Is brewing an art or a science?

Definitely magic or witch craft.

 

Agreed. A bit of both in my mind.

 

When I was homebrewing, I approached brewing from a more artsy standpoint and I used science to make sure that the beer was high quality. As a professional brewer, I definitely approach brewing from a much more scientific standpoint and I use the artsy lessons that I learned as a homebrewer to apply to a crafty recipe development. I would say at this point as a professional brewer, brewing is 85% science and 15% art.

 

Most of those adjustments can be done using Malt/Hops Analysis. I check COA's on every lot of malts I recieve and if I see a difference, I make changes as needed.

 

Yes

 

At what pitching rate will you have the most desirable fermentation profile? How about aeration? Which sugars are fermentable to your chosen strain? Is there enough soluble nitrogen for the yeast? If not, is your malt suitable for a protein rest? If you do so, will there be enough high molecular nitrogen for head retention? At what level of calcium should you have in your mash in order to prevent calcium oxylate from developing in your kegs? How much calcium do you need to ensure your yeast will flocculate at consistent rates? How do you harvest your yeast?

There are approximately 1,000 compounds that are produced in every glass of beer that contribute to flavor. About 900 of those come from fermentation.

 

Question (Curious): After you've done your calculations/analysis and made those changes, do you then do a final taste test of the beer before giving your stamp of approval? And throughout the process of getting to the final product, how often do you use the zwickle to get a sample for evaluation along the way to the final product?

 

okay, I concede. My point was mostly that fermentation occurs in the wild all day, every day. I guess my thought that steering the fermentation was artistic isnt going to hold true.

 

Science can get you very far in this area, but even still, there is always some trial and error. A Goose Island employee told me that they retained final say in what beers were accepted from AB during the first batches. Bottles were shipped overnight back to Goose Island and if the story is to be believed, Goose rejected the first 12,000 bbl produced of Honker's Ale and it was dumped.

I'm sure AB could get out a gas chromatograph or a HPLC and dial in a beer recipe using that info, but at the end of the day, you still need to rely on what your senses tell you.

 

We do taste every batch of beer. Every day, I pull samples and taste along the way. I taste the wort, I taste the malts, I smell the hops, etc. when the beer is complete, I typically have a 2-4 oz. pour. If I think something may be wrong, I'll call in our 12 member tasting panel and do a triangle test. If it passes the tasting panel, the beer goes out. Our tasting panel is still pretty new to us, but we have been reaping the benefits of training them for about 6 months now and the results are evident in our ratings on this site and in sales. We don't have much fancy lab equipment, just a microscope and some other basic tools, but we also send our beers for analysis at a local university on occasion.

 

Yes.

 

Thanks! This is at least one part of the process where I'd say that expertise and educated trial and error become important.

 

Absolutely! There is still the applied part of it here as well... If I taste Diacetyl later into fermentation than normal, what steps do I use to fix it? Same for Acetaldehyde. And then, how will those steps to fix that problem effect the rest of the batch? That is where understanding the science is very important.

 

I wouldn't even make such stark distinctions, if you create something that is held in high enough esteem by a certain grou of people it's art. Just because calculations, certain processes and the likes are involved doesn't rob it of its creative part if you ask me. And that goes for anything, from designing a building to writing a song.

 

Come on people (besides you, mister got-in-there-first @MNAle ).
The thread's only on the first page and you can't bother reading the posts?

 

A great painter can make a beautiful painting that defines an entire period of art. A great scientist can figure out how to take that painting and then print millions of that beautiful painting in the exact quality on a Xerox machine. So, the first batch of any beer is an art, the second batch is where the science takes over.

 

But... if a painting was not held in good esteem by anyone, couldn't it be bad art (and therefore still art).

 

Yes (in answer to the question)

 

Certainly can be, it really depends how you want to define art. I like to think of it as strengthening the case for it being art if it is held in esteem by a certain group of people. This generally not being the case could have multiple reasons, lack of exposure, being "bad" as you noted and a myriad of others I'm too unimaginative to think of right now.

I mean, just like with certain beers where a certain consensus would agree that they are bad doesn't make them any less of a beer. 50 Shades of Grey is still art, even if its merits are debatable.