Author: Marshall Schott

First wort hopping (FWH) refers to a brewing practice wherein hops, usually those typically used as aroma additions, are added to the kettle prior to boiling the wort and remain throughout the duration of the boil. It’s a fairly old method that began to regain popularity over the last decade, particularly among homebrewers, due to claims it imparts a smoother bitterness than traditional 60 minute bittering additions while also improving the aromatic hop character of the beer. Curious about these claims, Experimental Homebrewing author, Denny Conn, designed an interesting experiment that ultimately concluded,

…there were eighteen total tasters. Thirteen said they found a difference, but only seven correctly identified which beer was different. Of those seven, five preferred beer B, which was the FWH beer. As you can see, there was no clear consensus. (Experimental Homebrewing, Pg. 205)

Seven of 18 is not statistically significant. In contrast to the smooth bitterness claim, I’ve also heard Jamil Zainasheff say he experienced the FWH beer as actually having harsher bitterness. Oh, the confusion!

I’ve taken to using the FWH method fairly often because, for one, it’s really simple, but it also reduces the risk of the volcanic eruption that can occur when adding hops to boiling wort. Given the paucity of experiments regarding this technique, I decided to do my part and add more data to the pool!

| PURPOSE |

To investigate the qualitative differences between first wort hop and a standard 60 minute bittering addition in 2 otherwise similar beers.

| METHOD |

I knew I wanted the beer for this xBmt to be relatively light, a style that wouldn’t muddy any differences caused by the variable being tested, subtle as they may be. Since there can never be enough pale German lager around, I settled on making a Helles Export with a touch of Gambrinus Honey malt to add some complexity. This would also be my first time using The Yeast Bay’s Franconian Dark Lager yeast. I know, my recipe isn’t dark. I intended on using the new Hessian Pils strain, but it was sold out, and I was sort of curious how Franconian would work in a pale beer anyways.

Honey Helles Export

Batch Size Boil Time IBU SRM OG FG ABV 5.5 gal 60 min 28.3 6 1.050 1.009 5.4 %

Fermentables

Name Amount % Belgian Pils Malt 8.5 lbs 81% Gambrinus Honey Malt 1 lbs 9.5% Gambrinus Vienna Malt 1 lbs 9.5%

Hops

Name Amt/IBU Time Use Form Alpha % Spalter Select ~26.7 IBU (54 g/59 g ) FWH/60 min Boil Pellet 3.1% Spalter Select 14 g/1.7 IBU 15 min Boil Pellet 3.1%

Yeast

Name Lab Attenuation Ferm Temp Franconian Lager Yeast The Yeast Bay 82% 50°F

I purchased 2 vials of yeast from The Yeast Bay and made the same size starter for each batch.

The night before brewing, after harvesting a quart from each for future use, I tossed the flasks in the fridge to crash. The next morning, I was up and at ’em before sunrise. For whatever reason, I didn’t feel like splitting 13 gallons of wort into 2 batches, so I performed 2 separate no sparge mashes using the same ingredients.

Thanks to BeerSmith, hitting the same mash temp on both batches was a no-brainer. My target was actually 152°F/67°C, but I was lazy and let the strike water for the first batch sit in the cooler with the lid open too long. Meh. I compensated for this on the second batch.

While previous experiments have compared FWH to 60 minute additions using that same amount of hops, I thought it would be interesting to match the calculated IBU between each batch. I’m not sure the 5 gram difference is really all that significant either way. The first wort hops were added to an empty kettle then the wort was racked on top and brought to a boil. The 60 minute batch was brought to a boil before the bittering addition was added.

Boiling happened. It was time to chill.

Each carboy was filled with an equal amount of wort then placed in a 50°F/10°C fermentation chamber. Since my groundwater is warm, I was only able to get the wort down to 68°F/20°C, so I let it sit in the cool chamber to finish chilling. About 6 hours later, I returned to 2 carboys of 50°F/10°C wort, into which decanted yeast starters were pitched.

Fermentation kicked-off for both while I was asleep, they looked very similar less than 12 hours after pitching.

Since I brewed these beers 24 days before NHC and planned to collect all of the data there, I used the quick lager profile on my Black Box temperature controller. After 10 days, the temp sitting at 65°F, I took an initial hydrometer reading to discover both beers had reached my target FG.

I kept the beers warm for another 2 days before confirming no SG change. Sensing no diacetyl or other flaws, I cold crashed, fined with gelatin, then transferred to kegs.

Both sat in my keezer on CO2 for 8 days before being bottled for transport to San Diego.

| RESULTS |

Data collection for this xBmt occurred at the same times as the lager fermentation temperature xBmt during NHC. I won’t rehash it all here, but I’d like to reiterate how thankful I am to all the badass folks who contributed their time and tongues to this project.

Thirty-nine people consisting of certified BJCP judges, provisional judges, homebrewers, and experienced craft beer drinkers participated in this xBmt. Given this sample size, statistical significance would be reached if 19 (p<0.05) tasters accurately identified the odd-beer-out. Each taster was blindly presented with 1 sample of the FWH beer and 2 of the 60 minute bittering addition beer then asked to determine the one that was unique. In all, 15 people accurately selected the FWH beer as being different, a number only slightly higher than what might be expected from random guessing. Parsing out the data from certified BJCP judges revealed a similar frequency of correct responses.

Despite failing to reach statistical significance, I’ll share some of the data gleaned from the comparative evaluation completed by all participants who correctly selected the different beer in the triangle test. Please be cautious when interpreting this information, it’s questionable at best.

For aroma, flavor, and mouthfeel, the huge majority of tasters experienced FWH and 60 minute samples to be somewhat similar, with very few reporting them as being either exactly the same or not at all similar. Not a single person commented on any noticeable differences in the aromatic or bitterness characteristics between the beers. When asked about overall preference, 9 tasters endorsed the 60 minute beer and 6 said they preferred the FWH beer. Perhaps the most interesting bit of data from this evaluation came when the nature of the xBmt was revealed and participants were asked to select the beer they thought received the FWH addition– 12 of 15 were right. Huh.

My Impressions: I think I tested this one “blindly” on myself more than any other past xBmt, both at home and while attending the NHC, served by others who chose the beer that was different. I could not reliably distinguish between them, not even close. Given my slight preference for FWH as a convenience factor, I admit to feeling slightly biased toward that beer when pouring my own samples at home, but truthfully, to my palate, the aroma, flavor, mouthfeel, even the perception of bitterness, are all exactly the same. I’ve certainly no plans to discontinue using this method.

| DISCUSSION |

It would appear the results of this xBmt largely corroborate those performed by others in the past. In fact, homebrewer and author Mike Karnowski recently informed me of a very similar experiment he performed in which participants were unable to discern any differences between the samples, and moreover, a lab analysis revealed the beers differed by a single IBU. Given the growing body of evidence demonstrating FWH has a similar impact as standard 60 minute additions in terms of aroma and bitterness, I’m compelled to encourage homebrewers to choose whichever they prefer without worrying too much and, of course, accounting for different boil lengths. But to save face, I won’t. Rather, I recommend testing this out for yourself, as it’s a method highly unlikely to result in a spoiled batch, and as a convenient bonus, it may help you avoid a sticky mess.

If you have any thoughts on 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...