Let's Give Lagers Some Love (2025)

@LAFreeway - Had to did this up, as I know Chris purposedly goes out of his way to minimize the impact per ‘the American consumers’ perspective’. However, he himself has a high ‘diacetyl’ threshold. So…

Sources:

• Notch Brewing (2021) | Page 49 | Community | BeerAdvocate
• Round Two-Notch-Brew Roots

 

Thank you so much, I spent a bunch of time wading through all of Chris’s post on here, couldn’t find exactly what I thought I’d heard, but I believe it was this podcast, not a post on BA that I was remembering. I’m looking forward to listening to that a little later.

 

Speaking of Live Oak i picked up a Fonta Flora/Live Oak colab Friday afternoon, very good!
Cheers!
Tom

 

Interesting question, from a historical perspective, and how lagering might influence the final product.

I bet some folks may have experience with batches (of any beer) that were half lagered and half not. Although perceptions may drift with the time lag between sampling, so it really should be done by someone with a good track record of consistency, then the comparison between the “freshly” lagered and freshly brewed could be compared side-by-side.

 

Top fermentation with specific strains and then more fermentation after packaging for carb. I’ve never heard of commercial brewers lagering it historically.

Modern home brewers used to use “German ale” yeast for it before yeast suppliers starting carrying Grodziskie yeast. The tendency towards this probably had to do with a desire for low ester producing yeast and cultural synergy.

My theory is that the idea of calling these beers “lagers” is due to Live Oak being the American torch bearer of the style. They use their house lager yeast with a Grodziskie yeast strain to produce it (due to a historic method of using two strains). They seem to market it as being a bit lager-like and they are probably the brewer that others want to collaborate with the most when producing a Grodziskie.

I also think there’s a bad tendency to steamroll consideration of all beers from that part of the world as “lagers” from a modern beer geek perspective.

 

Steve,
It was a dilemma as to what thread to post to after @zid commented on my first Grodziskie brew from Terra Nova and reading the Live Oak Grodziskie description. Going forward i'll post any of my rare Grodziskie samplings in the Smoked Beer thread as the Germans no longer control Poland
Cheers!
Tom

 

This type of beer originated in the Polish town Grodzisk… which has been called Grätz in German. The beer has therefore been called both Grodziskie and Grätzer. The beer was brewed in areas of modern day Poland and northern Germany. The area was part of the Prussian Empire. You’d have to go to someone with greater understanding of this history for better info.

I have the feeling that the beer was potentially more commonly called Grätzer in earlier craft days until sensitivities wanted to celebrate its Polish heritage more and distance it from WWII German aggression. These days it would be strange to see the word Grätzer and some might be bothered if such beers were included in a “German beer” thread.

If you dive more into the style, you’ll also encounter lots of talk about it being sour or not. Those earlier craft days also had people thinking it was a sour beer. Work from Pattinson helped to change that belief.

@CarolinaCardinals

 

Appreciate it @zid. Within the last year or so i read James Michener's Poland; great read but i wish he expanded his extraordinary research skills to have included the beer history. I can see Michener factionalizing this around a BA thread.
Cheers!
Tom

 

Drekker That's A Real Nice Ski Mask Dark Lager (Schwarzbier), 5.1% ABV. Pours deep brown/black with a four-finger light-brown head that left abundant lacing. Aroma is roast malt and slight chocolate. Taste is roast malt, moderately bitter. Decent mouthfeel if a bit dry, overall very good.

3.87/5 rDev +1.6%
look: 4.25 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.75 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.75

Maybe since it looks like a stout I was subconsciously expecting it to taste like one.

 

It’s the diacetyl.
Seriously. The biggest difference between PU and similar pilsners available in the US is the diacetyl - which brings more complexity to the beer. At least for me.

 

BUD LIGHT vs PILSNER URQUELL

0.2% difference in alcohol content but even with a volume of about 7% less (11.2 / 12 ounces) the bottle of Pilsner Urquell has more than twice as many carbs, double the protein and is 27% higher in calories. There's just more "stuff" (so to speak) left in PU after fermentation.

Anybody got accurate OG and FG for the two?

 

I believe Urquell is a 12° pils (1048) so that should put the final gravity at 1.1014, I think I’ve seen those same numbers on homebrew “clone” recipes. That relatively high FG for a 4.4% beer seems to be hard for a lot of breweries and they end up around 1.010 and 5% ABV.

I’d bet .1037 & .1005 for a 4.2% Bud Light, I have a hydrometer (somewhere), but no Bud Light.

 

Spring! May! Malt!

 

Pretty close (presuming you meant 1.014 for the FG). From a table in the below linked article: Pilsner Urquell has an OG of 1.048 and a FG of 1.015.

For comparison Budweiser has an OG of 1.045 and a FG of 1.009.

https://www.morebeer.com/articles/Pilsner_Urquell

Pilsner Urquell via a number of brewing process choices creates a wort that is not very fermentable. One choice is to purchase barley from the region of Moravia (Czecg Republic) and produce their own malt, and they choose to produce undermodified malt consistent with their mashing procedure. And as regards mashing, they choose to conduct a triple decoction mash (details below) and during the decoction mashing regime a portion of the malt along with wort is boiled and the boiling denatures enzymes of the decocted malt which impacts conversion (i.e., a higher final gravity).

For the case of producing Pilsner Urquell a triple decoction process is employed to conduct a mash of varying temperature steps:

• The mash (malt & water) is first brought to a temperature of 95 °F and then sits for about 20 minutes; this is referred to as an acid rest.
• A portion of the liquid and some malt is extracted from the mash, brought to saccharification temperature for 20 minutes and then boiled
• This boiled portion is returned to the mash vessel bringing the temperature in the vessel to127 °F. This is permitted to sit for about 30 – 45 minutes. This is a protein rest which activates proteinase and peptidase enzymes.
• A second portion of liquid and some malt is extracted and boiled.
• This boiled portion is returned to the mash vessel bringing the temperature in the vessel to 143 °F. This is permitted to sit for about 30 – 45 minutes. This is the saccharification rest which activates the Beta-amylase enzyme and to a lesser degrees the Alpha-amylase enzyme.
• A third portion of liquid and some malt is extracted and boiled.
• This boiled portion is returned to the mash vessel bringing the temperature in the vessel to 163 °F. This is permitted to sit for about 10 – 15 minutes. This final step is referred to as the mash out.

https://www.morebeer.com/articles/Pilsen_Beer

Na Zdravi