The How My Averagely Perfect Dubbel Turned Out Thread

Discussion in 'Homebrewing' started by VikeMan, Jul 7, 2018.

  1. VikeMan

    VikeMan Poo-Bah (1,962) Jul 12, 2009 Pennsylvania
    Society

    It's been a month since the polls closed. So this is the thread to post about how your Averagely Perfect Dubbel turned out. I know at least a couple folks have started brewing this one. The crowd sourced recipe is --> here <--
     
    #1 VikeMan, Jul 7, 2018
    Last edited: Jul 7, 2018
    pweis909, calir1 and Eggman20 like this.
  2. Eggman20

    Eggman20 Initiate (70) Feb 14, 2017 Minnesota

    Bottling mine tomorrow or Wednesday so it'll be a couple weeks yet for full report. Gravity sample I pulled yesterday was very tasty with FG right on at 1.012. Can't recall SG off hand but it was within 2-4 points.
     
  3. Brewday

    Brewday Initiate (152) Dec 25, 2015 New York

    I'm going to make this tonight or tomorrow. Only issue i had is their styrian goldings were listed as 2.7 aa. I asked the hbs/brewery owner and he said batches are different so he helped calculate the difference and he came up with 3/4 oz more @ 60 which he gave to me free. Does this seem right.
     
    #3 Brewday, Jul 14, 2018
    Last edited: Jul 15, 2018
  4. VikeMan

    VikeMan Poo-Bah (1,962) Jul 12, 2009 Pennsylvania
    Society

    Okay, for the 60 minute addition, the recipe calls for 1.13 ounces @ 5% Alpha Acids. But your hops are 2.7% Alpha Acids. Ignoring the fairly negligible (in this case) impact to volume of wort needed (due to hop absorption), the amount of hops needed is inversely proportional to the alpha acid content.. So...

    X x 2.7% AAs = 1.13 ounces x 5% AAs
    X = 1.13 ounces x (5 / 2.7)
    X = 2.09 ounces

    So you need almost an ounce more to get the same bittering from the 60 minute addition. I don't know what your LHBS guy meant by "batches are different," so I have no idea how he came up with 3/4 oz more. At least he wasn't off by an order of magnitude, which is "LHBS progress" I guess.

    You might also want to adjust the 10 minute addition.

    Disclaimer: some LHBSs are ok. Some are even good.
     
  5. Brewday

    Brewday Initiate (152) Dec 25, 2015 New York

    Ok i'll just add 2 ozs @ 60 and the other 3/4 around 15. Hopefully this won't cause some flavors like grassy.
     
    #5 Brewday, Jul 15, 2018
    Last edited: Jul 15, 2018
  6. pweis909

    pweis909 Poo-Bah (1,906) Aug 13, 2005 Wisconsin
    Society

    Mine's ready to package. I don't think I'll get to it for another week though. As indicated elsewhere, I made an inadvertent substitution -- caravienne instead of caramunich. Ironically, the best dubbel I ever brewed used caravienne.

    Additionally, I used Styrian Golding Celeia, which I believe is not the same as Styrian Golding, but a viable substitute. @Brewday and @VikeMan -- my hops were 3% AA, so also lower than the 5% mark. My approach for adjusting was to keep the finishing hops at 0.5 oz and adjust the bittering to get to the proper ibus, using brewing software. I've always kept the finishing hops the same and adjusted bittering, in these scenarios, but I could see how if the hops were supposed to be a very resiny, highly aromatic hop, the characteristic hop compounds may co-vary with %AA, and then it may be wiser to make the adjustment to the finishing hops, too.

    In general, I don't think you will get grassy flavors out of this low amount of hops, although I did just brew a bitter with about this amount of fuggles-related hops, including Styrian Golding Celeia, in the boil and then again as a dry hop, and that does have some hay-like, earthy aroma to it. Still, in a dubbel, with the special b, caramunich, and yeast impact, I suspect you won't be able to taste hay or grass.

    Finally, I used Imperial Organic Triple Double yeast instead of 3787. Allegedly the same. So I changed the grist, the hops, and the yeast. But I really nailed down the water profile!
     
    #6 pweis909, Jul 15, 2018
    Last edited: Jul 15, 2018
    utahbeerdude and VikeMan like this.
  7. VikeMan

    VikeMan Poo-Bah (1,962) Jul 12, 2009 Pennsylvania
    Society

    Hmmm. That's not exactly what I was suggesting. (And it would land at only about 21 IBUs.) But now I know you have 2.75 ounces total (and not just 0.75 ounces more than the recipe called for). That's different. Even so, you won't have enough hops to scale each addition proportionally to hit 24 IBUs. So here's what I would recommend:
    - Keep the 10 minute addition at 0.5 ounces
    - Increase the 60 minute addition to 2.25 ounces (the balance of your hops)
    This should land you around 23 IBUs.

    Or a different compromise would be to sacrifice a little of the 10 minute addition in favor of the 60 minute bittering addition:
    - 2.45 ounces at 60
    - 0.3 ounces at 10
    This should land you at about 24 IBUs.

    But really, it would be hard to tell the difference between 23 and 24 IBUs.
     
  8. VikeMan

    VikeMan Poo-Bah (1,962) Jul 12, 2009 Pennsylvania
    Society

    My experience, at least with noble hops, has been that it's safer to keep the same mass for the late hops, and adjust the early addition(s) to hit the same total IBUs. I do the same thing with C-hops etc., but haven't really tested those the other way to compare.
     
  9. Brewday

    Brewday Initiate (152) Dec 25, 2015 New York

    Good idea. I can't think in this heat.I was also thinking of just adding a little williamette if needed..
     
  10. Naugled

    Naugled Defender (640) Sep 25, 2007 New York

    bump. I'm hoping to brew this around Oct
     
  11. CarolusP

    CarolusP Initiate (0) Oct 22, 2015 Minnesota

    I picked up all of the ingredients a few weeks ago. I haven't found the time to brew this yet, but hoping to do so in the coming weeks. I'd like this to have a couple months in the bottle by the time fall rolls around.
     
  12. Eggman20

    Eggman20 Initiate (70) Feb 14, 2017 Minnesota

    Drinking my first bottle as I wrap a brew session. Bottled 10 days ago so a bit more carbonating to go but has enough for me. I'm terrible at describing so I'll just say I'm enjoying it. Very nice beer
     
    VikeMan likes this.
  13. Buck89

    Buck89 Poo-Bah (3,190) Feb 7, 2015 Tennessee
    Society Trader

    I'm curious about everyone's yeast pitch rates for this one. Did anyone intentionally underpitch 3787? I'm planning on pitching at 68 and letting it free rise to 72-73. Thanks.
     
    NiceFly likes this.
  14. Eggman20

    Eggman20 Initiate (70) Feb 14, 2017 Minnesota

    I did not underpitch and fermented at 66-67 degrees
     
    Buck89 likes this.
  15. Brewday

    Brewday Initiate (152) Dec 25, 2015 New York

    Just bumping this up. I guzzled 3 glasses. I'll post the pic when we get some sun.
     
    Buck89 likes this.
  16. Brewday

    Brewday Initiate (152) Dec 25, 2015 New York

    This came out really good. Open fermented for the first time and it worked out great. I'll be doing that more often.Also added the syrup to the fermenter which comes out in the finish.
    [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
    #16 Brewday, Aug 17, 2018
    Last edited: Aug 17, 2018
    deadwolfbones likes this.
  17. CarolusP

    CarolusP Initiate (0) Oct 22, 2015 Minnesota

    I finally brewed this on Saturday. I increased the amount of base malt so that I could put 5.5 gallons into the fermenter, but otherwise left everything else the same. My OG was about 0.02 low, but oh well.
     
    pweis909 likes this.
  18. Buck89

    Buck89 Poo-Bah (3,190) Feb 7, 2015 Tennessee
    Society Trader

    After a minor keg issue this one is carbed up and ready to drink. It turned out great! Lots of plum and raisin mixed with floral esters. Dry and clean finish (FG was 1.009). A dangerous 7.6% beer to have on tap. I will definitely brew this again.
    [​IMG]
     
  19. CarolusP

    CarolusP Initiate (0) Oct 22, 2015 Minnesota

    I've been cutting back a lot on beer consumption recently for the sake of my gut (and therefore, also cutting back on brewing), but I just wanted to pop in and say that this beer turned out amazing. I cracked a bottle last week after about 3 weeks of conditioning, and I was very impressed. Much better than my one previous attempt at a dubbel. It seems like keeping a simple recipe is definitely the ticket for this style.
     
  20. riptorn

    riptorn Devotee (428) Apr 26, 2018 North Carolina
    Society Trader

    Look HERE for a links to the progression of threads on the AP Dubbel project. Suggestions on improving the content and/or format are welcomed.
     
  21. deadwolfbones

    deadwolfbones Initiate (159) Jun 21, 2014 Oregon

    Eggman20 and VikeMan like this.
  22. VikeMan

    VikeMan Poo-Bah (1,962) Jul 12, 2009 Pennsylvania
    Society

    Nice write-up. You mentioned using Wyeast 3522 in your version and missing signature Trappist flavors. My experience with 3522, which I love for easy drinking Belgian Pale Ales, is that it produces fairly restrained phenols and esters compared to the Trappist strains. So I think your observation is spot on.

    BTW, the picture of your beer looks delicious. Hope you don't mind a direct link here...
    [​IMG]
     
    #22 VikeMan, Oct 24, 2019
    Last edited: Oct 24, 2019
  23. deadwolfbones

    deadwolfbones Initiate (159) Jun 21, 2014 Oregon

    Not at all!

    I'd definitely like to brew it again with a more classic Trappist yeast.
     
  24. VikeMan

    VikeMan Poo-Bah (1,962) Jul 12, 2009 Pennsylvania
    Society

    So I finally got around to brewing this one. Stuck 100% to the recipe (adjusting for my own efficiency, etc.). Hit 1.065 OG on the nose. Attenuated down to 1.012. My impressions:

    - Malt derived flavors are right on for the style.
    - Achieved bitterness (24 computed IBUs) seems a little much when weighed against the maltiness/sweetness.
    - The Westmalle yeast did not want to come out of suspension, even after cold crashing. I had to resort to gelatin in the keg, something I've never done before. But it did the trick. A week later you could read through a pint.
    - Otherwise, no complaints. I think it's a pretty solid recipe. I took a growler to a homebrew club bottle share and a brewer from a local brewery asked me if I'd like to brew it with them as a base for thing they've been thinking about doing, so that says something.

    If I were to brew this again, I'd probably cut back on the IBUs a little. I'd also consider switching to the Chimay strain. A friend of mine once split a batch of Tripel between Chimay and Westmalle. Chimay cleared like a champ. Westmalle not so much. Interesting, because White Labs specs imply that Westmalle should be the faster flocculater.
     
  25. nowhyok

    nowhyok Initiate (0) Sep 22, 2015 Oregon

    I tried (perhaps foolishly) to make a session version of this by mashing at a higher temperature and cutting the pilsner malt down from 10.7 to 8 lbs. Mine tasted . . . a little bit like cola? I'm guessing that the D-90 syrup dominated the flavour after the base malt was cut down?

    (1) What else might have caused a cola-like flavour to this beer?
    (2) What would you try to do if you wanted a 5% abv dubbel-like beer?
     
  26. pweis909

    pweis909 Poo-Bah (1,906) Aug 13, 2005 Wisconsin
    Society

    (1) Cola flavors include citrus oils, vanilla, cinnamon, in an acidic matrix. Candi syrup might provide some vanillin. One of the flavors often attributed to some Belgian yeasts is clove, which is to say the yeast produces eugenol or eugenol-like compounds. In addition to being the prominent scent in clove, eugenol is also found in cinnamon. Beer is somewhat acidic. Dubbel is also colored somewhat like cola. Between the potential flavors and the power of suggestion, I am not surprised that you might find this to be cola like.

    (2) I would start with reducing the base malt to hit my gravity. I might also reduce the D90 by half. Or I might swap with D180 but keep to half the amount.
     
    nowhyok likes this.
  27. JackHorzempa

    JackHorzempa Poo-Bah (4,931) Dec 15, 2005 Pennsylvania
    Society

    I homebrew a Dubbel twice a year (spring & fall) and my fall batch is at day 6 pf primary fermentation right now. For the past 10+ years I have solely utilized WY3787 (the reported Westmalle strain) and I have never experienced any issues with this yeast dropping out. My process is always the same:
    • Two weeks of primary
    • Bottle Conditioning
    After 2 weeks of bottle conditioning the beer is fully carbonated and the yeast has settled out to the bottom of the bottles.

    @dmtaylor posted on the AHA forum:

    “I prefer 530. The two (WY3787 and WLP530) are supposedly equivalent... but really aren't. Not sure which one is the "real" one.”

    https://www.homebrewersassociation.org/forum/index.php?topic=33161.0

    Perhaps a difference between WLP530 vs. WY3787 is that WLP530 does not flocculate as well?

    Cheers!
     
  28. VikeMan

    VikeMan Poo-Bah (1,962) Jul 12, 2009 Pennsylvania
    Society

    Yeah, that's a possibility, although I noted in the link you posted that @dmtaylor mentioned that WY3787 didn't flocc well for him. Another possibility is that whatever was hazing my AP Dubbel was something other than yeast. But I know it wasn't "chill haze" in the traditional sense, because it didn't disappear when the beer warmed up. Whatever it was, either the gelatin cleared it, or the extra time did it, without the gelatin's help.
     
  29. dmtaylor

    dmtaylor Aspirant (223) Dec 30, 2003 Wisconsin

    With results kind of all over the place, my latest yeast master list still considers WLP530 and 3787 to be approximately equivalent. Perhaps *both* are just kind of finicky once in a while, maybe not always, but if there are temperature fluctuations or who-knows-what, if the yeast ain't happy, it misbehaves. I've used neither one enough times to discern the differences yet. I think I might start using WLP550 a lot more in future so it may be a while before I personally run any side by side experiments with the others. If you all want to run experiments, please report back with your results, I think we'd all greatly appreciate it.

    My living document for anyone interested, with the caveat that I'm sure this is only approximately 80-90% accurate, or as I like to say "good enough, for most intents & purposes":

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nwVema5Y8kuGbTR_vlz6gzU-KCngFYWjrAJO44xjwfA/edit?usp=sharing