Subject: Digest for the period 10/31/2003 - 11/1/2003 Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 01:01:13 -0500 Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Re: Munich malt in altbier (Ed Westemeier) 2. Re: Altbier (Martin Brungard) 3. altbier (Bryan L. Gros) 4. Re: Altbier, now Lambic (John DeCarlo) 5. style guidelines, again (Bryan L. Gros) 6. Re: Digest for the period 10/29/2003 - 10/30/2003 (Scott Bickham) 7. Re: Altbier (Phil Sides Jr) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ed Westemeier Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 14:03:06 -0500 Subject: Re: Munich malt in altbier I suspect there is wide variability, and at least some brewers use Munich malt. On a recent trip through that state, I didn't get to spend any time in Duesseldorf, but I enjoyed draft Gatz altbier (a brewery that was new to me) in another town. I agree with George about the overwhelming (but wonderful) bitterness being the hallmark, but I was pretty sure I found Munich malt flavor in there as well. George may be right about _most_ of them, but I think perhaps not all. Ed George de Piro digest wrote: > Munich malt character is absent, and indeed, malt > character > in general, is secondary to the hop bitterness in this style. ... > > I propose that the BJCP guidelines be changed to omit the line amount > Munich > malt being a must in this style, seeing as it just isn't true. ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Martin Brungard Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 13:40:54 -0900 Subject: Re: Altbier George De Piro's comments on Dusseldorf Alt are right on target in my limited experience. I just had a bottle of a Dusseldorf Alt in Gainesville, FL of all places. I can't recall the beer's name, but it was brewed in Dusseldorf. Possibly Mark Tumarkin in Gainesville can recall what brand they sell at Stubby's. Stubby's is a pretty good beer bar, especially for the size of the town. Back to the Alt. The malt was pronounced, but I was definitely stunned by the bittering level. It was significantly more bitter than balanced. In this regard, I had to object...the bitterness was not adequately supported by the malt. The style guidelines indicate "Assertively bitter, with intense Munich malt-derived flavor to support". I can say that the beer I tasted somewhat fit the style guidelines, but I found it less than pleasing to drink. If I had brewed this beer, I would not have been proud. If I had judged the beer, I would have downgraded due to the lack of intense maltiness for balance. George's comments may have some bearing here. I wonder if the fragile malt character is lost or diminished during bottling and shipping. I would relish the opportunity to try the brewery fresh product. In this beer's case, the intense munich malt sweetness wasn't there to support and balance the bittering. I'm not a super hophead, but I do enjoy a good APA or IPA. This beer was over the top. The bottom line with any beer style is that it has to be pleasing to drink. Martin Brungard Tallahassee, FL _________________________________________________________________ Want to check if your PC is virus-infected? Get a FREE computer virus scan online from McAfee. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bryan L. Gros Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 08:24:07 -0800 Subject: altbier George, thanks for your thoughts on Altbier from the source. I was there about 18 months ago, and posted the following here on Judgenet last June: >My tasting of three altbiers there was surprising to me. They were not >what I expected at all. You hate to go into another country with >preconceived notions, but we all carry around with us our reading of the >style guidelines, books etc. > >I found the Dusseldorf altbiers all similar to each other, and all thinner >and maltier than I expected. I did not get a significant hop flavor or >high hop bitterness. Perhaps the high IBUs were masked by the maltiness >in the beers. These were all light brown/deep amber in color, and I see >what the dark malt flavor and dry finish is that some have described as >astringency. I was disappointed in these beers based on my expectations. We only spent an afternoon in Dusseldorf, so I didn't really distinguish the different breweries. And I didn't mean to say I did not enjoy the beers. But just that the guidelines should be tweaked a bit. It is a tough style to describe without traveling. I spent more time in Cologne, and fell in love with the Koelsch beers, which I had previously dismissed as boring wimpy beers based on the guidelines. Can't wait to go back. Bryan Gros bgros`at`aggienetwork.com Oakland, CA Draught Board Homebrew Club http://www.draughtboard.org ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John DeCarlo Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 12:02:45 -0500 Subject: Re: Altbier, now Lambic Jim, First, I disagree the two cases are similar. I think George made a very good case for changing the description of Altbier, because of the commercial samples he described well. In particular, Alt is not made all that many places. Second, this kind of discussion about what you may find in the marketplace called "Style X" comes up all the time. It is always a balancing act between what the marketers call their beers and coming up with a style definition that indicates a unique style for some reason (historical, etc.) In particular, it is much easier to sell a sweetened version of Lambic than a more "authentic" style. (Yes, I am using loaded terms here.) But, just because it is marketed as a lambic doesn't mean it is representative of the style. After all, both Budweiser and Miller are marketed as prime examples of the Pilsener style. Now, are Cantillon, Boon, Hanson on the fringe or in the center of the Lambic style? Again, we could argue this and maybe we should. But I would not seriously consider the artificially sweetened and mass marketed "lambics" to be sufficient reason to change the style definition. But maybe I am just a Lambic snob. A few years ago, if I asked the wife of a friend what a Lambic was, she would say that it was a sweet fruit beer, without that beer taste. And she got that impression drinking in Belgium. I also don't consider that sufficient reason to change the BJCP style. > From: Mildren, Jim Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 10:15:09 -0500 > Subject: RE: Digest for the period 10/29/2003 - 10/30/2003 > > > Nice article George, I find the BJCP style guidelines (or their use) aren't > accurate for Belgian lambic beers as well. Having attended to the style in > my own time, touring the Lambic region I found the style guidelines only > favor the most severe examples such as Hanson's and Cantillon while ignoring > the much more predominant likes of Lindeman's, Liefman's, St. Louis, etc. > which are brewed in more rural settings. -- John DeCarlo, My Views Are My Own ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bryan L. Gros Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 14:41:53 -0800 Subject: style guidelines, again Mildren, Jim wrote: >Nice article George, I find the BJCP style guidelines (or their use) aren't >accurate for Belgian lambic beers as well. Having attended to the style in >my own time, touring the Lambic region I found the style guidelines only >favor the most severe examples such as Hanson's and Cantillon while ignoring >the much more predominant likes of Lindeman's, Liefman's, St. Louis, etc. Jim, I think the descriptions for some styles describe more the way "we" want the styles to be, not so much the way they are commercially produced now. Especially some of the English styles. Think IPAs currently produced in England. Not that you don't have a point, I'm just saying what I feel is a bias of the group that created the guidelines. Not right or wrong. Perhaps lambic should be revisited next revision. And everyone should keep in mind that the purpose of the guidelines is to (as accurately as possible) describe styles that are popular for homebrew competitions. They are not meant to describe every style every created, nor to encompass every commercial example of every style (although an attempt was made). Bryan Gros bgros`at`aggienetwork.com Oakland, CA Draught Board Homebrew Club http://www.draughtboard.org ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott Bickham Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 19:29:37 -0500 Subject: Re: Digest for the period 10/29/2003 - 10/30/2003 George makes some good points. Last September marked my fourth visit to Duesseldorf, and he sizes up my perception of the beer style quite well. Although I did not tour the brewery, I spent a good part of my visit discussing beer with the staff of Im Fuechschen, and was even invited to tap a cask, join the Stammtisch and drank schnaps after hours with the manager and Koebesse. Definitely a visit to remember, or perhaps not to. I digress... I believe the Munich malt perception originates in the flavors in the bottled versions. As George pointed, out these beers do not travel well and the bottled versions are often marked by honey and toffee notes. Bingo. This tastes like Munich malt to many judges. In addition, in my efforts to reproduce the style at home, I have found that 20% Munich malt pretty much hits the flavor profile I remember. It's not enough to emphasize the melanoidins, but it adds a nice malty backbone. In addition, a few ounces of carafe malt adds to the complexity and is in agreement with the malt types listed on the bottle labels. So while there may be some connections with Munich malt as a possible ingredient or perhaps a flavor description, it is not IMO a key element of the style. Happy Halloween, Scott believe the Munich malt comment is ----- Original Message ----- From: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" To: "Digest Recipients" Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 1:01 AM Subject: Digest for the period 10/29/2003 - 10/30/2003 > Table of contents > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 1. Altbier > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > From: George de Piro Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 23:40:23 -0500 > Subject: Altbier > > > Hi all, > > I recently visited Düsseldorf and sampled the local beers, and toured > one of > the breweries. The flavor of Altbier was quite different from what I > expected, since I was looking for what the BJCP style guidelines > dictate: > strong Munich malt flavor. > > First, there was an obvious quality difference between the four > Düsseldorf > brewpubs. In my opinion, Schumacher und Schlüssel were inferior to > Uerige > and Fuecshen (I liked Im Fuecshen best). The first two were not as > cleanly > brewed as the latter ones. > > The beer at Zum Uerige is intensely bitter, with a clean aroma and > not a > whole lot of malt character to back up that bitterness. In fact, I > doubt if > any Munich malt is in that beer. As a professional brewer that uses > a *lot* > of Munich malt, I'm certain that I know its flavor. The bottles from > Zum > Uerige list only barley malt, caramel malt, and roasted malt on their > label.. > Its color and flavor are consistent with the malts listed. > > The beer at Im Fücshen is more balanced: a light hop aroma, otherwise > clean, with a soft malt palate leading into a mildly bitter finish; a > quite > drinkable beer suitable for long sessions. Since I toured the > brewery, I > know for a fact that there is *no* Munich malt at all in this beer, > just > pilsner (Durst) and Weyermann cara, sauer, and roast malts. > > It gets only one hop charge, which is first wort. I was impressed by > the > amount of hop aroma that survived. I noted the hop aroma prior to the > informative tour. This was the first time in my beery existence that > I got > to taste a first wort hop beer completely blind to the fact that it > was > first wort hopped. Quite educational! (Of course, the Koelsch I > just made > at work displays no hop aroma despite the fact that I only first wort > hopped > it. Hmmm.) > > Bottles, obtained at Im Fuecschen and Zum Uerige, were not indicative > of the > flavor of the draft beer available on premises. Im Fuecschen, in > particular, suffered in the bottle, with heavy oxidative flavors like > honey > and tofee (not diacetyl, though). Uerige is better from the bottle, > but > even when kept cold, bottles nearing the one month expiration are > quite a > bit more estery than the Bier vom Fass. > > In conclusion: Munich malt character is absent, and indeed, malt > character > in general, is secondary to the hop bitterness in this style. Only > Uerige > is intensely bitter, the other 3 breweries producing more balanced > products.. > Bottles from any of the breweries are not quite like drinking at the > source.. > In the case of Im Fuecschen, this is easily explained by the brewing > and > packaging procedures: the beer is served VERY young on premises (2 > weeks > old on average) and the bottled product is put into a truck and sent > to a > bottling plant. The amount of beer transfers seems to encourage air > pick-up, and there is substantial hot side aeration in the brewhouse. > > I propose that the BJCP guidelines be changed to omit the line amount > Munich > malt being a must in this style, seeing as it just isn't true. As a > brewer, > I think that any of these beers would become more interesting by > including a > generous amount of Munich malt, but since the Düsseldorfers don't do > it, the > guidelines should reflect reality. > > Have fun! > > George de Piro > Head Brewer, C.H. Evans Brewing Company > at the Albany Pump Station > 19 Quackenbush Square > Albany, NY, USA 12207 > (518)447-9000 > www.EvansAle.com > > Brewers of Kick-Ass Brown: Twice declared the Best American Brown > Ale in > the USA at the Great American Beer Festival (2000 & 2002)! > > ********************************************************************** > * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * > * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * > * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * > ********************************************************************** > ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Phil Sides Jr Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 23:26:21 -0500 Subject: Re: Altbier George de Piro writes: >I recently visited Düsseldorf and sampled the local beers, and toured >one of the breweries. The flavor of Altbier was quite different from what I >expected, since I was looking for what the BJCP style guidelines dictate: >strong Munich malt flavor. > >First, there was an obvious quality difference between the four Düsseldorf >brewpubs. In my opinion, Schumacher und Schlüssel were inferior to >Uerige and Fuecshen (I liked Im Fuecshen best). The first two were not as >cleanly brewed as the latter ones. > >The beer at Zum Uerige is intensely bitter, with a clean aroma and >not a whole lot of malt character to back up that bitterness. In fact, I >doubt if any Munich malt is in that beer. As a professional brewer that uses >a *lot* of Munich malt, I'm certain that I know its flavor. The bottles from >Zum Uerige list only barley malt, caramel malt, and roasted malt on their >label.. Its color and flavor are consistent with the malts listed. > >The beer at Im Fücshen is more balanced: a light hop aroma, otherwise >clean, with a soft malt palate leading into a mildly bitter finish; a quite >drinkable beer suitable for long sessions. Since I toured the >brewery, I know for a fact that there is *no* Munich malt at all in this >beer, >just pilsner (Durst) and Weyermann cara, sauer, and roast malts. > >It gets only one hop charge, which is first wort. I was impressed by >the amount of hop aroma that survived. I noted the hop aroma prior to the >informative tour. This was the first time in my beery existence that >I got to taste a first wort hop beer completely blind to the fact that it >was first wort hopped. Quite educational! (Of course, the Koelsch I >just made at work displays no hop aroma despite the fact that I only first=20 >wort >hopped it. Hmmm.) > >Bottles, obtained at Im Fuecschen and Zum Uerige, were not indicative >of the flavor of the draft beer available on premises. Im Fuecschen, in >particular, suffered in the bottle, with heavy oxidative flavors like >honey and tofee (not diacetyl, though). Uerige is better from the bottle, >but even when kept cold, bottles nearing the one month expiration are >quite a bit more estery than the Bier vom Fass. > >In conclusion: Munich malt character is absent, and indeed, malt >character in general, is secondary to the hop bitterness in this style. Only >Uerige is intensely bitter, the other 3 breweries producing more balanced >products.. Bottles from any of the breweries are not quite like drinking >at the >source.. In the case of Im Fuecschen, this is easily explained by the brewing >and packaging procedures: the beer is served VERY young on premises (2 >weeks old on average) and the bottled product is put into a truck and sent >to a bottling plant. The amount of beer transfers seems to encourage air >pick-up, and there is substantial hot side aeration in the brewhouse. > >I propose that the BJCP guidelines be changed to omit the line amount >Munich malt being a must in this style, seeing as it just isn't true. As a >brewer, I think that any of these beers would become more interesting by >including a generous amount of Munich malt, but since the Düsseldorfers=20 >don't do >it, the guidelines should reflect reality. Funny, we just had a conversation about this at our homebrew club meeting last Saturday. I am curious George... With these altbiers fresh on your mind's palate, I wonder what you think of the bottled Frankenheim Alt which=20 is available in the states? I am thinking that many BJCP judges who have not traveled to Dusseldorf may have to rely on Frankenheim as the only commercial example they have tried. You may also be interested to know that at the end of January 2004, B. United is importing the seasonal Sticke Uerige in bottles and draft and after that, Uerige will be imported on a regular basis in bottles and kegs.=20 I hope it holds up coming across the pond :) I think it is great that we will have this beer to sample but I also fear that with the wide range of flavors in the 'in style' altbiers, judges who haven't tasted the others may try too hard to find beers that taste just like Uerige. I've had this discussion on APA panels about how they don't have to taste like SNPA to be=20 in style. = 3 D = = 3 D = = 3 D = = 3 D = = 3 D = =3D==3D==3D==3D==3D==3D==3D==3D=3D==3D==3D==3D==3D==3D==3D==3D==3D==3D Phil Sides, Jr. - Mid-Atlantic Brewing News Hop Tips Editor, Baltimore Correspondent, Import Columnist 2715 Plyers Mill Road Silver Spring, MD 20902-4207 (301)962-7817 FAX (781)623-837 phil`at`brewingnews.com http://www.brewingnews.com/mid-atlantic/ ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** Subject: Digest for the period 10/31/2003 - 11/1/2003 Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 01:01:13 -0500 Table of contents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Re: Munich malt in altbier (Ed Westemeier) 2. Re: Altbier (Martin Brungard) 3. altbier (Bryan L. Gros) 4. Re: Altbier, now Lambic (John DeCarlo) 5. style guidelines, again (Bryan L. Gros) 6. Re: Digest for the period 10/29/2003 - 10/30/2003 (Scott Bickham) 7. Re: Altbier (Phil Sides Jr) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ed Westemeier Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 14:03:06 -0500 Subject: Re: Munich malt in altbier I suspect there is wide variability, and at least some brewers use Munich malt. On a recent trip through that state, I didn't get to spend any time in Duesseldorf, but I enjoyed draft Gatz altbier (a brewery that was new to me) in another town. I agree with George about the overwhelming (but wonderful) bitterness being the hallmark, but I was pretty sure I found Munich malt flavor in there as well. George may be right about _most_ of them, but I think perhaps not all. Ed George de Piro digest wrote: > Munich malt character is absent, and indeed, malt > character > in general, is secondary to the hop bitterness in this style. ... > > I propose that the BJCP guidelines be changed to omit the line amount > Munich > malt being a must in this style, seeing as it just isn't true. ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Martin Brungard Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 13:40:54 -0900 Subject: Re: Altbier George De Piro's comments on Dusseldorf Alt are right on target in my limited experience. I just had a bottle of a Dusseldorf Alt in Gainesville, FL of all places. I can't recall the beer's name, but it was brewed in Dusseldorf. Possibly Mark Tumarkin in Gainesville can recall what brand they sell at Stubby's. Stubby's is a pretty good beer bar, especially for the size of the town. Back to the Alt. The malt was pronounced, but I was definitely stunned by the bittering level. It was significantly more bitter than balanced. In this regard, I had to object...the bitterness was not adequately supported by the malt. The style guidelines indicate "Assertively bitter, with intense Munich malt-derived flavor to support". I can say that the beer I tasted somewhat fit the style guidelines, but I found it less than pleasing to drink. If I had brewed this beer, I would not have been proud. If I had judged the beer, I would have downgraded due to the lack of intense maltiness for balance. George's comments may have some bearing here. I wonder if the fragile malt character is lost or diminished during bottling and shipping. I would relish the opportunity to try the brewery fresh product. In this beer's case, the intense munich malt sweetness wasn't there to support and balance the bittering. I'm not a super hophead, but I do enjoy a good APA or IPA. This beer was over the top. The bottom line with any beer style is that it has to be pleasing to drink. Martin Brungard Tallahassee, FL _________________________________________________________________ Want to check if your PC is virus-infected? Get a FREE computer virus scan online from McAfee. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bryan L. Gros Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 08:24:07 -0800 Subject: altbier George, thanks for your thoughts on Altbier from the source. I was there about 18 months ago, and posted the following here on Judgenet last June: >My tasting of three altbiers there was surprising to me. They were not >what I expected at all. You hate to go into another country with >preconceived notions, but we all carry around with us our reading of the >style guidelines, books etc. > >I found the Dusseldorf altbiers all similar to each other, and all thinner >and maltier than I expected. I did not get a significant hop flavor or >high hop bitterness. Perhaps the high IBUs were masked by the maltiness >in the beers. These were all light brown/deep amber in color, and I see >what the dark malt flavor and dry finish is that some have described as >astringency. I was disappointed in these beers based on my expectations. We only spent an afternoon in Dusseldorf, so I didn't really distinguish the different breweries. And I didn't mean to say I did not enjoy the beers. But just that the guidelines should be tweaked a bit. It is a tough style to describe without traveling. I spent more time in Cologne, and fell in love with the Koelsch beers, which I had previously dismissed as boring wimpy beers based on the guidelines. Can't wait to go back. Bryan Gros bgros`at`aggienetwork.com Oakland, CA Draught Board Homebrew Club http://www.draughtboard.org ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John DeCarlo Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 12:02:45 -0500 Subject: Re: Altbier, now Lambic Jim, First, I disagree the two cases are similar. I think George made a very good case for changing the description of Altbier, because of the commercial samples he described well. In particular, Alt is not made all that many places. Second, this kind of discussion about what you may find in the marketplace called "Style X" comes up all the time. It is always a balancing act between what the marketers call their beers and coming up with a style definition that indicates a unique style for some reason (historical, etc.) In particular, it is much easier to sell a sweetened version of Lambic than a more "authentic" style. (Yes, I am using loaded terms here.) But, just because it is marketed as a lambic doesn't mean it is representative of the style. After all, both Budweiser and Miller are marketed as prime examples of the Pilsener style. Now, are Cantillon, Boon, Hanson on the fringe or in the center of the Lambic style? Again, we could argue this and maybe we should. But I would not seriously consider the artificially sweetened and mass marketed "lambics" to be sufficient reason to change the style definition. But maybe I am just a Lambic snob. A few years ago, if I asked the wife of a friend what a Lambic was, she would say that it was a sweet fruit beer, without that beer taste. And she got that impression drinking in Belgium. I also don't consider that sufficient reason to change the BJCP style. > From: Mildren, Jim Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 10:15:09 -0500 > Subject: RE: Digest for the period 10/29/2003 - 10/30/2003 > > > Nice article George, I find the BJCP style guidelines (or their use) aren't > accurate for Belgian lambic beers as well. Having attended to the style in > my own time, touring the Lambic region I found the style guidelines only > favor the most severe examples such as Hanson's and Cantillon while ignoring > the much more predominant likes of Lindeman's, Liefman's, St. Louis, etc. > which are brewed in more rural settings. -- John DeCarlo, My Views Are My Own ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bryan L. Gros Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 14:41:53 -0800 Subject: style guidelines, again Mildren, Jim wrote: >Nice article George, I find the BJCP style guidelines (or their use) aren't >accurate for Belgian lambic beers as well. Having attended to the style in >my own time, touring the Lambic region I found the style guidelines only >favor the most severe examples such as Hanson's and Cantillon while ignoring >the much more predominant likes of Lindeman's, Liefman's, St. Louis, etc. Jim, I think the descriptions for some styles describe more the way "we" want the styles to be, not so much the way they are commercially produced now. Especially some of the English styles. Think IPAs currently produced in England. Not that you don't have a point, I'm just saying what I feel is a bias of the group that created the guidelines. Not right or wrong. Perhaps lambic should be revisited next revision. And everyone should keep in mind that the purpose of the guidelines is to (as accurately as possible) describe styles that are popular for homebrew competitions. They are not meant to describe every style every created, nor to encompass every commercial example of every style (although an attempt was made). Bryan Gros bgros`at`aggienetwork.com Oakland, CA Draught Board Homebrew Club http://www.draughtboard.org ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott Bickham Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 19:29:37 -0500 Subject: Re: Digest for the period 10/29/2003 - 10/30/2003 George makes some good points. Last September marked my fourth visit to Duesseldorf, and he sizes up my perception of the beer style quite well. Although I did not tour the brewery, I spent a good part of my visit discussing beer with the staff of Im Fuechschen, and was even invited to tap a cask, join the Stammtisch and drank schnaps after hours with the manager and Koebesse. Definitely a visit to remember, or perhaps not to. I digress... I believe the Munich malt perception originates in the flavors in the bottled versions. As George pointed, out these beers do not travel well and the bottled versions are often marked by honey and toffee notes. Bingo. This tastes like Munich malt to many judges. In addition, in my efforts to reproduce the style at home, I have found that 20% Munich malt pretty much hits the flavor profile I remember. It's not enough to emphasize the melanoidins, but it adds a nice malty backbone. In addition, a few ounces of carafe malt adds to the complexity and is in agreement with the malt types listed on the bottle labels. So while there may be some connections with Munich malt as a possible ingredient or perhaps a flavor description, it is not IMO a key element of the style. Happy Halloween, Scott believe the Munich malt comment is ----- Original Message ----- From: "JudgeNet - the beer judge digest" To: "Digest Recipients" Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 1:01 AM Subject: Digest for the period 10/29/2003 - 10/30/2003 > Table of contents > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 1. Altbier > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > From: George de Piro Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 23:40:23 -0500 > Subject: Altbier > > > Hi all, > > I recently visited Düsseldorf and sampled the local beers, and toured > one of > the breweries. The flavor of Altbier was quite different from what I > expected, since I was looking for what the BJCP style guidelines > dictate: > strong Munich malt flavor. > > First, there was an obvious quality difference between the four > Düsseldorf > brewpubs. In my opinion, Schumacher und Schlüssel were inferior to > Uerige > and Fuecshen (I liked Im Fuecshen best). The first two were not as > cleanly > brewed as the latter ones. > > The beer at Zum Uerige is intensely bitter, with a clean aroma and > not a > whole lot of malt character to back up that bitterness. In fact, I > doubt if > any Munich malt is in that beer. As a professional brewer that uses > a *lot* > of Munich malt, I'm certain that I know its flavor. The bottles from > Zum > Uerige list only barley malt, caramel malt, and roasted malt on their > label.. > Its color and flavor are consistent with the malts listed. > > The beer at Im Fücshen is more balanced: a light hop aroma, otherwise > clean, with a soft malt palate leading into a mildly bitter finish; a > quite > drinkable beer suitable for long sessions. Since I toured the > brewery, I > know for a fact that there is *no* Munich malt at all in this beer, > just > pilsner (Durst) and Weyermann cara, sauer, and roast malts. > > It gets only one hop charge, which is first wort. I was impressed by > the > amount of hop aroma that survived. I noted the hop aroma prior to the > informative tour. This was the first time in my beery existence that > I got > to taste a first wort hop beer completely blind to the fact that it > was > first wort hopped. Quite educational! (Of course, the Koelsch I > just made > at work displays no hop aroma despite the fact that I only first wort > hopped > it. Hmmm.) > > Bottles, obtained at Im Fuecschen and Zum Uerige, were not indicative > of the > flavor of the draft beer available on premises. Im Fuecschen, in > particular, suffered in the bottle, with heavy oxidative flavors like > honey > and tofee (not diacetyl, though). Uerige is better from the bottle, > but > even when kept cold, bottles nearing the one month expiration are > quite a > bit more estery than the Bier vom Fass. > > In conclusion: Munich malt character is absent, and indeed, malt > character > in general, is secondary to the hop bitterness in this style. Only > Uerige > is intensely bitter, the other 3 breweries producing more balanced > products.. > Bottles from any of the breweries are not quite like drinking at the > source.. > In the case of Im Fuecschen, this is easily explained by the brewing > and > packaging procedures: the beer is served VERY young on premises (2 > weeks > old on average) and the bottled product is put into a truck and sent > to a > bottling plant. The amount of beer transfers seems to encourage air > pick-up, and there is substantial hot side aeration in the brewhouse. > > I propose that the BJCP guidelines be changed to omit the line amount > Munich > malt being a must in this style, seeing as it just isn't true. As a > brewer, > I think that any of these beers would become more interesting by > including a > generous amount of Munich malt, but since the Düsseldorfers don't do > it, the > guidelines should reflect reality. > > Have fun! > > George de Piro > Head Brewer, C.H. Evans Brewing Company > at the Albany Pump Station > 19 Quackenbush Square > Albany, NY, USA 12207 > (518)447-9000 > www.EvansAle.com > > Brewers of Kick-Ass Brown: Twice declared the Best American Brown > Ale in > the USA at the Great American Beer Festival (2000 & 2002)! > > ********************************************************************** > * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * > * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * > * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * > ********************************************************************** > ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * ********************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Phil Sides Jr Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 23:26:21 -0500 Subject: Re: Altbier George de Piro writes: >I recently visited Düsseldorf and sampled the local beers, and toured >one of the breweries. The flavor of Altbier was quite different from what I >expected, since I was looking for what the BJCP style guidelines dictate: >strong Munich malt flavor. > >First, there was an obvious quality difference between the four Düsseldorf >brewpubs. In my opinion, Schumacher und Schlüssel were inferior to >Uerige and Fuecshen (I liked Im Fuecshen best). The first two were not as >cleanly brewed as the latter ones. > >The beer at Zum Uerige is intensely bitter, with a clean aroma and >not a whole lot of malt character to back up that bitterness. In fact, I >doubt if any Munich malt is in that beer. As a professional brewer that uses >a *lot* of Munich malt, I'm certain that I know its flavor. The bottles from >Zum Uerige list only barley malt, caramel malt, and roasted malt on their >label.. Its color and flavor are consistent with the malts listed. > >The beer at Im Fücshen is more balanced: a light hop aroma, otherwise >clean, with a soft malt palate leading into a mildly bitter finish; a quite >drinkable beer suitable for long sessions. Since I toured the >brewery, I know for a fact that there is *no* Munich malt at all in this >beer, >just pilsner (Durst) and Weyermann cara, sauer, and roast malts. > >It gets only one hop charge, which is first wort. I was impressed by >the amount of hop aroma that survived. I noted the hop aroma prior to the >informative tour. This was the first time in my beery existence that >I got to taste a first wort hop beer completely blind to the fact that it >was first wort hopped. Quite educational! (Of course, the Koelsch I >just made at work displays no hop aroma despite the fact that I only first=20 >wort >hopped it. Hmmm.) > >Bottles, obtained at Im Fuecschen and Zum Uerige, were not indicative >of the flavor of the draft beer available on premises. Im Fuecschen, in >particular, suffered in the bottle, with heavy oxidative flavors like >honey and tofee (not diacetyl, though). Uerige is better from the bottle, >but even when kept cold, bottles nearing the one month expiration are >quite a bit more estery than the Bier vom Fass. > >In conclusion: Munich malt character is absent, and indeed, malt >character in general, is secondary to the hop bitterness in this style. Only >Uerige is intensely bitter, the other 3 breweries producing more balanced >products.. Bottles from any of the breweries are not quite like drinking >at the >source.. In the case of Im Fuecschen, this is easily explained by the brewing >and packaging procedures: the beer is served VERY young on premises (2 >weeks old on average) and the bottled product is put into a truck and sent >to a bottling plant. The amount of beer transfers seems to encourage air >pick-up, and there is substantial hot side aeration in the brewhouse. > >I propose that the BJCP guidelines be changed to omit the line amount >Munich malt being a must in this style, seeing as it just isn't true. As a >brewer, I think that any of these beers would become more interesting by >including a generous amount of Munich malt, but since the Düsseldorfers=20 >don't do >it, the guidelines should reflect reality. Funny, we just had a conversation about this at our homebrew club meeting last Saturday. I am curious George... With these altbiers fresh on your mind's palate, I wonder what you think of the bottled Frankenheim Alt which=20 is available in the states? I am thinking that many BJCP judges who have not traveled to Dusseldorf may have to rely on Frankenheim as the only commercial example they have tried. You may also be interested to know that at the end of January 2004, B. United is importing the seasonal Sticke Uerige in bottles and draft and after that, Uerige will be imported on a regular basis in bottles and kegs.=20 I hope it holds up coming across the pond :) I think it is great that we will have this beer to sample but I also fear that with the wide range of flavors in the 'in style' altbiers, judges who haven't tasted the others may try too hard to find beers that taste just like Uerige. I've had this discussion on APA panels about how they don't have to taste like SNPA to be=20 in style. = 3 D = = 3 D = = 3 D = = 3 D = = 3 D = =3D==3D==3D==3D==3D==3D==3D==3D=3D==3D==3D==3D==3D==3D==3D==3D==3D==3D Phil Sides, Jr. - Mid-Atlantic Brewing News Hop Tips Editor, Baltimore Correspondent, Import Columnist 2715 Plyers Mill Road Silver Spring, MD 20902-4207 (301)962-7817 FAX (781)623-837 phil`at`brewingnews.com http://www.brewingnews.com/mid-atlantic/ ********************************************************************** * JudgeNet - the beer judge digest * * Send plain text only, no HTML, MIME, encoded text or attachments * * Send subscription requests & changes to judge-request`at`synchro.com * **********************************************************************