Beers (late 19th Century and 20th Century)

[PeeBee]

Need to record these tests before I start mixing them up. The No.4 will have to wait! Here we have "comparative" photo's of No.2 and No.3 "Inverts":

20220503_192122.jpg (32.95 KiB) Viewed 441583 times

20220504_141035_WEB.jpg (35.3 KiB) Viewed 441583 times

Humm, not much difference? Probably something to do with exposure. The first was late in the evening (1/50 sec, hence not great focus) the second was next day early in evening (1/414 sec). Geeky! Well, I'm not redoing them so get used to it!

In both the Regus "Invert" sample is on the right in each photo. 10g made up to 100ml, a 10% solution. The "emulation" samples (on the left in each photo) are also 10g made up to 100ml. The 10g "emulation" samples are made up of:
"No.2" 3.3g "Billington's Light Muscovado Sugar", 6.7g "Billington's Golden Caster Sugar".
"No.3" 1.5g "Billington's Dark Muscovado Sugar", 8.5g "Billington's Golden Caster Sugar".

The flavours and colours are matching at this but as before ("No.1") the "emulations" seem to be sweeter and "lusher". In fact, I reckon the No.2 can be altered to a rounded 30/70 without further comparative tests.

No.4 to do. No Ragus compare, but we have Graham Wheeler's comment that Tesco's Dark Muscovado is 600EBC (10 years ago).

[PeeBee]

I'm getting a few anomalies creeping in (well, I'm doing visual comparisons with eyes well past their best, and taste comparisons that are ... let's say "subjective"). Look at the previous post: No.2 and No.3. From Ragus data you might expect one to be twice as dark as the other? 60-70EBC against 120-140EBC. Twice the dark sugar in one than the other? I'm using 10% solutions of 30/70 (dark/light sugar) and 15/85. Good so far, but I'm using different types of dark sugar. Err? And:

... But as you said earlier, #3 isn't really very dark. 40% "invert", like in that recipe, might have a bit more impact (I'm working with 10% solutions). ...

Say it quick and you don't notice? I obviously didn't notice! But 40% in a recipe isn't comparing like-with-like with a 10% solution.

I'm having a bit of trouble tying down what to expect from "Demerara" sugar too.

A bit finicky? But I'm trying to present an alternative to what I see as a great wrong, and what many others see as a lot of hard work boiling sugar syrup. So best if I try to be squeaky clean. I'll spend a day or two quietly having a bit of a review.


[minor edit to improve readability.]
[... and another to correct a typo. PLUS:]

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=10278

[Might be best to stay away from that topic?]

[PeeBee]

I thought I was fairly lucky, the beer colour from using 10% of fermentables as Invert #3 (the other 90% of fermentables in the "recipe" was set to zero coloured) in a "virtual" 20L batch was about the same as a 10% solution of the same Invert #3. 10-11.4EBC, yippee! I escaped that blunder! ... According to Beersmith! And then what I thought was going to be an easy task fell into a tailspin. I knew beer colour calculations should follow a straight-line, but there was a nagging doubt that this wasn't universally accepted. So, I started digging:

viewtopic.php?p=663289#p663289

Oh crap! Always thought the colour calculations in Beersmith were a bit dodgy. And not just Beersmith it seems. And who's supporting Graham Wheeler's view anyhow? So "easy task" is now "walking on broken glass". I had best tread carefully.

... PeeBee, don't worry about colour, ...

Was Eric cryptically trying to tell me something?

[PeeBee]

I'm still working at these Ragus "emulations". I've some piccies to post here, but meanwhile I've posted a summary over at THBF:

https://www.thehomebrewforum.co.uk/thre ... st-1138025

[PeeBee]

These are my latest comparison samples. Ragus No.1-3, 10% w/v solutions (10g sugar made up to 100ml in water). Right to Left No.1, No.2 and No.3. The previous tests compared by eye between the Ragus sugar and the "emulation". These tests use the first ones to get about the right concentration then are tweaked so the differences are proportional (#2 is twice as dark and twice the concentration of colouring sugar than #1, #3 is twice as dark as #2 and four times as dark as #1). Linear changes of colour work well when judging colour contributions of sugars (in boiler, not mash tun) so we do not apply the non-linear "Morey's Formula", Beer-Lambert law rules here (unfortunately, many home-brewing calculators fail to account for that!).

The 10% solution gives about the colour contribution of Invert Sugar making up 10% of the fermentables in a 1.045 beer.

20220510_134632_WEB.jpg (48.74 KiB) Viewed 441466 times

The taste tests from "Take 1" apply here as very little changes. Only colour was compared. The proportions of sugars in the emulations are given in the following table (the previous test results hidden for clarity):

Capture4.jpg (103.06 KiB) Viewed 441466 times

Note there's three samples for #3. One emulation uses Light Muscovado, the second uses Dark Muscovado. Working with both shades of Muscovado provided an "index" link for calculating darker (#4) emulations. There is no Ragus #4 for comparison, so it is built up from the results creating #3. So, got:

20220510_151550_WEB.jpg (23.98 KiB) Viewed 441466 times

Hum. That's a bit black. I think I'll switch to 5% solutions for #4 comparisons!

[PeeBee]

Before I start on #4 "invert", I should have mentioned in the last post that the table's "rows" provide the weight in grams, the total in each row being 10g to be made up to 100ml to prepare the 10% sample. So, sample #3b is 8.4g "Golden Caster/Granulated" (could use Granulated White) and 1.7g "Billington's Dark Muscovado" (heck, a rounding error, should be 1.6g, but of no consequence) made up to 100ml with water. Multiple by ten to get percentage of sugar in full-scale emulation (so for #3b it's 84% and 16%).

So, on to #4. Half the listed sugar quantities are used here to give provide 5% solutions.

20220510_171653_WEB.jpg (58.93 KiB) Viewed 441446 times

The "Billington's Dark Muscovado" was the "reference" (no Ragus #4) and constructed from the results of #3b. Uses five times the quantity of Dark Muscovado. The "Billington's Molasses Sugar" sample was constructed to match this "reference". The "Meridian's Blackstrap Molasses" sample was constructed to match the old "Dilution Method" No.4 Invert Sugar emulation (author unknown). That Blackstrap is obviously mucky stuff!

The #4a sample (reference) and #4b sample (Molasses Sugar) were virtually the same flavour-wise. Tasting strongly of "brown sugar". The blackstrap sample was a surprise, diluted down to a 1% solution (the other "4%" of the 5% sugar solution is a nearly neutral "filler") tasting very much of Victoria Plums over the background treacle. (Maillard Reaction products?). As No.4 would be used in strong flavoured beers (stout and porter) such subtleties would probably be lost?

[man_beach]

I too have been reading Ron's posts with interest. I tried making a No 1 invert using Tesco's golden granulated sugar and the method outlined here, heating to 114 degrees C. Used it in a brew with 6% invert and it'll be the next one to drink. I'll try making it using plain golden granulated sugar next time, to see if I can taste any obvious difference. If not, it'll save a bit of hassle.

[PeeBee]

I too have been reading Ron's posts with interest. I tried making a No 1 invert using Tesco's golden granulated sugar and the method outlined here, heating to 114 degrees C. Used it in a brew with 6% invert and it'll be the next one to drink. I'll try making it using plain golden granulated sugar next time, to see if I can taste any obvious difference. If not, it'll save a bit of hassle.

That "www.homebrewersassociation.org" article ... yes, I had come across it. I was slightly baffled by them inverting at a temperature above the caramelisation temperature of fructose (created by inverting). But you should have been fine for No.1 as you are not instructed to hold the temperature at 114C, only get it to that temperature, so shouldn't have caramelised much. Inversion doesn't need to boil, though might take a little longer to complete. Ragus invert at 70C but do use strong acids.

Though that article really crossed over into "Never, Never Land" when it started suggesting heating the "inverted sugar" to "hard-crack" temperature!

I'm still getting through one of RP's gleaned AK recipes where I did caramelise the "No.2" to colour it before I figured it was a silly idea. Terrific beer though, just perhaps not "historically" accurate and a lot of wasted time making the pretend "No.2 Invert Sugar".

You should get on fine using just "Golden Granulated", though I was recommending 12% Billington's Light Muscovado to approximate the flavour of Ragus No.1 (Light) Brewing Sugar. I used Billington's as it copies the old style of refining and should have caramels and "Maillard products" built in. Though Ragus is just one of multitudes of Invert Sugar (for brewers) manufacturers ... it's just the only one left to compare with!

I've just created my yeast starter today to put on two brews for comparison: 1898 Hancock XX. One will have Ragus No.3 (Dark) Brewing Sugar, the other Golden Caster with 17% Dark Muscovado (my No.3 emulation). I shall also be trying to see if I can taste the difference (not inverted). I'm not expecting a difference, and so should "save a bit of hassle".

[PeeBee]

The Hancock XX trials progress. Read about them >here<. That thread was a bit of an "off-subject" excursion, so I'll post follow-ups here.

[PeeBee]

Preparing to keg the second of my 1898 Hancock XX "invert sugar" trials today. I've tried to keep everything the same for the two brews so only the sugars are different. This one has the Ragus Invert "emulation" (not actually "inverted"), the one kegged last week has the actual Ragus Invert ("Dark" or "No.3"). The Tilt hydrometer reading for today's is currently:

Capture3-END.JPG (32.73 KiB) Viewed 441269 times

A final reading ("FG", but it's not actually the "FG", perhaps the "casking gravity") will be made with a puknometer before the keg is sealed. Last week's was only 0.0002 different to the Tilt (pro), but the pyknometer reading is done at 20°C and the weighing scales are not really good enough to work out SG at four decimal places. The Tilt is not temperature compensated (although it could have been).

The final Tilt reading for last week's brew was:

Capture1-END.JPG (33.18 KiB) Viewed 441269 times

Now that is very, very eerie!

[WallyBrew]

Paul, this may be of use to you

Billingtons unrefined sugar colours on 10% solution.jpg (221.42 KiB) Viewed 441266 times

[PeeBee]

Paul, this may be of use to you ...

Thanks. Now why couldn't Billington's tell me that when I asked them.

[Eric]

Transferred my modified version of Hancock's 1888 XX to a plastic barrel. OG was 1050, sample read 1004 by hydrometer this evening, just over 6% ABV. Looked the colour of an old fashioned Amber Ale.

[PeeBee]

"Modified version"? I think from your description (in a different thread) it was a "severely hacked" version! But thanks for stirring Mr Pattinson on that Hancock 1888 potential qtrs and cwts mix-up. I think I escaped it by opting for the 1898 version which I'd picked because I hadn't the insane quantities of Ragus Invert to make the un-modified 1888 version.

My 1898 versions are coming out a moderately dark amber colour (i.e. not very dark!). I was a little disappointed that the Ragus "No.3" ("Dark") didn't produce a darker amber colour (and certainly not brown). Sort of fell into the "Morey formula" (non-linear beer colouring) camp which Graham Wheeler used to rant against.

... Looked the colour of an old fashioned Amber Ale.

Now, now. We all know you're not that old! And if you were, your memory would probably not go back that far. Whereas I, being such a youngster and despite a little tap on me 'ead, have pin-sharp memory and can easily tell you the colour of my Livingroom; it's .... it's ... damn!

[PeeBee]

Paul, this may be of use to you ...

It was of use! I'd gone too far with the "compare" strategy (free of EBC values) to use the information to redesign my "emulations" from scratch. But I could use it to verify what I have done.

1: I should close the gap in colour between my comparisons of dark muscovado and molasses sugars to conform better with that table of EBC colours. Reviewing my work suggests there should be room to do this anyway. Will allow me to recommend using "Molasses Sugar" again. It was my intention to have a wide spread of "colouring sugars" (molasses sources) to imitate Invert Sugar - as the Invert Sugar numbers decrease the source sugars get more refined and molasses it contains more refined. Using "Molasses Sugar" (the rawest) to colour and flavour the "No.4" emulation should be an advantage?

2: The gap between light and dark Muscovado sugars in my comparisons and the table of EBC colours is too big to fill so easily. My assessment was Light Muscovado had about a third the colour of Dark Muscovado, but the table's assessment has the figure at around about a fifth. Too big a gap to pass off as my crumby eyesight. But it does indicate how variable in colour these sugars can be. In compiling the table of EBC colours, how big was the sample size of sugars? My sample size was all of "one"!

3: My choice of comparison "benchmarks" was inconvenient. Few have (including me shortly) access to Ragus Invert Sugars to use them as a benchmark. I really need to identify a more useable "benchmark" ...

Thanks. But I'm just being "farty"; people will adopt whichever of the above comparisons to use, if they use any at all.