Planning some Belgian beers

Of course each one has different tastes, so what's the "best beer in the World" for someone could be an OK beer for another. I personally do not enjoy St. Bernardus Abt 12 and FAR prefer Westvleteren. However, I do like some of the other beers made by St. Bernardus such as Pater 6, a much less strong beer. I don't rank Westvleteren as a (not "the") top beer because of all the hype, but because the taste really does appeal to me. I make my own clone, so have access to it often.

I disagree that the sugar is the same as what others use. This is not totally based on opinion but on discussions by one of the people who are part of Candi-Syrup Inc. See the following FAQ page, which will provide information on the various candi-syrups better than I could:

http://www.candisyrup.com/faq.html


See especially: "How can CSI's syrups actually be better than imported candi syrups?"

Still in doubt?

Here is a list of over FIFTY clone recipes that Candi-Syrup has actually tested their product on:

http://www.candisyrup.com/recipes.html

Some excellent recipes here that you can download, BTW.

Please read their webpage for much more information, testimonials, etc. BTW I have no affiliation with this company. I just know from making the clone that the taste is incredibly close to the actual product, and based on a discussion far too long to include here, that there is indeed significant differences between commercial candi-syrups.

Don't rely on my opinions - try it for yourself. Compare two samples - one made from one company, and another made by Candi-syrup.

 

If you want to read his actual comments, go to:

http://www.homebrewtalk.com/showthread.php?t=500037

There are 719 messages in the forum, which would take me far too long to summarize here. I'd rather be making beer

This is actually the second of two forums where he provided comments on the candi-syrup. If you want more, there are 2,268 additional messages you can wade through here:

http://www.homebrewtalk.com/showthread.php?t=500037

As a participant, I've read every single message in both forums (except for maybe a few near the very end).

He goes by the name "CSI", the initials of his company.

 

I don't have an opinion one way or the other, but I'm following this thread, and nothing in that FAQ says anything about what specific sugars/syrups are used by Westvleteren, St. Bernardus, or any brewer.

 

It doesn't matter what the monks use. D-180 makes an authentic dark Belgian. If Rochefort uses Brun Fonce as Northern Brewer alleges, there are no indications of how they use it. Rochefort allegedly uses white and dark sugars. It's quite possible they use these sugars to make their own syrup. The Candi Syrup people sell Brun Fonce, but use 2# of D-180 for Rochefort 8.

The Trappist breweries were using candi syrups long before the American Candi Syrup company existed. It's highly unlikely they are buying from CSI. They do make a good product, though.

 

I already mentioned that the specific syrups used by Westvleteren, etc. are totally secret. Apparently, they make their own, or get it from an unidentified source. The best that any candi-syrup maker do is perform multiple experiments and taste testing to come up with as many of the subtleties as can be detected. Then try it out on clone recipes - which they did.

 

So it seems kind of silly to make statements about one using a different syrup than another, IMO. If someone knew everything about the recipes and processes except for the sugar used, then I suppose testing clones might get you close to knowing what the sugars must be like. But that's not the case.

I think it's great if someone can make something they think is close to Westvleteren 12 or whatever, but that proves nothing about one particular ingredient, other than it seems to work in the context of the rest of the guessed-at recipe.

 

Maybe this quote by the partner might help somewhat: "Most kitchen syrup recipes create a fairly large list of unacceptable acids in the process due to shortcut chemical additives. The equipment required to coax the correct flavors out of beet sugar and the multiple physical processes required to do it are not something that can be done in a kitchen. I know the web is filled with recipes for these syrups (some are really questionable). Years ago we also thought making Candi Syrup was a simple proposition and followed some of the same ideas. Brew trials proved out what was workable and what was not. None of the stove top syrup recipes were acceptable by our standards. Creating a syrup of sorts isn't that difficult but creating a real old world Candi Syrup is a different set of challenges. Most kitchen syrup recipes can be created in 30-45 minutes. A genuine Candi Syrup takes a minimum of 3 days to create and finish. It's time consuming. It isn't as simple as boiling sugar on a resistance burner and tossing in some chemicals. I've bumped up against my NDA to say this much but some clarity is really needed on this because of all the mis-information out there. I'm not trying to discourage anyone from making their own kitchen syrups but wanted to clarify expectations."

Also:

"We use three variants to baseline. The Dark Candi D and D2, the Dutch Kandij Sirop, (from Kandico), and Sirop Kandi, (an off Belgian import). The Dutch has the highest percentage of Maillard compounds and is richest in flavor and results in the best Ale of the imports. Our D180 exceeds the Kandij Sirop in flavor and Maillard compound density."

And

"Just as an insight from our tests, Randy Mosher's recipe is not an authentic, (nor a close approximation), Candi Syrup. Early on, we tried his and other permutations on the web and in print. All fail to match "authentic" Candi Syrup based on our testing throughout our due diligence to baseline the recipe(s). If you read the entire thread on this subject you'll note one of our partners is a food chemist. We've been trialing methods and materials for just over a year and have duplicated, (and in the opinion of some more than exceeded), the quality of the import syrups. Refined or unrefined sugars from Jaggary to Turbinado to Demerara, Beet, Cane, make no difference whatsoever. The complexity does not originate in the level of refined sucrose or lack of it or the origin of the sucrose, (Beet or Cane). If you are after a "rummy" affect then just use Sorghum. It's cheaper. If you're after something a little more complex then you'll need to use a more complex syrup. I believe brewers want the very best result from a Belgian Ale recipe. If you're interested in quality syrups and the science behind them you may look at the following volumes to give you a more empirical perspective on food flavor, especially the sections on sugars:

- Fenaroli's Handbook of Flavor Ingredients, Sixth Edition by George A. Burdock
- Flavor Chemistry and Technology, Second Edition by Gary Reineccius

The recipes, concepts, and materials you mention above sum up what we have affectionately come to know as the "Candi Syrup Myths". It has accumulated over many years and is propagated in many publications and is mostly wrong. I have always suspected the syrup makers and dealers of seeding the myths but there is no way of knowing the single point of origin. It does make for interesting and humorous reading. My favorite is that Candi Syrup is the "byproduct of the candy making process" and there is still one manufacturer in Holland still plunking this on their web site. I think the discussion based on "there is no definition" is yet another in a long list of deflections and myth and is a diversion from a more studied approach. Out of curiosity what methods are you using to measure "authentic" v. "inauthentic" in modern Candi Syrups?

We've taken the time and legal expense to patent our process. We also no longer use imports in our most expensive clones. They are simply inferior. This represents our own practice in brewing. We use only the best products for Belgian Ales. Our products will easily market themselves. In the years ahead we will see how this goes. Te market will determine what makes a better ale."

And:

"We have produced an exact replica of D2 and are quickly exceeding the import quality in our testing. These 'superior' syrups have more intense and fresh flavors than the imports using natural ingredients and methods. What we can tell you is that the "candy making by-product" description for Candi Syrups is probably a ruse. It's been a year in the making and close to 800 lbs of sugar trials, but well worth it."

And:

"Based on the 2 W12's I've evaluated, I have reservations about the syrup ingredient being common "Belgian Candi Syrup" as distributed here in the US. I have always found the flavor profile notably off with both D and D2 syrups. Many have tried and failed but maybe its time to try another approach to "authentic" Belgian Abbey syrups?"

I could go on and on, but that should be enough.

 

^ That's all interesting. But I don't see how it supports your claim that Belgian Brewer A uses a different sugar than Belgian Brewer B.

 

Just use common sense then. One brewing company/monastery is not going to reveal its secret process on making candi-syrup to another (some Belgian breweries don't even use syrup).

Would Coca-Cola reveal it's secret formula to Pepsi?

 

Common sense says that when a brewer takes his recipes from one brewery to another, he might just know what the old brewery's recipes look like.

 

1836 - Monks at Westmalle begin brewing.
1839 - Brewing begins at Westvleteren, established as a monastery five years earlier.
1844 - Monks from Westmalle start a monastery at Achel, and brewing begins in 1852.
1850 - Monks from Westvleteren found the abbey at Chimay, and in 1862 start brewing beer and selling it to the surrounding community.
1899 - Rochefort resumes the sale of spirits in bars and other public places, helping create demand for stronger beers.
1922 - Westmalle begins using a dark sugar syrup (also called "candisyrup) in Westmalle Dubbel, making it the beer stronger without bloatin gits body.
1932 - Orval, rebuilt in 1926, resumes brewing with a brand new recipe.
1934 - Westmalle completes construction of a modern brewery, begins selling Westmalle Tripel, the first pale Trappist beer.
1946 - The abbot at Westvletern decides to de-emphasize brewing, and a deal is struck to have Saint Sixtus beer brewed under contract.
1992 - Westvleteren ends a 46-year contract deal with Saint Bernardus and reassumes control over all the beer it sells. Saint Bernardus begins selling beers under its own name.
[Source: Brew Like a Monk, Stan Hieronymus.

Based on the above, a lot of monasteries separated before candisyrup was used in 1922. The only two monasteries that somewhat remained connected appear to be Westvleteren and St. Bernardus, and they split in 1992. Granted, that St. Bernardus might know the basic recipe, there's no guarantee that the others know the recipe. Also, for all we know, Wesvleteren may have changed their candi-syrup recipe both between 1922 and 1992, and as well as since 1992. Hieronymus also indicates that the monasteries used different sugar/syrup combinations.

 

For all we know, they haven't. It's speculation. You are also assuming they all make their own. More speculation.

And he knows that how? I'm not saying they don't/didn't. I don't know. Nobody does. A person could fill a book with unsubstantiated facts about Trappist beers.

 

Well, he visited some of the monasteries and spoke to the brewmasters themselves, but I suppose that's not enough, because it's my word based on his word, even if I had to quote the entire book. Or maybe the devout brewmasters lied to him? Or perhaps they might have been drunk custodians pretending to be the Brewmaster. But you can check out the book yourself, or ask others who have read it, assuming they're not all lying or drunk as well. If you're looking for absolute proof of anything, good luck! There's absolutely nothing that can be proven 100% other than mathematics, and that's only because it's designed by strict rules. All we have here on this forum are our words themselves, backed up where possible, by references that you can check out yourself.

 

So your argument is that each brewmaster told him that each of the other breweries use different sugars/syrups, even though none of them (according to one of you arguments) know what the others are doing? That's confusing. Anyway, I think we've both said about all we have to say on this one. I have, at least.

 

I have read the book more than once. Stan did a great job with it. I also tried Dark Candi Inc. syrup almost immediately after it hit the market about a decade ago and have also had great success with the product offerings from CSI. What I'm struggling to understand is what you're trying so hard to prove here? To VikeMan's point, all you can do is speculate when you say that monastery X uses 'different' sugar(s)/syrups than monastery Y - not because it's a grand conspiracy of lies - but because no Trappist brewer speaks of these things in SPECIFICS, at least not publicly. No one says "we use D-90 at 7.7% of fermentables and 1.3% sucrose in our dubbel." Even the FAQ you posted earlier says that such info constitutes proprietary secrets and can't be shared with the public - but that doesn't preclude two very well known breweries from using the same syrups and/or sugars from a common vendor to produce distinctly different beers.

All I see here are a lot of words arguing a point that no one was questioning in the first place: Namely, that candi syrup contributes to the character of many classic Belgian beers. Thanks for clearing that up?

 

This could go on forever, so I agree - let's stop here.