Thick Stouts vs. Thin Stouts

I haven't had DB Hunahpu or BA Ten Fidy, but compared to a number of other BA Stouts I've had, Parabola is plenty thick.

A big part of a beer's thickness comes down to a beer's OG (original gravity),the % attenuation, and resulting FG (final gravity). The higher the OG, the higher the viscosity -- basically more sugar for the yeast to convert, therefore a denser solution. Depending on the health of your yeast, type of yeast, and conditions of your wort, the level of attenuation can be on the higher end (~85%) or on the lower end (~65%). Lower attenuation = more residual sugar, and therefore a fuller-bodied beer.

I don't know what Black Tuesday's OG or FG is, but looking @ it being a 20% abv beer, I would guess a lot of that sugar has been converted to alcohol, which in turn would make it less viscous.

I'm sure someone smarter can come in here and correct some of the above or add-on, but I'm running out the door so will have to add more later. Cheers!

 

Mash temp and final gravities are going to be the kicker. A thicker stout is going to have more sugars left over that the yeast didn't want to chew on because they are too complicated for them. A drier one they'll attenuate i.e. chew on more of the sugars and leave you with a lower final and a thinner drier body.

 

Parabola...watery?

That's not even one of the first 50 descriptors (good or bad) I would use to describe that beer. Glorious immediately comes to mind.

To answer your question though, when one creates a mash depending on the mash temperature, some sugars in the wort are short chain sugars easily fermented by beer yeast. If you mash lower, more of the wort will be fermentable resulting in a lower potential final gravity (considering yeast health and pitching rate). That beer will seem dryer and thinner. However, if one mashes at a higher temperature, longer chain sugars remain in the wort can't be easily broken down by beer yeast. The resulting beer will seem thicker. Many IPA's are mashed at 148-150. Most stouts are mashed a little higher: 152-155.

Combine that with oats or other specialty grains, CaCl in the water chemistry, dextrose or lactose, and a higher final gravity you can usually end up with a thicker/more viscous beer in the end.

That is the short answer.

However, it's important to note that BCBS finishes at a F.G. of 1.040.; Parabola finishes at a F.G. of 1.035. Only 5 points between the two final beers isn't that much considering the starting gravity and the two beers are quite different in the end. BCBS seems much sweeter, more than the gravity would suggest.

A beer like Parabola that you call thin and watery, I would call perfectly balanced in pretty much every way.

 

I also prefer thicker, creamier stouts. I had a parabola this summer and also thought it was on the thinner side, but not too thin. I find KBS to be about the same in terms of viscosity. Mornin Delight is another good example of a very viscous stout. Mouthfeel is definitely important on stouts, but no the end all. I would imagine the type of malt used would have a lot to do with the thickness in a stout.

 

There has always been a variety of viscosities with Imperial stouts and everyone has their own preference. Just because a particular stout is not your preference doesn't mean there's something wrong with it. Flavor and balance should be a priority and if you like a big thick malt bomb, go for it.

 

I'm gonna be that guy...

I consider thin stouts to be porters, and thick to be stouts. In general, this is what I've found anyway, so I just... keep it that way. I mark down a thin stout like I would a thick porter, as I don't feel like they're true to the style -- based on the majority of others I've had in the style.

That's probably not fair, but it's what I do.

 

Probably true...although I'm curious how much grain they put in their mash tun and how much volume they are able to produce per batch?

 

I think some of it is perception, because my experience with your original examples is very different.

I opened a Huna last week at a share, and it poured super-thin. It had a decently thick, sticky mouthfeel, but still wasn't nearly as thick as the Dark Lord and Darkness we also cracked (though admittedly Dark Lord is basically motor oil).

On the other hand, I thought the Black Tuesday I had earlier this year was reasonably thick (not sure if it makes a difference, but it was a 2014) and my Parabola was a little thin but not egregiously.

Mouthfeel can be a little abstract, so that probably plays a role.

 

Like @SerialTicker said. If I get a stout, especially a IMP Stout and it's thin it might as well be a porter at that point. I like my stouts thick like blood.

 

I like my stouts moderate to thin and carbonated. Along with a mild hop presence.

 

I’ve too always wondered what gave stouts that thick viscosity, as I like them chewy thick.
I agree that BT & Parabola were a bit thin. Not saying they are bad beers.

Here are some that come to mind:
Angry chair (any) these guys kill it when it comes to mouthfeel. Grab a spoon lol
Dark Lord (and all variants) and Black Flame
Assassin (sure other TG stouts as well)
Hill Farmstead Beyond Good and Evil
BCBS

 

Angry Chair does amazing stouts... Can't wait to stop back there when in Florida again!

 

Ugh. When I was in Tampa earlier this year they had just released their German chocolate cupcake stout, phenomenal.

 

To each his own. The stout vs. porter debate is pretty much useless at this point. BJCP guidelines don't even require black malt or roasted barely in either style. At the end of the day, the requirement of a stout vs. a porter isn't viscosity or mouthfeel; its color. 20-30 srm and it's a porter...anything darker is a stout. That's how they are judged professionally. How you do it for personal notes is up to you. YMMV. Cheers!

 

this is the correct answer. It's all about the final gravity. The higher the final gravity, the more unfermented sugars and proteins that are perceived as "body" to the beer.

http://howtobrew.com/book/section-4/experiment/increasing-the-body

 

Pretty much the reason I think the Weekday beers are almost undrinkable. So so thin.

 

Nice question that has received some good answers. I never knew why some beers of similar style and abv were thicker or thinner. Even More Jesus and Barrel Aged Yeti have been my sweet spot as far as viscosity goes.

I understand what your saying about a RIS being too light, though Parabola didn't quite get there for me. I thought it was slightly lighter than normal, but not thin enough to be a turn off.

 

+1 Not understanding why Parabola is cited as being too thin. It's not as syrupy as BCBS, sure. But I'm not sure why that's a bad thing. It's far more thick than ordinary stouts though.