AdamJackson - re: your brett beers

Someone sent me this asking my thought:
http://adam-jackson.net/beer/homebrewing-sampling-my-brett-beersneed-some-advice/
I went to reply on your page but it won’t let me, so copy/paste here:

Sounds like you have a lacto infection on the first one. Brett L won’t create that much acidity. Pushing for a 13% Saison might have been a bit of a mistake. Not sure how far the French Saison yeast will take it, but the Brett L will have to pick up and do the rest. It will likely continue to eat away, but it moves at a slower and slower speed as ABV rises. Check it ever couple weeks and if the gravity is steady, then you’d be fine.

Blueberries are very tannic by nature, so you have to expect a degree of that. Does it taste like you are eating just grape skins? There is a good thread here talking about that:
http://www.homebrewtalk.com/f127/psa-do-not-use-anthocyanin-rich-fermentables-sour-beers-353080/
Anthocyanins is high in blueberries.

Hi Levi. Thank you for the feedback.

As for the question, yes it’s very grape skin heavy. I’m not known to have a very good palate but what you’re describing sounds right and close to 9 pounds of blueberries certainly contributed a lot of tannins, huh?

As for the 13% saison. I was having some bad efficiency issues averaging 50% efficiency on most batches so I increased the grain bill to account for this but then hit a higher efficiency and bam, 13% expected ABV. BUT, since that batch, my efficiencies are around 70% as I made changes to the sparge and crush level of grains so overall, it’s a good thing.

The first one (non-blueberry) I just ordered the same ingredients again so I can rebrew it and try not to make the same mistakes (lower ABV, more sanitizing) and hope the next batch turns out better. It was the intention to make a Saison brett (boulevard clone) but that obviously didn’t happen.

Thanks for taking the time to lend some helpful advice!

Oh and while I have you, sorry you can’t comment on the blog. I block "troll" comments based on IP address and there were a lot of anonymous comments coming in last march / april so I did a few blocks based on that. The only way to unblock is for you to give me your home IP and I can revert the change. Sorry about that.

Well I learned something new. Thanks for posting this Levi.

Originally posted by b3shine

Originally posted by beastiefan2k
if there was only some way for people to communicate with each other electronically when using personal messages without having to post it to a wider community board.

someone should get on that.

I understand where you’re coming from Eugene, but I think given that Adam wanted an answer on his blog - which is also a public forum of sorts - that Levi’s post is fine. That and this is the homebrew forum, so it might spark a good conversation. Just my $0.02

Originally posted by HornyDevil

Originally posted by b3shine

Originally posted by beastiefan2k
if there was only some way for people to communicate with each other electronically when using personal messages without having to post it to a wider community board.

someone should get on that.

I understand where you’re coming from Eugene, but I think given that Adam wanted an answer on his blog - which is also a public forum of sorts - that Levi’s post is fine. That and this is the homebrew forum, so it might spark a good conversation. Just my $0.02

My thoughts as well. More conversation here isn’t a bad thing.

I’m interested why you think lacto contamination in the first beer? With as crazy fast a fermentor as 3711 is, I would imagine that the vast majority of simple sugars were chewed up pretty early on, leaving little for something like L. delbrukii to work on. Couple that with a ABV in the range that Adam referenced, and I have a hard time believing that lacto would be the main culprit here. Granted, it is possible that he picked up a Lacto species that can ferment maltose (I think some of the dominant soudough lactos can?), but I would still think there might be something else going on in there.

I am also somewhat surprised that the 3711 didn’t take it down farther after 3 months, but that’s another conversation perhaps.

With all that said, if you like the final product, it’s all good!

I’ve already kegged both beers. That post is 2 weeks old now and some guys gave advice privately. The first is very sour and tastes good but still has a thickness that makes me think the yeast wasn’t done with it.

The blueberry tastes like crap. It’s gonna sit in the keg for a few months. If nothing changes, ill dump it.

I think the first one has a bacterial infection because he says its very sour. Brett alone wouldn’t do that. I just assumed lacto because its easy to pick up and in my experience works faster than pedio. With him saying now that it still has a "thickness", I’m going to guess pedio and that the percieved thickness is diacetyl. Adam, let it ride and the brett will clear that out.

Originally posted by levifunk
I think the first one has a bacterial infection because he says its very sour. Brett alone wouldn’t do that. I just assumed lacto because its easy to pick up and in my experience works faster than pedio. With him saying now that it still has a "thickness", I’m going to guess pedio and that the percieved thickness is diacetyl. Adam, let it ride and the brett will clear that out.

Yea, I’m just guessing. I haven’t tasted it, so IDK.

I know Brett can produce acid (acidic not acetic, right?), but it won’t be enough to make a beer noticeably sour, especially not "very sour" as AJ says it is. I think of diacetyl as oily, but yea it would give a perceived thickness. Personally I’m not very sensitive to the "buttery" flavor. A guy in our homebrew club is overly sensitive to it. Last we checked on a club barrel sour, he said it was buttery, which I couldn’t really taste, but had noticed the oiliness. AJ has said he doesn’t have the best palate, so him (or I) not tasting butter wouldn’t rule out pedio. Thickness and high acidity = pedio IMO.

How old is the beer now?