Perception

[brettprevans]

If you've never done two 'Single Malt and Single Hop' (SMaSH) beers with two different hops (yes, I've done several - have you?) then by all means, do one and see for yourself. Don't assume that no-one else ever has.

QB Ill have to pull you up on that point...
you missed ' your a moron' from that

Powered yeast?

Are batteries included?

his grasp of the use of 'propoer english' as he touted in the 5.2 thread doesnt seem that great now does it. I didnt pick thast up. Although im intreiged by powdered yeast. is there a columbian powered yeast? is it like columbian marching powder?

Its dried/dehydrated yeast knobby. its not powdered. powder is a consistency not a state of being

 

[bignath]

QB, couldn't agree more, top post mate. Hopefully you've given him a good old "behind the bike shed" thrashing with this one and he leaves us all alone, but i don't think it will happen unfortunately..

No more definitive way to figure out what individual hops do than a good old smash beer.

Smash is all i'm doing at the moment, as i'm trying different hops, and i like the fact that they are simple (hard to hide behind though).

100% BB Pale Pilsner w/Nelson Sauvin or Cascade or even did POR's and a Magnum one.

 

[earle]

Powered yeast?

Are batteries included?

I usually pop an electric eel in my fermenter to power the yeast. h34r:

 

[bignath]

When i wear my rubber thongs to the supermarket, i always get a static shock from the shelves...

I might try covering my fermenter with my thongs and giving it a rub...

 

[earle]

When i wear my rubber thongs to the supermarket, i always get a static shock from the shelves...

I might try covering my fermenter with my thongs and giving it a rub...

Ha ha, reminds me of when we were moving furniture back after getting new carpet and my brother got a static shock in the front of the pants. :lol:

 

[felten]

I guess if you spew out enough shit you eventually lose your sense of taste

 

[argon]

Brew three beers using the same malt bill and brew schedule
Change the yeast in each brew smack pack powder whatever maintain similar strain ale for ale etc

Let the ferment run its course condition the brews keg and get ready for tasting

Now heres the rub dont tell your buddies what is what even better get some one to be totally independent and serve the beer

I bet my aggotts that there would be less than 15% of the tasters get one yeast strain indentified from the others

Thats being generous

I do this in probably every second batch...so maybe 20 times. I regularly pitch 2 different strains at half a double batch. even did a small triple batch split across 3 yeasts 12 months ago. Everything is identical of course, including fermentation schedule ie side by side. And every time i've been able to pick which is which, although admittedly i've done it with strains that are meant to be different; 1272 and 1007 as an example. Maybe i'd get different results if i tried something like WY2000 and WY2001 where there probably isn't much difference.

Not only have I been able to pick the difference, but my megaswill mates as well know there is something different. Comments such as, "oh, that one's fruity and that one's cleaner" essentially picking the diff between 1272 and 1007 respectively.

So from 5 people, 1 that brewed it and 4 that are not necessarily that interested in the intricacies of yeast strain variations without a clue which is which, we all noted some difference, with a common consensus of attributes.

So that'd be 100% identification... please now remove your aggots

 

[jbirbeck]

I'll bet my aggots that my mega swilling family could tell the difference in all of the proposed and I could do it on a day when I have bad hayfever and a cold...

Done all of the 'tests' but not in the bullshit manner suggested, had brewing mates do the tests but again not in the manner described and of course there if a difference.

The more interesting test would have been the difference in flavour as you adjusted the ferment temp of a brew using the same recipe and same yeast. Now go away and do this test...do a SMaSH all Ale and your choice of hop. don't choose your favourite because you may be sick of them by the end. the ferment at different temps in 0.5 degree increments to detect ester differences...that would be more subtle.

Now which aggots were you betting? non-pc aggots or aggots

great post QB.

 

[bum]

Now which aggots were you betting? non-pc aggots or aggots

My guess is that, much like the illiterate contributors at urbandictionary.com, he is actually confused in regard to the correct spelling of the word "agates".

 

[jbirbeck]

My guess is that, much like the illiterate contributors at urbandictionary.com, he is actually confused in regard to the correct spelling of the word "agates".

Ugly semi-precious stones...I would have thought aggots were worth more :lol:

 

[bluenose]

I did just that recently. Made a Marzen and split into two batches.

Used W34/70 in one and White Labs 838 Bavarian Lager. I did it to see if the WL yeast justified the extra cost and inconvenience. I didn't do a starter for either one (didn't think necessary as they were only going into 10L batches).

Theoretically these should be VERY close in taste.

On blind tasting with a variety of people, the conclusion was that both were good, but that the hop character WL838 was more "rounded" and less bitter. Malt character came through better in the 838 and it was almost universally preferred.

Cheers,
Pete

 

[HoppingMad]

The OP is a little confusing, but I'm desperately trying to play catch up on this one- if only to try and figure out what Speedie is getting at!

There's a lot of tangents in the OP about 'hop for hop etc' which are distracting but re-reading this post three or four times I'm deducing the actual challenge Speedie is suggesting is to do a yeast test with the same grain bill on each batch? Am I right?

I agree with the sentiment that a non-brewer can scarcely tell the difference between an english or US ale yeast with the 'ale for ale' statement. And even if they could on taste, they wouldn't be able to pinpoint where the difference is because they don't brew.

But I think most people would be able to tell that something is 'different' if you subbed in something like a Belgian Strain or German Wheat Strain. Some strains like these can change a beer dramatically whether it is spicy aromas or fruit ester. Most non-brewers wouldn't be able to explain to you how it is different though but they would taste it.

But yep on simple ale strains that are more neutral or even using a lager yeast versus a US-05 many non-brewers would scarcely know the difference so yes I agree with this. Before I started brewing I didn't realise a yeast had so much impact on the overall taste of a beer. Most non-brewers wouldn't either.

Speedie, you'd have to explain what you mean by 'buddies'. If you're talking about pushing a beer infront of a brewing buddie who knows the parts that make up a brew I reckon they would tell straight away. If it was handing a beer to a work colleague, mate or relative that doesn't brew, they might taste something different - but they wouldn't be able to explain it to you in a clear way other than stuff like 'that's different' or 'that's fruitier'.

Cheers,

Hopper.

 

[Malted]

When i wear my rubber thongs to the supermarket, i always get a static shock from the shelves...

I might try covering my fermenter with my thongs and giving it a rub...

Ohh rubber thongs! I thought you said Rubber Thong!
I'd imagine that would get looks of shock at the supermarket.

What are you giving a rub? You are talking about rubbing the fermenter right? I know I often rub the active fermenter in the same manner as you would rub a beloved dog's belly. I also often make encouraging remarks to the yeasties such as 'Go you good things'. Having said that, I don't get so excited that I look at the fermenter and rub one out/off. :lol:

 

[Ronin]

I agree with the sentiment that a non-brewer can scarcely tell the difference between an english or US ale yeast with the 'ale for ale' statement. And even if they could on taste, they wouldn't be able to pinpoint where the difference is because they don't brew.

Yes but the subject of the OP is the perception ot taste, not knowledge about what causes the taste.

I actually don't agree that it isn't possible for a non-brewer to taste the difference between an english and ale yeast strain. I believe that the tastes of the two are very very different and that the taste difference can be percieved.

Yes a non-brewer may not know what caused the taste difference, but they'll know there's a taste difference.

They many not notice the difference between base malts, but regarding yeast and hops I believe they'll be able to percieve the taste differences.

James

 

[bignath]

Ohh rubber thongs! I thought you said Rubber Thong!
I'd imagine that would get looks of shock at the supermarket.

What are you giving a rub? You are talking about rubbing the fermenter right? I know I often rub the active fermenter in the same manner as you would rub a beloved dog's belly. I also often make encouraging remarks to the yeasties such as 'Go you good things'. Having said that, I don't get so excited that I look at the fermenter and rub one out/off. :lol:

Niiiiiiiiiiiice, Very niiiiiiiiiiiiiiice

High Five!!!

 

[DUANNE]

oh shit ,ive been wasting time sanitising equipment and paying for yeast all this time.if all yeast taste the same why should i bother stuffing around when i could spontaniasly ferment and get much the same result?split a batch recently between 3724 and brett c all other things being equal and if some one tasted them and cuoldnt tell the difference id just serve that person vb in the future.

 

[Ronin]

oh shit ,ive been wasting time sanitising equipment and paying for yeast all this time.if all yeast taste the same why should i bother stuffing around when i could spontaniasly ferment and get much the same result?split a batch recently between 3724 and brett c all other things being equal and if some one tasted them and cuoldnt tell the difference id just serve that person vb in the future.

Or just use bakers yeast, it's all the same anyway....

 

[BjornJ]

it's a fun experiment for sure, the splitting a batch in two and doing something different.

Last time I split a mid-strength porter in two and used WLP001 (the liquid version of US-05 if you will) on one and WLP005 (liquid version of wyeast 1098 I believe it is) on the other part.
The "US Porter" on the neutral WLP001 ended up being 3.9% plus bottle conditioning and was far cleaner tasting, almost Toohey's old kind of thing.
The "UK Porter" on the English WLP005 ended up being 3.6% plus bottle conditioning and was more fruity, a touch sweeter and just tasted... different?

I brought it to the homebrew club, sent it to the Castle Hill competition and have shared bottles of it with several others.
Some think the US is best, some think the UK.
I prefer the US one, but the great part about it is the ability to test two different yeasts at the same time on the same brew, fermented and bottled at the same time.

I'm sure everyone here does this from time to time, just wanted to say it sure is fun, eh!



Bjorn

 

[manticle]

I know there's a few people who have a history on other forums with speedie so I won't comment on that.

Anyone else who doesn't though who seems so keen to jump down his throat - what are you actually arcing up about?

However badly literarily expressive the chap may be, he hasn't suggested anything incredibly ridiculous - eg: try and see who can pick the differences in hops, yeast and malt.

Yes I reckon I can and yes I reckon most people will be able to at least suggest "this beer is fruitier/more bitter/sweeter than the last but 'reckon' and 'see for yourself' are two different things.

I'm not interested in becoming Speedie's public advocate by any means but just because you see the name 'speedie' in the posting history doesn't mean you should get out your pitchforks. The guy mentioned a legitimate brewing comp and got his head metaphorically turned into a pumpkin (in another thread).

I judge people for who they, are not what their name is. If speedie writes something twattish, I'm happy to tell him I think it's twattish but I'm not happy to tell him I think he's a twat just because he writes something. If better expressed (and most of you should be capable of looking beyond average writing skills to interpret the meaning) there was nothing intrinsically wrong with the tasting suggestion, even if you're not interested in trying it for yourselves.

 

[bum]

there was nothing intrinsically wrong with the tasting suggestion, even if you're not interested in trying it for yourselves.

But here's the rub, he's talking about a matter that is well known to all as though he has thought of it, made some wild extrapolations, then told people to prove him wrong rather than having anything to support his case himself - I'd suggest that is what is bothering people.

Plus, a great many seem to generously be giving speedie credit for probably meaning that we should be seeing what the differences are for ourselves. It seems pretty clear to me that he is suggesting that vast majority of people won't see a difference - thus, by weight of numbers, there is no difference. That is probably getting under the skin of some as well.