Newbie Advice For Irish Stout

sirgockster

Hi all, I'm new to the forum and just looking for some advice, As a present, I have been giving a coopers home brew kit, Have never been into home brewing but since getting this kit, I have looked it up on forums and watched a few video etc, I have picked up a few things and i'm still trying to learn and I'm not taking everything I see or hear on youtube as gospel as everyone seems to have a difference of opinion on alot of things, So I'm hoping to hear from people on this forum to help me with a few questions. My first brew I would like to do is a All Malt Coopers Brewmaster Irish Stout, With this I will get Coopers Light Malt Extract Light.

What I'm wondering is to get the best out of this beer how would you go about doing this..

What sort of yeast would you use?

Would you use Light Malt Extract? If Not which would you perfer

Would you use any dry hops? (or anything like that)

I'm a guinness drinker at heart, So I know a good stout when I taste one but I know I wont get anything like that from kits, All I'm really looking for is a high alcohol % without losing the flavour, I was told if I got 2 cans of the Irish stout and put it in at once, Then that would work, Is this true, How would you go about this using the coopers kit? Sorry for all the questions folks advice much appreciated.

irish_goat

sirgockster wrote: »

I'm a guinness drinker at heart, So I know a good stout

sirgockster

I noticed that after I typed, I take that back, Does anyone have an answer to the questions?

Mashtun

What's wrong with guinness?

BeerNut

sirgockster wrote: »

What sort of yeast would you use?

There'll be a yeast with the kit. If you're picking your own dry yeast, S-04 will do the job.

sirgockster wrote: »

Would you use Light Malt Extract? If Not which would you perfer

In a dark beer it doesn't matter. Light will be fine.

sirgockster wrote: »

Would you use any dry hops? (or anything like that)

No: Irish stouts aren't normally very hoppy, and I don't think any are dry-hopped.

sirgockster wrote: »

I'm a guinness drinker at heart, So I know a good stout when I taste one but I know I wont get anything like that from kits

You should easily be able to get something very like bottled Guinness.

sirgockster wrote: »

All I'm really looking for is a high alcohol % without losing the flavour, I was told if I got 2 cans of the Irish stout and put it in at once, Then that would work, Is this true

My advice is try the first one normally. Think about hacking about with the next one after you've tasted and evaluated it.

sirgockster

Cheers mate for your reply, I think I may take you up on your advice and just go with the instructions for the first time out and hope to get a few beers into me:)

sirgockster

Just another question? Would you reccommend getting the brew enhancer or would I be better of without it, Im still new to this game just want to get it right. Cheers in advance

BeerNut

You should be fine with what what you have. I think the enhancer is just a way of adding more malt when you're using sugar with the kit. Since you're already all-malt you should be grand without any more.

Martyn1989

My 2nd brew, Youngs Harvest Stout Kit, I added a can of Coopers Dark Malt Extract, against the advice of these guys on this (http://www.realbeer.com/discussions/showthread.php?t=23145) forum
You might find what they said useful

I used the Safale S-04 Beernut mentions
Its currently maturing, I'll be tasting it in a week or so, but i think its ok....
I didn't get a Hydrometer reading because I broke mine (don't put it in the sample tube with sanitising solution, put the cap on and shake).
It was in the fermenter for 3 weeks also, longer then I had wanted.
Still I'll have to wait and see.

sirgockster

Thanks for your help fellas, Im going to get started on this today hopefully all will turn out ok

Martyn1989

Had a fair few pints of the stout last night with a mate, very happy with the results, easiest to compare it with Trouble Brewing Dark Arts porter, isn't the same of course, but thats what its closest to, can't wait to get the next beer going

RichieC

Mashtun wrote: »

What's wrong with guinness?

It's a swill brew made for mass market appeal.

Martyn1989

I like Guinness, its a good flavour, its also the closest thing available in every pub that even gets close to really good beer

RichieC

Well I tell you what.. if my first brew of stout came out tasting like guinness I'd probably be very happy with it. personally I like more taste though, essentially there's no taste of guinness to me.

Mashtun

RichieC wrote: »

Well I tell you what.. if my first brew of stout came out tasting like guinness I'd probably be very happy with it. personally I like more taste though, essentially there's no taste of guinness to me.

Probably doesn't have a hop character that non mass market appeal stouts have, but pig swill!! Guinness is decent. It's better that the muck from Holland that's drank by the lorry load here.

RichieC

Mashtun wrote: »

Probably doesn't have a hop character that non mass market appeal stouts have, but pig swill!! Guinness is decent. It's better that the muck from Holland that's drank by the lorry load here.

I didn't say pig swill.

oblivious

Mashtun wrote: »

Probably doesn't have a hop character that non mass market appeal stouts have

Or flavor on nitro

Mashtun

oblivious wrote: »

Or flavor on nitro

What's that mean? Am I in over my head in this discussion?

BeerNut

Mashtun wrote: »

What's that mean?

Draught Guinness (pretty much all draught stout, in fact) is served with a 80/20 mix of nitrogen and carbon dioxide. The nitrogen bubbles stay where they are in the beer (because air is mostly nitrogen already) which gives you the smooth texture and long-lasting creamy head stout is known for. You also get nitro ales like Kilkenny, and a certain amount of nitro (20% usually) is used in virtually all draught beers today to aid head retention.

The downside of nitro is that it destroys beer flavour. Because the gas stays in the beer, the flavour tends to as well. When you incorporate modern chilled serving temperatures, the end result is a smooth but almost tasteless beer.

Bottled Guinness is gassed with pure CO2, and a bottle of Guinness off the shelf has far more of a stout character than draught Guinness.

oblivious

As nice as it is to find the bottle version in an Irish pub, it can be a bit one dimensional in flavour.


The below paragraph is an interesting insight that not everyone was falling for Dublin porter

“Guinness is a respectable enough drink, but we must say that the ascendancy it has gained in many coffeehouses and taverns of London is anything but creditable to the taste of their frequenters. Its sub-acidity and soda-water briskness, when compared with the balmy character of London bottled stout from a crack brewery, are like the strained and shallow efforts of a professed joker compared with the unctuous, full-bodied wit of Shakspere. "London" by Charles Knight, 1842, page 14

BeerNut

oblivious wrote: »

Its sub-acidity and soda-water briskness, when compared with the balmy character of London bottled stout from a crack brewery, are like the strained and shallow efforts of a professed joker compared with the unctuous, full-bodied wit of Shakspere

Yeah? Do it blind or STFU, Charles.

Mashtun

Charles sounds like an awful bumraider to me

Martyn1989

BeerNut wrote: »

Draught Guinness (pretty much all draught stout, in fact) is served with a 50/50 mix of carbon dioxide and nitrogen.

I thought the Guinness blend was 70% Nitrogen, 30% Carbon Dioxide, can't remember where I saw it, I think it was one of Guinness quality dvds, I thought other stouts where served on 75 -25% N-C02, and other beers vice versa.

Most people in 1843 where bumraiders (no evidence to say their not), still thats a very interesting quote oblivious

BeerNut

Martyn1989 wrote: »

I thought the Guinness blend was 70% Nitrogen, 30% Carbon Dioxide, can't remember where I saw it, I think it was one of Guinness quality dvds, I thought other stouts where served on 75 -25% N-C02, and other beers vice versa.

D'oh! Yeah, sorry, by 50/50 I meant 80/20. Not with the numbers at all today.

Martyn1989

BeerNut wrote: »

D'oh! Yeah, sorry, by 50/50 I meant 80/20. Not with the numbers at all today.

Sounds more like it, I couldnt remember the exact split, 50/50 sounded way off, anyone tried the nitro widgets for pressure barrels?

oblivious

Mashtun wrote: »

Charles sounds like an awful bumraider to me

No need to be offensive Mashtun, it’s a primary source material and is what it is. While it does come off a little jingoistic, his comments do compare with other writings about Guinness

Martyn1989

I would have automatically presumed that the Guinness, or any other beer, served in 1843, or a very long time after that would be very very bad.
Though having thought about it Im probably wrong, the genuine product would have been high quality and full of flavour.
What you guys know about?

BeerNut

Martyn1989 wrote: »

I would have automatically presumed that the Guinness, or any other beer, served in 1843, or a very long time after that would be very very bad.
Though having thought about it Im probably wrong, the genuine product would have been high quality and full of flavour.
What you guys know about?

You don't build an empire like Guinness -- or any other industrial brewery -- by making bad beer.

1842 you're looking at Guinness Extra Stout being 85% pale, 10% amber, 5% roasted malt. OG of 1.086, so somewhere north of 8% ABV. And a major brett sourness from the wood it's aged in. Modern Guinness Foreign Extra would be some way similar, I guess.

Thing is, I doubt the London porter breweries were producing anything very different so our old pal Charlie's opinion seems likely to me to be little other than snobbery at these upstart provincials and their growing market share of London's native beer style.

oblivious

Martyn1989 wrote: »

I would have automatically presumed that the Guinness, or any other beer, served in 1843, or a very long time after that would be very very bad.
Though having thought about it Im probably wrong, the genuine product would have been high quality and full of flavour.
What you guys know about?

Guinness has always has a lacto bacteria relationship that was usually made worse in warn summer, until they changed over to a sterile plant (form wood to stainless steel). Higher hopping rates help to protect the beer also bulk storage in wooden vats allowed organisms like Brettanomyces kept major spoilage bacteria/ yeast in check.

oblivious

BeerNut wrote: »

Thing is, I doubt the London porter breweries were producing anything very different so our old pal Charlie's opinion seems likely to me to be little other than snobbery at these upstart provincials and their growing market share of London's native beer style.

Well Brown malt would change the flavour considerable, London brewer where using something around 15 up to 20% of the grist. Also there finish gravity ( Whitbread is as an example) is much higher up to 1.019

Compare this to Guinness acidity HERE which is considerably higher for over a century with the very low finish gravity suggest an endemic infection and would considerably alter the flavour