Sours vs. Infection

Well not everyone. I do not Know everyone. Groups do it.

Besides, why does me not liking a grouping beers single out a organization? BJCP and those groups do what they like, does not mean I have to agree with them. They do not speak for everyone. I just happen to like the old terms.
You can attack my opinion or ignore it, but you will not stop it. thanks for listening.....geez

 

Yep, Sour would be a "controlled fermentation" with beer spoiling bacteria. Brewers add a desired cell count of a/each of the bacteria they are using to give a wanted flavor profile.
Infected beers would be the result of poor sanitary practices, resulting in a undesired flavor profile... That being said, you might get lucky with the flavors present in an infected beers but it wasn't intended by the brewer.

 

A small local brewery near me has an infection issue across their lineup of beers. All styles (pale ale, American amber ale etc.) have a sour taste. With that said most aren't very good, but there is one accidental Red Ale they made that is quite tasty if you pretend its a Flanders Red. They should just put it in a corked big fancy bottle sell for $15-$20 instead of the $9 a six pack as it is currently and profit more from the contamination.

 

It's really just a matter of symantics when you are talking about a beer that was intentionally infected (call it what you will) because the brewer wants that bacteria in there for a reason. A beer that was not intentionally infected is likely the bottle you may or may never have had that tastes tart or objectionable as it really wasn't meant to be that way. I had a Kentucky Bourbon Barrel Stout (by Lexington I think) ironically today that had a slight bit of sour to the nose. I'm sure that wasn't intentional but it still tasted pretty good as it wasn't too overpowering and seemed to just add another layer of complexity. Sometimes mistakes turn out OK too but I think we can all agree that this is just a matter of symantics and we typically all know when a brewer meant or didn't mean to do it. They usually let you know on the bottle.

 

Contaminating a beer to sour it is an art that not many breweries care to get into because of cross contamination that isn't intended. Learning how long and how much bacteria to put in or expose it to naturally is also an art. Sours are hard beers to make right. Some brewers just use old barrels that have been inoculated and put a base beer in them. From my understanding that is how Lauren at New Belgium does things but she had to start somewhere. Those barrels weren't that way to begin with. She's a smart, crafty lady.

 

One time my buddy left a growler of Dry Dock Apricot Blonde in his fridge for fucking ever, and then when he cracked it, it was super pressurized and fizzed everywhere but apparently it was infected and turned out to be very sour, funky and delicious!

 

As far as I've always known, in beer terminology, inoculation is the intentional addition of souring bacteria or wild yeast (controlled or spontaneously). Infection is the result of the unintentional addition of unwanted organisms.

Of course we all know that every beer has at least a yeast infection. But we aren't gynecologists. Semantics, people.

 

Some of us know it is not that type of yeast.

 

Drain pouring now...

 

No wonder my homebrews have been off....

 

Just like everything else in the beer world, it's been done. I'm not sire I would want to drink Original ***** Beer, but apparently some folks liked it.

http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/Content?oid=23562

 

That came to mind when I posted.

 

Open fermentation isn't the same as spontaneous fermentation. Most breweries in Franconia open ferment their Lagers.

With Lambic beers, my guess would be that the source of the yeasts/bacteria is more often the equipment than the air.

 

I guess it is what I get for not being sober touring Cantillon. and reading Tim Webb's book. Good Guide to Belgium.