An interesting parallel

I don't know much about wine, really.  I do like reading some of the discussions about wine, and I've even posted about it too.  The wine writing for Slate I particularly like because Mike Steinberger often right to the heart of debates in the wine world.

The most recent article is here.  I love it because it's so very parallel to debates in the beer world, but it gives me a bit of perspective since I have no particular axes to grind about wine.  His newest article is about the debate over ever-increasing alcohol and fruit-bombiness in wines.  Steinberger's preferences are pretty plain -- enough is enough.  But in the end, his call is for variety instead of limits.  Sure, let the high-alcohol fruit bombs fly, just so long as there are other choices available.

It's a great point and one that is definitely germane in the beer world, where people like me are always carping that "special" beer is often equated with "high alcohol and over the top flavor".  So I end up championing the more subtle, if no less wonderful, beers that I think get overlooked.  But the point should really be about variety -- let's get a range of different flavors on the bar there!

A couple of points:

1. It's very clear in the wine world that the preference for bigger, bolder, more alcoholic has been driven by the Robert Parker palate, and the ratings systems that tend to favor the wines he likes (and thus the bigger, jammier wines).  It's less clear in the beer world, where just don't have any one central voice or palate driving preferences.  It does seem clear that even more democratic, mass-rating sites like Beer Advocate and Rate Beer tend to reward the bigger, bolder beers in the same way though.
2. Steinberg makes the very good point that actually even in blind tastings, even people who think they prefer more restrained wines actually prefer the bigger ones!  That is, wine makers go big because they are rewarded for it in the market.  Again to the beer world: clearly people do go for bigger and bolder.  
3. Is this an effect (see point 2) driven by those first getting into craft beer, as some have suggested, or is it a general preference? I'm not really sure. Another idea though is that it depends not just on palates but on how much.  I see this all the time in judging at homebrew competitions.  Judges too tend to go for bigger and bolder, even within a given style.  I think that's often because they are taking small sips, rather than drinking the beer as they would in a bar.  To me, a perfectly legitimate question is not just "which do I prefer" but "which would I want to have two of?"

Dave's Brew Farm!

Been meaning to go forever.  Very long, trying month or so beforehand.  But Halvo rented a sweet bus for the SPHBC faithful, and off we go.  I can barely stand up from fatigue.  But I managed to snap a few pics, which become sparser as the evening wears on.

Thanks a million to Dave and Pam for hosting us in the LaBrewatory tap room.  Great spot, and great beer.  Here's the day in pictures.

The bus is cool.  Sort of too classy for the Saint Paul Homebrewers, but we'll take it.

It isn't the nicest day as we get started.  On to Wisconsin.

The entrance of the tap room at Dave's BrewFarm.  Everyone's lining up for beers
before the fun begins.  The beer tasting flight is the way to go.

Dave talking about the beers.  Pam looks on with patience. They are really
nice people.

Some of the new equipment.  Dave is getting ready to push his local (ie, in-house)
production a bit this year.  He says he likes the water on site. I have to agree.

Two growlers to go for me.  The single-hop lager with Perle was great.  I took the Harukazi
on faith since it wasn't one of the tasting flight beers.  Really nice, like many of the BrewFarm
beers it was Belgian-y without being over the top.

Let's capture the moment in pictures.  Best SPHBC president ever.

Open fermenting lager

An actual brewing post!

I've been experimenting a bit lately with open-fermenting lagers. It was a suggestion from Kris (lately of PDBC) that I thought I would try.  He's right, many of the classic German lager beer producers historically did open fermentation in lined tanks. Some still do. Not that I'm an expert, but many have told me this, and New Brewing Lager Beer has a few good passages on it. Good enough to try even though it goes so strongly against the "keep it closed, keep it clean" mentality that's been hammered into my head.

Very simple open fermenting.  Just skim the head.

While I don't have lined tanks, I do have a handy plastic fermentation bucket which fits just about as well in my beer fridge as my glass carboys do.  Just put the lid on loosely without locking it down, and let it ferment nicely during primary before transferring to glass for the longer, colder secondary stage.

What does this do?  I suppose it allows theoretically for better uptake of oxygen during the aerobic phase of yeast growth and development.  But to my mind really the key is that it allows easy access to skim the foam head and braunhefe that develops daily during the very active, high krausen phase of fermentation.

And why does that matter?  Well, try some.  Seriously.   Intensely unpleasant, mouth-coating, lingering bitterness from hop residues accumulate in that head.  What I do is sanitize a long-handled stainless spoon in Star-San, then just skim off this very thick head about once a day during active fermentation.  (By the way, braunhefe refers to the brown-tinged scum that comes up as well -- you can see it in the picture.  The brown color apparently comes from degenerated yeast cells.  The color gets less and less pronounced each day, but the head remains quite bitter.)

And the result?  I have to try it a few more times before I'm ready to have a firm opinion.  At least, I'm convinced of the importance of skimming the very bitter head from my lighter, more delicate lagers.  So far, the helles shown in the picture (now lagering happily) is really good.  If anything, the schwarzbier I made before that might be too clean though.  This technique does seem to reduce overall perceived bitterness in the finished product, and I have yet to nail my adjustments for that.

Good beers cheap: Grimbergen

Trip to Dave's BrewFarm this weekend.  So much fun, even though I was running absolutely on empty from the start.  By the end, the only thing keeping me up was the accordion player behind my chair at the German restaurant... but that's a story for another post.

A second in an occasional series that I always meant to be a little less occasional.... And I've been meaning to do this one for some time too.  One thing that beer nyerds -- excuse me, craft beer afficionados -- tend to fetishize is the Trappist style of beers.  There's the great photos in the brewing books of Rochefort's grand cathedral of a brewhouse, the pictures of monk-robe clad brewers there and at Westvleteren.  And of course the history and lore of Westmalle, the crazy deco ruins of Orval, and so forth.

And there is the fact that many of the classic abby styles of beer are very straightforward, simple recipes that are for many homebrewers awful hard to replicate.  It shouldn't be the case, but there it is.  It seems like there's magic in there somewhere.  (I actually think it's just proper yeast handling, but then again I've never made a dubbel that would hold a candle to Westmalle's, so I should talk.)

Hiding out at Thomas Liquor.
Good beer, budget price.

Anyway, three things should be kept in mind.  One is that, gorgeous as they often are, the Trappist appellation doesn't come cheap.  Chimay has wide availability I guess, but pick up a (small, 330 ml) bottle of Rochefort and it's going to cost you.  Less than it did a few years ago admittedly, but it will cost you nonetheless.  Second, while the Trappist beers are produced actually in the brewhouses of the Trappist monasteries, they are often produced by lay brewers rather than the monks themselves.  Third, there is a whole range of often really very nice "abbey" beers that fall in the same style range that are worth trying.

The abbey beers are affiliated, or licensed by, Belgian abbeys -- just not the Trappist ones.  Generally brewed off-site, this takes some of the "magical" aura away from them I guess.  Still, they can be gorgeous.  Maredsous in particular is one of my favorites.

For some reason, it recently hit me that Grimbergen (produced for the Abdij von Grimbergen by Alken-Maes) was becoming widely available around here, and way cheap by Belgian beer standards.  Like about half the price of cheap Trappist.  The Blonde and the Dubbel are the two I see in bottle shops, so I decided to pick them up and give them a formal tasting.  So here with it:

• Grimbergen Blonde (6.7% abv).  Light golden in color, with a dense white head.  Really full carbonation, but not as outrageous as some Belgian beers, and less central to the overall character as with some Belgian blonde beers in particular.  Bouquet is somewhat restrained, slightly fruity and spicy.  It smells a bit like cut apple, with moderate acidity and ester coming through the carbonation.  In flavor, the spiciness comes across as white pepper along with some restrained sweetness from the alcohol.  Full, prickly carbonation.  There's a hint of apple-like pils malt in the flavor too -- almost like a Chardonnay -- and a little hop bite at the end.  The alcohol to me seems a little to forward for a 6.5% beer in this style.  The yeast-derived spiciness is nice but just a touch high and and there's a little harsh, astringent note at the end that mars it.  Overall, a really nice beer, though not outrageously good.  
• Grimbergen Double (6.5% abv).  Very pretty brown with red highlights, and astounding clarity.  Lowish tan head.  It has a sweet malt aroma, with a prominent caramelized sugar character that's classic for the style. Faint hop.  Fruity esters -- fig, plum.  Full carbonation gives way to hop bite and tannin, then a hint of fruity/spicy Belgian yeast character.  In both the flavor and aroma, there's a floral rose petal note and black pepper, both driven up by full carbonation.  The finish seems hoppier than the initial taste -- this is definitely more bitter than some dubbels.  Really good.

Overall, these beers stack up well.  They are not as good as some of the best in the style -- in particular, there's a bit of a harsh tannic bite in both that I don't see in the best examples.  On the other hand, the dubbel in particular I think is still really good, and at about $2.50 in these parts, well worth having around.  Scenario: you're having a party.  You're known as the "beer guy."  Friends expect you to stock impressive beer, but you're unwilling to throw down $6 per bottle for Trappist beers only to see some fools pop the cap and swill from the bottle.  What to do?  Grimbergen, baby.  That's what.