Expensive Saisons....

The most I think I've spent for a saison is around $13-$15, and that was for Saison-Brett (and worth every penny). Aside from that I find people are generally pretty well able to produce some phenomenal beers for a more nominal price point.

 

Saison - Brett (tank 7 bottled with brettanomyces) is definitely worth the cash, as are many others.

 

This whole thread makes me want to say one thing... I hate Hennepin. Yeah, I said it. Done. Tank 7 is 3x the brew for the same price. I can't stand it. The yeast is cloying and sweet in more of a Tripel way. I'm just not a fan.

 

Ok, ok, the facetiousness didn't need to be laid on quite that thick. Haha. Also, notice how I didn't mention Sofie in my post for the very reason that both that and Matilda have some amount of Brett in them.

 

Casey's Saison is pricier than most, but worth the $. As long as the beer inside the bottle is worth a couple bucks more, I have no problem paying for it.

 

Precisely the reason I used the word "arguably."

 

Silly of me to not see that coming......

 

Funny you should say that because, when I was writing my post, I was debating between using the word "normal" or "traditional." Traditionally, saisons contained wild yeast because they were left to sit and would inadvertently be inoculated. However, in the past 20 or so years of beer culture's rejuvenation in the US, the typical saison contains no wild yeast so the words "traditional," "normal," and "authentic" are now gray areas when talking about this style...which in fact is one of those ambiguous styles that can contain a very broad range of flavors anyway, if you really wanna get into it.

 

Are you saying open fermentation is the same thing as intentional inoculation? I'll get into it. I've got nothing to lose

 

SAISON IS DEAD

 

Haha, let's do this. I'm saying that the same wild bacteria (pedio, brett, lacto) occur in open fermentation as well as when some beers are intentionally inoculated to create a tart or sour flavor profile. It's not the exact same thing because when you intentionally inoculate you have more control over which bacteria is used, but you will arrive at some amount of tart/funky every time when you open ferment.

 

I'll jump on Brooklyn Sorachi Ace

 

Yup, I saw your word of "arguably" and in fact I quoted that word in my post.

Needless to say but I am arguing against your blanket statement.

Cheers!

 

Take it easy guys... it's beer. Wait, not only is it delicious... it can be stylized from a marketing standpoint?!? Take a breath & let bygones be bygones.

 

Your last post made me laugh. Very nice.

So let's talk about "quality" then since I do agree with you that one might view quality in a different way than someone else. I'm always reminded of wine when talking about this. I've tasted samples of $40, $50 bottles of Cab and thought very little of them and then had a taste of a $20 bottle of Cab from the same region and thought "why does this one taste so much better while costing so much less?" Someone with a more refined palate for wine might tell me that the more expensive bottles are of a higher quality for whatever reason; reasons that I probably won't ever understand. So many times I've much preferred the cheaper glass of wine I ordered to a more expensive glass of wine a friend at the table let me try when it's the same varietal. It's all a mystery to me so, yeah, I can relate to one's perception of quality being skewed one way or the other due to certain factors. For instance, how many times have we heard from brewers that the macro light beers are of such a high quality due to how difficult they are to produce and do so consistently? It's all relative I guess.

 

Open fermentation can be done two ways.

Sierra Nevada currently uses open fermentation for Bigfoot:



but the beer does not become infected with airborne wild yeast because they also maintain positive pressure, reducing the risk of "contamination" by wild yeast to virtually zero.

So open fermentation does not necessarily translate to spontaneous fermentation as with what happens when using a koolschip exposed to the night air and then using the cooled beer to fill barrels (which will have residual "infection" in the pores from Brett and the associated bacteria) for aging, etc.

 

Thank you. I knew as I was writing my post that there had to be some exception. I wonder how they ensure that only saccharomyces comes in contact with the beer though. Or is there no yeast present in the air inside the room? And then, if so, what's the point?

 

Apparently the sealed room under positive pressure. Notice in the video that when some guy opens the door, under positive pressure air would go rushing out of the room blowing any thing airborne away from the room.

 

Having a high pitching rate is essential with a short lag time; by the time that the wort starts fermenting then any other wild yeasts in the air won't be able to get a foothold.

 

Ok, so they pitch with Sacch and then the positive pressure prevents anything else from getting in, ensuring that there's no yeast present in the room. Which still leaves me asking, what's the benefit of putting it in an open room in the first place? (sorry drtth, I edited my post to ask that question shortly after and I guess you'd already responded)