BeerBorg

I'm having another one of my "Tax Relief Ale" beers. It's a 5G Extract w/steeping grains recipe from Jaspers Homebrew that I was able to brew in my 3G pot. It's a little higher on the ABV scale than I usually drink, 6.6% according to the recipe. Tastes pretty good though.

Simply Simarillo home brew on the deck on a wonderful evening.

This earlier. Thank you for sending it Ron. It was quite yummy!



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Lots of my "Bitter and Mild" has been consumed. Down to only a few bottles of it left. I'll probably make something like it again in the late fall.

Love the glassware, inky...

A bit of hotel beer (and later pool beer) while hanging in Atlanta and Athens. Stumbled into some decent stuff at a hole in the wall by the hotel...



Sent from my SM-G860P using Tapatalk

BlackDuck wrote:Awesome. I really liked it too, but mine is long gone. I'll brew it again too sometime.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've got bout 6-8 glasses worth left in the last keg of it. I picked up everything I need to brew it again in the next day or 2 except the corn. I do have a lot of whole corn in the bins, I will just clean/crush some and try it that way. Drinking one right now, dayum good beer!

Pool (day one of many). I have so... much... can... beer... Bring on the summer. ..



Sent from my SM-G860P using Tapatalk

Brewers Best Summer Ale

I drank a BBS Every Day IPA earlier, I even shared it with one of my Sisters that came over for my Birthday (Birthday was actually Friday but we all got together today instead), she liked it and she's not much of a beer drinker. Now I'm having a Jaspers Big Furry Dribblechin Brown Ale. Mmmm, Good Stuff.

I saw something odd at the corner store on the way home today. "Old Tankard Ale" brewed by Pabst.

I had three choices:
1. Google it and pick some up tomorrow if it sounded interesting.
2. Buy it and try it.
3. Nah, no way.

I went with number 2.

Apparently it has it's own web page and video.

To me it does not sound like the recipe is being followed that closely. I actually sent a quick note to the Barclay Perkins guy who is used to reading old beer log books wondering what the recipe really was. While the modern version does actually have some flavor, it tends a bit towards dishwater and, of course, Sierra Nevada Pale Ale blows it out of the water.

It's a nice 5.8 ABV, 35 IBU dishwater though.

To me it does not sound like the recipe is being followed that closely

"Utilizing the original Brewer’s Log recipe from 1937"...

But using ingredients that did not exist until the 1980s. I see goldings in the recipe. None of the hops they used are anything like the Goldings in the recipe. They used crystal malts that were not in the recipe and didn't exist. It looks like they wimped out on the sugar. If they thought the sugar was of a dark English candi sugar type, then that's what they should have used, not crystal malts? The NW hops were probably Cluster back then. Or maybe Northern Brewer. There certainly was not cascade or nugget in it.

It doesn't sound like the recipe at all. (not that closely seems to be an understatement!)

So... there you go.

Anyways, I am drinking a half full trub / tester bottle of my continuously hopped bohemian pilsner that I used my last pack of swiss lager yeast in and fermented warmish (60ish). It tasted nice and was smooth out of fermenter, so I didn't think it actually needed any laagering, but I figured I'd try my tester and see if my view changed. So I chucked the tester in the fridge last night (and this is young - it's only 2 1/2 weeks after I bottled it). And it's great as in easy to drink and tasty. So ???? Laagering is overrated???

It is officially in my rotation.

My pitching lots of yeast and semi-open fermenting keeps doing this - giving me beer that tastes good out of the fermenter and that I can happily drink in 2 weeks instead of 4 like "back in the old days". Even though I'm bottling it. I don't know why it cleans up the bottling sugar acetaldehyde so fast where it did not before (more happy yeast going into the bottle?). But it has been like that - and I like it.

Had a couple stupid easy ciders (which are being remarkably slow to carb up--or maybe they're just thinner because I added a lot of sugar during fermentation of this batch, so with the extra alcohol, it's even thinner than usual for cider), and now am happily drinking my session brown ale/porter (I think I'm just going to call it a porter)...light bodied but nice and roasty without being astringent.

Definitely a successful brew--my first AG brew in Houston!

mashani wrote:

To me it does not sound like the recipe is being followed that closely

"Utilizing the original Brewer’s Log recipe from 1937"...

But using ingredients that did not exist until the 1980s. I see goldings in the recipe. None of the hops they used are anything like the Goldings in the recipe. They used crystal malts that were not in the recipe and didn't exist. It looks like they wimped out on the sugar. If they thought the sugar was of a dark English candi sugar type, then that's what they should have used, not crystal malts? The NW hops were probably Cluster back then. Or maybe Northern Brewer. There certainly was not cascade or nugget in it.

It doesn't sound like the recipe at all. (not that closely seems to be an understatement!)

So... there you go.....

That was sort of my take-a-way as well.
From the vocal description it sounded like amber malt (base malt with amber color we do not have today) with invert sugar (malt, grist, sugar in the recipe? Not just pale malt with invert sugar that gave it an amber color?). The hops appear to be listed as Washingtons, Goldings, Oregons. Cluster, Goldings, and?

My guess would be pale malt with invert sugar, bittered with Cluster, flavored with Goldings. Just like a lot of the recipes at Barclay Perkins.

The_Professor wrote:

mashani wrote:

To me it does not sound like the recipe is being followed that closely

"Utilizing the original Brewer’s Log recipe from 1937"...

But using ingredients that did not exist until the 1980s. I see goldings in the recipe. None of the hops they used are anything like the Goldings in the recipe. They used crystal malts that were not in the recipe and didn't exist. It looks like they wimped out on the sugar. If they thought the sugar was of a dark English candi sugar type, then that's what they should have used, not crystal malts? The NW hops were probably Cluster back then. Or maybe Northern Brewer. There certainly was not cascade or nugget in it.

It doesn't sound like the recipe at all. (not that closely seems to be an understatement!)

So... there you go.....

That was sort of my take-a-way as well.
From the vocal description it sounded like amber malt (base malt with amber color we do not have today) with invert sugar (malt, grist, sugar in the recipe? Not just pale malt with invert sugar that gave it an amber color?). The hops appear to be listed as Washingtons, Goldings, Oregons. Cluster, Goldings, and?

My guess would be pale malt with invert sugar, bittered with Cluster, flavored with Goldings. Just like a lot of the recipes at Barclay Perkins.

That would be my guess too and a much better place to start then what they did in that recreation. I know that Northern Brewer was cultivated in those parts back then. So maybe some of that.

Every hop they used in the recipe recreation did not exist.

I have no clue what amber malt was back then, but some RedX might hit the spot in place of it. It might not be right, but it would be tasty. What is called British Amber malt these days is around 40L and has no D-Power, so it ain't right.

mashani wrote:

The_Professor wrote:That was sort of my take-a-way as well.
From the vocal description it sounded like amber malt (base malt with amber color we do not have today) with invert sugar (malt, grist, sugar in the recipe? Not just pale malt with invert sugar that gave it an amber color?). The hops appear to be listed as Washingtons, Goldings, Oregons. Cluster, Goldings, and?

My guess would be pale malt with invert sugar, bittered with Cluster, flavored with Goldings. Just like a lot of the recipes at Barclay Perkins.

That would be my guess too and a much better place to start then what they did in that recreation. I know that Northern Brewer was cultivated in those parts back then. So maybe some of that.

Every hop they used in the recipe recreation did not exist.

I have no clue what amber malt was back then, but some RedX might hit the spot in place of it. It might not be right, but it would be tasty. What is called British Amber malt these days is around 40L and has no D-Power, so it ain't right.

All amber malt just does not sound right. An amber plus pale mix would be fine, but that would be for an older recipe. I am considering, for instance, write ups on Kentucky Common wherein something like using dark malt and caramel for the desired amber color is used, not a special malt "not available today".

But, I have made a Porter (and it would be an old style) with home malted Pale, Amber, and Brown malt (1/3 each). Really good. I'd make some amber if that was right, but I don't think it is. Getting into the 20th Century, dark malts are adjuncts, not the base malt. And if the suggested base malt is wrong, how wrong is the suggested sugar addition? Both invert and straight sugar additions were not uncommon (So maybe even just caramel coloring for the amber appearance.). And is anything in the recipe a corn addition?