What is a focused beer?

Originally posted by HornyDevil

Originally posted by CLevar

Originally posted by HornyDevil
To continue my trying to be right about terroir, after the grapes are harvested, they are crushed. The wine maker has to decide whether or not to crush with stems and leaves or with just the fruit. After that, to ferment with or without the skins. To ferment in stainless or in wood. To secondary in wood or go straight to the bottle. How long to leave in the secondary vessel. Which type of yeast to use. Etc., etc., etc. That is not just about growing good grapes. That is about knowing your ingredients and knowing what kind of wine you want to make.

I’d argue that what you are describing is part of the brewing *process*, not the terroir. Holding these process variables constant, I see the terroir more as the impact of the land (climate, soil type, native microflora, etc), NOT how the brewer chooses to use the ingredients the land has given him or her. What you are describing is more controllable, from recipe design and process engineering standpoint, than the intricacies of "terroir" as I see it.

How can you separate the two?

Originally posted by CLevar

Originally posted by HornyDevil

Originally posted by CLevar

Originally posted by HornyDevil
To continue my trying to be right about terroir, after the grapes are harvested, they are crushed. The wine maker has to decide whether or not to crush with stems and leaves or with just the fruit. After that, to ferment with or without the skins. To ferment in stainless or in wood. To secondary in wood or go straight to the bottle. How long to leave in the secondary vessel. Which type of yeast to use. Etc., etc., etc. That is not just about growing good grapes. That is about knowing your ingredients and knowing what kind of wine you want to make.

I’d argue that what you are describing is part of the brewing *process*, not the terroir. Holding these process variables constant, I see the terroir more as the impact of the land (climate, soil type, native microflora, etc), NOT how the brewer chooses to use the ingredients the land has given him or her. What you are describing is more controllable, from recipe design and process engineering standpoint, than the intricacies of "terroir" as I see it.

How can you separate the two?

I read this as "How can you separate controllable variables from those outside of your control?"

My answer to that question should be apparent.

Consider- I could, given the resources, brew a beer here in Minnesota to the exact specifications and using the exact processes of traditional lambic producers. Yet the final product would likely be very different. In my mind, those differences exemplify terroir.

Originally posted by CLevar
It seems like you are trying to change the specific meaning of the word terroir. Feel free to try to redefine it if you would like, but I think you are going to encounter resistance.

Funny how far off topic this "discussion" has actually gotten. Nobody wants to discuss what characteristics they want in their beer, but they’re more than happy to split hairs over the use of a couple words used to convey the overall concept. Though I’m more than happy to continuously argue, you could not be missing the boat more by doing this.

Originally posted by HornyDevil

As far as the climate and soil influencing agriculture part, sure, it is obvious that it does. However, how much does it affect the end product? You can’t taste the soil in the grape. You can, however, taste that grapes were grown differently. Same as you can taste how the same hop grown in different locations tastes different. You may not know where it came from, but you will be able to appreciate a difference.

Originally posted by HornyDevil
Funny how far off topic this "discussion" has actually gotten. Nobody wants to discuss what characteristics they want in their beer, but they’re more than happy to split hairs over the use of a couple words used to convey the overall concept. Though I’m more than happy to continuously argue, you could not be missing the boat more by doing this.

Originally posted by Cletus
I want chaos in my beer.

I tend to approach beer formulation as a minimizing process. Instead of making an "and the kitchen sink" beer where I just add a dozen different ingredients for the sake of supposed ’complexity’, I choose to try to find the simplest way to accomplish a goal.

For certain styles, I think that SMASH brews are a completely appropriate approach. I would view this as the starting point to building a focused beer. Take this base and MAKE IT. Taste is, critique it, learn about it, even brew it a couple times to ensure that your process is consistent before altering ingredients.

Then if you want to attempt to change something, add ONE thing, or alter ONE process, or change ONE ingredient at a time. Rebrew and repeat your analysis. Look for changes that have not simply made your beer ’more’ (the ’this one goes to 11’ problem). Decide whether or not the change has made the beer ’more correct’. Does that caramel malt in your IPA actually make the IPA better or just add another flavor that it doesn’t need?

Building in this way, you can find out at what point you have improved the beer in a slow, calculating way. Sure, you can overcompensate and skip to adding 5 more ingredients. Your beer will probably be fine, but you’ll never know that 2 of those ingredients are contributing nothing to your finished product, and people are very much resistant to going backwards and removing steps, processes, and ingredients from beers that they already deem as good. Their idea for improvement is always to add.

So to me, focus is minimalist.

(Hope this wasn’t too rambly)

Originally posted by HornyDevil

Originally posted by bitbucket

Originally posted by HornyDevil
Note to self: RB homebrewers don’t care about making great beer

It’s probably fair to say they don’t check the forums obsessively for your posts.

The words "focused beer" by themselves don’t mean anything to me. It’s a meaningless phrase like "quality is job 1" or "support our troops." Support them financially? Philosophically? Emotionally? Support them as human beings? Support their mission?

If you say hop-focused or malt-focused, now we have something to talk about.

Please read the OP for more information on what the post is actually about before writing that the phrase is meaningless. I assure you that it has nothing to do with propaganda used to justify United States foreign policy.

To me, a focused beer knows what it is and what it is for. It isn’t trying to be too many things. It’s clean and well-made. Its flavors might be strong or unbalanced, but there is an overall respect for an established culinary or brewing norm that condones whatever it has going in. Beers that are brewed "to-style" tend to be more focused, though you can certainly have focused beers that are completely out of any style. Styles have just organically developed around focused ideas on how a beer can and/or should taste. The platonic version of any given style is perhaps the definition of a focused beer.

I think we make focused beers. Some might disagree.

Originally posted by CLevar

Originally posted by Cletus
I want chaos in my beer. I do not want to be able to control every variable in my finished product, but yet I can to a large degree which is why talking about what I want in my beer is an uninteresting topic.

But focused chaos, right?

I agree to some extent: I want a beer that surprises me, but in a desirable way. I don’t want to brew similar to what I can buy in a store, I want to brew something new and interesting and enjoyable.