TimT
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26/9/13
- Messages
- 2,094
- Reaction score
- 587
I've been herbal brewing for a few years - brewing a number of brews entirely without hops, concentrating mainly on historical brewing herbs like the Artemisias, Sage, alehoof, yarrow, etc etc etc. And giving my own brews out for tastings - and tasting other people's brews - I've come across comments of this sort:
Gee, without the hops bacteria's really had a souring effect, hasn't it?
You get it with comments about other people's brews, too - not just my own admittedly odd brews.
It's probably one of the main things that has stopped folks from brewing according to these historical, unhopped styles more often - and it's always attributed to the antibacterial effect of hops in standard brews.
But the more I think about it, the less sense this makes. I can think of about five or six separate arguments against the souring occurring due to the antibacterial effect of hops, and really only one argument in favour. Let me count the ways, good people!
ARGUMENTS IN FAVOUR
- Hops do have an antibacterial effect. It's true, and it's been repeated too often enough with citations to studies for me to doubt it.
ARGUMENTS AGAINST
- Other herbs, including traditional brewing herbs, have antibacterial effects too. Wormwood and Mugwort (the Artemisias) in particular. Pennyroyal, too, and possibly some of the other mints. Honey, the oldest brewing ingredient of all, definitely has some antibacterial qualities. But brews that include these ingredients and not hops will typically become sour anyway.
- Yeast will naturally acidify its environment, which I presume is one of its natural defences against other microorganisms. The natural pH range of beers is around 3.9 - 4.5. (By comparison, orange juice (with all that citric acid) pH ranges from around 3.3 - 4.19. Apple juice pH is similar.)
- Traditionally many beers were either drunk while incredibly young (a day after the start of fermentation, when a lot of residual sweetness was left over) or while incredibly old (when it had had time to age and mellow). Perhaps the standard rule that beers should be drunk within a few weeks of fermentation should be modified for herbal brews and gruits.
- The acidity of brews will intensify with the type of malts you add; ie, it seems to be partially malt driven. Dark malts make the brew more acidic, with herbal dark beers often being undrinkable.
- My brews are frequently sour-acidic but I don't see any other signs of a bacterial fermentation, ie, no pellicle or carbonation from lactic fermentation.
- It's not just me; other brewers - including commercial brewers - report a similar sort of acidity for their brews. I had a lovely dark lager that contained anise and fennel from Temple the other week, and I asked them if they encountered tartness with the brew at first. They said they had; the brew had been aged for a number of months, and was, they said, at first, "almost undrinkable". It strikes me as unlikely that they'd have similar sort of problems with lacto-bacilli as I do in my dodgy brewery...
- Hops are a masking ingredient, and a very good one. I think this is a key point, and one that is very often ignored. Hops are very effective at hiding unwanted flavours, or altering the whole quality of a brew and dominating the taste profile. Their history in English brewing at least seem to back this up; they were brought to UK brewing by the Dutch, who were also noted for importing other strong spices like ginger and nutmeg to the UK as well. It is hardly a surprise that the highest-hopped of traditional English brews, the IPA, was also the brew that had to be transported the furthest: the hops arguably not only acted as a preservative, but their bitterness helped to keep unsavoury flavours hidden. (Another food that the English got from the India is the curry, and again this is associated with the use of masking ingredients: curry spices masked old or rancid meat). Some other traditional brewing herbs appear to have similar masking effects: wormwood, horehound, gentian, vanilla.
In short you're all wrong and I don't care I'm going to my room nyah nyah.
(Comments and rebuttals and vociferous agreements or disagreements welcome).
Gee, without the hops bacteria's really had a souring effect, hasn't it?
You get it with comments about other people's brews, too - not just my own admittedly odd brews.
It's probably one of the main things that has stopped folks from brewing according to these historical, unhopped styles more often - and it's always attributed to the antibacterial effect of hops in standard brews.
But the more I think about it, the less sense this makes. I can think of about five or six separate arguments against the souring occurring due to the antibacterial effect of hops, and really only one argument in favour. Let me count the ways, good people!
ARGUMENTS IN FAVOUR
- Hops do have an antibacterial effect. It's true, and it's been repeated too often enough with citations to studies for me to doubt it.
ARGUMENTS AGAINST
- Other herbs, including traditional brewing herbs, have antibacterial effects too. Wormwood and Mugwort (the Artemisias) in particular. Pennyroyal, too, and possibly some of the other mints. Honey, the oldest brewing ingredient of all, definitely has some antibacterial qualities. But brews that include these ingredients and not hops will typically become sour anyway.
- Yeast will naturally acidify its environment, which I presume is one of its natural defences against other microorganisms. The natural pH range of beers is around 3.9 - 4.5. (By comparison, orange juice (with all that citric acid) pH ranges from around 3.3 - 4.19. Apple juice pH is similar.)
- Traditionally many beers were either drunk while incredibly young (a day after the start of fermentation, when a lot of residual sweetness was left over) or while incredibly old (when it had had time to age and mellow). Perhaps the standard rule that beers should be drunk within a few weeks of fermentation should be modified for herbal brews and gruits.
- The acidity of brews will intensify with the type of malts you add; ie, it seems to be partially malt driven. Dark malts make the brew more acidic, with herbal dark beers often being undrinkable.
- My brews are frequently sour-acidic but I don't see any other signs of a bacterial fermentation, ie, no pellicle or carbonation from lactic fermentation.
- It's not just me; other brewers - including commercial brewers - report a similar sort of acidity for their brews. I had a lovely dark lager that contained anise and fennel from Temple the other week, and I asked them if they encountered tartness with the brew at first. They said they had; the brew had been aged for a number of months, and was, they said, at first, "almost undrinkable". It strikes me as unlikely that they'd have similar sort of problems with lacto-bacilli as I do in my dodgy brewery...
- Hops are a masking ingredient, and a very good one. I think this is a key point, and one that is very often ignored. Hops are very effective at hiding unwanted flavours, or altering the whole quality of a brew and dominating the taste profile. Their history in English brewing at least seem to back this up; they were brought to UK brewing by the Dutch, who were also noted for importing other strong spices like ginger and nutmeg to the UK as well. It is hardly a surprise that the highest-hopped of traditional English brews, the IPA, was also the brew that had to be transported the furthest: the hops arguably not only acted as a preservative, but their bitterness helped to keep unsavoury flavours hidden. (Another food that the English got from the India is the curry, and again this is associated with the use of masking ingredients: curry spices masked old or rancid meat). Some other traditional brewing herbs appear to have similar masking effects: wormwood, horehound, gentian, vanilla.
In short you're all wrong and I don't care I'm going to my room nyah nyah.
(Comments and rebuttals and vociferous agreements or disagreements welcome).
