rogue 8 to 10 year old employees do).

Commercial megaswill is (i contend) slightly OVER-hopped for the level of maltiness. This makes the beers drier and crisper (they ARE designed to be drunk cold). The beers are under-malted (or whatever the correct word is) because this makes it easier to throw down glass after glass. There is little to no hops flavour/aroma because less palates are educated enough to appreciate it (and not go "Hey bazza, someone's gone an' put grass clippings in me beer!!!")

All in all, they are not coinnosseur's beer, but in fairness, they are deliberately so. They are not maliciously saboutaged, they are designed to be easily drunk by anyone and everyone. They ARE easy to drink. Like I said earlier, I love freshly squeezed orange juice, but not everyone's palate is ready for the tartness, not all tastebuds appreciate it. A glass of water with a slice of orange in it still has that orange taste, but it's a lot easier to drink, and easier for more people to appreciate.

So what makes megaswill so crap? I guess my response would be the fact that it's DESIGNED for the lowest common denominator.


----------



## mfdes (23/4/08)

Isn't it funny while Australian mainstream 'discerning' drinkers will choose an import such as Stella or Heineken (both brewed domestically but still passed as 'imports'), many people in Europe and North America will drink Fosters! Yes, the 'F' word! 

You'd be surprised how many people in Europe 
1) think Fosters is THE beer that's made and consumed in Australia (little if anything else), and
2) think it's better than their locally produced mainstream beers.

This entire argument about Australian 'megaswill': Have you travelled much overseas and tasted mainstream beers in different countries? If you had you'd realise there is a reason people think Australian beer is good: the story repeats itself the world over. The consumer demands thirst-quenching light lager served at 2 degrees centigrade. You find this product dominating the beer market in every major country in the world.

Finally, all these people bagging POR hops: There is really nothing wrong with POR, they're very nice hops when used properly. There is currently more worldwide demand than supply for this variety, as it ripens far too late to be grown elsewhere. Do you realise they're hardly grown in Australia any more? Good old Pride of Ringwood is nowadays a (superseded) defunct variety. Only a couple of breweries use it, but it makes up only a single digit percentage of the Australian hops grown. Do you realise people make the same megaswill with all noble hop varieties? Anheuser busch use only low alpha aroma noble hops for their bittering. Much megaswill is made in Europe using perfectly good hops. 
Please don't blame a perfectly good hop for your subjective percieved lack of quality in a beer. 

So if no longer POR, what are Australian beer made with these days? 
Mainstream varieties, I'm sorry to disappoint you, are:

-Millenium
-Super Pride (not, I think, a Pride seedling, but a seedling of J78)
-Topaz
-Galaxy
-Symphony

Others in development with larger acreages:

-Valley
-Noon
-Wenceslas

Many of these are simply mixed up as high-mix for CO2 extraction. What you get is pure iso-alpha and beta acid and nothing else.

MFS.


----------



## justsomeguy (23/4/08)

maltedhopalong said:


> Taking the fast food analogy further, many people (myself included) love mcdonalds because it's always there and we're always eating it. We're conditioned to like it, it's not a conspiracy theory, sure maccas wants us to like it, but in the end it's the nature of it.
> 
> I DO like Macdonalds. That's not to say I don't appreciate a big juicy grain-fed steak and vegies 1000 times more.
> 
> Nonetheless, McDonalds make meals that are meticulously designed to be unoffensive, and enjoyable to eat (conversely, no attempt is made to cook food aimed at food critics). It may not be the highest quality in terms of coinosseurs, but they DO NOT take their burgers out the back and rub them in the dirt to deliberately make them taste disgusting (that's what the rogue 8 to 10 year old employees do).



Exactly. I could get a McDonalds burger from Perth, Melbourne, Los Angeles and San Francisco, put them side by side and you would be hard pressed being able to tell the difference. Their key is consistency. As I indicated earlier, it may not be the best food but you know exactly what you are getting. I think megaswill is similar in this respect, I may not really like it too much, but I know what its going to taste like when I do get it. From a consumers point of view this is key. A consumer wants a consistent product, not something that is going to vary all the time.

Whether you love or hate them, I am amazed and tip my hats to the fact that the breweries can produce megaswill or any beer for that matter that is so consistent given the variability of grain crops, hops and adjuncts. 

gary


----------



## Mantis (23/4/08)

justsomeguy said:


> Exactly. I could get a McDonalds burger from Perth, Melbourne, Los Angeles and San Francisco, put them side by side and you would be hard pressed being able to tell the difference. Their key is consistency. As I indicated earlier, it may not be the best food but you know exactly what you are getting. I think megaswill is similar in this respect, I may not really like it too much, but I know what its going to taste like when I do get it. From a consumers point of view this is key. A consumer wants a consistent product, not something that is going to vary all the time.
> 
> Whether you love or hate them, I am amazed and tip my hats to the fact that the breweries can produce megaswill or any beer for that matter that is so consistent given the variability of grain crops, hops and adjuncts.
> 
> gary



So true this analogy with maccas. I go to the local footy on Saturday and usually stand beside the beer truck. Nearly every guy that comes and gets their first beer for the day has a swig and says "God that tastes like crap" or something similar. Followed by laughter all round and things like "They get better mate" etc. 
It is megaswill and it tastes awfall for a while. Then it is just tipped down with abandenment till at least silly or even fall down drunk. 
Yes, the big breweries do it well. 
Shit, I have to put in special orders at the bottle shop here to get Coopers long necks in. The coolrooms are filled to the roof with CUB.
Hey, I am not being holier than thee here, I am very guilty of swilling Hahn Ice with gay abandenment, but now I am getting into this brewing thing I am very much a happier person. 


:beer:


----------



## Hutch (23/4/08)

shonky said:


> I'm not sure I agree with this statement, the cost of production is minimal compared to excise, distribution, packaging and marketing. I would be very surprised, for example, if crown lager cost any more to produce than vb (seeing as it comes from the same wort stream), possibly a tiny bit more for hops, but in terms of a case of beer you are probably talking about a few cents here and there as a difference between all large breweries beers not the $10-30 price difference us consumers have to bear. Of course if grain and hop prices continue to rise quickly this may become a factor over time.
> 
> The price of the beers are ultimately what the customers are prepared to pay IMO.
> 
> Cheers


You're probably right - excise, packaging, distribution, *marketing*, etc would amount to a large percent of the retail price.
I still recon that access to the right ingredients (in the quantity required) for making premium beer would be a major part of the problem. In my experience of AG brewing, you CANNOT produce a genuine Euro-style pils using all-Aussie ingredients. The hops issue has been metioned quite a few times - you could not use POR. Importing would be the only option, as even the locally grown Hallertau, Hersbruker, etc. are completely different to the imported variety, and are not (yet) grown in the quantities required. They are also much lower alpha acid variety hops, so a great deal more would be required than is currently the case wth POR (of those breweries that actually use real hops, that is!). 

Malt is perhaps an even bigger factor. This is not a "imported is always better" rant - You can make fantastic beer with Aussie malts, but you just can't make genuine Euro-style beers without Euro malts. This is why most AG brewers (and micrbrewers) insist on using various imported Weyermann malts in these styles. With the quantity of beer produced by the mega-breweries to keep the entire population drinking, that would be a SERIOUS quantity of grain being shipped over from europe - imagine the cost of that, not to mention guaranteeing supply year-in, year-out, come rain, shine, droughts, floods, etc.

...We should all be very thankful that we, as homebrewers, have access to all of these quality ingredients, and can make whatever beer we like, irrespective of what the mega-breweries choose to produce!
Vive la HB!


----------



## ibast (23/4/08)

mfdes said:


> This entire argument about Australian 'megaswill': Have you travelled much overseas and tasted mainstream beers in different countries? If you had you'd realise there is a reason people think Australian beer is good: the story repeats itself the world over.



I'd have to disagree. It was only after traveling overseas and then coming back that I realised how bad Australian beer really was.

It's what got me into home brewing.


----------



## mfdes (23/4/08)

ibast said:


> I'd have to disagree. It was only after traveling overseas and then coming back that I realised how bad Australian beer really was.
> 
> It's what got me into home brewing.



Well, my experience when I lived in Europe and the States was that mainstream (not carefully-chosen above-the-cut stuff) beer such as Bud, Miller, Coors, Amstel, Heineken, Stella, Carlsberg, Mahou, Aguila, San Miguel, Perroni, Kingfisher, Kirin, Sapporo, Asahi, oand your generic, local light lager that most people drink is much the same worldwide.

I of course exclude most real ale, genuine bitters, stouts, and other good local styles (Belgians, proper German and Czeck Pilsner, etc...)

MFS.


----------



## ibast (23/4/08)

mfdes said:


> Well, my experience when I lived in Europe and the States was that mainstream (not carefully-chosen above-the-cut stuff) beer such as Bud, Miller, Coors, Amstel, Heineken, Stella, Carlsberg, Mahou, Aguila, San Miguel, Perroni, Kingfisher, Kirin, Sapporo, Asahi, oand your generic, local light lager that most people drink is much the same worldwide.
> 
> I of course exclude most real ale, genuine bitters, stouts, and other good local styles (Belgians, proper German and Czeck Pilsner, etc...)
> 
> MFS.



Yeah beer's pretty bad in the US, but they are as guilt of adjunct abuse as we are. Their beer is, whilst not to the Australian palate, is probable more balanced.

Still not good.


----------



## peas_and_corn (23/4/08)

that might be true, but the US has a much more developed craftbrew culture than Australia


----------



## ibast (23/4/08)

peas_and_corn said:


> that might be true, but the US has a much more developed craftbrew culture than Australia



Getting a bit off topic, but I went to Colorado last year and was really suprised. Good brewing scene there.


----------



## barneyhanway (23/4/08)

The previously universal truth that "Americans make terrible adjunct filled watery beer" hasn't been true for quite some time. They are leading the (dare I say) craft revolution, Aussie and particularly NZ could learn a great deal from them.

There was a book brought out by an American writer recently (heard about it in brewing podcasts late last year) that pretty much debunked the myth that US megaswill brewers forced their crap tasteless lager on an unsuspecting public. The author, whom the podcaster interviewed, stated in no uncertain terms that the brewers adapted their products to suit the taste of the market. I'd never thought this to be true but it does make an interesting counterpoint to mass-production marketing conspiricists.

My take is that big brewers create a rather bland variety of lager. Very well brewed, flawless lager, but bland lager nonetheless. The overriding characteristic of lager is its clean profile. With bland lager, magnify that x100. The things that make it bland are: use of adjuncts, high percentage of cheap simple sugers, low hopping rates, cold serving temperatures, carbonation. These things are done for more than one reason, chiefly - lower cost or production, and the requirement that it is as innoffensive as possible to the broadest possible audience.

Just like food (I for one can't stand McD's) I lean towards the slow food movement. Same for beer. Quantity over quality in EVERY instance. Of course being an all grain homebrewer, I get quantity AND quality


----------



## dc59 (23/4/08)

> I was raised on VB and drank it exclusively for 25 years until I started home brewing. For me it was the best beer in the world and no one could tell me any different. Now that my taste has been changed I can no longer drink VB and to me it tastes like crap. So in answer to your question What Makes Megaswill Just So Crap? I would have to say for me home brewing.



I love this comment and can very easily relate to it, except instead of VB it was new and instead of 25 years it was more like 5 years. All the same, it answers the original question and is the truth (at least for me).



> If they were to start brewing beers to a similar standard as to the Euro lagers/Pilsners etc. then it would cost as much (or more) to produce than the imported megaswill (better grain bill, imported hops, water treatement, cold fermentation, extended lagering, etc. etc.), and would consequently not sell. There would be no "premium imported" label, and therefore impossible to sell at the inflated price. Unfortunately we're stuck with the substandard quality they churn out in order to maximise turnover, and therefor profit.
> 
> Like you, I wish it could change overnight, but I don't think this is ever likely to happen.



Not true, if you wont to improve the standard of your domestic swill overnight, its easy. 
Move to Belgium.


----------



## mfdes (23/4/08)

I'm sorry but isn't this 'megaswill' debate pure "look-at-me, aren't-I-good?"
How many of you started home brewing better quality beer than mainstream lagers off the posts.
For me it took 2 years of intensive brewing to get better ale than almost any commercially available, and close to 5 years to brew a truly good lager or pilsner.
Before you bag a megaswill show me you can beat it in a fair competition.

MFS


----------



## rimrunner (23/4/08)

not me i can't make better beer.. yet.

but just by thinking about it i have certainly tried out more beers and educated myself about taste a lot more. i quickly came to the conclusion i can't afford to drink the commercial beer i really like.

i better get good at making beer. B)


----------



## Mantis (23/4/08)

rimrunner said:


> not me i can't make better beer.. yet.
> 
> but just by thinking about it i have certainly tried out more beers and educated myself about taste a lot more. i quickly came to the conclusion i can't afford to drink the commercial beer i really like.
> 
> i better get good at making beer. B)




I agree , but I reckon the most basic homebrew would be better than the big breweries main lines. I used to drink them but now drink the expensive stuff while waiting for my first HB efforts to condition. 
I am not looking forward to going to the footy this weekend when megaswill is the only beer on offer.
Drinking coopers stubbies now for $17/half doz, where I used to drink Hahn ice at $30 per 30 can block.

Better stop now. Another of these sparkling ales and I will be talking $hit , hic


----------



## rimrunner (23/4/08)

it's alarming how i'm drinking the same right now. :lol: 

it places nicely on the value/flavour/availabilty and effect graph.


----------



## mr brau (23/4/08)

This thread is v interesting. Firstly, I find the name of it pretty ordinary, and full of generalisation. I am assuming that by the term "megaswill" that Sponge (and others who have replied) implies adjunct lagers. 

Adjunct lagers are a style of beer all by themselves, and need to be appreciated as such. The Australian International Beer Awards defines the style "Australian Lager" as follows:

"Australian Style Lagers have low to medium hop bitterness. Hop taste and aroma, if present, should be of low to medium intensity. They are light in colour (less than 15 EBC) and fruity esters (if present) should be low to medium. They have low to medium body, a clean crisp flavour and medium to high carbonation. There should be no diacetyl and no chill haze. Low levels of DMS can be present in pale lagers. Residual malt/sugar sweetness should be low."

When you get a good fresh one, it is a great beer, and I would be happy to drink them in multiples of six. They are all about the careful and subtle integration of ingredients, as are American beers - not very easy beers to brew, and there are a lot of very intelligent people working diligently on their production, with massive R & D budgets. My point - for what they aspire to be, Australian lagers are beers of good quality, and certainly no worse than macrobrewed beers of other nations. 

What do you mean by "just so crap"? I think that as brewers we need to avoid such generalisations and actually define the fault, whether it is acetaldehyde, diacetyl, oxidisation or whatever. I don't think any of us, as brewers, would like our beer simply branded as "crap" without further qualification. 

Incidentally, I work for a micro, and I often taste our beer out in trade on draught, and it is occasionally quite unrecognisable from the state that it leaves the brewery in. There is some very scary stuff that grows in beer lines out there , and there is little that we can do to control it. We once had a customer accuse us of sending out faulty beer, but when questioned about his cleaning regime, he admitted that his lines hadn't been cleaned with appropriate chemicals for 4-5 months - this is a guy who specialised in serving live beers (which makes it far worse), and took pride in his beer selection. I don't want to think about the average publican who couldn't care about his lines at all. 

I was talking to a Dutch bar manager who told me that where he's from, the lines are checked regularly by the food safety people, to ensure good cleaning happens regularly. I think that this is something that K Rudd overlooked in his election campaign - funding for beer line police. You could probably even get a volunteer brigade together. 

We, as consumers and producers are at the mercy of publicans. We all understand the fragile nature of beer, and it doesn't take much to ruin a good beer.


----------



## razz (23/4/08)

Evening Mr. Brau. What do you do for a living ? Any comments on my theory ? 
http://www.aussiehomebrewer.com/forum/inde...st&p=306522


----------



## mfdes (23/4/08)

razz said:


> Evening sponge. I can't comment on their ingredients but I have a bit of a theory about the beers storage properties. The big brewery beers don't appear to travel very well, kegs fair a bit better than smaller glass and aluminium. The beer is probably not to bad when "brewery fresh" as they say in the ads but given the rigors of our weather conditions and transport I think they go down hill very quickly. Have you ever driven past a pub bottlo and noticed pallets of booze sitting in the sun for hours at a time ? I have, and you generally don't have to look to far.



Hi Razz,

Re: storage qualities. If you talk to quality control people who work for the major breweries, you often hear that, as the beer is both filtered and pasteurised, it is at its best the moment it leaves the brewery, and will decline from then on. Past 6 weeks it should not be drunk, though this is not reflected in the use-by-date or they'd be shooting themselves in the foot and not selling any.
Don't know about you people on the mainland, but finding beer less than 6 weeks old in a bottleshop in Tassie is nigh impossible.

MFS.


----------



## mr brau (23/4/08)

I


----------



## razz (23/4/08)

mfdes said:


> Hi Razz,
> 
> Re: storage qualities. If you talk to quality control people who work for the major breweries, you often hear that, as the beer is both filtered and pasteurised, it is at its best the moment it leaves the brewery, and will decline from then on. Past 6 weeks it should not be drunk, though this is not reflected in the use-by-date or they'd be shooting themselves in the foot and not selling any.
> Don't know about you people on the mainland, but finding beer less than 6 weeks old in a bottleshop in Tassie is nigh impossible.
> ...


Thanks MFS. And according to the beer fan/home brewer/part time Cascade tour person, who very kindly showed us around that old brewery last February, you will find their freshest ales being served out of a bar in Salamanca place. But I'm guessing you already know that ! It wasn't you was it ?


----------



## mr brau (23/4/08)

razz said:


> Evening Mr. Brau. What do you do for a living ? Any comments on my theory ?
> http://www.aussiehomebrewer.com/forum/inde...st&p=306522


I'm a brewer. 

There is an old English saying - "if you can't see the brewery, don't drink the beer!"

There are some very high quality filtered beers that travel in bottles from Europe, across the equator in shipping containers that reach 50degC inside, and arrive in fairly good nick, though. 

I just don't believe that there is that much faulty beer out there, aside from the stuff that goes through infected lines - I do think that the style is misunderstood. I am not sure why I am being an advocate for aussie lagers - most micros don't even make them. As a brewer, I am just completely over simplistic statements like "megaswill is just so crap". It doesn't do the industry any good at all.


----------



## sponge (23/4/08)

mr brau said:


> As a brewer, I am just completely over simplistic statements like "megaswill is just so crap". It doesn't do the industry any good at all.



Hey Razz, if i could change the title of the post I would as i didnt actually mean for my thoughts to come across like that. Sorry mate

I was mainly wanting to know if there are any lesser quality ingredients or procedures which are used by the big breweries to give a beer of, not lesser quality, but lesser taste/flavour? (cant think of the right word). And as a few people have mentioned which i never really thought of, but its made that way because thats what sells. They wouldnt be multi million dollar businesses if their product didnt sell. They advertise well, and produce the beer which most australians are happy to be drinking. Not that theyre of lesser quality, just theyre brewed for the aussie palate and they do a dam fine job for 90% of the aussie beer drinkers

Once again, sorry about the post name as I realy dont like it either. 


Sponge


----------



## maltedhopalong (23/4/08)

mr brau said:


> ... I don't think any of us, as brewers, would like our beer simply branded as "crap" without further qualification ...



Excellent point.

It is what it is. I find it hard to believe even the most avid homebrewer would find it hard to finish a whole glass. By even the critic's own admission, it is supposed to be found palatable even by people who don't like beer! It might be unexciting beer, but not distasteful. Bland maybe, but not "awful".


----------



## razz (23/4/08)

mr brau said:


> I'm a brewer.
> 
> There is an old English saying - "if you can't see the brewery, don't drink the beer!"
> 
> ...


Thanks Mr Brau. I think I know why you're an advocate for Aussie lagers, something to do with being a professional brewer by day and a homebrewer by nights/weekends. Passion. 
Thirsty boy shed some light about big breweries for me when he spoke about ingredients earlier in the thread.
Don't regret the post name sponge, I think it's contents have been enlightening. It certainly has bought out peoples thought and feelings about the subject. And now, back to the James Bond movie. Good night all.


----------



## mr brau (23/4/08)

razz said:


> Thanks Mr Brau. I think I know why you're an advocate for Aussie lagers, something to do with being a professional brewer by day and a homebrewer by nights/weekends. Passion.
> Thirsty boy shed some light about big breweries for me when he spoke about ingredients earlier in the thread.
> Don't regret the post name sponge, I think it's contents have been enlightening. It certainly has bought out peoples thought and feelings about the subject. And now, back to the James Bond movie. Good night all.


Actually work for a microbrewery - my weekends are my own. BTW I prefer a good AHB thread than Pierce Brosnan as 007. Sean Connery or even Daniel Craig would kick his arse. Brosnan is a pussy.


----------



## sponge (23/4/08)

mr brau said:


> BTW I prefer a good AHB thread than Pierce Brosnan as 007. Sean Connery or even Daniel Craig would kick his arse. Brosnan is a pussy.



Well said. Sean will always be the greatest bond.


----------



## Stuster (23/4/08)

mr brau said:


> As a brewer, I am just completely over simplistic statements like "megaswill is just so crap". It doesn't do the industry any good at all.



That's certainly an important point. I think what this thread (and others like it) reflect is frustrating/disappointment/disillusionment with mainstream beers on the part of new brewers. For many brewers, it's their first time to drink different beers than standard Aussie lagers. After years of drinking one style, they see the variety of beers that there are. (It'd be like eating Maccas every day for years, only to discover there are other kinds of food.  :icon_vomit: ) It's really no wonder that some think there's a conspiracy that's meant they've missed out on this world of beer. Then, brewers try to spread the word, only to be confronted by friends/family who refuse to admit that other kinds of beer might be tasty (as well). Sure, it's not that there is a conspiracy, sure the beers made by large breweries are very good technically, but it's nice to have more than one kind of beer. :chug: 

And well done to you as well, mr brau, for bringing different beers to the market, unless of course your micro only brews light lagers. :lol:


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (23/4/08)

I think we all need a good does of KB...


----------



## Tony (23/4/08)

Stuster............. i started to post half hour ago and deleted it. I wasnt diplomatic enough but you hit it on the head.

I dont mind most comercial beers........ they are made to fill a market requirement! Its what Aussies have been bred to drink.

So live with it! ITs not going to change.

There will always be the majority that thinks "swill" type beers as we know them are the best beer in the world.

Them bloody poms drink their beers warm and flat! you know the line.

But to be honest.......... i still like going to the club after a hot day for a cold schooey of new........ fresh off the tap!

I have a few and become fatigued and come home and apreciate that i can make better.




We are home brewers!

Make your own, enjoy your own and except the fact that you making a bit of beer in your garage wont change the world......... but you can enjoy what you make with a smile on your face knowing its better.

If its not........ put up with the swill, dont complain and keep working till you get it right!

Thats my 2 bobs worth

cheers


----------



## schooey (23/4/08)

Ducatiboy stu said:


> I think we all need a good does of KB...



Reg......Is that you?


----------



## lowtech (23/4/08)

beer is beer.
The beer I make is for me and I love it.
I also enjoy Macro brew beers as well.Some are better(more enjoyable) than others, but thats my palate speaking.
some of the most ordinary beers I've had have been from micro's, due to infection or batch variability.These are the things that confront us as homebrewers as well,and I'm sure we are all forgiving in our judgement of our own brews.
mega brewers deliver a consistent product to an enormous market and do it well.
beer is beer.


----------



## imellor (23/4/08)

Ok Sean is by far the best bond as he oozes class and style.

Back to the megaswill. It is not crap as I will still often drink it when I go out. Will drink Coopers Pale as my first choice but will also drink what ever is available. What i produce at home is more to my taste with hop aroma and flavour more suited to my taste rather than what others like. My mates like my beer but not enough to start homebrewing as it is so much easier to buy a carton of what they are used to. 

The brews that we make are primarilly to suit our own personal tastes. I have seen many posts that have recipes to suit peoples mates for parties but would that be your first choice for yourself.

Beer is all about individual taste. There is no bad beer as long as someone likes it, just personal taste.

I like my beer and am always trying changes as there is no such thing as the perfect beer. Just what we enjoy and are happy to drink.

Cheers, :beer: 
Ian


----------



## Thirsty Boy (24/4/08)

sponge said:


> Hey Razz, if i could change the title of the post I would as i didnt actually mean for my thoughts to come across like that. Sorry mate
> 
> I was mainly wanting to know if there are any lesser quality ingredients or procedures which are used by the big breweries to give a beer of, not lesser quality, but lesser taste/flavour? (cant think of the right word). And as a few people have mentioned which i never really thought of, but its made that way because thats what sells. They wouldnt be multi million dollar businesses if their product didnt sell. They advertise well, and produce the beer which most australians are happy to be drinking. Not that theyre of lesser quality, just theyre brewed for the aussie palate and they do a dam fine job for 90% of the aussie beer drinkers
> 
> Once again, sorry about the post name as I realy dont like it either.



I don't think you have anything to be sorry about there mate,

You think its crap and by asking the question about why it is the way it is, you were actually seeking out the qualification that Mr Brau was looking for. You weren't happy with just saying "its shit because I don't like it" you wanted to know why, so that you could dislike it in an educated way.

You got a bunch of answers - some of them were good and informative, some of them not so much. And you got some philosophical points to boot.

Now when you come forth with "megaswill is crap ...." you can add an informed "because" to the statement and you will sound like a _proper_ beer snob. Welcome to the club  


Megaswill is crap because it is bloody cold on the tootsies when you are wading around in it and it comes over the top of your gumboots. oh for a nice tepid real ale when you really need one.

Thirsty


----------



## staggalee (24/4/08)

Mantis said:


> I agree , but I reckon the most basic homebrew would be better than the big breweries main lines. I used to drink them but now drink the expensive stuff while waiting for my first HB efforts to condition.
> I am not looking forward to going to the footy this weekend when megaswill is the only beer on offer.
> Drinking coopers stubbies now for $17/half doz, where I used to drink Hahn ice at $30 per 30 can block.
> 
> Better stop now. Another of these sparkling ales and I will be talking $hit , hic



It`s too late- you`re talking it now.
You`re saying the most basic homebrew {which could be a can of No Frills lager and a kg. of white sugar} would be better than the big breweries main lines.
Don`t be so bloody ridiculous. :excl: 

stagga.


----------



## lagers44 (24/4/08)

OK so I might come across as stupid for this reply , but can some-one please explain just what mega-swill is please.

Is it just mass produced beer from the larger breweries ? If so wouldn't beers like Guinness , Bitburger , Fullers , Pilsner Urquell etc all be mega swill as they are produced in large volumes.
Is it the style of beer ( thin gassy low in flavour ) that makes it mega swill ? if so wouldn't a can of kit beer fall into that category as most kits with sugar result in a similar light bodied flavoured beer .

Shouldn't beer be judged by it's technical correctness not so much it's flavour profile or content ?
When trying some-ones homebrew does everyone say "this is crap beer " just because it's too bitter or malty or do you judge the efforts on how clear it looks and how free of off flavours it is and just how technically right the brewer did the job ?
Personal preferences shouldn't determine if something is crap or not just if you like it or not.

There , i've said my piece now I can leave this thread alone.


----------



## bonj (24/4/08)

lagers44 said:


> OK so I might come across as stupid for this reply , but can some-one please explain just what mega-swill is please.



In this context, mega-swill is referring to the bland lagers produced in extremely large quantities by the big two in Australian brewing.

mega: large quantity
swill: bland beer consumed in large quantities by the unwashed masses


----------



## ibast (24/4/08)

Tony said:


> So live with it! ITs not going to change.



Look where wine was in Australia in the 70's and look where it is now. That came about by people being critical. It is healthy to be critical.

And the title of the thread is fair enough. If commercial brewers are aware there are an increasing number of people who are discontent with their product, then the product can only get better.


----------



## mr brau (24/4/08)

A lot of you have missed the point. The beer is not crap (ie faulty in some way). It achieves what it was meant to - please re-read the AIBA guidelines for Australian Lagers. That your palate prefers something with higher hop and malt profile doesn't make the alternative - what you call "megaswill", crap.

I believe that we become better brewers by appreciating, rather than dismissing styles - and defining faults rather than making generalisations. A beer's technical merit is not at all related to personal taste. That is all that I have been meaning to say.

Oh, and support microbrewed beer more.


----------



## mfdes (24/4/08)

Two points I'd like to add. 

First, I think the title of the thread is great! It's certainly stimulated vigorous debate, with remarkably little flaming... 

Second, this comment about most basic homebrew being better than megaswill... I know we all like to think out product tastes good, but it takes a lot of time and effort to produce a beer that just plain tastes balanced and drinkable and is to style and with no major faults. Ask any novice using K&K and they may be truthful and tell you their stuff doesn't actually taste like beer, or they may be optimistic and say their stuff is good (when it doesn't even pass for something that's recognisably beer). We have a homebrew club down here and the majority of brews I've tasted in competitions I would not swallow for fear of poisoning (just being silly here ). But seriously, it takes a bit of effort to get past the K&K according-to-instructions-on-the-package crap.

My point is, the beer they make, within its style, is in general very good, and the majority of people I know will swallow liters of it with a satisfied smile (as I used to), and then turn around and tell me this Moo Brew and Little Creatures stuff tastes like somebody pissed in it after drinking perfume! Most people I know won't swallow a hoppy American Pale Ale, home- or commercially brewed! 
However the megaswill is designed to appeal to as wide a share of the market as possible, including (especially?) teenagers, and does it remarkably well.

MFS.


----------



## the_fuzz (24/4/08)

ibast said:


> If commercial brewers are aware there are an increasing number of people who are discontent with their product, then the product can only get better.



You think they would see a forum about people who home brew, discussing how some people do not like megaswill, and then develop a hoppy ale to satisfy the HOME BREW market???

The big breweries already try to satisfy all markets with their other brands, With Lion Nathan, they have James Squires to fill the "craftbrewer" segment and then you also have knapstien (SP) lager and other ones off's


So they are not just out there trying to brew (in your opinion "crap beer") they are brewing 100's of styles across numerous brands to try to have everything covered


----------



## Mantis (24/4/08)

staggalee said:


> It`s too late- you`re talking it now.
> You`re saying the most basic homebrew {which could be a can of No Frills lager and a kg. of white sugar} would be better than the big breweries main lines.
> Don`t be so bloody ridiculous. :excl:
> 
> stagga.



Sorry to offend Stagga, keep your shirt on mate
Perhaps its because I have just gotten into homebrewing and am enjoying the taste of them over the commercial beers that I have swilled in great amounts to the point that I find them soso. By commercial beers I mean mainstream brands and not coopers and others.
Cheers
Have another drink and rise above it man


----------



## the_fuzz (24/4/08)

Mantis said:


> By commercial beers I mean mainstream brands and not coopers and others.




A little off topic - but why is coopers not refered to as MegaSwill?

Surely after their plant upgrade etc, they would have to be Megaswill - the CPA is bland as is the CSA - why are they still seen as some shiny becon of hope in the beer world?

Seriously, they still crap on about their beers being handmade - WTF, Sure - you push buttons on a control panel, that means hand made right?


----------



## mfdes (24/4/08)

Whats_Wrong_with_Hahn said:


> A little off topic - but why is coopers not refered to as MegaSwill?
> 
> Surely after their plant upgrade etc, they would have to be Megaswill - the CPA is bland as is the CSA - why are they still seen as some shiny becon of hope in the beer world?
> 
> Seriously, they still crap on about their beers being handmade - WTF, Sure - you push buttons on a control panel, that means hand made right?



They have sludge on the bottom of the bottle. This acts as a sort of safety blanket to make us homebrewers feel warm and fuzzy  

MFS


----------



## the_fuzz (24/4/08)

mfdes said:


> They have sludge on the bottom of the bottle. This acts as a sort of safety blanket to make us homebrewers feel warm and fuzzy
> 
> MFS



Exactly what I thought - throw some dead yeast into the bottle and people will think your beer is special :blink:


----------



## ibast (24/4/08)

Whats_Wrong_with_Hahn said:


> You think they would see a forum about people who home brew, discussing how some people do not like megaswill, and then develop a hoppy ale to satisfy the HOME BREW market???



No I don't expect them to run out and create a beer. But if they believe there is a market for better beer then it is more likely they will create better beer.

Take TV stations for example. If you ring up and whinge they actually note what you have to say. They've done their research and they know that for every person that whinges there are 400 other people who feel the same that have not rung up.

It's disappointing that the commercial brewers on this forum are not as open minded and are indignant that their product could in no way be improved.


----------



## the_fuzz (24/4/08)

ibast said:


> No I don't expect them to run out and create a beer. But if they believe there is a market for better beer then it is more likely they will create better beer.
> 
> Take TV stations for example. If you ring up and whinge they actually note what you have to say. They've done their research and they know that for every person that whinges there are 400 other people who feel the same that have not rung up.
> 
> It's disappointing that the commercial brewers on this forum are not as open minded and are indignant that their product could in no way be improved.



You seemed to be confused with the market - I assume you are calling New, VB etc crap - that is your opinion and the CUB/LN giants ahve responded, thus the reason they also have James Squires, Red Back etc - plus all of the BUL beers.

Your complaint is pointless as they already brew a beer to fill the void you are talking about? Or do you just want them to make a hoppy VB :blink:


----------



## Dave86 (24/4/08)

I think all people need to realise that better can mean two (or more different things) One it could be a technically better brewed beer that wins gold medals at beer awards eg: tooheys new, not a beer I enjoy at all but well constructed for the market. Or secondly it could mean that it tastes better to YOU, which is how I think of beer most of time as I would prefer an averagely brewed homebrew with interesting flavours, than to something bland, but this doesn't mean they're crap, just that you don't like them.

For example everyone thought the chaser were funny to begin with (I still do!) until more and more people got offended. Doesn't mean they stopped being funny, some people just didin't like them, its all down to preference...

Thats what I reckon anyway

Dave


----------



## barneyhanway (24/4/08)

I'm not sure I buy the "never put the big guys down" philosophy, though a lot of people I know are very much in agreement with you mr brau.
To my mind, you have to try and teach people that the big guy makes tasteless beer (which to me at least is a very bad thing), and that to get a full flavoured alternative you have to turn to the craft brewers and pay more for the priveledge. Or learn how to brew your own to a reasonable level.

Tell me, how are you going to convince a wider audience to shell out more for a product brewed with passion for maximum flavour, if you maintain that the big guys products are good beers.

Oh and I thought that was a fairly well known fact that the big brewers invent those competition styles because their watery bland mucky brands don't fit into honest traditional beer styles.
They invent and run competitions with categories that fit their bland product line so they can put gold medals on the labels and market it as award winning. HA - faster than you can say "conspiracy".


----------



## mfdes (24/4/08)

Barneyhanway:
Would you consider Macs to be a microbrewery, craft or mainstream?
What about Monteiths? Speights?
CUB? Most people say yes. What about Cascade? It IS CUB and many CUB beers are now brewed down here. 
San Miguel? Major international conglomerate. Generic light flavoured pilsner. Boags? They make a similar product but they even have an ale dry hopped with EKG? Yet they are owned by San Miguel.

Where do you draw the line?

MFS.


----------



## mje1980 (24/4/08)

Interesting thread. I drink tooheys old when out, and the other day tried a matilda bay bo pils, it was pretty good, i enjoyed it better than the barons pale ale ( dont kill me please ). My feeling is, if the beer tastes good, i;ll drink it no matter who made it. Mass produced beers aren't my first choice, and i just cannot drink some of them, but some aren't terrible either. 

I think most ( commercial ) beer drinkers aren't really interested in beer, they just wanna go to the pub/club/bbq and have a laugh with mates after work, the beer is really secondary to the social experience.


----------



## ibast (24/4/08)

barneyhanway said:


> They invent and run competitions with categories that fit their bland product line so they can put gold medals on the labels and market it as award winning. HA - faster than you can say "conspiracy".



You're not as far off as you think. They are certainly selective about which competitions they run in. As for the Australian Lager category, well it was created around the style, so one of the megaswill brews has to win it.

Claiming victory in this category is pretty hollow.


----------



## ibast (24/4/08)

mje1980 said:


> I think most ( commercial ) beer drinkers aren't really interested in beer, they just wanna go to the pub/club/bbq and have a laugh with mates after work, the beer is really secondary to the social experience.



Now that is a good point. I and I imagine most people on this forum take beer more seriously than my mates. So I get upset when the only thing available at a pub is megaswill.

My mates don't. So good point.


----------



## shonky (24/4/08)

mfdes said:


> Boags? They make a similar product but they even have an ale dry hopped with EKG? Yet they are owned by San Miguel.



Boags is now owned by Lion Nathan.

Cheers


----------



## Hutch (24/4/08)

barneyhanway said:


> Oh and I thought that was a fairly well known fact that the big brewers invent those competition styles because their watery bland mucky brands don't fit into honest traditional beer styles.
> They invent and run competitions with categories that fit their bland product line so they can put gold medals on the labels and market it as award winning. HA - faster than you can say "conspiracy".


...and fill the judging panels with their employees (just to propogate the conspiracy theory  ).
This is very true. Is there an "Aussie Style Lager" category in other international competitions? No - it's a fabricated category to justify the bland beer they're been producing for decades, and to win awards for doing it so well.



mje1980 said:


> I think most ( commercial ) beer drinkers aren't really interested in beer, they just wanna go to the pub/club/bbq and have a laugh with mates after work, the beer is really secondary to the social experience.


Totally agree - it's not usually a big talking point around the barby, other than comments like "Ahhhh, that hit's the spot. Nice 'n cold. Could slam it down, and back it up with another 6"....and then wake up the next day with a monster hangover, and wonder why!


----------



## the_fuzz (24/4/08)

Hutch said:


> ...and fill the judging panels with their employees (just to propogate the conspiracy theory  ).
> This is very true. Is there an "Aussie Style Lager" category in other international competitions? No - it's a fabricated category to justify the bland beer they're been producing for decades, and to win awards for doing it so well.



Interesting - I wonder how Hahn Premium did so well at the International Level......


----------



## Thommo (24/4/08)

mje1980 said:


> I think most ( commercial ) beer drinkers aren't really interested in beer, they just wanna go to the pub/club/bbq and have a laugh with mates after work, the beer is really secondary to the social experience.



I know what you mean when you said this, and I agree. Here's a slight diversion though. All my mates are die hards when it comes to defending their crap beers.

After midnight their conversations usually go something like this.

"VB is great, much better than that Tooheys Spew".

"Rubbish, New is heaps better then Vee Pee"

I just sit quietly in the corner thankful that I am enlightened, drinking my red bull and vodka (just kidding).

And to answer the question that this thread initially asks, Megaswill is crap because they put chemicals in it that don't belong in beer that give me wicked hangovers. (It's either the chemicals that give me hangovers, or every time I have a huge session on megaswill I get served one that must be off and gives me food poisoning!!!)

TBH, I don't actually know if they do put preservatives and/or chemicals in beer, it's just something I heard and someone once told me CUB put worse ones in there than Tooheys, so VB gave worse hangovers. I have no idea if it's true. I don't really care.

EDIT: ON RE-READING MY REPLY I FEAR I HAVE GONE WAY :icon_offtopic: 

I have another mate who only drinks Tooheys New and other LN beers. He can't have VB because they "use fish swim bladders to filter it" and he is a die hard Veggie head. Steers well clear from all CUB products.

I'm rambling now. I haven't had a very productive day at work (reading this, and the other megaswill thread and the James Squire thread has seen to that). It would be interesting to do a poll on who actually still lets megaswill pass their lips.

For the record, I do. (wow, They were right, I do feel much better now that I'm out of the closet.)!!! I prefer craft beers when I'm out on the town; If Tooheys Old is a choice over VB and New I will take it every time. If I turn up to a mates place and he gives me a Crownie I will gladly accept, and will not knock him for buying it thinking he was getting a premium product. (although I do still give my mates $hit if they ever buy Corona.)

This rambling of mine has now reminded me of the "Best beer you have ever had" thread. (Do a search, it's there somewhere.) Lots of people were posting and some came to the conclusion that their best beer was usually helped along with the location/situation in which it was had. I can't remember what I posted for my example, (If I even did post I'm not sure) and may have put in a ritzy Euro example I have, but here is another one.

One of the best beers I ever had was a VB at the Pitt Town Sports Club after spending 8 hours digging trenches in a school when I was labouring for my Plumber Uncle in 36 degrees heat.

Whoah. I think this is officially my longest ever post on AHB. I'm off to get a beer. We only have Tooheys New or Cascade Light in the work fridge though. Maybe I might just wait till I get home and have English Brown instead. Nah, stuff it. I'll just grab a new and hope that none of my Home Brew mates find out about it.

I told you I wasn't having a very productive day at work fellers.

Time for jiggling titties!
:icon_chickcheers:


----------



## beersom (24/4/08)

Hutch said:


> Is there an "Aussie Style Lager" category in other international competitions? No - it's a fabricated category to justify the bland beer they're been producing for decades, and to win awards for doing it so well.


 Actually there is .... World Beer Cup has a section for them.


----------



## the_fuzz (24/4/08)

beersom said:


> Actually there is .... World Beer Cup has a section for them.




There is no point in telling people facts - they tend to just want to believe that Australia's Biggest Breweries must be crap - even thou they do very well on the World Stage


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (24/4/08)

Most mega drinkers are programed to only drink what they drink...be it VB,NEW or XXXX.....and it is very hard to make them change..

I have seen fights & brawls over what particular beer is going to be taken on a fishing trip...they all put in, then argue if it is going to be vb,New or xxxx..Jeez, I have seen mates fall out with each other over it....

90% would tell you that Coopers is crap "YUK...not drinking that cloudy muddy sh&t.."

Most like there Mega and that is all they will drink, and you wont change them..EVER....I have even taken somke good brews to the BBQ's and get a positive reaction...but always get "Yeah thats really nice....but I will stick to my _brand x_ beer thanks"


----------



## AlwayzLoozeCount (24/4/08)

I went down to Hobart not so long ago and ordered a pint of Boags, the barman got all pissed off and said "I don't want to dirty my glasses with that crap". They realy love their Cascade down there.


----------



## newguy (24/4/08)

Really interesting thread!

I have to respect the megaswill because of their consistency. It's very difficult to make something that light without flaws. And to make it consistent from batch to batch.

The reason I hate the *megabrewers* is their arrogance. Their "this is *REAL* beer" advertising. It pisses me off. What pisses me off even more is the fact that most people believe that shite.

...At least I know that hot scantily clad strange women won't suddenly appear when I pour myself a pint of my own brew.

:huh: <_< 

Dammit. Suddenly I'm depressed.


----------



## ibast (24/4/08)

Whats_Wrong_with_Hahn said:


> There is no point in telling people facts - they tend to just want to believe that Australia's Biggest Breweries must be crap - even thou they do very well on the World Stage




In their own category, competing against themselves.

It's not like Stella is going to enter the best Australian Lager category :lol:


----------



## Mantis (24/4/08)

newguy said:


> Really interesting thread!
> 
> I have to respect the megaswill because of their consistency. It's very difficult to make something that light without flaws. And to make it consistent from batch to batch.
> 
> ...



LOL. Thanks, at last some humour in this thread
Cheers


----------



## Thommo (24/4/08)

ibast said:


> In their own category, competing against themselves.
> 
> It's not like Stella is going to enter the best Australian Lager category :lol:



Actually ibast, if I'm not mistaken, they won best Australian beer (or something like that) not too long ago.

EDIT: And I've suddenly realised you were probably being sarcastic. Sorry.


----------



## PostModern (24/4/08)

newguy said:


> Really interesting thread!
> 
> I have to respect the megaswill because of their consistency. It's very difficult to make something that light without flaws. And to make it consistent from batch to batch.



With controlled industrial process, plus a number of batches in various tanks available for blending, I think it's easier to be consistent in a megabrewery than a home setup. All that engineering, test equipment and technicians... 

As an analogy, I'm not amazed when a paint shop can tint can after can and get them all identical. I expect it.


----------



## the_fuzz (24/4/08)

ibast said:


> In their own category, competing against themselves.
> 
> It's not like Stella is going to enter the best Australian Lager category :lol:




Really, so the numerous awards for Hahn Premuim, Hahn Premuim Light and the recent Squires Pils award was all because they had no competition?


----------



## Hutch (24/4/08)

beersom said:


> Actually there is .... World Beer Cup has a section for them.





Whats_Wrong_with_Hahn said:


> There is no point in telling people facts - they tend to just want to believe that Australia's Biggest Breweries must be crap - even thou they do very well on the World Stage


No, there is no point in telling people facts.... where is this category in the BJCP style guidelines? Must be there if it's a recognised style worthy of recognition in a competition.


----------



## mfdes (24/4/08)

AlwayzLoozeCount said:


> I went down to Hobart not so long ago and ordered a pint of Boags, the barman got all pissed off and said "I don't want to dirty my glasses with that crap". They realy love their Cascade down there.



Interesting... I'd say at least 50% of pubs in Hobart serve Boags, and all restaurants. Most Hobartians will also drink Boags, especially when for a while it was independent while Cascade had fallen to CUB...

MFS.


----------



## the_fuzz (24/4/08)

Hutch said:


> No, there is no point in telling people facts.... where is this category in the BJCP style guidelines? Must be there if it's a recognised style worthy of recognition in a competition.




I am referring to all the beers the big 2 make, not just the common VB/New - they do produce International award winning beers (Real awards), however is it there fault that Australians prefer New/VB/XXXX?


----------



## PostModern (24/4/08)

Hutch said:


> No, there is no point in telling people facts.... where is this category in the BJCP style guidelines? Must be there if it's a recognised style worthy of recognition in a competition.



The BJCP styles are largely based on what is already being brewed commercially. Breweries don't look at the style guides for amateur brew competitions to choose what they make. Successful breweries are shaped by the market. If no-one liked it, no-one would drink it and the breweries would have to change what they make.


----------



## newguy (24/4/08)

PostModern said:


> With controlled industrial process, plus a number of batches in various tanks available for blending, I think it's easier to be consistent in a megabrewery than a home setup. All that engineering, test equipment and technicians...



True, the large scale does make it easier to be consistent. But when a brewery consumes the amount of malt in a single day what a micro does in a year, things like the malt itself make a big difference. As does a clumsy brewer, if he/she manages to spoil x batches because they were lax with their sanitation procedures. I still have to give credit where it is due - they're good at being consistent.

At the end of the day, megabrewer or homebrewer, it all comes down to 1) hoping that the yeast you pitch does what you want, and 2) hoping that your sanitation is up to snuff. We all get blindsided by unexpected issues from time to time.

BTW, I'm an engineer, and I don't trust other engineers. Most of them, anyway. Technology and people can and do fail. It's inevitable. Sort of like the old saying that not all doctors were first in their class. Same goes for brewers and the people who create the machines/technology they rely on.


----------



## mfdes (24/4/08)

How can you say there is no such style as "Aussie Lager" when most of the available product tastes the same?
Just because BJCP (who are not, by the way, god, or their style guidelines the bible... they DO get updated regularly) doesn't have this style doesn't mean it's not there, just that it hasn't made it into the styles, a bit like imperial IPA...

Actually Aussie lager is essentially an extension of European style Pilsners, only without hop flavour and aroma, using local barley, high in adjuncts, and not matured for very long.

This thread is starting to get a bit boring. The argument has been a bit circular for a few pages.

MFS.


----------



## Hutch (24/4/08)

Whats_Wrong_with_Hahn said:


> I am referring to all the beers the big 2 make, not just the common VB/New - they do produce International award winning beers (Real awards), however is it there fault that Australians prefer New/VB/XXXX?


I agree - they make some good beers through their various subsidiaries (Cascade, Malt Shovel, Matilda Bay, etc. etc.).
But just where do the "megaswill" beers rate in these beer awards? You certainly never see VB getting too many Gold medals!

...incidentally, have a look at how the brewers themselves (Fosters) clasify VB - "full strength bitter lager". WTF???
So they're making up styles now are they? Probably not too long before this style appears in competitions too


----------



## PostModern (24/4/08)

newguy said:


> True, the large scale does make it easier to be consistent. But when a brewery consumes the amount of malt in a single day what a micro does in a year, things like the malt itself make a big difference.



Sure. But they have processes to deal with variability. Colour can be adjusted, mash temps and steps can be altered to deal with varying protein levels, there are adjuncts for nitrogen additions, and so on. They can also reject loads of malt if they are too far from spec. There are ways and documented processes to deal with just about any scenario. They're very organised and have been doing this for a long long time.

And I take your point about errors, and whatnot, but as I mentioned in my last post, sins can be hidden by blending. One bad or out of spec tank can be blended in small amounts into other batches, and I reckon there's always the same out that we all have: dumping the undrinkable stuff into the sewer.


----------



## the_fuzz (24/4/08)

newguy said:


> But when a brewery consumes the amount of malt in a single day what a micro does in a year



To put it into perspective - 30 Tonnes per Hour of grain is crushed


----------



## Hutch (24/4/08)

mfdes said:


> This thread is starting to get a bit boring. The argument has been a bit circular for a few pages.
> 
> MFS.


I disagree - not a boring thread at all. 
It's just hitting a raw nerve with some of you that many of us could have such negative opinions of this "beer". I think it's a good discussion, with many perfectly valid opinions being expressed, and some insightful discussion going on.


----------



## newguy (24/4/08)

Whats_Wrong_with_Hahn said:


> To put it into perspective - 30 Tonnes per Hour of grain is crushed



That's a truly mind blowing amount. Reminds me of a picture a friend showed me of the Warsteiner brewery in Germany. I got one of those "holy shit" moments when I saw their rotary keg filler. I was born & raised on a farm, and I keep converting this huge malt consumption into acres & growing seasons. It still blows my mind.



PostModern said:


> And I take your point about errors, and whatnot, but as I mentioned in my last post, sins can be hidden by blending. One bad or out of spec tank can be blended in small amounts into other batches, and I reckon there's always the same out that we all have: dumping the undrinkable stuff into the sewer.



You're absolutely right - blending is their way to assure consistency. And I'm sure that a lot of beer ends up being dumped (we all do that). As much as it hurts a homebrewer to dump a batch, I imagine that it really hurts the megabrewers.


----------



## Hutch (24/4/08)

Whats_Wrong_with_Hahn said:


> To put it into perspective - 30 Tonnes per Hour of grain is crushed


 :huh: That's a lot of Millmasters going flat-out


----------



## Jerry (24/4/08)

mfdes said:


> This thread is starting to get a bit boring. The argument has been a bit circular for a few pages.
> 
> MFS.



Agree!

And I just read the whole bloody lot!

There's 30 mins I'II never get back.


----------



## petesbrew (24/4/08)

Maybe the moderators can start up a new subforum for these "I hate megaswill" topics.
It seems like theres one every fortnight .... in which I also stupidly post a reply somewhere.

Anyway, at least there's always Tooheys Old. I still enjoy that megaswill.


----------



## mfdes (24/4/08)

Hutch said:


> I disagree - not a boring thread at all.
> It's just hitting a raw nerve with some of you that many of us could have such negative opinions of this "beer". I think it's a good discussion, with many perfectly valid opinions being expressed, and some insightful discussion going on.



Hi Hutch,
I've actually been making the opposite point if you read my posts. I think the large breweries make a very successful product that people evidently enjoy and does exactly what it's designed for, in the Australian market.

My boring comment is that we're starting to see points being repeated more than once. Time to move on for me.
MFS.


----------



## neonmeate (24/4/08)

after 9 pages we still don't know what it is that makes it so crap! and i honestly want to know... all the posters with inside info are defending megaswill to the death because it's successful therefore good, and won't tell us why it tastes so bad... (or tell us that if it tastes bad it's only cause it's poorly handled/or it's all in our minds because we're snobs). but i don't care how many "awards" tooheys and CUB have won, all their beers taste like they're mashed with cat litter and fermented with toejam.


----------



## warrenlw63 (24/4/08)

neonmeate said:


> fermented with toejam.



:icon_vomit: 

Warren -


----------



## staggalee (24/4/08)

warrenlw63 said:


> :icon_vomit:
> 
> Warren -


Cop that, yer pommy bastard  {Barry McKenzie 1971}
Who started this anyway?
Get a rope, lets string im up.  

stagga.


----------



## mfdes (24/4/08)

Hahaha.

Taste is so subjective I think the point being made is that just because it tastes bad to YOU doesn't mean it's a bad product.
I don't like spirits. To me they just taste bad. Not just bad, pukingly awful.
That doesn't mean I get stuck onto my brother in law when he's enjoying a nice Johnny Walker Black Label. He enjoys it, good on him. 

MFS.


----------



## Thirsty Boy (24/4/08)

neonmeate said:


> after 9 pages we still don't know what it is that makes it so crap! and i honestly want to know... all the posters with inside info are defending megaswill to the death because it's successful therefore good, and won't tell us why it tastes so bad... (or tell us that if it tastes bad it's only cause it's poorly handled/or it's all in our minds because we're snobs). but i don't care how many "awards" tooheys and CUB have won, all their beers taste like they're mashed with cat litter and fermented with toejam.



Not so my friend... in post number 10 of this thread I gave you the insidest information you are likely to get along with a reasonably carefully thought through theory about why that relates to the sorts of tastes you are likely to find in an Australian Mega beer.

The following 8 pages has been spattered with a mix of speculation, philosophy and rubbish.

You might note that very few people are actually saying that the beers being talked about taste good, the debate has been more about what constitutes crap.

For the record, using this post as a straw poll - most of what people believe happens in a large brewery doesn't, most of the things that they think get put into the beer produced by a large brewery dont and most of the things that large brewerys actually do do, or do put into their beer, don't happen for the reason that people think they do.

Thats what shits me ... I don't care a bloody zot if people hate the beers I make at work, I don't care if they shout it from the damn rooftops, but if they are going to state a reason for their perceived crapness... get it right or be prepared for a correction. Unless you actually _know_ about the ingredients, or the process, or the people, or the adjuncts, or the additives .... don't spout off about them. 

You're contention that the beers are mashed with cat littler and fermented with toejam is around as accurate as some of the other stuff I have read in this thread.... but at least it was funny. (oh and screw you too  - _some_ of them are good dammit )

Critisise away people. I promise to not "defend" beers that I have plainly stated that I don't actually like......................


----------



## staggalee (24/4/08)

the dogs bark, and slowly like time in a bottle, the caravan moves on :lol: 

stagga.


----------



## AndrewQLD (24/4/08)

> Thats what shits me ... I don't care a bloody zot if people hate the beers I make at work, I don't care if they shout it from the damn rooftops, but if they are going to state a reason for their perceived crapness... get it right or be prepared for a correction. Unless you actually know about the ingredients, or the process, or the people, or the adjuncts, or the additives .... don't spout off about them.



I was going to keep out of this but T.B's post above has prompted me to break silence.

The above quote is probably about the most accurate and insightful thing I have read in this whole thread.
The amount of posts that spout so called "factual" information that are blatantly just heresay or urban myths handed down from one brewer to another with no basis in fact is astounding.

What ThirstyBoy is saying above is that unless you have first hand knowledge of the information you are putting forward on this, or any other site, you really should be most carefull what you post.

On this site alone we have several members who are actively working in breweries around the country, members who have completed brewing degrees, and you will probably notice they tend to steer clear of topics such as this and I suspect it may well be to avoid the negative responses that so often seem to go hand in hand with these threads.

In all honesty, I drink VB and I don't like APA's but that doesn't make my beers shit or commercial brews crap, it's just my preferences.

Cheers
Andrew


----------



## Hutch (24/4/08)

Thirsty Boy said:


> ...
> For the record, using this post as a straw poll - most of what people believe happens in a large brewery doesn't, most of the things that they think get put into the beer produced by a large brewery dont and most of the things that large brewerys actually do do, or do put into their beer, don't happen for the reason that people think they do.


Hi TB,

I think you're perfectly justified in defending the reputation and ability of the people you work with, and like you I agree that they do a miraculous job at producing a consistent product, regardless of what that product is (I'm talking about the Big volume stuff here).

So far there's been a lot of argument and rhetorical debate on this topic, however what is obviously missing is any REAL factual information about what actually MAKES this beer the way it is - this is what I believe the original topic was trying to explore!

There's plenty of speculation and opinions about hops/isohop, preservatives, adjuncts, sugars, etc. but what many of us would like to know is EXACTLY what they do to produce this type of beer. I'm not suggesting you lose your job by providing us with a photocopied recipe for VB (for want of an example), but I think a lot of myths would be debunked if you (or any others here that know THE FACTS) could enlighten us with what you know, under the relative anonymity of a public forum:

* Sugar
* Adjuncts and enzymes 
* preservatives
* Mashing regime
* Fermentation temp and yeast strain(s) (that might get you into trouble!)
* Lagering duration/ temperature
* Blending
* Pre-packaging treatment (filtering, pasturisation, etc.)


Also, it's also been mentioned earlier that isohop is used in certain brews, though I'm not convinced this is as big a culprit as I once thought - please correct me if I'm wrong.
So, does anyone want to share what they actually know?

Hutch.


----------



## sponge (24/4/08)

staggalee said:


> Who started this anyway?
> Get a rope, lets string im up.



Im sorry.... haha. Ill sit back in the corner. i didnt actually expect this debate to go on, just was after an answer from someone who knew some inside info such as what thirsty boy has already been saying. its made like it tastes because thats what people enjoy.


I will admit that when i go to a pub with not a whole lot of selection, i will always be able to find either tooheys old or kent old brown. as someone has mentioned, a lot of it is to do with the social side of drinking. i will happily drink an old/brown with a few mates at the local, or if someone buys me another schooey of something i dont like as much, ill still drink it. its not my favourite but if drank fast enough its slightly drinkable.



Thirsty Boy said:


> Thats what shits me ... I don't care a bloody zot if people hate the beers I make at work, I don't care if they shout it from the damn rooftops, but if they are going to state a reason for their perceived crapness... get it right or be prepared for a correction. Unless you actually _know_ about the ingredients, or the process, or the people, or the adjuncts, or the additives .... don't spout off about them.



Well said. all i was after was some facts and not opinions. oh well. its made for some good reading at uni none the less


Sponge


----------



## staggalee (24/4/08)

Who gives a shit what he`s mumbling about? This is a beer forum, and by God it should be treated as such, not a roost for would be academics to get on a soapbox.

stagga.


----------



## peas_and_corn (24/4/08)

Hutch said:


> :huh: That's a lot of Millmasters going flat-out



Nah, they bought a bunch of Monster mills on a bulk buy


----------



## mr brau (24/4/08)

After now 10 pages, perhaps this thread should be called "What makes homebrewers just so ignorant and self righteous?"


----------



## razz (24/4/08)

mr brau said:


> After now 10 pages, perhaps this thread should be called "What makes homebrewers just so ignorant and self righteous?"


Our ability to make superior ale of course !


----------



## Hutch (25/4/08)

mr brau said:


> After now 10 pages, perhaps this thread should be called "What makes homebrewers just so ignorant and self righteous?"


 :angry: 
After now 2.5 years of you being an AHB member, you've made a sum total of 12 posts on this forum - Very valuable contributor mr brau. 
Do you have anything more constructive to add to this discussion, or is a broad insult easier to come up with?


----------



## Tim F (25/4/08)

Thirsty Boy said:


> People drink what they do because thats what they prefer, not because they are too dumb to know better. Jeezus.



Mostly agree with you but not that point. A lot of people drink what they do ONLY because they don't know any better. Case in point being the vast majority of people on this board who would have happily guzzled down 'megaswill' for years before they realised there could be more to beer than just something cold and fizzy that gets you drunk.


----------



## schooey (25/4/08)

Tim F said:


> Mostly agree with you but not that point. A lot of people drink what they do ONLY because they don't know any better. Case in point being the vast majority of people on this board who would have happily guzzled down 'megaswill' for years before they realised there could be more to beer than just something cold and fizzy that gets you drunk.



and there's probably a couple of hundred thousand wine snobs out there that think us craftbrewers drink beer, no matter how good, ONLY because we supposedly haven't discovered the refinement of wine yet..


----------



## PostModern (25/4/08)

Tim F said:


> Mostly agree with you but not that point. A lot of people drink what they do ONLY because they don't know any better. Case in point being the vast majority of people on this board who would have happily guzzled down 'megaswill' for years before they realised there could be more to beer than just something cold and fizzy that gets you drunk.



Agreed. From my own past, I got into homebrew in the 80's to make beer "as good as VB or Melbourne". Nuts when I look back now, but that's not here not there. Having developed what I consider to be taste, I still occasionally have a look back on the range of Aussie "Draught" beers just to see how far I've come.


----------



## Thirsty Boy (25/4/08)

Hutch said:


> Hi TB,
> 
> I think you're perfectly justified in defending the reputation and ability of the people you work with, and like you I agree that they do a miraculous job at producing a consistent product, regardless of what that product is (I'm talking about the Big volume stuff here).
> 
> ...



Only too happy to share - I need to be a little generic because the answers aren't the same across the spectrum of beers I help to make & because I really don't want to lose my job by giving away trade secrets.

I'm not sure if it will help though - there wont be any startling revelations and I imagine the information will both satisfy the curious and simultaneously confirm all the worst suspicions of those who knew it all along. But for what its worth, here are the things I know about brewing at a "mega" brewery

*Malt -* All out malt is from that evil purveyor of substandard product (joking guys no need for lawyers) Barret Burston. It is mostly a pale/lager malt designed for low maltiness & a higher level of dextrins per mash temp. Super low DMS pre-cursors. Every single truckload is visually inspected and comes with a full set of specifications so that mashing can be tailored to compensate for the grain being used _today_. We also get in BB crystal and Black Barley for those beers that need them.

*Adjuncts -* There are no starch adjuncts used. Only sugar adjuncts. The sugar all comes in the form of syrups. We use a few different sorts, predominantly sucrose and maltose syrups. But there are also a few specially tailored syrups that are a combination of those two things and dextrins. The different syrups are used to tailor fermentability profiles. For the majority of the brews, the sugars would make up somewhere between 15 & 20% of the fermentables. At least one of the beers has a much higher proportion of sugar... but to balance that, we also make at least two no adjunct beers (ie All Grain) Bet you can't guess which ones are which.

*Mashing -* Beers are usually step mashed with an L:G of between 2.5 & 3. Temp controlled Mash Tun. Stand times are mostly quite a lot shorter than a homebrewer would use - but you have to remember that mashing in and transfer times take a while when you are talking about a 17,000kg grist. So they all add up. Then again, one of our beers has a 120min sach rest.... The temps overall are probably a lot higher than HB temps would be, but we are shooting for a much more dextrinous wort than a homebrewer would normally be looking for. Standard mash additions of Gypsum/Salt/Cal Chloride/Mag Sulphate etc are made as appropriate for the brew.

*Lauter/sparge - * Mash is transferred after a partial mashout (not high enough to stop enzyme activity, but enough to slow it down a lot) to a bloody great big lauter tun, where it is sparged over around 120mins. Continuous sparge, probably best described as a "flood" sparge rather than a "fly". We would be collecting around about 100,000L of wort from each batch mostly in the 13-18 plato range.

*Boil/hopping -* Boils are usually 60min and dependent on the brew either bittering or aroma hops might be added in pellet form. The bittering hops if they are added are POR and the aromas will be a Euro Noble hop. Even when bittering hops are added - they aren't the primary source of bittering. It will always be mostly ISO extract of one form or another. But where it is desirable to have an actual hop character to the beer, they are used. Aromas though... don't talk to me about the bastards..... pallets and pallets of pellets I have to lug around the place  . Of course during the whole process, in-line meters are monitoring every possible volume, temp, level, attribute of the wort etc etc that you could possibly think of, and probably more. Post boil samples are taken for among other things pH, tint (some brewers caramel is sometimes added to adjust colour) & of course gravity. Our spec for the gravity allows us a little leeway - we need to get it within .001 SG -we can add cut water if we are a little high, but too low means adjusting the next brew. It takes 2-5 brews to fill a fermentor, so the blending starts at wort production, this brew a little low, next one is made a little stronger. The fermentors will be accurate to the 4th decimal place of SG by the time we are done.

*Whirlpool and Chill - *aren't exciting, they are just a whirlpool vessel and a whacking great plate chiller

We run two brewhouses simultaneously and our wort production complex is able to produce 18-20 brews/24hrs at around 120,000L per brew. At the risk of making it absolutely clear to my employers who they should sack if they dont like this thread, the Wort Production Complex is where I spend my time, about as far away from being in charge of anything as its possible to get 

*Enzymes - *Yep. Every brew gets a bit of a shot of a gluconase enzyme to help with lautering. About 1L in the 40,000+L of mash. It does its job and make things go faster. "other" enzymes are used to make low carb beers low carb, but not really for anything else.

*Fermentation/Yeast -* Yeasts are all either Proprietary strains that were mostly developed by the brewery over the last hundred years or so, came with the acquisition of a beer brand, or are the official yeast of a BUL beer. The strains for the local brews are have been cultured to perform quickly and cleanly at higher than normal "lager" brewing temps. All the major brands are lagers no matter what the label says. I wont do the actual temps thing - but suffice it to say, for lagers fermentations are hot and fast. Fermentation takes around a week starting out quite low and free rising to its maximum before being held there to finish, beers are then chilled back for a couple of days to allow the yeast to settle, then they are tapped off the fermentor, through centrifuges to get rid of almost all the yeast and put into cold storage for a week or three. I don't believe that we use a fining agent in the fermentors now that we have centrifuges - we used to use isinglass, but I dont think we do anymore. I will call a fermentation guy to check and update here if we do. Hop extract for bittering is added to the beer during transfer to the storage tanks.

*Blending -* Absolutely. The aim is to hit the quality targets into the bright beer tanks. So fermentors and storage tanks will be analyzed and tasted numerous times. High will be blended with low and visa versa, out of spec might be dribbled into batches that have room to move etc etc. Brands aren't mixed, but for instance an export version might get downgraded if it cant be made to hit its (much tighter) specs. If beer is unblendably out of spec... it goes down the drain. Takes a couple of days to pour nearly a million litres of beer down the sink, I've watched it happen.

*Preservatives/process aides etc - * Some. The only actual preservatives that I have seen put into beer are some Ascorbic Acid and some Sodium Metabisulphite - there might I suppose be others, but not that I am aware of. In some beers anti haze enzymes are added. Mainly the ones that are going overseas on a boat, the physical rocking back and forwards on the boat causes a haze to occur in the bottle. Pre-filtering PVPP or Silica Gel is added to control chill haze, I am pretty sure its used for all beers these days. Those are filtered out again of course so they are process aides rather than ingredients.

*Filtering -* is done via diatomaceous earth filters (candle) which take out yeast and the PVPP or Silica gel. Carbonation and dilution to sale strength happens during the transfer/filter process from Storage to Bright tanks. Final adjustment dosing of hop extract and caramel happens just prior to the filter. This is adjusted during the filter run so that the final bright tank levels are to spec. Bright beers are monitored for carbonation etc and stored at around -1C till they are required by packaging.

*Packaging -* Cans and bottles are filled on fancy arsed Krones steam strerilizing fillers, and all but the beers labelled "cold filtered" are pasturised in tunnel pasturisers. The cold filtered ones are sterile filtered instead. Beers for kegging are flash pasturised on the way to the kegging plant.

And thats it .... so in there is all the merit and all the bad you care to find. If you think the beers are great, thats why - if you think they are fine examples of beers you don't really care for, thats why - if you think they are crap.... then in there somewhere is the reason why.

You can figure out which bits you think are "responsible" - but it wont be any single one of them - it will still end up being the fact that the beers are carefully and deliberately brewed to taste the way they do, and you just don't like it. The exact same process could be used to brew a beer you love, it just isn't thats all.

At least now you'll know rather than just suspect. At the risk of perpetuating an already overly long thread... I'll answer specific questions (if I can) if people want me to.

Had my favourite beer tonight - Reissdorf Kolsch - compared to that stuff, nearly everything is crap

Thirsty


----------



## Duff (25/4/08)

Very interesting post Thirsty. Thanks.




Thirsty Boy said:


> Only too happy to share...
> 
> *Adjuncts -* Only sugar adjuncts. The sugar all comes in the form of syrups.




Are these available to the homebrewer? If so, where?

Cheers.


----------



## kabooby (25/4/08)

Every day I log on to see a few more pages of the same argument.

I know I shouldnt read it but I just cant help myself. Its like a drug 

Maybe by next week we will have a "What Makes Megaswill Just So Crap II" thread :unsure: 

Kabooby  

I might add that this thread has generally been about aussie megaswill. Most beer consuming countries produce megaswill, and I would not say that there beer is much better. Anyone fancy a Budweiser h34r: 

Now lets all have a group hug


----------



## Stuster (25/4/08)

Very informative, Thirsty Boy. One question about the sugar syrup, just wondering when in the process it's added in?


----------



## floppinab (25/4/08)

Thirsty, your post was absolutely fantastic. Given some have handed directly and indirectly a fair bit of crap (whoops that word again), you've gone above and beyond to give those that wanted it more detail than they probably deserve. I thought you'd given us more than enough in your first post, and others that you have given us here in the past.
Thanks


----------



## Duff (25/4/08)

Stuster said:


> Very informative, Thirsty Boy. One question about the sugar syrup, just wondering when in the process it's added in?



I was thinking the same Stuster. I remember a post recently from Gough who mentioned they add theirs about 2 - 3 days into primary for their Tripel, etc. Have a Golden Strong I was thinking of doing the same way shortly.


----------



## sponge (25/4/08)

Cheers Thirsty Boy



Sponge


----------



## beersom (25/4/08)

Hutch said:


> No, there is no point in telling people facts.... where is this category in the BJCP style guidelines? Must be there if it's a recognised style worthy of recognition in a competition.




BJCP is a homebrew/amateur ONLY style guidline... it is, as far as I am aware, not used by ANY pro comp anywhere in the world.
The BJCP is a most welcome part of the entire brewing community but it is not the definitive guide, without flaw or without room for improvement. This is why they do updates etc. BJCP is a good basis for comp guidelines that is a reflection of the beer world (pro and amateur) not a mirror image.

As far as the Aussie Mega breweries competing against only themselves in these classes.... well as far as I can recall they haven't done too well competing against themselves the last few years.
2008
Gold Anchor Ice
Asia Pacific Breweries Limited
Singapore, Singapore 
Silver Imperial
Cerveceria Hondurea, S.A. de C.V.
San Pedro Sala, Honduras 
Bronze Pacea Tropical Extra
Cervecera Boliviana Nacional S.A. 
La Paz, Bolivia 
2006
Gold: Norte Blanca, Cerveceria y Malteria Quilmes, Quilmes, Argentina
Silver: Kingfisher, Shepherd Neame Ltd, Faversham, England
Bronze: Bohemia Especial, Cerveceria Nacional Dominicana, Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic
2004
Gold: Premium, Compaia Cervecera de Nicaragua, Managua, Nicaragua
Silver: Myanmar Beer, Myanmar Brewery Ltd., Yangon, Myanmar
Bronze: Vailima Special Export Lager, Samoa Breweries Ltd., Apia, Samoa
2002
Gold Southern Cross Export, Honolulu Brewing Company, LLC., Honolulu, HI 
Silver Premium Cia. Cervecera de Nicaragua, Managua, Nicaragua 
Bronze Double Happiness Beer, Guangzhou Brewery, Guangzhou, China 
2000
Gold Southwark Bitter Lion-Nathan, Lidcombe, Australia 
No silver awarded
Bronze Fiji Bitter Carlton Brewery Fiji Ltd., Walubay, Suva, Fiji 

But they have picked up many awards in other classes in that time.

As far as their quality goes.... well
Subjectively- They are brewers of very high standard that acheive remarkable results of consistant quality of the desired end product using the best means to acheive that goal.
Objectively- They are the producers (note I do not use the term brewers) of remarkably bland products devoid of character and without trace of gastronomic experience.

The actual brewers themselves are generally VERY talented.... VERY talented. That is one of the reasons why they are able to meet standard time and time again. If given the green light to produce an IPA or APA in true manner I am sure that Fosters Yatala plant would produce one hell of a beer. But as we know this is not the point of these companies (Fosters has Matilda Bay for this) The point of these companies is to produce quick and inoffensive products for the largest population percentage possible.

It is very much like many have stated earlier comparing McDonalds to a fine restaurant, only I prefer a cheese analogy. 
Kraft singles are bland and inoffensive and fill a void for a quick and easy sanga.... A fine leiscester is a flavourfull cheese for the moments when a gastronomic experience is desired.

In short -
Mega beers = very well made, economically made, bland mass product.
Craft (pro and amatuer)beers = an experience!!!!


----------



## SpillsMostOfIt (25/4/08)

Thirsty Boy,

Your boss just called. He wants to see you in his office first thing Monday morning...

h34r:


----------



## Weizguy (25/4/08)

most excellent feedback, Thirsty. Well done



Thirsty Boy said:


> You can figure out which bits you think are "responsible" - but it wont be any single one of them - it will still end up being the fact that the beers are carefully and deliberately brewed to taste the way they do, and you just don't like it. The exact same process could be used to brew a beer you love, it just isn't thats all.



I think that this is the point being made by both sides. It's about the efficiency of process, leading to the maximum $$ return to investors and the minimum product that will be acceptable to consumers (of which there is obviously a helluva lot of willing or even obsessive individuals).  



Thirsty Boy said:


> At least now you'll know rather than just suspect. At the risk of perpetuating an already overly long thread... I'll answer specific questions (if I can) if people want me to.


"Respect" for your time and input.

People need to remember that it's not just the brewery that you work in, but all large breweries use a similar quality control/ measuring/ blending/ intensive/ all-encompassing process.

Even the German breweries, as I believe I have mentioned/ heard-mentioned before, do NOT have to comply with the Reinheitsgebot for product brewed for export.

Les the not-so-anal-now Weizguy.


----------



## PostModern (25/4/08)

Good on you TB. It's always good to hear this sort of thing first hand, from someone inside the facility. 

I think I found the reasons in your list that I don't like the beer you guys make as much as the stuff we amateurs make:



> It is mostly a pale/lager malt designed for low maltiness & a higher level of dextrins per mash temp.



I like maltiness in malt.

and



> Filtering - is done via diatomaceous earth filters



Filtering really kills a beer, imvho, but I completely understand why it's required for mega-production of mega-beers.

Thanks again for taking the time to post that great summary of the megalager manufacturing process.


----------



## geoffi (25/4/08)

Thirsty Boy...excellent explanation of what goes on in the 'dark satanic mills'.

While we, the self-appointed taste Polizei, might be scornful of the 'quality' of the product, we have to acknowledge that these guys are masters of 'quality control'. They know what product sells, and they know how to reproduce that product exactly time after time. On the micro scale, I (and I guess everybody else here) am trying to achieve control and consistency, especially with our 'house' brews that we do again and again.


----------



## Hutch (25/4/08)

Awesome reply Thirsty - exactly what I was hoping for. Perhaps one of the best posts I've read on the forum to date.
The volumes of wort you mention, and the nett output are simply mind-boggling (and all to within .001 SG!). 
...also goes a long way to explain the smell throughout all of Abbotsford/Studley Park on some days!
Cheers :icon_cheers: 
Hutch.


----------



## SpillsMostOfIt (25/4/08)

Hutch said:


> ...also goes a long way to explain the smell throughout all of Abbotsford/Studley Park on some days!



Wonderful, isn't it? To my mind, it's why that part of the Yarra is some of the most popular bike track in the state...


----------



## newguy (25/4/08)

Thank you TB. That explanation took a lot of time; I appreciate it. The one thing that struck me is how Australian 'mega' lager differs from their North American counterparts: corn. Up to ~40% of the grist here is corn. Probably related to cost/availability.

I have to ask about high gravity brewing. Pretty much every big brewery over here produces high gravity wort, then dilutes it with water once it is done fermenting. I'm not sure of the exact reasons why, but cost and consistency are definitely factors (somehow). Is that a common practice in Australia?


----------



## Thirsty Boy (25/4/08)

Duff / Stu - the syrups are added to the boil. Batched in when the wort is being transferred into the kettle.

newguy - yeah, its all HG brewing. that 15-20plato strength coming out of the brewhouse is significantly more than serving strength. I didn't specifically say High Gravity, I sort of thought the OG levels would give it away. Its all brewed and fermented at the higher strength to maximise tank space and capacity, then it is diluted back to serving strength in the filter room.

Happy to provide info, but really I'd rather talk about homebrewing

TB


----------



## dig (25/4/08)

Whats_Wrong_with_Hahn said:


> Who are the big 2 that use POR?
> 
> 1 = CUB
> 
> but who is the other? Or, as per everything else to have said, do you just think something - so it must be true <_<



I've seen POR and Super Pride in the Tooheys hop coolroom. Perhaps you should have a look next time you've got your daddy's 'access all areas' pass. Take the lift at the south-west corner of the brewhouse down two floors, tun left, look in the fridge. Oh, and when you step out of the lift, see all that stuff on the pallet racking? Yeah, that all goes into the beer. That stuff goes into the beer.

Home work for you: Ask your dad what 'recovery' is, ask him what percentage and then do the maths. Once you've put your eyeballs back in, report back to us on monday with the answer.


----------



## lowtech (25/4/08)

Thirsty Boy said:


> Happy to provide info, but really _*I'd rather talk about homebrewing*_
> 
> TB



Given that this is "Aussie _*Home Brewer*_" I totally support that notion.
Thirsty, your posts are certainly valuable and insightful to all beer geeks and I (we) gratefully thank you for your input.
After reading through all of this thread i have concluded that I am a "fence sitter".
I grew up on commercial beer, and continue to drink(_*enjoy*_) commercial beer.
A love of all things beery and subsequent research/ tasting has led me to find a plethora of styles that I enjoy.
Brewing(AG) at home has allowed me to experiment with grains, yeast and hops from all over the globe and arrive at a point where I can produce 20 litres @ a time of real beer that is fresher than imported examples and tailored to my fussy tastebuds.
If I want to produce a beer in a particular style I read/research/ question and totally immerse/absorb every bit of info and then go forth and make a beer.Some make me grin, and some make me sigh.That is the beauty of HB'ing.

I will continue to purchase and enjoy such beers as Coopers Sparkling,Stout, Lager, Dr Tim's, Boags draught, Amsterdam Mariner, Southwark stout,Little creatures PA, Goat High tail(draught) and even a mega cold xxxx gold at the cricket.
At the same time I will continue to rejoice in the fact that I can access malt from Europe/ UK, and Hops from the same places as well as US and NZ, and a mind boggling array of liquid and dry yeasts that allow me to make beer at home that tastes like nothing on earth that any one else has!

Lucky I am!!!!!


----------



## dig (26/4/08)

Whats_Wrong_with_Hahn said:


> Wanker


Fanboi

Tell the forum what 'recovery' is.


----------



## randyrob (26/4/08)

I've read figures like 90% of the yeast cake can be 'recovered' and put back into the beer :blink:


----------



## Murray (26/4/08)

This 'dig' character is epitomising all I've come to dislike about this forum over the last year. We're all brewers of some sort, let it go. Save the aggressive stuff for somewhere else.


----------



## staggalee (26/4/08)

who or what is he referring to as "fANBOI"?

stagga.


----------



## lowtech (26/4/08)

staggalee said:


> who or what is he referring to as "fANBOI"?
> 
> stagga.



her ya go Ol' Fella LINK


----------



## staggalee (26/4/08)

lowtech said:


> her ya go Ol' Fella LINK



Gracias  

stagga.


----------



## Weekend_warrior (26/4/08)

Murray said:


> This 'dig' character is epitomising all I've come to dislike about this forum over the last year. We're all brewers of some sort, let it go. Save the aggressive stuff for somewhere else.



suprisingly this 'dig' character has done more for the australian brewing community than most of us probably ever will


----------



## Dave86 (26/4/08)

I can't believe you guys are still going on with this shit...


----------



## kirem (27/4/08)

Thirsty Boy said:


> Not so my friend... in post number 10 of this thread I gave you the insidest information you are likely to get along with a reasonably carefully thought through theory about why that relates to the sorts of tastes you are likely to find in an Australian Mega beer.
> 
> Critisise away people. I promise to not "defend" beers that I have plainly stated that I don't actually like......................



I have to commend TB for his post. We both work for the same 'MAN', he in beer-land and me in wine-land. I would never post even a remotely as detailed post about how I make wine and for him to share what he has is very courageous to say the least.

I make wine in a large winery - 70,000t+ and an awful lot of what is being said is exactly the same sorts of comments when comparing home winemaking, micro&craft wineries and large scale winemaking. I don't think there should be a comparison, they really are so different. They have different pressures, constraints, philosphy, ingredients etc.

The beer/wine that is produced by each type of brewery is made for a specific market. Australian draught is a style that is liked by a lot of consumers and when you are in the business of making beer, being consumer focused helps you stay in business, imagine turning around and saying we are not making VB the same anymore as some of the members of ahb said that it was crap and we should be making something along the lines of sierra nevada pale ale and it is going to cost you twice as much. 

A beverage company the size of Foster's understands this and thus has smaller breweries to produce beer like alpha pale ale, barking duck etc and also play in the VB market. Same for wine, Grange/ WB platinum/ St Peters at one end and bag in box at the other. All are high quality & well made but are targeted and costed at different markets.

Further to this I think a brewery cops a lot of fault complaints about their product that are caused by transport, storage and most importantly delivery. I think dirty lines are a very big problem in the industry.

You've got big balls TB!


----------



## dig (27/4/08)

kirem said:


> Further to this I think a brewery cops a lot of fault complaints about their product that are caused by transport, storage and most importantly delivery. I think dirty lines are a very big problem in the industry.



I agree. Years ago when I was studying, I was lucky enough to go to the pub for lunch with a couple of senior brewers from Abbotsford. They sipped their pots of draught, looked at eachother and called the publican over for a chat.

"Yeah, I age my kegs for a couple of months", said the owner who went on to explain the workings of his keg solera system in the cellar. "My customers love it!"


----------



## Thirsty Boy (27/4/08)

kirem said:


> I have to commend TB for his post. We both work for the same 'MAN', he in beer-land and me in wine-land. I would never post even a remotely as detailed post about how I make wine and for him to share what he has is very courageous to say the least.
> 
> . . . . . . snip . . . . .
> 
> You've got big balls TB!



Not really, there isn't really that much more in my post than a knowledgeable brewer willing to bug the shit out of the guide, could get from the tour groups that come through the place twice a day. Maybe a little more, but not a lot. Hell, they let people taste the adjunct... all I did was talk about it 

Fingers crossed thats the way the boss sees it too.... h34r: 

Thirsty


----------



## mfdes (27/4/08)

You won't even see super pride around for much longer. Not when new Australian varieties such as Topaz yield 4800+ kg/ha with 17-18% alpha (low co-h), and the grower gets paid per alpha yield.

MFS.


----------



## WitWonder (30/4/08)

Great post TB. I'm glad I skipped to the end and read it. 

Whilst I'm sure there are numerous 'brewers' who work for the big breweries who have forgotten more about brewing than I'll ever know, I am sure there are equal numbers, if not more, of scientists, engineers and marketing types who are more responsible for the final product. IMHO they have to be because they produce such huge volumes and must ensure it all tastes the same (until the local leaves it on pallets in the sun behind the pub). Personally, I would say the beer is fantastic - it must be, look at how many people buy it! Then again, look at how many records Brittney Spears has sold


----------



## ibast (30/4/08)

WitWonder said:


> Personally, I would say the beer is fantastic - it must be, look at how many people buy it! Then again, look at how many records Brittney Spears has sold



I think this must be Whats_Wrong_With_Hahns alter ego:



"After All it's been through, how dare you pick on Tooheys!"


----------



## kirem (30/4/08)

Thirsty Boy said:


> Not really, there isn't really that much more in my post than a knowledgeable brewer willing to bug the shit out of the guide, could get from the tour groups that come through the place twice a day. Maybe a little more, but not a lot. Hell, they let people taste the adjunct... all I did was talk about it
> 
> Fingers crossed thats the way the boss sees it too.... h34r:
> 
> Thirsty



So how did you go TB? Been in to see big Trev yet


----------

