Author: Marshall Schott

I learned of first wort hopping years ago when someone on a homebrewing forum claimed it was a method used by German brewers as a way to retain aromatics from hops despite their presence throughout the entire boil. This sounded bogus to me, but given how easy the method was, I gave it try, didn’t notice any detriment to my beers, and began swapping out nearly all of my bittering additions with first wort hop additions. Anecdotally, I didn’t notice much of a qualitative impact from this method, so I decided to put it to the test and had a bunch of 2015 National Homebrewers Conference attendees participate. The results from that xBmt validated my experience, the beers were largely indistinguishable, though I’ve continued using the method as a way to eliminate the volcanic eruption that often occurs when adding the first dose of hops to boiling wort.

Since a single data point does not a principle make, and given my regular use of first wort hopping, I figured it was time to revisit this variable. Coincidentally, For The Love Of Hops author, Stan Hieronymus, published a fantastic blog post on this very topic while my beers were being made. After acknowledging that his prior suggestion to first wort hop in order to impart a “finer” bitterness was largely based on anecdotal evidence, he reported on new research from Oregon State University that aligned nicely with our 2015 xBmt– participants could not distinguish a first wort hopped beer from one brewed with a standard 60 minute kettle hop addition. Stan went on to discuss the history of first wort hopping as well as other fascinating aspects of the technique, which made me all the more interested to see how my second attempt would turn out!

| PURPOSE |

To evaluate the differences between a beer brewed using the first wort hop method and the same beer made with a standard 60 minute bittering addition.

| METHODS |

In an attempt to isolate the variable as much as possible, I designed a very simple beer with but a single hop addition.

Grendel

Recipe Details Batch Size Boil Time IBU SRM Est. OG Est. FG ABV 5.5 gal 60 min 25.4 IBUs 3.4 SRM 1.052 1.013 5.1 % Actuals 1.052 1.008 5.8 % Fermentables Name Amount % Pilsner (Weyermann) 9 lbs 85.71 Vienna Malt (Weyermann) 1.5 lbs 14.29 Hops Name Amount Time Use Form Alpha % Hallertauer Mittelfrueh 80 g 60 min First Wort Pellet 2.4 Yeast Name Lab Attenuation Temperature Urkel (L28) Imperial Yeast 73% 52°F - 58°F Notes Water Profile: Yellow Balanced in Bru’n Water Spreadsheet Download Download this recipe's BeerXML file

I made a starter of Imperial Organic Yeast L28 Urkel 2 days ahead of time.

The night prior to brewing, I weighed out and milled the grain for a 10 gallon batch.

I then collected the full volume of brewing liquor, which I ran through a carbon filter.

I adjusted the water to my desired profile using gypsum, calcium chloride, and lactic acid.

Finally, I dropped my heat stick into the water and set a timer for it to turn on early the next morning.

I awoke the following morning to water that required mere minutes to reach strike temperature, at which point I stirred in the grist, nearly topping out my 20 gallon mash tun.

Once fully incorporated, I checked to confirm I’d hit my target mash temperature.

A check of the pH 15 minutes into the mash confirmed the prediction made by the Bru’n Water Spreadsheet.

With a few minutes left in the mash, I measured out 2 sets of the same amount of hops, one for each condition.

The hops for the first wort hop batch were placed in one kettle.

When the 60 minute mash rest was completed, I began collecting the sweet wort.

The entire volume of sweet wort was initially placed in an empty kettle where I gently stirred to ensure homogeneity before transferring half to the kettle containing the first wort hop addition. I lit the flame under the first wort hop kettle first, allowing it to come to a boil before proceeding with the batch that would receive a standard 60 minute bittering addition.

Once the second batch reached a boil, I poured in the single hop addition.

The worts were boiled for an hour after which I quickly chilled each to slightly warmer than my groundwater temperature.

Hydrometer measurements at this point revealed both were sitting at the same predicted OG.

Each batch of wort was racked to separate identical fermentors.

I placed the the Brew Buckets in my fermentation chamber and left them alone to finish chilling. Approximately 6 hours later, both worts had stabilized at my desired fermentation temperature of 50°F/10°C, so split the yeast evenly between the batches. At 12 days post-pitch, fermentation activity nearly absent, I bumped the controller to 60°F/16°C to encourage complete attenuation and clean up of any off-flavors. The beers were left alone for another week before I took hydrometer measurments confirming FG had been reached in both.

I knocked the temperature down to 32°F/0°C for cold crashing, fined with gelatin, racked the beer to kegs, then placed both in my keezer to lager for an additional 2 weeks while carbonating. When it came time to collect data, they looked similarly clear and bubbly.

| RESULTS |

A total of 21 people of varying levels of experience participated in this xBmt. Each participant was served 1 sample of the first wort hop beer and 2 samples of the beer made with a standard 60 minute bittering addition then asked to identify the sample that was unique. Given the sample size, 12 tasters (p<0.05) would have had to select the unique sample to reach statistical significance, though only 7 (p=0.58) made the correct selection, exactly the amount expected by random guessing alone. These results suggest participants were unable to reliably distinguish a beer made with the first wort hop method from one made with a standard 60 minute bittering addition.

Lab Data

Curious as to impact first wort hopping had on bitterness level, I sent samples of each beer to Oregon Brew Lab for IBU analysis, something we didn’t do in the first iteration of this xBmt. While I wasn’t convinced the predicted IBU would perfectly match lab measurements, I have to admit I was pretty shocked with the ultimate discrepancy, even considering the ±0.5 margin of error.

Tinseth Formula Rager Formula Garetz Formula Measured First Wort Hop 25.6 30.6 25.6 15.5 60 Minute 23.3 27.8 23.3 13.5

My Impressions: Out of the 6 blind triangle tests I attempted, all of which I fully admit boiled down to me simply guessing which sample was different, I was correct twice. I didn’t perceive either beer as being characteristically different than the other in terms of bitterness quality, aroma, flavor, or mouthfeel. While both were very clean and surprisingly crushable, they possessed a character I’ve come to expect in beers brewed with a large portion of Weyermann’s Barke malts, a flavor reminiscent of white grape skin. Not offensive by any means, in fact my neighbors couldn’t get enough of this beer, but definitely not my preference… I won’t be upset once I’ve used up all the Barke malt in my brewery.

| DISCUSSION |

As Stan Hieronymus discusses in his recently published article, brewers have been lauding the practice of first wort hopping for its ability to impart a qualitatively different bitterness while also retaining unique aromatic characteristics that are expressed in the finished beer. Given the wonderful accounts from trusted authorities, professional and homebrewers naturally began adopting the method, ultimately producing even more reports of the benefits of first wort hopping as compared to standard 60 minute bittering additions. I’m reminded of a saying:

The plural of anecdote is not data.

Humans are a curious lot, born with incredible perceptual abilities, though forced to rely on idiosyncratic interpretations of that which enters our perceptual organs. Given the flimsiness of system, what we sense is often biased by expectation, which is hugely influenced by those we view as trustworthy. I can’t help but consider this reality when it comes to first wort hopping, a method seemingly built only of anecdote and conjecture. With nothing more than hypothesis as to how adding hops to wort prior to boiling actually impacts beer characteristics, the results of this xBmt along with findings from various other experiments leave me even more convinced the only benefit to first wort hopping is that it reduces the likelihood of a boil over. This, admittedly, is the only reason I’ll continue doing it.

The most interesting thing about these findings to me is the discrepancy between the predicted IBU in BeerSmith and the lab measurements showing that regardless of the formula used, the actual bitterness was nearly 10 IBU less than expected. While I’m not convinced the IBU is necessarily a lie, the commonly used formulas certainly would seem to be a less-than-accurate measure of a beer’s actual bitterness.

If you have thoughts about this xBmt, please share them in the comments section below!

Support Brülosophy In Style!

All designs are available in various colors and sizes on Amazon!

Follow Brülosophy on:

If you enjoy this stuff and feel compelled to support Brulosophy.com, please check out the Support Us page for details on how you can very easily do so. Thanks!

Advertisements

Share this: Facebook

Twitter

Pinterest

Tumblr

Email



Like this: Like Loading...