Brew To Style

[Swinging Beef]

I have been listening to some podcasts and reading some artikkles in the BYO about brewing to style, and I have foud it very informative and useful, in terms of understanding beers and what to expect when you pop the top.

However... once one has made a few beers to style... how hard is it to cross over and start brewing beers not to style that still taste outstanding?

Im a big fan of all strong Belgian beers and I guess I was wondering how many of them really fall into the classifications other than "Belgian Specialty Ale" which seems to be an all encompasing "other" category.

 

[boingk]

I've amde a few things to style using partial mashes and found them good...but I have to admit theres not much more satisfying than raiding the cupboard and throwing together some things that you think will work. I really don't mind, to be honest. Stouts, pilsners, schwartzbier, bitters...brewed to style brews can definitely be great, without question, but I just like to experiment.

What would happen if I added a dry-hopping of Saaz and Amarillo? What if there was more crystal? What if there was some choc and patent in there? What if I used a different yeast? These are the sort of questions I play around with when its pen-and-paper time and I'm deciding on whats going to be made. I might use kits, but I'm treating them more and more as mere pre-bittered liquid malt and adding other stuff to bring a brew to what I think it should be. It'll be interesting being able to alter a whole grain bill when I start doing AG, just thinking of the possibilities is awesome.

Summary? Just do what you want, pretty much.

Cheers - boingk

 

[Fatgodzilla]

'Swinging Beef' date='Jan 9 2009, 10:41 AM' post='397709']

However... once one has made a few beers to style... how hard is it to cross over and start brewing beers not to style that still taste outstanding?

The million dollar questions ...

Purest answer is .. very easy and very hard. Most beers I brew are not to style (easy) but I can't say they are outstanding.

The ethics of home brew beer to style only emerges if you typecast your beer for competition or judgment.

On one hand judging will be on "beer to style" not necessarily on how good the beer tastes. Many a brew will score low because it is not to style requirements and not because it is a bad beer. Many a beer will score high because it fits the judges perception of style yet can't be called outstanding.

If you make one of your brews along the lines of "a belgium pale ale" you can use any number of different ingredients that could just as easily be used in a large number of other styles of beer.

The intent of the styles as per the BJCP are not meant to be hard and fast rules, merely guide rails for judges to operate and assess within, in a competition.

I will be entereing beers in competitions this year as I try to brew a beer to a style as a a mark of my knowledge and skill as a brewer (as distinct from brewing a beer then trying to find a style that beer sits within).

I will also brew beers that don't easily fit the style guidelines because I want to make an outstanding (well drinkable) beer both for myself and to fellow case swapper for the fun of it and the amusement of other (hence my american hopped, predominantly wheat grained, fermented with Wyeast's Scottish Ale effort in the NSW Xmas swap, which clearly meets no BJCP styles I can find).

Every individual brewer finds their own reasons for brewing a particular style - what they do after that is their own ethical dilemma.

 

[browndog]

I have been listening to some podcasts and reading some artikkles in the BYO about brewing to style, and I have foud it very informative and useful, in terms of understanding beers and what to expect when you pop the top.

However... once one has made a few beers to style... how hard is it to cross over and start brewing beers not to style that still taste outstanding?

Im a big fan of all strong Belgian beers and I guess I was wondering how many of them really fall into the classifications other than "Belgian Specialty Ale" which seems to be an all encompasing "other" category.

Mate, you really need to talk to Bindi, he is a mad belgian brewer who I can't recall ever brewing a beer to style in his life.


cheers

Browndog

 

[newguy]

The style guidelines really only exist for competitions as competitions require a "yardstick" against which the beers are judged. Guidelines also help to "bin" entries so that like are judged against like. Speaking as a judge, there are plenty of beers that don't properly fit into any style but are nonetheless delicious. I don't think that there are many commercial breweries that limit their creativity to the style guidelines either.

If you're at all competitive, then brewing to style will be your ultimate goal. I find that it's quite fun to try and hit a certain style target. But there are others that simply let their imagination be their guides and try to brew something they personally like or find intriguing. Sort of like the difference between musicians that have to read notes on a page in order to play versus those that play by ear.

I started off by brewing whatever I liked, then I switched to brewing to style as my competitiveness got the better of me. I'm now starting to get back to brewing whatever I fancy, but I still brew most batches with the guidelines in mind.

There's no right or wrong way to brew. Ultimately you only have to please yourself. Right now I'm enjoying something akin to a dark tripel spiced with cardamom, anise, and just a hint of orange peel. And I have no intention of trying to ram that square peg into one of the guideline's round holes.

 

[bindi]

Mate, you really need to talk to Bindi, he is a mad belgian brewer who I can't recall ever brewing a beer to style in his life.


cheers

Browndog

Style, what's style, who thought up the style guidelines? I could go on but I will not.
It has been said before and it will be said again. Brew what YOU [think you will] like, I also like the surprising results, some fantastic, some Ok, the good ones are repeated [ or close to it] no complete duds yet.
A few off the top my head, Saison Stout,very nice , Imp Stout with 9 malts and Northern Brewer, POR,Amarillo, Nelson Sauvin, Amarillo and Cascade, two yeasts Windsor Yeast Yeast-Ale,British Ale (Wyeast Labs #1098) It was fantastic, too many to name and I am bored already.
It's easy, just do it.

 

[Bizier]

Read Brew Like a Monk.

Hieronymus emphasises that the magic of Belgians comes from their creativity and lack of distinguished boundaries. I finished this a few days ago and left with a sense that brewing for the judging arena is missing the point, even if you are successful. But it also gives plenty of info to get you into the ballpark of the BJCP Belgian beer styles.

 

[Swinging Beef]

Read Brew Like a Monk.
Hieronymus emphasises that the magic of Belgians comes from their creativity and lack of distinguished boundaries. I finished this a few days ago and left with a sense that brewing for the judging arena is missing the point, even if you are successful. But it also gives plenty of info to get you into the ballpark of the BJCP Belgian beer styles.

HA!
I ordered the book yesterday from the UK.
I get what you are saying... like entering in band comps.. whether you come first or not, you are still a loser.

 

[white.grant]

I'm brewing styles so that I learn more about what makes a beer taste and look the way it does.

Having a set of guidelines to aim for and to compare my efforts against is quite helpful as I learn and refine my techniques one blunder at a time.

cheers

grant

 

[Thirsty Boy]

Styles are TOOLS... not rules.

People who rail against the "styles" often seem to forget one thing... the style guidelines were created to describe styles that existed already. The guidelines didn't invent a type of beer and tell you that you weren't allowed to brew anything else, they were just a way to help you know what to aim for if you want to brew a type of beer that you had tasted before and liked - and a way for judges to compare like with like.

Be honest - if I handed you a Pint of dark copper, slightly crystal sweet, very malty, low carbonated beer with an EKG hop character..... and said here's my interpretation of a German Pilsner - would you think I was a free and unconstrained brewer who brews for my own taste... or would you think I was a bit of a dill who didn't know the difference between a Pilsner and a Bitter.

Pilsner and Bitter are styles - and they make no more or less sense than any others.

I look at it like art - Picasso didn't set out to be a cubist, he just painted whatever the hell he wanted - other painters liked what they saw and keeping within certain guidelines which reflected the underlying concepts that Picasso was trying to express, painted works which while different, were of a similar style... and a movement was born. But it was only given an name and had its attributes defined after the fact.

I like to brew to style (mostly), because I am a learner brewer - when I have mastered the ability to brew exactly what I intend to brew, then I wont need the styles anymore. Till then, styles and the comps that judge to their standards are a fantastic tool to help me hone my art.

Brew the beer you want to drink, anything else is just silly. Funnily enough - the styles dont effect your ability to do that in any way.

 

[devo]

I found in past comps that beers i brewed for myself, thinking outside of the box didn't score as well compared to the beers I've done to style guidelines. Most judging forms tended to reflect this with comments as " an excellent beer in itself but not close enough to style".

 

[bindi]

I found in past comps that beers i brewed for myself, thinking outside of the box didn't score as well compared to the beers I've done to style guidelines. Most judging forms tended to reflect this with comments as " an excellent beer in itself but not close enough to style".

:icon_offtopic:
PM sent, those Belgians in your signature caught my attention.

 

[Jakechan]

Styles are TOOLS... not rules.

People who rail against the "styles" often seem to forget one thing... the style guidelines were created to describe styles that existed already. The guidelines didn't invent a type of beer and tell you that you weren't allowed to brew anything else, they were just a way to help you know what to aim for if you want to brew a type of beer that you had tasted before and liked - and a way for judges to compare like with like.

Be honest - if I handed you a Pint of dark copper, slightly crystal sweet, very malty, low carbonated beer with an EKG hop character..... and said here's my interpretation of a German Pilsner - would you think I was a free and unconstrained brewer who brews for my own taste... or would you think I was a bit of a dill who didn't know the difference between a Pilsner and a Bitter.

Pilsner and Bitter are styles - and they make no more or less sense than any others.

I look at it like art - Picasso didn't set out to be a cubist, he just painted whatever the hell he wanted - other painters liked what they saw and keeping within certain guidelines which reflected the underlying concepts that Picasso was trying to express, painted works which while different, were of a similar style... and a movement was born. But it was only given an name and had its attributes defined after the fact.

I like to brew to style (mostly), because I am a learner brewer - when I have mastered the ability to brew exactly what I intend to brew, then I wont need the styles anymore. Till then, styles and the comps that judge to their standards are a fantastic tool to help me hone my art.

Brew the beer you want to drink, anything else is just silly. Funnily enough - the styles dont effect your ability to do that in any way.

Well said TB. (and to be honest I don't agree with everything you say but this was a good post)

I would like to be able to brew a beer that I set out to brew, rather than just mix it up and hope for the best. As you say, once that is mastered then you can step outside the box.

Brewing what you like is a given, but I think that in any discipline the basics need to be learned first.

But if you handed me a Pint of dark copper, slightly crystal sweet, very malty, low carbonated beer with an EKG hop character, you can call it what you like, if it tastes good then it is good. But then Im not a beer judge, just a piss head

Cheers,
Jake

 

[Muggus]

I've never been one for following recipes or style guidelines. I'm a fan of all sorts of styles, but i'd rather create my own recipe from scratch using ingredients I have or can get ahold of easy the would fit the basics for that style.

Its important to know your ingredients well I reckon if you're ever going to move outside the square. Know what hop gives what, what this yeast does, know how much of what malt would fit the mould.

At the end of the day it's really up to what YOU want out of a beer. You may have brewed something like a Belgian Blond and thought "Hmmm, its nice but could do with a more fragrant aroma", so you change the recipe to include more late hops, or your 'to-style' APA is nice but you'd like it to be maltier, you could add (more) crystal malts or increase the mash temp.
Experimentation is a great way to figure out these things. If you don't know what a malt/hop/yeast will do to the taste of a beer, you're best off making a beer based around that ingredient with the other ingredients at a neutral sort of measure.

No need to get caught up too much with this style business, the exceptional examples of styles are generally made by the people who throw away the rule book!

 

[TidalPete]

Well said TB. (and to be honest I don't agree with everything you say but this was a good post)

+1 to the above sentiments. A good post. :icon_cheers:

Pete. :beer:

 

[buttersd70]

Styles are TOOLS... not rules.

.... they were just a way to help you know what to aim for if you want to brew a type of beer that you had tasted before and liked - and a way for judges to compare like with like.

Brew the beer you want to drink, anything else is just silly. (Butters' edit...unless, of course, that beer is being produced for someone else, eg a judging panel, then you brew the beer that they want to drink. Target the audience.)

Sorry TB, I had to bastardise your post slightly, to point out in big, bold and brassy bloody print some things that so many people (I refer to them as "style Nazis") so often forget....who bang on about beers being brewed 'outside of style', when those beers are being brewed for the consumption of the brewer, to their own tastes, not for consumption by others, or for competition or any other purposes.

To paraphrase (very liberally) an example....
- mmm. that sounds nice. But I wouldn't mind darkening it up a little. I prefer my beers slightly darker.
- How dare you! If you darken it, it won't be a (insert style) at all! poppycock and balderdash!!! It would, actually, make a good beer, but really! Darken it, you say? How uncouth.....

example 2...
- I don't like my beer that bitter, what you said sounds very good to me indeed. However, the guidlines say I need another 5 IBU at least....so even though I probably won't like it as much, that's what I am going to do.


OK, so I've used ridiculous language here, but it's to illistrate a point. These examples aren't as ridiculous as they seem....they are, in essence and meaning, based on real posts on this site......I have nothing against the BJCP guidlines. I do, however, have plenty against the overzelous, overly literal interpretation that they sometimes recieve....particularly when this is done outside of competition. In summary, if you like pineapple on your pizza, and your making it for yourself, put pineapple on it. If your making a Pizza for people just in from Naples, don't add the bloody pineaple.

end rant, end mixing metaphors and similes. I will now rdwahahb etc etc. :icon_cheers:

 

[sinkas]

My rule is, drink many different styles# of beer.
Find the ones you adore, and use recipes for these or similar style to guide you
Then go on a "bit of a blast" make your own beer.