Getting rid of that "homebrew taste"

[JDW81]

I read an interesting article somewhere and can't locate it, but it went something like this:

Prohibition: most breweries closed down and never reopened.
The ones that hung on did so by making "near beer", malted milk drinks, ingredients for Mars bars etc and MALT EXTRACT

Home bootleg brewing using LME was huge, I even remember a Laurel and Hardy episode where they had a crack. That's also when carboys came into use as Coopers fermenters hadn't been invented :unsure: .

All the bootlegger crime gang underground breweries used LME which is why they could continue underground without huge malting and mashing facilities, they just needed fermenters and a barrel filling line.

After Prohibition, home brewing automatically meant LME, end of story, and it's stuck ever since in the USA, including the use of carboys.

Bribie, you are a suppository of brewing knowledge.

 

[carniebrew]

I hadn't seen that sentence, I stand corrected, thanks. Seems confusing given the introduction consistently refers to extract recipes, and the fact the book is written with extract in each recipe, and all grain as an afterthought.

It does stand though that extract brewing is hugely more popular in the US of A, and not seen as a poor cousin to AG brewing. And not all extract-based beers have twang. My very own first full extract beer was a Dr Smurto's Golden Ale, made with a tin of Coopers light LME, and a tin of Thomas Coopers Wheat LME, a 21 litre batch made in an 8 litre boil using the 'late extract addition' method. I entered that in Vicbrew, it rated quite well, and not one of the 3 judges mentioned anything about tasting extract or twang. I also entered an extract Dunkelweizen made with Briess' CBW Bavarian Wheat LME and some Amber DME. It didn't rate as highly as my DGSA, but that was attributed mostly to the yeast (I'd used wb-06 fermented at 20C. Again no mention of twang. I can only assume (perhaps wrongly) that if a Vicbrew judge noticed 'homebrew twang' that they would mention it?

 

[JDW81]

And not all extract-based beers have twang.

Very true. A mate of mine, who is about to jump into AG, has been brewing extract for about 12-18 months and makes cracking beer. He uses good yeast, has good sanitisation and good temp control. His extract dunkle is a thing of beauty.

JD

 

[Mattrox]

Bribie, you are a suppository of brewing knowledge.

Repository?

A suppository is quite something else.

hehe

 

[Lord Raja Goomba I]

Repository?

A suppository is quite something else.

hehe

Gives new meaning to "pulling some facts out".

 

[Mattrox]

My take on "twang" is that unwanted flavours are introduced. Wrong sugar for style, wrong fermentation temp/temp fluctuation, minor infections, wrong yeast for style, old tins/damaged tins.

Is it possible that "homebrew taste" can arise from a lack of "something" that AG provides? This would be quite different to "twang" but still something detectable because there is a lack of richness in the flavour profile?

By the correct use of grains and hops, this adds some or almost all of what was missing?

In addition in AG you get malt grains from the region where a particular style originates. This surely imparts a distinctive flavour that a malt in a tin can't provide?

Is there a distinction between twang (bleh) and being able to tell it is homebrew?

 

[Goose]

My take on "twang" is that unwanted flavours are introduced. Wrong sugar for style, wrong fermentation temp/temp fluctuation, minor infections, wrong yeast for style, old tins/damaged tins.

mostly agree but I think "twang" is a term attributable from the stuff in the can and not the process or whatever you add to it afterward.

Is it possible that "homebrew taste" can arise from a lack of "something" that AG provides? This would be quite different to "twang" but still something detectable because there is a lack of richness in the flavour profile?

I don't think so. the "homebrew taste" is something that brewers aspire to remove. I don't think any addition or compliment from the AG process will remove the "homebrew taste". It might negate or mask it slightly....

By the correct use of grains and hops, this adds some or almost all of what was missing?

It can help to add more character but again, if the source of the twang is the contents of the can, its going to be tough to mask with grains or adjuncts.....

In addition in AG you get malt grains from the region where a particular style originates. This surely imparts a distinctive flavour that a malt in a tin can't provide?

err yes, but again it boils down (no pun intended) to the fact you have no control over the process that made the concentrate. A black box you have to trust not just in the process of manufacture but how its been handled and stored thereafter.

Is there a distinction between twang (bleh) and being able to tell it is homebrew?

Terms seem to be used interchangeably. You can still get that "homebrew" taste if doing AG but using incorrect methods that you identified earlier, I prefer to ascribe "twang" to the taste caused by the gloop in the can. meaning, if you are confident on all the rest of the factors that contribute to the homebrew taste and you still have it.... that's a kit twang

 

[manticle]

Repository?

A suppository is quite something else.

hehe

I think it was a deliberate reference to Tony Abbot's recent misuse of the word in the same way.

 

[yum beer]

The twang IMO comes from the can.
I brewed plenty of brews that had the twang, some had less than others but it was always there.
Process, additions, ingredients....they made the twang less noticeable.
I made a 'coopers recipe of the month' a few months ago from prize winnings......The Anzac Ale.
extra hops and grain, good yeast.....lovely flavours but had twang up the ying yang.

Never had twang from AG.......gotta be in the can.

 

[carniebrew]

yum, do you mean 'can' literally? i.e. I'm asking, did you ever make an extract beer from extract kept in something other than a can, e.g. a plastic container like Briess supply in?

I have read a lot of posts where people theorise that extract tastes worse out of a can than out of plastic. Not to say all extract out of a can will have twang, but perhaps stored poorly, exposed to heat, left too long etc?

 

[Goose]

The twang IMO comes from the can.
I brewed plenty of brews that had the twang, some had less than others but it was always there.
Process, additions, ingredients....they made the twang less noticeable.
I made a 'coopers recipe of the month' a few months ago from prize winnings......The Anzac Ale.
extra hops and grain, good yeast.....lovely flavours but had twang up the ying yang.

Never had twang from AG.......gotta be in the can.

yep agreed. The other thing is repeatability .... you can get a kit brew with little or no twang, think you've nailed it and the next one, despite identical processes is vile in style...

 

[Mattrox]

mostly agree but I think "twang" is a term attributable from the stuff in the can and not the process or whatever you add to it afterward.


I don't think so. the "homebrew taste" is something that brewers aspire to remove. I don't think any addition or compliment from the AG process will remove the "homebrew taste". It might negate or mask it slightly....


It can help to add more character but again, if the source of the twang is the contents of the can, its going to be tough to mask with grains or adjuncts.....


err yes, but again it boils down (no pun intended) to the fact you have no control over the process that made the concentrate. A black box you have to trust not just in the process of manufacture but how its been handled and stored thereafter.


Terms seem to be used interchangeably. You can still get that "homebrew" taste if doing AG but using incorrect methods that you identified earlier, I prefer to ascribe "twang" to the taste caused by the gloop in the can. meaning, if you are confident on all the rest of the factors that contribute to the homebrew taste and you still have it.... that's a kit twang

I don't think a can automatically adds "twang". I think it is a number of things if it is simply goop in a can and unavoidable, why is it not present in some of the brews I do. I know I am a noob to brews, however a mate years a go put down a number of brews where I assisted in part or most of the process. He did not have the means to buy extra ingredients eg good yeast, grains etc nor the ability to control temperature. ( His wife, now ex, spend every last cent after bills were paid, sometimes before so he had literally no cash left for his hobby). Some brews he put down did have an identifiable "twang", not so bad as to render it undrinkable or unenjoyable. Others were quite good, better than mega swill but not quite up to a standard that would garner worthy praise. When I compare the (just a few so far) brews I have put down with better yeast, gains for steeping and a temperature appropriate for the yeast I use, there is not that same twang. For example, the Aztec gold (coopers recipe which I followed to the T) that I first brewed, was as more enjoyable than a mid-strength mega swill lager. No twang. Not a great beer, but very encouraging for a noob brewer. I did a Eurpoean lager next and added crystal and hops with a proper lager yeast. I also lagered on the yeast cake for 3 months. The flavour and aroma was much more herbacious than commercial brews and that did put some mega swill drinkers off. At first they commented that it was a very good beer, but added a qualifier about the herbyness. I drank it side by side to Stella and Heiniken .... Stella, both the BUL and imported, and I did prefer mine. (I know I am biased) I am going to brew it again and get SWMBO to do a blind tasting for me.I don't claim that my European lager is as good as AG or Partial, but it beat the brand names for mine.

I think that an AG brewer has much more control over the process and can select the exact ingredients to make an outstanding brew. Once you taste this and become accustomed to it, a KnK or extract or even partial won't be as good and you will identify it as homebrew, but that isn't "twang".

I also posit that a can does not automatically add "twang". I believe a number of factors contribute..... age of can, a damaged can allows the goop to come in direct contact with metal. But by far the biggest factors if the first two are avoided (fresh, undamaged cans) will be yeast, brew temps and the sugars used. Perhap a cheap can of malt vs a premium can might have an effect, but I have not experimented with this. I have only brewed Coopers and Black Rock so far and wouldn't touch a Brigalow or Tooheys or Homebrand etc.

I think that terms can't be used interchangeably. "Twang" should have a proper definiton for homebrewers rather than be a vague concept. I have had many homebrews that did not have a twang like my old mate's brew did, but you could tell they were not commercial. More earthy, the hops treatment gave a different experience than commercial beers, or the beer was slightly too malty ie a homebrew taste was imparted to the beer, but no off flavours that I'd describe as twang.

I hope that makes sense.

I also think that some times a "homebrew taste" is not actually a "homebrew" taste, it is a yeast taste. I have formed this opinion because mega swill paturises and filters out yeast. When I compare bottle conditioned commercial beer to homebrews the residual yeast does have a flavour. I must admit that all the homebrews I have tried are either KnK or extract as none of my mates do AG brewing. But the familiar yeast taste of homebrew is present in many craft beers I try. Could this be called "twang" by a mega swill drinker who habitually buys the exact same pasturised and filtered beer?

I know this post is in the TL;DR zone now......... and I should have posted it in the other thread on the other board, but the themes crossed over.

Twang for me = off or unusual flavours
"Homebrew taste" = "I know this stuff is not commercial", but it still could be a ripping beer that is better than commercial.

 

[Rod]

Very true. A mate of mine, who is about to jump into AG, has been brewing extract for about 12-18 months and makes cracking beer. He uses good yeast, has good sanitisation and good temp control. His extract dunkle is a thing of beauty.

JD

I am mainly into extracts

any chance of the dunkle recipe , I assume it is dunkel

 

[pcmfisher]

I don't think a can automatically adds "twang". I think it is a number of things if it is simply goop in a can and unavoidable, why is it not present in some of the brews I do. I know I am a noob to brews, however a mate years a go put down a number of brews where I assisted in part or most of the process. He did not have the means to buy extra ingredients eg good yeast, grains etc nor the ability to control temperature. ( His wife, now ex, spend every last cent after bills were paid, sometimes before so he had literally no cash left for his hobby). Some brews he put down did have an identifiable "twang", not so bad as to render it undrinkable or unenjoyable. Others were quite good, better than mega swill but not quite up to a standard that would garner worthy praise. When I compare the (just a few so far) brews I have put down with better yeast, gains for steeping and a temperature appropriate for the yeast I use, there is not that same twang. For example, the Aztec gold (coopers recipe which I followed to the T) that I first brewed, was as more enjoyable than a mid-strength mega swill lager. No twang. Not a great beer, but very encouraging for a noob brewer. I did a Eurpoean lager next and added crystal and hops with a proper lager yeast. I also lagered on the yeast cake for 3 months. The flavour and aroma was much more herbacious than commercial brews and that did put some mega swill drinkers off. At first they commented that it was a very good beer, but added a qualifier about the herbyness. I drank it side by side to Stella and Heiniken .... Stella, both the BUL and imported, and I did prefer mine. (I know I am biased) I am going to brew it again and get SWMBO to do a blind tasting for me.I don't claim that my European lager is as good as AG or Partial, but it beat the brand names for mine.

I think that an AG brewer has much more control over the process and can select the exact ingredients to make an outstanding brew. Once you taste this and become accustomed to it, a KnK or extract or even partial won't be as good and you will identify it as homebrew, but that isn't "twang".

I also posit that a can does not automatically add "twang". I believe a number of factors contribute..... age of can, a damaged can allows the goop to come in direct contact with metal. But by far the biggest factors if the first two are avoided (fresh, undamaged cans) will be yeast, brew temps and the sugars used. Perhap a cheap can of malt vs a premium can might have an effect, but I have not experimented with this. I have only brewed Coopers and Black Rock so far and wouldn't touch a Brigalow or Tooheys or Homebrand etc.

I think that terms can't be used interchangeably. "Twang" should have a proper definiton for homebrewers rather than be a vague concept. I have had many homebrews that did not have a twang like my old mate's brew did, but you could tell they were not commercial. More earthy, the hops treatment gave a different experience than commercial beers, or the beer was slightly too malty ie a homebrew taste was imparted to the beer, but no off flavours that I'd describe as twang.

I hope that makes sense.

I also think that some times a "homebrew taste" is not actually a "homebrew" taste, it is a yeast taste. I have formed this opinion because mega swill paturises and filters out yeast. When I compare bottle conditioned commercial beer to homebrews the residual yeast does have a flavour. I must admit that all the homebrews I have tried are either KnK or extract as none of my mates do AG brewing. But the familiar yeast taste of homebrew is present in many craft beers I try. Could this be called "twang" by a mega swill drinker who habitually buys the exact same pasturised and filtered beer?

I know this post is in the TL;DR zone now......... and I should have posted it in the other thread on the other board, but the themes crossed over.

Twang for me = off or unusual flavours
"Homebrew taste" = "I know this stuff is not commercial", but it still could be a ripping beer that is better than commercial.

Twang for me = Homebrew taste = bad flavours that should not be in beer. You can taste it and you can smell it. I think it has all to do with pre hopped kits as I do not get it from my extract brews.

I think maybe you should make or try some well made All Grain or even unhopped extract brews and you will realize that, looking back, all of the kit brews you have tasted actually did have twang/homebrew taste regardless of how good you thought they were at the time or still think they are.

 

[MHB]

[SIZE=medium]I think the main cause of “Kit Twang” is under pitching, but the basics of making good beer remain the same for kit, extract and all grain brewers.[/SIZE]

• [SIZE=medium]Hygiene – good cleaning and sterilising is the foundation of all brewing, from K&K to mega-brewers.[/SIZE]
• [SIZE=medium]Temperature control over the ferment – brew in a fridge with a temperature controller and ideally a fan in there to.[/SIZE]
• [SIZE=medium]Good ingredients make good beer – fresh kits and extract (liquid) avoid too much sucrose except where it’s a part of the style (Belgian and some English pale ales). When yeast detects Sucrose it excretes Invertase into solution, this could be a part of the change in flavour people experience when they use a lot of white sugar[/SIZE]
• [SIZE=medium]Pitch enough yeast, the little 5-6g packets under the lid just don’t cut it.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]If you made a standard kit with 1 Kg of Dry Malt Extract to 23L the OG should be about 1.041 (10.25o[/SIZE]P) (Plato is another way to measure gravity).
[SIZE=medium]The recommended amount of Ale Yeast is 0.4-1 Million cells/mL of Wort/1o[/SIZE]P
[SIZE=medium]Using a mid range pitch 0.7 Million – 0.7*10^6*23*10^3*10.25 = 1.65*10^11 cells[/SIZE]
[SIZE=medium]If you were using US-05 one of the most popular yeasts around here you will see there are at least 6*10^9cells/g so you would need 27.5g call it 2 packs of US-05 or 4-5 small packs usually found under tin lids (yes I know it’s not US-05 and that the cell count isn’t identical but close enough) for a mid range pitch.[/SIZE]

• [SIZE=medium]Don’t leave the brew on the yeast cake too long – about 2 weeks is the maximum recommended time, after that the yeast will start cannibalising old yeast and you get a marked increase in lipids and fusels in the beer.[/SIZE]
• [SIZE=medium]Crash chilling the beer will make it much more acceptable to your friends[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]Mark[/SIZE]

 

[Joel Mcleod]

[SIZE=medium]I think the main cause of “Kit Twang” is under pitching, but the basics of making good beer remain the same for kit, extract and all grain brewers.[/SIZE]

• [SIZE=medium]Hygiene – good cleaning and sterilising is the foundation of all brewing, from K&K to mega-brewers.[/SIZE]
• [SIZE=medium]Temperature control over the ferment – brew in a fridge with a temperature controller and ideally a fan in there to.[/SIZE]
• [SIZE=medium]Good ingredients make good beer – fresh kits and extract (liquid) avoid too much sucrose except where it’s a part of the style (Belgian and some English pale ales). When yeast detects Sucrose it excretes Invertase into solution, this could be a part of the change in flavour people experience when they use a lot of white sugar[/SIZE]
• [SIZE=medium]Pitch enough yeast, the little 5-6g packets under the lid just don’t cut it.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]If you made a standard kit with 1 Kg of Dry Malt Extract to 23L the OG should be about 1.041 (10.25o[/SIZE]P) (Plato is another way to measure gravity).
[SIZE=medium]The recommended amount of Ale Yeast is 0.4-1 Million cells/mL of Wort/1o[/SIZE]P
[SIZE=medium]Using a mid range pitch 0.7 Million – 0.7*10^6*23*10^3*10.25 = 1.65*10^11 cells[/SIZE]
[SIZE=medium]If you were using US-05 one of the most popular yeasts around here you will see there are at least 6*10^9cells/g so you would need 27.5g call it 2 packs of US-05 or 4-5 small packs usually found under tin lids (yes I know it’s not US-05 and that the cell count isn’t identical but close enough) for a mid range pitch.[/SIZE]

• [SIZE=medium]Don’t leave the brew on the yeast cake too long – about 2 weeks is the maximum recommended time, after that the yeast will start cannibalising old yeast and you get a marked increase in lipids and fusels in the beer.[/SIZE]
• [SIZE=medium]Crash chilling the beer will make it much more acceptable to your friends[/SIZE]

[SIZE=medium]Mark[/SIZE]

Nailed it. Anyone how does all of those things will get consistent, great tasting beer.

 

[jkhlt1210]

I think the main cause of “Kit Twang” is under pitching, but the basics of making good beer remain the same for kit, extract and all grain brewers.

• Hygiene – good cleaning and sterilising is the foundation of all brewing, from K&K to mega-brewers.
• Temperature control over the ferment – brew in a fridge with a temperature controller and ideally a fan in there to.
• Good ingredients make good beer – fresh kits and extract (liquid) avoid too much sucrose except where it’s a part of the style (Belgian and some English pale ales). When yeast detects Sucrose it excretes Invertase into solution, this could be a part of the change in flavour people experience when they use a lot of white sugar
• Pitch enough yeast, the little 5-6g packets under the lid just don’t cut it.

If you made a standard kit with 1 Kg of Dry Malt Extract to 23L the OG should be about 1.041 (10.25oP) (Plato is another way to measure gravity).
The recommended amount of Ale Yeast is 0.4-1 Million cells/mL of Wort/1oP
Using a mid range pitch 0.7 Million – 0.7*10^6*23*10^3*10.25 = 1.65*10^11 cells
If you were using US-05 one of the most popular yeasts around here you will see there are at least 6*10^9cells/g so you would need 27.5g call it 2 packs of US-05 or 4-5 small packs usually found under tin lids (yes I know it’s not US-05 and that the cell count isn’t identical but close enough) for a mid range pitch.

• Don’t leave the brew on the yeast cake too long – about 2 weeks is the maximum recommended time, after that the yeast will start cannibalising old yeast and you get a marked increase in lipids and fusels in the beer.
• Crash chilling the beer will make it much more acceptable to your friends

G'day Mark can I just ask a possible stupid question? When doing extract brewing is liquid malt better than dried malt? Or much of a muchness?? Any advice is much appreciated

Mark

G'day

 

[carniebrew]

Liquid v Dried makes little difference if they're both handled/stored correctly. Liquid malt can suffer more from being mis-treated, e.g. exposed to heat.

I recall reading some threads from Homebrewtalk over in the US where some brewers insist they get less 'twang' from DME, but again, they could have been using old/badly treated LME.

 

[jkhlt1210]

Liquid v Dried makes little difference if they're both handled/stored correctly. Liquid malt can suffer more from being mis-treated, e.g. exposed to heat.

I recall reading some threads from Homebrewtalk over in the US where some brewers insist they get less 'twang' from DME, but again, they could have been using old/badly treated LME.

Ok so not much difference cool thanks for that

 

[manticle]

Liquid also contains water so the you cannot sub 1kg dried for one kilo liquid and get the same gravity.