"Joel" > wrote in message
...
> Lew Bryson > wrote:
>>Just to horn in... We were at Weihenstephan back in December, and got a
>>lecture from one of the profs there on this. They did a decoction and a
>>non-decoction batch, otherwise identical, then put the beers to a tasting
>>panel. They could not taste e difference. The prof was shocked, but
>>pointed
>>out that while the panel could not...he could, blinded, repeatedly. He's
>>still a decoction disciple, but he's not sure what's going on. Is it
>>subtle,
>>or is it not recognizable?
>
> What style and gravity of beer?

Sorry...don't know, he didn't say, and we were evidently all too groggy from
lack of sleep and weisswurst/weissbier overload to think to ask. Most of
what I remember about that trip is being exhausted, half-drunk, stuffed to
the gills, and ****ed off...at all times. Except when I was in a beer hall
with Stan Hieronymus and Jim Parker, when things were suffused with a rosy
glow of camaraderie (and Edelstoff), and when Steve Effin' Jackson showed up
in the midst and we hit a Paulaner hall for a damnably brilliant dunkles.
Thanks, Steve...it WAS a dunkles, wasn't it? Or was it a completely
unexpected Schwarz? I just can't remember shit any more about that trip. Oh,
wait...I remember the bus breaking down, and drinking rum (from the bottle)
in a parking lot the next morning with Steve Beaumont while we waited for
the replacement bus. Yeah. I remember that. And the Schlenkerla
Lager...hmmm. A lot more's coming back now. Good.
--
Lew Bryson

"As for talking shit in this NG, Lew, you're the undisputed king, and
that's no SHITE." -- Bob Skilnik, 1/31/02

www.lewbryson.com

"Lew Bryson" > wrote in message
. com...

> and when Steve Effin' Jackson showed up in the midst and we hit a Paulaner
> hall for a damnably brilliant dunkles. Thanks, Steve...it WAS a dunkles,
> wasn't it? Or was it a completely unexpected Schwarz?

It was a Schwarzbier, ungefiltriert. And ****ing good (or gut, if you wish).

-Steve

Denny Conn > wrote in
:

> Scott Kaczorowski wrote:
>
>> Again, if you live anywhere near Long Beach, get your ass
>> over here. We will do your "experiment" and send the
>> results to the gentry. And you will find yourself wrong.
>
> Ya know, this is one reason that the article may never see
> the light of day. Too many people aren't interested in
> hearing about anything that contradicts their own beliefs.

Apologies. I know you are a brewer with a deserved reputation.

But my assertion is not based on opinion or belief. It is based
on direct experience. A decoction drastically affects the final
result. Period. I know that might sound like closemindedness,
but it is my direct experience.

An identical grain bill can lead to a unique finished beer in SO
many ways. Mash in at 122F and then proceed to 152. Go for
158F right off the bat. ... I've experimented with infusion at
145F for 90 minutes. A decoction does not necessarily give me
something that is uniquely discernable. Aromatic,
Melanoidin...both can fake a decoct. But then we're talking
about different grain bills, aren't we?

But talking about a decoct...we're talking about wildly
different mash schedules, so: point to you.

> I'd like to get the info out there, but I have limited
> energy to try to convince anyone of its veracity. Scott,
> all I can tell you is to arrange your own blind tasting of
> beers that are identical other than mash schedule.

Been there.

> Don't
> taste your own beers and tell me you can tell the
> difference...

I do. I say exactly that. Where else am I going to do a side
by side like you advocate? I have done the "experiment" more
than a few times.

A decoction lends a distinct characteristic given same grain
bills. Period. No discussion possible. I have done same-
grain-bill batches, specifically wheat beer. Same bill, same
volume, same yeast. The decocted beer is drastically different.
Period. No discussion possible.

Again, I know you by reputation. But you are simply wrong about
this. Your tasters are either not well-schooled or the grain
bills are not the same.

> brew 2 batches with different mash schedules
> and get others to do a blind tasting. You can find the
> questionnaire we used at www.hbd.org/cascade/decoction .

"can you tell the difference between decocted and non
decocted beers,"

Of course. My dead dog Bonzo can tell the difference.

"and which do you prefer."

Not relevant. I prefer the decocted beer without exception, but
that's a preference, an opinion.

My point: A decocted beer is different from a non-decocted
beer.



Scott Kaczorowski
Long Beach, CA

"Steve Jackson" > wrote in
news:Jo0Tf.4999$TK2.4976@trnddc07:

> "Denny Conn" > wrote in
> message ...
>
>> You can find the
>> questionnaire we used at www.hbd.org/cascade/decoction .
>
> I see one immediate flaw in the questionnai no control,
> no validation that the taster is able to accurately
> distinguish between two beers.

Indeed. One of the two criteria is "prefer." Some people
prefer Bud. Preference is subjective (as is necessary in this
sport). The question: Does decoction make a difference?

Duh.



Scott Kaczorowski
Long Beach, CA