Modern Homebrew Recipes (8 page)

•
Grain quantities missing
– Some recipes (particularly those from commercial breweries) are expressed in percentages. This is great for scaling a recipe and comparing it with other recipes, but many homebrewers don’t know how to translate percentages to applicable quantities. I like to plug the recipe into brewing software, entering the percentages as if they were pounds. I then set the target gravity and let the software scale the grist accordingly.

If you don’t have recipe software, you can estimate the grist manually. First, calculate the total weight of malt needed to hit the recipe’s starting gravity target using your system’s mash efficiency (use equations in
Appendix A
if necessary), assuming the entire grist is base malt (use 36 points per pound). Second, apply the percentages of each grist component from the recipe to total estimated grist weight to estimate the weight of each ingredient in the mash. Third, calculate the gravity of this recipe. If the calculated gravity is different from the recipe target, scale each grist component by the percentage difference between the estimated gravity and the target gravity. Recheck the gravity of the updated recipe, repeating as necessary until the gravities match.

•
Grain details missing
– If the country of origin is missing, go with the native country if possible (for instance, if a recipe says Munich malt, go with a German maltster). If the maltster isn’t specified, you can pick your favorite. You can sometimes use recipe software to help determine grain color if an overall color of the beer is given. However, many maltsters produce crystal-type malts within a certain range, and chocolate malt can be vastly different in color and flavor from one maltster to another. When in doubt, pick something reasonable for the style of beer.

•
Boil information missing
– Most recipes will give a batch size, but many will omit information on the starting volume or length of boil. The ending volume is the same as the batch size, and can be assumed if not explicitly stated. The starting volume is the most interesting piece of information since it determines how much wort I collect from the lauter, and suggests what kind of boil-off (or evaporation) rate is implied when compared to the final batch size. Even if the starting volume, ending volume, and length of boil are given, I’m looking for clues as to the vigor of the boil (i.e., how hard should the wort be boiling? Is it normal, or is it boiling hard?). If the implied evaporation rate is different than on your system, you will have to change sometime (starting volume, boil length, or boil vigor). If no boil time is given, assume 60 minutes (unless you see a hop addition that is earlier than that).

•
Hop information missing
– The typical hop schedule includes the variety, quantity, and timing of usage. If also often includes the alpha acid percentage of the hops, the format of the hops, and the IBU target for the beer. It rarely includes the IBU estimation method (unless the recipe is from a book or magazine where they list the method for all recipes). There are several cases of missing information to consider.

•
Recipe in AAUs
– Some homebrew recipes might give hop information in AAUs (alpha acid units, sometimes called HBUs, or homebrew bitterness units); other recipes may give hop additions in IBUs. Expressing hops in AAUs simply means multiplying the weight of a hop addition by the alpha acid percentage. For example, using 2 ounces of a 6% alpha acid hop gives 12 AAUs of bitterness. If you want to brew the recipe but can only find 4% alpha acid hops,
you would use 3 ounces of them since 12 AAUs/4% AA = 3 oz. It’s helpful for scaling hop additions based on what hops are available to you, but I would only use said hops for bittering additions. For flavor and aroma additions, you should be more interested in the amount of hop oils, so go by weight, not bittering contribution (since the bitterness of these hops is a secondary concern). Note that AAUs do not predict bitterness of the finished beer; they are simply a convenient measurement of the source ingredients.

Even if you don’t use AAUs in your recipes, you might use them indirectly if you have to adjust the quantity based on the alpha acid content of your available hops. The alpha acid content of hops varies year to year too, so that’s why you often see different alpha acids listed for the same variety of hops. When I fill out my recipe log, I write down what I actually used, because it might be different the next time I buy hops.

If designing a new recipe, I validate my recipe using software and the actual AA% of the hops I’ve chosen. The more modern approach is to list the IBU contribution of bittering hop additions rather than the weight and alpha acid percentage; it’s understood you will use brewing software or a calculator to determine the actual amount needed (see
Appendix A: Basic Beer Math
for the specific calculation). Given the desired IBUs, the timing of the hop additions, the wort’s gravity, the batch volume, and the AA% of the hops to be used, most software can determine for the weight of the hops required.

•
Alpha acid percentages missing
– If the alpha acid percentages are missing from the recipe, I can still figure out the value if I have the weight of the necessary hops and the total IBUs for the beer. I first check if I have those hop varieties on hand, and plug in the AA% from those. I then calculate the total IBUs using recipe software and check it against the target for the recipe. If that still doesn’t work, I use the hops I have or can buy, add the indicated weight, and scale the bittering addition to hit the target IBU level.

•
Hop weights missing
– If I need to complete a hop schedule where weights are missing, I finalize the flavor and aroma hops first. I set the weight of those additions to give the expected perceptual impact for the style of beer. In a 5-gallon (19 L) batch, I
start with 0.25 oz (7 g) of hops for light impact, 0.5 oz (14 g) for moderate impact, 1 oz (28 g) for high impact, and 2 oz (57 g) for very high impact. Once those weights are set, I determine how many IBUs those additions contribute. The bittering addition is then scaled to provide the remaining IBUs needed to hit the overall bitterness target for the beer.

If I’m using recipe software to scale the bittering addition after I have set the flavor and aroma weights to desired levels, the software will often try to scale all the hops equally. When that happens, I need to manually reset (or lock, if that feature exists) the flavor and aroma additions quantities so I am varying only the bittering additions.

•
Beer style information lacking
– This issue takes one of two forms, either not clearly identifying the style, or providing a recipe that doesn’t fit the stated style. Some beers are described with generic names, and others state they are following BJCP guidelines. Some recipes that are trying to match or clone commercial beers will state the brand name of the beer they seek to emulate.

I handle this situation by trying to determine the author’s intent. Were they trying to brew a classic example, or were they just trying to pick a name for their beer? If no style information is given, try to imagine the flavor profile and balance of the beer and see if it fits a defined style. Calculating the vital parameters using recipe software can also help. There may be several valid matches, and sometimes you must brew these recipes to evaluate them. Trained judges can help determine the closest style match.

This is a problem only if you intend to enter the beer into a competition and are worried that your beer won’t be judged properly, or if you don’t like certain styles of beer and would rather avoid making them. Otherwise, just brew the recipe, enjoy your beer, and don’t worry about the style.

•
Mash schedule deficient
– Some recipes don’t provide a full mash schedule, or omit durations for different rests. If a recipe provides only one mash temperature, assume an infusion mash program and perform a one hour rest. Not all recipes specify a mashout; some brewers don’t use it, and some simply don’t include it as a mash step since it’s a normal part of their process.

It’s hard to write a recipe with a complicated mash program without describing the rests. Any brewer would be confused if a mash schedule said to do a decoction mash, for instance. If I ran into that case, my default mash schedule would be a
hochkurz
single decoction mash with a rest at 145°F (63°C) and another at 158°F (70°C), as described in the
Brewing Techniques chapter
. If it was a paler beer style, I’d boil for 5–10 minutes, and if it were a darker style, 15–20 minutes.

Regardless of mash technique, check through the mash schedule to be sure that there is at least one rest in the saccharification range of the diastatic enzymes (generally 144°F/62°C to 162°F/72°C). On the homebrew scale, a total mash rest time of at least an hour is typical.

•
Special ingredients or processes not described
– Sometimes in a recipe for an unusual or unconventional batch, a brewer will leave out abnormal steps. When I discuss my pumpkin ale recipe, I take extra time to explain how I prepare and use the pumpkin, since I know that most people mash it (while I put it in the boil). Some people like to keep their special methods secret, but many simply don’t take the time to explain something they take for granted. All I can suggest is that you look through the recipe process carefully to see if it mentions how exactly special ingredients are used. Sometimes this information can be in several places, including part of the ingredient description.

•
Errata
– People are human and mistakes happen. Even in printed publications, errors can slip by editors and reviewers. You should review a recipe not only for completeness, but also for accuracy. Common errors that I see in recipes include transposing (swapping) digits, using the wrong units, incorrect metric conversions, dropped characters, off-by-one typing (hands shifted on a keyboard giving a different character or number), and cut-and-paste or reuse errors (using a template or previously written snippet, but not fully changing it). I can’t describe every possible error, so use your judgment in questioning something odd.

Depending on your experience level (and sometimes your personality type), you might be able to accept a reasonable amount of uncertainty or ambiguity in a recipe. It helps if you already know how you are going
to adjust it to your methods and system, unless you want to follow the recipe to the exact detail. Knowing the gaps that may exist gives you room to fix them, as discussed in the next section.

Fixing a recipe
– If a recipe is missing a few pieces of necessary information, there are a few ways to go about fixing the problem. First, see if you can calculate the missing information given the information you have. I’ve discussed those methods in the
previous chapter
, but some additional formulas can be found in
Appendix A: Basic Beer Math
.

Next, see if you can resolve any unclear parts of the recipe. Maybe the original source of the recipe has more to say. If it comes from a book or magazine article, those sources may include information relevant to the recipe. If the recipe is from a person you know, see if you can contact them directly to ask your questions. I get a few emails a week from people asking me about my recipes; most authors are happy to help, as long as the requests are polite and to the point.

Finally, you may be able to make educated guesses about the recipe, or simply apply your own default processes. If you do add your own guesses or processes, be sure to re-read the entire recipe to see if there are any new inconsistencies. Regardless of the way you go about filling in the missing details, you should not brew until you have a final, executable recipe in hand. The recipe you actually brew may be a bit different than the original, but at least you’re starting the brewing process with a plan.

RECIPE FORMULATION FUNDAMENTALS

You can develop solid skills working with other people’s recipes. Adapting recipes to your system, scaling them, validating calculations, learning flavor profiles, and similar tasks all make you think about the structure and format of the recipe. However, when you reach the point when you want to create your own new recipes, or create a substantially different variation of an existing recipe, then you’ll need to start applying some additional skills. This is true learning-by-doing, and cannot be forced or learned solely by reading. In this section, I explore how to approach this skill development and provide some recommendations based on what I do (and how I learned).

There is some additional background material in appendices that might be useful when working with recipe formulation.
Appendix A
includes basic beer math, the common equations you’ll need to
understand to work with recipes, and examples on how to use them.
Appendix B
describes how to work with recipe software, and how to select software to best support your needs.
Appendix C
discusses how recipes can be converted to use malt extract as a fermentable, and the special issues that extract brewers face when dealing with recipes.

Conceptualizing Recipes
– When I start thinking about a new recipe, whether it is completely new or a major variation of an existing recipe, I don’t rush to entering data into recipe software. I tend to start organizing my thoughts first before turning to any automated tools.

I use recipe software to support my recipe development, but mostly in the revising and refining phase. It’s useful to know how to perform common calculations by hand, or to quickly validate the output of recipe software using rough approximations. It’s equally helpful to know how to quickly use brewing calculators to automate otherwise tedious calculations you might need to make in the course of brewing.