cmbrougham
Grandmaster Brewer
Two brews down, and I'm starting to get my groove back 8) For my next trick brew, I'm planning on going as simple as possible, for three reasons:
[list type=decimal]
[*]I've got some efficiency and output volume issues that I need to dial in, and if I focus on a simple, less layered recipe, I think I can make that happen a little more easily.
[*]I want to explore the SMaSH approach--a single malt with a single hop, more as an experiment in flavor rather than style or technique.
[*]I'd like to develop some simple but tasty session beers that can be my house brews. I like big beers and I cannot lie... but I also like to have a couple beers on occasion, and I've found my day-after spring back is a lot less springy than it used to be ;D
[/list]
So, I've got a simple 5-gallon recipe that I'm going to use as a starting point: 7-8 lbs. of pale malt (Briess) with a single ounce of Simcoe (13.1%) split between FWH and flame-out. I think I'll mash somewhere in the mid-temps: I want it to stand up to the hops, but not be too thick that it gets tiresome to drink. I may go lower, though, and shoot for a lighter body, and here's why...
I got to thinking about this, and while I like the idea of simple, I don't necessarily relish the idea of boring. This could be a one-note song if I'm not careful, and while it'll still be beer, I'd like a bit more melody. I got to thinking about boiling down a half-gallon or so of the first runnings: I'd done this a long time ago with a wee heavy and I think either a stout or porter. This seemed like it might be a nice way to add a little more backbone to the beer.
Then I got to reading some other posts today about doing a single decoction, particularly for a mash out, and the flavor benefits that it could provide. This seemed like it might be an even better way to pump up the complexity of the brew, plus I'd get the mash out down with it, and it really wouldn't take a significantly greater amount of time. I've never done it before, but the process seemed fairly easy: pull a third of the thickest part of the mash, get it boiling, and add back to the MLT, then sparge/lauter/boil like usual.
(At some point, I'd also like to sour part of the mash to bring even more funk to the party, but let's start here...)
So, with that all in mind, what would you do? Boil the first runnings, or do a decoction mash out? Mash lower, higher, or... uh.. midder? I'll probably be using Wyeast Am. Ale II, which is going to leave a bit more body anyway. Any other ideas for keeping the ingredients simple, but going gonzo with those ingredients to add some interesting harmonies?
[list type=decimal]
[*]I've got some efficiency and output volume issues that I need to dial in, and if I focus on a simple, less layered recipe, I think I can make that happen a little more easily.
[*]I want to explore the SMaSH approach--a single malt with a single hop, more as an experiment in flavor rather than style or technique.
[*]I'd like to develop some simple but tasty session beers that can be my house brews. I like big beers and I cannot lie... but I also like to have a couple beers on occasion, and I've found my day-after spring back is a lot less springy than it used to be ;D
[/list]
So, I've got a simple 5-gallon recipe that I'm going to use as a starting point: 7-8 lbs. of pale malt (Briess) with a single ounce of Simcoe (13.1%) split between FWH and flame-out. I think I'll mash somewhere in the mid-temps: I want it to stand up to the hops, but not be too thick that it gets tiresome to drink. I may go lower, though, and shoot for a lighter body, and here's why...
I got to thinking about this, and while I like the idea of simple, I don't necessarily relish the idea of boring. This could be a one-note song if I'm not careful, and while it'll still be beer, I'd like a bit more melody. I got to thinking about boiling down a half-gallon or so of the first runnings: I'd done this a long time ago with a wee heavy and I think either a stout or porter. This seemed like it might be a nice way to add a little more backbone to the beer.
Then I got to reading some other posts today about doing a single decoction, particularly for a mash out, and the flavor benefits that it could provide. This seemed like it might be an even better way to pump up the complexity of the brew, plus I'd get the mash out down with it, and it really wouldn't take a significantly greater amount of time. I've never done it before, but the process seemed fairly easy: pull a third of the thickest part of the mash, get it boiling, and add back to the MLT, then sparge/lauter/boil like usual.
(At some point, I'd also like to sour part of the mash to bring even more funk to the party, but let's start here...)
So, with that all in mind, what would you do? Boil the first runnings, or do a decoction mash out? Mash lower, higher, or... uh.. midder? I'll probably be using Wyeast Am. Ale II, which is going to leave a bit more body anyway. Any other ideas for keeping the ingredients simple, but going gonzo with those ingredients to add some interesting harmonies?