A Good Czech Pilsner

I meant to say the Pilsner beer is fresh/close to bottling date and the hop flavors are still well noticed and haven't faded. Sorry for the wording.

 

I mentioned both points in a later post (see below)... I am just not a fan though. I only hold this against Urquell on a level of personal taste. I brought it up since the OP was wondering about not clicking with the beer either.

 

More to the topic at hand, if I knew how to get that particular and very district flavor that fresh Urquell possesses, I certainly would.

 

To get that Urquell magic, just introduce the threat of modernization to Bierkeller and folks will start worrying that you'll lose your special distinct flavor. I kid of course.

 

This has been a very informative thread. I've never really thought of PU (or other beers) as tasting "buttery/butterscotchy" per se, but given the pattern of beers I do and don't like, together with the fact that I generally dislike chardonnays, I'm guessing that diacetyl might be the culprit nonetheless. I'll have to keep those descriptors in mind next time I have a potential offender.

I did a search for other threads on diacetyl here and there was some great stuff from a couple years back. This one has a lot of good info as well as some interesting links.

https://www.beeradvocate.com/community/threads/diacetyl-beers.195922/

I'm tempted to try the "add imitation butter" to your beer exercise to try and better understand/identify this flavor so I can figure out once and for all if this is a common thread between beers that don't work for me.

 

I'm not a huge Pilsner fan, and this might only be available in CA, but Reality Czech is pretty tasty and I will order it from time to time

 

I personally love both styles. I lean more toward Czech Pils than German, but it honestly depends on what I am in the mood for.

I think it is likely impossible to state your pilsner style preferences based on American examples. Most of the time I cannot tell why they call one "German" and another "Czech", not to mention all of the others just labeled "Pilsner" that we try to squeeze into style guidelines.

I agree with the above posts that state the major style difference is in the malt and not the hops. Czech Pils seem to have a full, soft pilsner malt presence to me. German Pils are drier and leaner. The hops "pop" more in the German style, but to me that is a secondary aspect of the malt and water profile and not so much inherent hop profile differences.

I also appreciate the diacetyl presence in PU. It compliments the malt and hop profile imo.

 

I would think you might be able to get it in NY area possibly, the Von Trapp Bohemian Pils I had recently was really impressive I thought.

 

And don't forget the 'new old' Bohemian Pilsner of Stroh's Bohemian Pilsner that I discussed recently in a New Beer Sunday thread:

Today is Beer History Day!

Well, not officially but…

I am filling in for @cavedave so I am taking this opportunity to unofficially make this “Beer History Day”.

I am going to discuss the past and present of Stroh’s beers but first let me lead in with a story. The first time that I had a Stroh’s beer in my hand was a loooong time ago. I was just a couple of years out of college and I was invited to a Fourth of July picnic/party. One of the beers available there was Stroh’s and since this was the first time I have actually seen this beer I figured I would give it a try. The only thing I really knew about Stroh’s was their advertising slogan of “Fire-brewed” and since at that time I knew nothing of the brewing process I was uncertain what meaning this had. As I was drinking my first can of Stroh’s (and yes I did drink it from the can) I heard some guy at the party loudly exclaim: “Who brought Stroh’s? I hate that beer, it gives me gas!!” I will admit that this statement gave me a bit of pause but I thought to myself: who is this loud mouthed Bozo and what does he know? I am glad to report that I did not suffer any gas issues, well no more than usual.

I am guessing (older) folks who originate from Michigan have a pretty good understanding of Stroh Brewing Company but for the uninitiated (like me) a few details. Stroh Brewing Company was started by Bernhard Stroh in 1850 in Detroit, Michigan so this was one of the early breweries started by German immigrants (e.g. Schlitz – 1849, Miller – 1855). Wikipedia makes the claim that Bernhard Stroh “immediately started producing Bohemian-style pilsner”. Sometime in the 1960s a decision was made to expand distribution of Stoh’s beer and by the late 1970’s: ”By 1978, Stroh's served 17 states when it produced 6.4 million barrels of beer.” In the early 1980’s Stroh Brewing purchased Schaefer Brewing Company which included the Schaefer brewery near Allentown, PA which is reportedly the last large efficient brewery in the US not built by one of the major national brewers. My guess is this was the timeframe when Stroh’s was first made available in my area of Pennsylvania (SEPA). Two years after the Schaefer purchase, they beat out Heileman in the race to buy the failing Schlitz - which leapfrogged Stroh into the #3 brewer in the US (behind only AB and Miller) with 13% of the US market, selling 23.5 m bbl. yr. With Schlitz came 4 modern breweries (CA, TX, NC, TN), with capacities of 3-6 million barrels a year and what would become Schlitz best selling beer for much of its last two decades - the "popular-priced" Old Milwaukee.

In the mid-1990s, Stroh added to its already large brand portfolio (and to its problems) by taking over the failing Heileman, accumulating dozens of more brands and a few more breweries. Well, as with many Regional Breweries all good things must come to an end and Stroh’s sold their brands to Pabst and Miller in 1999. Present day beers with the Stroh’s label are Pabst products brewed at Miller breweries via contract brewing.

But wait, there is more!

In August 2016, a brewery in Detroit's Corktown neighborhood called Brew Detroit began brewing batches of Stroh's Bohemian-Style Pilsner beer. And this brings us to today’s beer: Stroh’s Bohemian-Style Pilsner.

On the back label of the bottle is the following story:

“Established in 1850, the Stroh Brewing Co. is proud to honor our brewing heritage by reintroducing Stroh’s Bohemian-Style Pilsner. Our Master Brewer has crafted an exceptional European-style pilsner in the heart of Detroit, using Saaz and Magnum hops with Vienna Malt. The result is a crisp, balanced pilsner with a floral aroma, subtle hop spice, and a rich, bready maltiness. Brewed for everyday enjoyment, this is a Bohemian-Style Pilsner worthy of the Stroh’s name.”

Well, I will frankly admit that this has me salivating but can a small brewery in Detroit suitably create a beer like Bernhard Stroh brewed in 1850? We shall see.

Served in a new Christmas present – Firestone Walker Pivo Pils glass

Appearance:

A nice medium golden color with a BIG rocky white head. Nice Belgian Lace as the beer is consumed.

Aroma:

The first smell that I perceive is Pilsner Malt aroma (sweet-ish & cracker/biscuit like) and in the background is some herbal/spicy hop aromas.

Taste:

The flavor for the most part follows the nose. The Pilsner Malt flavors are there but there is more here from a malt flavor perspective; there is a depth of malt flavor which I presume is from a judicious addition of Vienna Malt to the grain bill. The hop flavors of herbal/spicy is more prominent resulting is a pleasing balance of the malt and hop flavors. There is a firm bitterness.

Mouthfeel:

Medium bodied with a pleasant dry-ish finish.

Overall:

This is a very tasty Bohemian Pilsner beer. I found the balance of malt and hop flavors to be an excellent feature of this beer. When I was finished I very, very much wanted a second Stroh’s Bohemian-Style Pilsner.

I have no absolute way of knowing but I strongly suspect that Bernhard Stroh would be very proud of this rendition of his beer and would be very happy seeing his name on the label.


I have two other new Pilsners in my existing inventory and I have another locally produced Pilsner ‘on my radar screen’ for purchase. Stay tuned!!

Please discuss your chosen beer with us today and if you have some history to share with us please do so.

Cheers!

 

Jack, you probably know that the "fire brewed" on Stroh's label had to do with the direct fired copper kettles they had in the old Detroit brewery. Stroh's was a little darker due to more Maillard reactions in the direct fired kettles vs. steam heated kettles used by other US Brewers. Picture at the top of the linked article, which covers the demise of Stroh's.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kerryad...private-beer-fortune-in-the-u-s/#2ff140c01ede

 

I would love to sit and have beers with BAs who understand the science behind the beer. I don't at all. I'm not particularly sensitive to small flaws at least to the degree of what's causing it. I'm as simpe as I like or I don't like, I like X better than Y , but I couldn't tell you why. It's one reason I put such a high priority in fresh, it's the way it was meant to drink, and I certainly don't believe any beer is just as good 5-6 weeks in the can or bottle vs fresh.

 

My posts about this haven't been too popular on here in the past. I had a bottle of Pilsner Urquell while at Doemens as part of our styles training. The level of diacetyl in that bottle was very high. To me, it was undrinkable. I had PU in Chicago just a few weeks before, so I at least had some frame of reference. The beer in Chicago had a noticeable level of diacetyl that I assume most people would be OK with. Being sensitive to diacetyl, I don't like any contribution of diacetyl in any beer that I've tried (although, I do find it less offensive in some sours, I still don't prefer it). What our class was told that day was that Pilsner Urquell did taste tests on European beer drinkers and found that they preferred more diacetyl. As a result, they were working to increase the level of diacetyl in their beer. The belief was that the diacetyl acted to balance out the hops. I wouldn't be surprised if there is an intentional difference in PU in America vs PU in Europe.

As for Czech vs. German, I prefer German and I love to brew German style pils. My favorite by far was Augustiner which I'm told is actually a hopbursted Pilsener brewed with Mittlefreuh. At my last brewery, we brewed a similar recipe with a different blend of German hops that were all added to the whirlpool with a target of 33 IBU. Many people know that German brewers are pretty opinionated about the proper way to brew German beer and 33 IBU was the number that was quoted as being the perfect level by a few of my professors. Although many people say that diacetyl is acceptable in Czech pilsners and not in German pils, I would estimate that about 1/3rd of the German Pilseners I drank in Germany had noticeable levels of diacetyl, although none of them approached anywhere near the level that I tasted in Urquell.

Edited to Add:

I've never brewed a beer that I tried to encourage any level of diacetyl, but I'd imagine that it is much easier to brew beer with a level of diacetyl below the threshold level than it is to brew a beer with a specific amount of diacetyl. Any small variance in the amount of diacetyl could be perceived as an enormous difference. I find it very impressive when breweries that do try to encourage small amounts of diacetyl are able to do so consistently.

 

No argument to what you said, but the unfiltered unpasteurized PU from the tanks had no Diacetyl. A friend who had been to PU about 1+ years before said he got no Diacetyl from that, and he is hypersensitive. I have read that the Czech drinking population does not view Diacetyl as a flaw, and if PU increases the level i the production PU, then the sales go up.

 

I'd be curious to know at which point they sample the beer from the tanks. A few years ago, I had to dump a few batches of pale ale as they developed diacetyl after a few days in kegs. In my experience, diacetyl in the fermenter is only noticeable for a very brief time period. However, if not all the precursor is converted into diacetyl, the yeast can't clean it back up and then the precursor can be converted at a later date.

 

My opinion is that the unfiltered unpasteurized PU has enough yeast left in suspension to clean up the diacytal. The lagering tanks are pitch lined wood, so the pitch keeps O2 out. The precursor must be oxydised to form Diacetyl, and once turned to Diacetyl, the yeast will re absorb it.

For the production PU, they crash and filter the yeast.

 

Interesting. I guess for some reason I assumed that everything they sold in Europe was unfiltered and unpasteurized and what was shipped to the U.S. was pasteurized.

 

Is there a place in NYC that still does the various Urquell pours?

 

The unfiltered unpasteurized is only on the tour of the brewery, and a few pubs in Pilsen.

 

I wish there was a Gordon Bierch near me, their Czech Pils is outstanding, and pretty cheap too for the win. I hate that Old Mecklenburg pulled back to Charlotte only, but their beers are impressive across their line. That lady one alone would simplify my beer buying decesions.

 

Jeff.

Unpasteurized and unfiltered PU occasionally makes its way to the US. A beer bar near me had a batch a few months ago but unfortunately I missed it.

Below is a link from another ‘release’ of this beer in the US:

https://www.craftbrewingbusiness.co...rare-unfiltered-unpasteurized-pilsner-urquel/

Cheers!