1st Wort Hopping.

[Thirsty Boy]

Up front I going to say I'm a bit of a sceptic especially where people talk about Aroma, taste well that's pretty straight forward and yes First Wort Hoping can give a smoother beer, the mechanism is even well enough understood. Alpha Acids (remember that there are three of them) are as we all know relatively insoluble cold but are quite soluble in hot wort, in solution over a given time a proportion of them will Isomerise and once Isomerised a proportion of those will undergo "Trans Isomerisation Degradation" what governs the rate of both reaction is heat. Simply in hot wort Alpha Acids go into solution, the hotter it is the faster they get isomerised and the faster Iso-Alpha breaks down, it's the Iso-Alpha breakdown products that contribute to the smoother bitterness.

By adding hops earlier in the kettle they have more time to undergo the process; you get more Trans-Iso products giving smoother tasting beer. If you were doing 90 minute or longer boils I suspect that there would be very little difference to the taste, but getting the hops in 15-20 minutes earlier in a shorter boil would make a marked difference.

For those that care "Isomerization and Degradation Kinetics of Hop (Humulus

lupulus) Acids in a Model Wort-Boiling System " MARK G. MALOWICKI AND THOMAS H. SHELLHAMMERView attachment 52660

Where it comes to aroma, well that's where I get very sceptical, to be able to smell something it must be volatile, anything volatile that's been in the boil for an hour or more has been ejected it's gone you won't be able to smell it! Talk about aromas being "locked in" doesn't make much sense either, unless someone can explain how they later get unlocked and become volatile again. Much more likely that as the hops were boiled longer there has been more volatile products stripped out so later additions are more easily detected.

I have no doubt that FWH changes the beer, I think we even know how, that hops boiled for an hour or more add anything much to hop aroma I doubt.

Mark

Actually - a fair few aroma compounds are released in "beer" that are bound in wort. Specifically (but limited to as far as I am aware) degredation products of glycosides from hop products. There is a bunch of chemistry involved which is way over my pathetic arm waving understanding - but it certainly makes sense to me that aromas which might (in a VERY arm waving type of fashion) get baked into low temperature wort in a way that binds them to other compounds, the result being able to survive being volatilised in teh boil... but which are helpless in the face of the enzyme rich, low pH, mild ethanol solution which happens in your fermenter.

Beer is chemically very different to wort - things which are "done" in wort can and always are, "undone" in beer and the results may well be smelly.

I'm not saying that I am a FWH believer - I dont really have an opinion one way or the other - but its certainly conceivable to me that the process could result in different proportions of compounds that break down to release aroma in a beer. Especially given that my understanding of what FWH is supposed to do to aroma is make it "long lasting" so when other aromas have faded away... FWH have an aroma that lasts over time. If things are being slow released as they break down in beer, that would explain it.

This doesn't talk at all baout FWH - but it does demonstrate the idea of aromas being released over time in a beer due to the breakdown of hop compound glycosides.

http://hopsteiner.com/pdf/gly_bound.pdf

TB

 

[mje1980]

Is there a clear definition of the what and why of this practice? Appears to be popular with pilsners more than others.
I just cant see how adding around 30% of your 20 minute additions (just one technique I read about) to the kettle then boiling it for 60 - 90 minutes could have contribute anything other than bitterness.
Is there some funky reaction going on chemically whilst the hops sit in the run off?

If you've had a go at it, what was the result and in what style?




Edit: this might feel more at home in the common ground, so mods, feel free to shift it. I promise I wont cry.

For probably 2 years I FWH'd every beer I made. Loved it. Only stopped,cos I used a lot of hops, and when I switched to 90min boils,i wasn't sure what'd happen. Im planning a 9%ish IIPA,soon, and it will be FWH'd and 10min hops only. I loved the,flavour and smooth bitterness. I calc'd mine as a 20min addition, coz most people then did. Worked fine. I did a few all FWH bitters, great beers.

Apologies for the comma's, smart phones my arse!!

 

[black_labb]

I thought about doing something similar but there's sure to be other issues with boiling small quantities of wort like evaporation and caramelization, if doing small batches is what you 're talking about. I thought there might have been some hard - or at least firm - science behind how supposed low AA aroma hop acids make the journey from one end to the other.

I think if you have the same boil off rate as a % it shouldn't make any difference to the result of the experiment.

 

[Malted]

smooth bitterness. I calc'd mine as a 20min addition, coz most people then did. Worked fine.

Perhaps this is the difference between actual bitterness and perceived bitterness? Just throwing it out there. So if FWH additions are smoother, could some folks calculate FWH additions as 20 min additions because that corresponds to the perceived bitterness levels?

 

[mje1980]

Quite possibly. I know that the bitterness actually increases, but I found calcing at 20 gave a great result, so I kept calc'ing it as a 20 min addition. When I did,the first one, I copied a standard bitter of mine, same gravity, IBU's etc, and it tasted pretty much the same in regards to bitterness.

 

[hoppy2B]

I was under the impression that possibly the volatile components of hops locked into the wort might contribute to the flavour of beer as apposed to its aroma. And also quite possibly that the additional flavour may smooth the bitterness in a similar way that malt sweetness balances with hop bitterness.
Did find the information about breakdown of alpha acids interesting. :huh:

 

[Benchish]

cohumulone (harsh bitter) is broken down into isocohumulone (smooth bitter) with extended boil times. Although FWH is primarily used in lagers that use low cohumulone noble hop varieties. (paraphrased from "Principles of Brewing Science" G. Fix)

Im assuming that the smoother bitterness is more pronounced more delicate styles.

The longer boil does effect the makeup of the hop oils changing their flavour and aroma character. Not all the aroma is boiled off but what is left will have a different character.

 

[manticle]

chill the first two batches, then repeat with no chilling the batches


four identical wort/hop beers, differing in procedure only

Good idea. I am contemplating buying a plate chiller so I can really sit on the fence comfortably with the chill/no chill thing.

Would be small batches considering my system though - can just get 35 L if I really push it. I do have two mash tuns but that introduces another variable straight away.

 

[mje1980]

First brew in a while today, and im going back to FWH'ing. This time however i am writing down what time the hops go into the wort, and what time the boil starts ( 3 ring takes a while ). Not sure i'll find anything out, but over the course of a few brews i might see something. Im looking specifically at how long the hops are in contact the hot, but not yet boiling wort. Might have an effect, might not. I'll be FWHing a IIPA as well tomorrow.

I can tell you one thing, FWH'd galaxy is a pleasure on the nose, it smelt delicious when i whacked em in!!

 

[hillbillybreweries]

In my experience with FWH which I have done a fair few times I have gotten good smooth refined hop flavour that comes through very well and a refined aroma but not an over the top aroma by any means. I have used FWH in both ales, mainly Apa and have also tried it with Pils.
I tried it out when i first read John Palmer's book as he has a recipe for a Classic American Pilsner. I tried it his way and did a second batch where I altered the recipe and dry hopped using Saaz. The results were different with the dry hopped version a little more harsh but not too bad with more hop aroma . Both got the thumbs up at Melbourne Brewers and most of the guys way back then were more interested in the corn flavour and what it contributed. After that point big debates went on about whether the American throwback style was valid or not which definitely pushed the FWH Dry hop experiment into the background. However I was using a reasonably low amount of dry hop in that Pils it was not too harsh it came down to personal preference of which beer was better.
Great to see home brewers trying out an old European brewing technique for themselves.

 

[mje1980]

Yeah hillbilly i did it for all beers for a while a few years ago. Only stopped when i switched to 90 minute boils, and coz i used lots a hops haha. Back into it, and looking forward to my galaxy pale ale. I agree, the aroma isn't crazy good, but i really like the flavour and smooth bitterness.

Out of 30 IBU's in my ale, 7 are from the 60 min addition of Super pride ( 4g!! ), and 23 are from the galaxy FWH addition.

 

[Housecat]

3 Questions,

1- When do I throw the hops in?

I was thinking at the start of the mash or half way through

2- How much is a good guide to use?

30% is a figure thrown around but is it 30% on top of the hop bill or as part of the hop bill?

example:

20.0 g East Kent Golding Pellet (4.7% Alpha) @ 60 Minutes (Boil)
34.0 g Cascade Pellet (7.8% Alpha) @ 20 Minutes (Boil)
46.0 g Cascade Pellet (7.8% Alpha) @ 5 Minutes (Boil)

100g Total Hops

Do I just use 30% of the total hops as FWH and the other 70% as per normal ie:

30.0 g (6g EKG + 24g Cascade) FWH
14.0 g East Kent Golding Pellet (4.7% Alpha) @ 60 Minutes (Boil)
24.0 g Cascade Pellet (7.8% Alpha) @ 20 Minutes (Boil)
32.0 g Cascade Pellet (7.8% Alpha) @ 5 Minutes (Boil)

100g Total Hops

Or is it 30% extra as FWH?

30.0 g (6g EKG + 24g Cascade) FWH
20.0 g East Kent Golding Pellet (4.7% Alpha) @ 60 Minutes (Boil)
34.0 g Cascade Pellet (7.8% Alpha) @ 20 Minutes (Boil)
46.0 g Cascade Pellet (7.8% Alpha) @ 5 Minutes (Boil)

130g Total Hops

3- Would FWH help No Chill hold some more of its hop flavour and aroma. If not why?
The way I see it is it would help but, you would still lose some of your late addition flavour and aroma but, due to the reasons above, the FWH should help lock in and maintain some flavour and aroma during the No Chill stages.

HC

 

[hillbillybreweries]

There is a difference between adding hops as First Wort Addition and adding Mash Hops. First wort is added to the boiler as you sparge so they soak while you are drawing off your wort for the boil. They remain for the entire boil and cooling process and land up in the trub. For my part I do 90 minute boils.
Mash hops are added to the mash usually for it's totality and left behind with the spent grains when you sparge. You can just add Mash hops if it suits the style you're brewing. Some brewers use both Mash Addition and FWH to make up their hop additions with no other additions.

 

[donburke]

no, the hops do not go in the mash, thats mash hopping

put the first wort hops in the kettle when its empty, then pour the first runnings in

3 Questions,

1- When do I throw the hops in?

I was thinking at the start of the mash or half way through

2- How much is a good guide to use?

30% is a figure thrown around but is it 30% on top of the hop bill or as part of the hop bill?

example:

20.0 g East Kent Golding Pellet (4.7% Alpha) @ 60 Minutes (Boil)
34.0 g Cascade Pellet (7.8% Alpha) @ 20 Minutes (Boil)
46.0 g Cascade Pellet (7.8% Alpha) @ 5 Minutes (Boil)

100g Total Hops

Do I just use 30% of the total hops as FWH and the other 70% as per normal ie:

30.0 g (6g EKG + 24g Cascade) FWH
14.0 g East Kent Golding Pellet (4.7% Alpha) @ 60 Minutes (Boil)
24.0 g Cascade Pellet (7.8% Alpha) @ 20 Minutes (Boil)
32.0 g Cascade Pellet (7.8% Alpha) @ 5 Minutes (Boil)

100g Total Hops

Or is it 30% extra as FWH?

30.0 g (6g EKG + 24g Cascade) FWH
20.0 g East Kent Golding Pellet (4.7% Alpha) @ 60 Minutes (Boil)
34.0 g Cascade Pellet (7.8% Alpha) @ 20 Minutes (Boil)
46.0 g Cascade Pellet (7.8% Alpha) @ 5 Minutes (Boil)

130g Total Hops

3- Would FWH help No Chill hold some more of its hop flavour and aroma. If not why?
The way I see it is it would help but, you would still lose some of your late addition flavour and aroma but, due to the reasons above, the FWH should help lock in and maintain some flavour and aroma during the No Chill stages.

HC

 

[Housecat]

no, the hops do not go in the mash, thats mash hopping

put the first wort hops in the kettle when its empty, then pour the first runnings in

Thanks HBB and DB, :icon_cheers:

Since I BIAB, I would add them after I had pulled the grains getting ready for the boil.

Which still leaves the question, how much do you use?

HC

 

[donburke]

Thanks HBB and DB, :icon_cheers:

Since I BIAB, I would add them after I had pulled the grains getting ready for the boil.

Which still leaves the question, how much do you use?

HC

ok, why dont you try something different and throw them in at the beginning of the mash, but under the bag so they stay in the liquor, even after you have pulled the bag ?

i add all my bittering hops as the FWH, and dont change the subsequent additions

 

[warra48]

Thanks HBB and DB, :icon_cheers:

Since I BIAB, I would add them after I had pulled the grains getting ready for the boil.

Which still leaves the question, how much do you use?

HC

I like first hopping, and I do believe it gives smoother bitterness, particularly in hoppy beers such as AIPA.

I use BeerSmith to do my calculations. It calculates FWH as a 60 minute addition plus 10%. As the perceived bitterness is smoother, I'd use the same as if you are adding your usual 60 minute addition.

A couple of recent brews I did included an APA with 45 IBU, which I didn't FWH. The next brew was an AIPA with 60 IBU but FWH. The AIPA is noticably smoother and with a more integrated hop aroma, flavour, and bitterness. Hops for each brew were the same mix, except for quantities used.

 

[Thirsty Boy]

FWH - I'm not actually a believer. I dont think it gives a smoother bitterness, I dont really think it makes any difference at all - maybe, just maybe it actually reduces bitterness a little tiny bit because of hop compounds trapped in break material... but thats it. I think its a furphy plain and simple.

BUT I do it anyway. . . . sometimes.

If I'm using a hop that has any reputation for harshness at all. I FWH. Because IT CANT HURT !!!

The worst that can happen is that it has no effect at all and you get exactly what you would have gotten if you didn't FWH - but maybe I'm wrong about FWH doing nothing... who knows?? I'm not ******* perfect. So - given that there is no downside whatsoever - I FWH just on the off chance that I'm wrong, the believers are right and FWH will improve my beer. Even the possibility of improving my beer is a good thing (especially if you have tasted my beer :icon_vomit: )

It takes no effort, it takes no time and it can have no ill effect.... why the hell not?

 

[mje1980]

Well, i got back into FWHing in my last 2 beers. One, a galaxy pale ale, with pretty much all IBU's from the FWH. Holy jesus it is bitter!. 1.046 and 30 IBU's, but it is drinking much more bitter. Its drinkable, but not the best beer i have made. The 2IPA had some FWH, and the rest 10min Columbus. Its also more bitter than i'd expected, but it suits the style, and i think in the bottle, it will calm down nicely ( its also 8.5% so will need a few weeks anyway ).

I never had a big increase in percieved bitterness before when i FWH'd. However, i only did 60min boils, and i pretty much only used mid range AA hops. I also aimed for mainly hoppy beers, on the lower end of the style guidelines with regards to IBU's. Could be many different things. Going to do the galaxy pale ale again, but this time, im going to go 50:50 with the IBU's. 50% from a 60min addition, and 50% from a FWH addition. Should bring it back down to more normal. The one i just did i got 90% of the IBU's from the Galaxy FWH.

 

[mje1980]

Hmmm well, the galaxy pale is just too bitter for me. However, the 2IPA is actually not too bad. I mean, its bitter, oh yeah, but sipping on a week old bottle ( can't help myself! ) its definately not undrinkable. I think it'll calm down nicely. Which is a shame, because i only bottled 15 or so !!. Might have to have another, just to make sure

For ***** n giggles i edited the beertools recipe, to see what my 20 min calc'd FWH'd addition would work out to be as a 60 min addition. 117 IBU!!!!