Discussion in 'Beer Kit Brewing Discussion.' started by oo7tk, Feb 25, 2017.
Brilliant work! It will be really interesting to hear your results.
Back in the old days Whitbread at Portsmouth used to brew a strong ale called Pompey Royal. The reason we used to love it was because it tasted like my dad's homebrew, complete with twang.
I have tasted excellent kit beer and dreadful, including those I brewed while I was learning the ropes. As I kept everything else constant (yeast, hops, temperatures, sanitation, etc) I conclude that the difference is the quality of the kit. And a large part of "quality" is freshness of the liquid malt extract - for how long and in what conditions was it stored?
It'll be at least a week until I get the brew on. I'll brew at 19c. I was going to do a partial mash to make up the kit but remembered that when I did the 10 litre B&M IPA kit a while back it was a lot more like an IPA with the dextrose that came with it than the split I did with spraymalt. Even though I've eliminated sucrose as the twangster when used with all grain but I'll just stick with dextrose to make for less variables.
I'll then update week by week as they age to see not just the sugar effects but if the sulphite does change how the hops taste over time. Some of you might already be thinking for the ones bottled conditioned then that yeast will scrub oxygen anyway but it's always good to have a fanny about in the name of science (cough).
I can see there being no twang in any of them just to annoy me.
EDIT: I might overly aerate a few bottles, too.
For me it's an after taste that just shouldn't be there. As I said previously I had my first kit beer in a long time of a friend. The beer looked perfect. Poured well but just had a Smell and an after taste that should not be there.
I've used Sucrose to prime three of my four brews to date. Two of those have the twang but not so bad they spoil the beer, the other one has no twang at all. My first brew was primed with carbonation drops and this is undrinkable because of the twang. Same taste as the drinkable ones but so so strong. That said, it is a lot worse in some of these bottles than others. This got me thinking about the oxidisation theory. It was my first brew and, although I bottled using a bottling wand which should have minimised excess oxygen going into the bottles, I did leave varying gaps between the top of the beer and the top of the bottle. I wonder if this has made a difference? I'll dig out a couple of bottles at different extremes of "air gap" tonight to see if there's a trend.
Wouldn't it be brilliant if we could finally crack this eternal problem?!!!
I have noticed that the bigger the gap the better carbonated the beer either that or the homebrew has waterlogged my brain.
Homebrew twang was commonplace years ago when the fermenting bucket used to go into the airing cupboard, at temperatures above 30 °C.
I've also noticed that modern yeasts settle quickly when the fermentation stops.
I brewed 1 can kits + 1 kg table sugar for many years. Some had really bad twang. Others none at all. Worst offenders seemed to be bitters and `real ale'. Stouts were always pretty good. Before I switched to AG I'd settled on brewing them short - to 4 or 4.5 gallons instead of 5, and only adding half a kilo of sugar. Result: no twang in anything.
To this day I still brew in the airing cupboard when doing AG - no twang.
I sometimes add half a kilo of sugar - no twang.
I can only guess that it's a combination of factors rather than 1 single thing that causes twang.
I've made loads of kits, many of them Muntons and never noticed the taste being described, in fact I'm not even sure what's being described. Ive always gone for 2 can kits never adding sugar but Ive friends who've done 1 can kits adding different combinations of table sugar, dextrose and DME. Again no trace of the said defect.
I've always substituted a good quality fresh yeast packet for the one supplied in the kit. Water analysis is another possibility. You get used to the water you live with and won't necessarily notice any tastes it imparts simply because your used to it, a fermentation however may not take kindly to it and produce off flavours.
Interesting test of the differences in flavour of dry and liquid extract.
It's not in the actual Brulosophy experiment list yet but they did a test of liquid vs dry malt extract. Both Breiss pilsen, amounts so they'd be the same gravity.
People could tell the difference and neither was a bad beer, but neither of them tasted like the style you'd think you'd get with pilsen malt.
"Guesses included Amber Ale, Altbier, ESB and other more malt-forward styles. Looks of confusion only arose when I informed tasters they’d been drinking beers made entirely with either liquid or dry Pilsner malt extract..."
"...the LME beer was slightly richer with a stronger caramel flavor while the DME beer was a bit cleaner. Regardless, both shared the unmistakable richness of malt extract, a flavor I’ve never gotten in beers made with 100% Pilsner malt."
"As someone who only uses malt extract for xBmts specifically focused on malt extract, my experience with these beers did little to change my opinion on the ingredient. That said, my previously held conviction, which was beaten into me during my first few years of brewing, that LME is of higher quality than DME has certainly changed. I’m not saying the LME beer was bad, but in terms of the style I was aiming for, it was far from the mark. For what was ultimately 100% Pilsner malt beers, the DME version came quite a bit closer in appearance and flavor. In the event I decide to use extract for anything other than a starter in the future, without question, it’s be dry."
In an older experiment on the age of liquid extract that caramel flavour was more evident and that's part of what me and a few others have perceived as part of the twang. Far from all of it but a part.
I've just been going over my notes of beer I've made with all or part extract had any notes about twang and the only thing close was this:
⦁ 17th Dec 4am. Eating it with a couple of fajitas and the chilli sauce is giving it a peppery edge. On pouring even going aggressive at the end got zero head. The taste is a slight chocolate. There's some fruityness to it and a very slight 'cask a few days in' twang, but given all that I think it's alright. The bitterness is there and just on the edge of going too far.
And that was with a dry extract stout with a little crystal and chocolate malt that I'd left in a fermenter with no airlock and a slightly opened lid for a few months and it had got a pellicle on it.
Then looking back on the rest of the DME beers I'd never thought about the twang when tasting them, and that means it didn't present itself enough to make you think about it, which is great. It's like when you have 1,000 cups of tea and don't even think about them then you get a crap one and that's the one you think about. You don't notice things being right and doing their job properly.
Then I looked back on my beer kits and found regular notes of slight sourness, caramel and general homebrewyness. Loads of the kits tests I did were two cans or short brewed with no sugar, too.
I'm still siding with liquid extract being the biggest cause of twang.
That's two people on this Forum that agree on something !
i'd triple like this if i could
Separate names with a comma.