| Author |
Message |
    
Vance Barnes
Senior Member
Username: Vancebarnes
Post Number: 3312
Registered: 03-2003
Posted From: 74.7.7.66
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2008 - 07:59 pm: | 
|
So on Friday the 8th I'm doing a presentation at the Brewmaster's meeting on the OO debate. I also have the beer that was split with half getting O2 and the other half getting OO instead. I want to do a blind tasting and see if the group can identify which one is which.
I'm looking for the best way to do the tasting. I think the triangle test would be where you have 3 samples, with 2 of them being the same? Get everyone to vote on what sample they think is O2 or OO and why and then compile the results? |
Denny Conn
Senior Member
Username: Denny
Post Number: 6861
Registered: 01-2001
Posted From: 140.211.82.4
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2008 - 08:07 pm: |
|
Do a blind triangle test. 2 samples of one beer and one of the other. If people can't identify the different beer, any further responses from them are invalid. If they identify the beer that's different, then ask them which they think is which. Also, ask them questions about the characteristics of the beer. Is one maltier? does one have better mouthfeel. Try to figure out what it is the OO is supposed to be doing and aim your questions at that.
(Message edited by denny on July 30, 2008) |
Tom Viemont
Junior Member
Username: Vantas
Post Number: 93
Registered: 03-2003
Posted From: 206.105.78.10
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2008 - 03:54 pm: |
|
I'd also suggest that this is best done in a written format, so that you gather the data on paper without fear of one person's opinion making others think they tasted something.
You could do the tasting prior to the meeting and then present your results AT the meeting. If you do this at the meeting, it would really slow the meeting down. |
Denny Conn
Senior Member
Username: Denny
Post Number: 6862
Registered: 01-2001
Posted From: 63.114.138.2
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2008 - 04:55 pm: |
|
Yes, I used written forms for the tasting experiments I did and it worked well. Vance, if you'd like to see the forms I used to get ideas for your own, shoot me an email. |
Vance Barnes
Senior Member
Username: Vancebarnes
Post Number: 3313
Registered: 03-2003
Posted From: 74.7.7.66
| | Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2008 - 08:05 pm: |
|
I was thinking of doing some forms. Some how mark which one is the odd/single one. Then which one that was vs the other 2 and list why they think which one(s) OO and which one(s) O2.
I'll email you about the form Denny. |
Steve Jones
Advanced Member
Username: Stevej
Post Number: 538
Registered: 08-2001
Posted From: 76.7.159.69
| | Posted on Friday, August 01, 2008 - 01:07 am: |
|
Vance,
Do they all know it is an OO beer vs an O2 beer?
I'm no statistician, but I would think that when the tasters are more 'blind', the conclusions are more valid. If at all possible I'd try NOT to let them know that there were specific process differences. |
Vance Barnes
Senior Member
Username: Vancebarnes
Post Number: 3315
Registered: 03-2003
Posted From: 74.7.7.66
| | Posted on Friday, August 01, 2008 - 03:26 pm: |
|
So far they don't know that it's OO vs. O2. Maybe we do the tasting first and then have the presentation and go over the results?
Denny, thanks for the questionnaires. I may actually incorporate some of the format from both tastings into the tringle. |
Denny Conn
Senior Member
Username: Denny
Post Number: 6863
Registered: 01-2001
Posted From: 140.211.82.4
| | Posted on Friday, August 01, 2008 - 03:51 pm: |
|
Vance, make sure you tell them nothing to start with. When I did the FWH triangle, I just said "Here are 3 beers. They may all be the same, 1 or 2 may be the same, or they may all be different". Then ask them to identify which, if any, is different. Go through the first set of questions. Then tell them which are the same, but nothing else, and ask your second set of questions. Of course, the only responses that count are the ones that correctly identified the different beer. |
Bob Wall
Senior Member
Username: Brewdudebob
Post Number: 1613
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 24.248.74.254
| | Posted on Friday, August 01, 2008 - 04:10 pm: |
|
"So far they don't know that it's OO vs. O2"
I do.  |
Vance Barnes
Senior Member
Username: Vancebarnes
Post Number: 3316
Registered: 03-2003
Posted From: 66.32.240.193
| | Posted on Saturday, August 02, 2008 - 10:29 pm: |
|
Bob, so glad you volunteered to help me setup and run the tasting. 
I guess Craig is now in the volunteer group since he too knows. |
Josh Johnson
Member
Username: Msujdog
Post Number: 146
Registered: 07-2003
Posted From: 167.73.110.8
| | Posted on Sunday, August 10, 2008 - 10:49 pm: |
|
Damn. I just finshed a 10 gallon batch of my Centennial IPA, which I split into two 5g carboys. I wish I would've thought of doing the same thing for my club.
Definitely post the results after the tasting. |
Vance Barnes
Senior Member
Username: Vancebarnes
Post Number: 3328
Registered: 03-2003
Posted From: 74.7.7.66
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2008 - 03:30 pm: |
|
I've got the questionnaires and will have to enter all the data into XL and then graph the results. Just a quick survey at the meeting had some interesting results though.
About half the group identified the 2 beers that were alike. There were some flavor differences between the 2 batches. Of the people that prefered one over the other, most prefered the O2 over the OO beer. The opposite of what was reported at New Belgian during their experiments. They obviously have more experianced tasters than we did. There were a couple of BJCP rated tasters, some experianced but not BJCP, and a couple of newbies.
Everyone seemed to really enjoy doing the triangle tasting and the presentation. If you're looking for something to do for a club presentation I'd recommend this highly. |
Denny Conn
Senior Member
Username: Denny
Post Number: 6866
Registered: 01-2001
Posted From: 140.211.82.4
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2008 - 05:14 pm: |
|
I just read on the B3 forum that NB has stopped using OO because they found it reduced the shelf life of the beer. |
Bob G.
Intermediate Member
Username: Brewerbob
Post Number: 449
Registered: 06-2002
Posted From: 24.23.19.188
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2008 - 05:55 pm: |
|
Going back to good ol 02 for me. |
Kevin Kowalczyk
Intermediate Member
Username: Itsfunbrewingbeer
Post Number: 267
Registered: 10-2007
Posted From: 67.167.4.225
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 13, 2008 - 03:55 am: |
|
We're waiting! |
brett matthews
Intermediate Member
Username: Brettj
Post Number: 289
Registered: 06-2004
Posted From: 124.150.127.146
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 13, 2008 - 10:12 am: |
|
Denny, by how much was the shelf life reduced? Do you have any data points?
Homebrewers tend to churn through their beers quickly so it may not be such a problem.
I could imagine if normal shelf life of NB beer 6 months but cut down to 5 months it could be a problem. |
Denny Conn
Senior Member
Username: Denny
Post Number: 6872
Registered: 01-2001
Posted From: 140.211.82.4
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 13, 2008 - 04:11 pm: |
|
No details yet, Brett. I'll see what I can find and post anything relevant. But combined with Vance's taste tests where a large majority of tasters preferred the O2 beer over the OO beer,it pretty much kills my desire to use OO. |
brett matthews
Intermediate Member
Username: Brettj
Post Number: 290
Registered: 06-2004
Posted From: 124.150.127.146
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 13, 2008 - 11:11 pm: |
|
I'd be interested to see if NB detected any decrease or for that matter increase in beer quality and if they conducted their own consumer taste tests.
Vance's test is interesting, but it's only one taste test! As I've mentioned before, the last 2 beers brewed I've used OO, (a dubbel and a ESB) these are the best 2 beers I've brewed for a long time, and a APA that has just finished fermenting tastes amazing. This is a standard brew so I'm well tuned to what it looks like at each stage. This brew is remarkably clean and the hop character appears very fresh. So for me, if I keep getting these results I'll keep using OO.
I'm still staggered at the tunnel visioned attitude to this OO thing. I like this board because of the brewers willingness to take on new ideas but I'm not sure I've seen any topic split the board like OO (I'm sure there has been something in the deep dark past!)
I guess we can stuff around with parallel, triangular, whatever tastings but I think the best way to see if this work is to try it yourself with a standard brew that you know well. |
Vance Barnes
Senior Member
Username: Vancebarnes
Post Number: 3339
Registered: 03-2003
Posted From: 74.7.7.66
| | Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2008 - 03:30 pm: |
|
"(I'm sure there has been something in the deep dark past!)"
HSA? If not here, on the hbd for sure.
Still working on getting the data entered in XL and doing graphs. I've got Part 1 done and may get to start on Part 2. |
Denny Conn
Senior Member
Username: Denny
Post Number: 6874
Registered: 01-2001
Posted From: 140.211.82.4
| | Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2008 - 04:23 pm: |
|
Brett, I just don't see how wanting to get something verified amounts to "tunnel vision". If you had done a blind triangle test like Vance did, rather than saying the OO beers were your best, we'd have even more info to evaluate. Skepticism and a desire for proof should not be mistaken for tunnel vision. |
Bill Pierce
Moderator
Username: Billpierce
Post Number: 9120
Registered: 01-2002
Posted From: 69.157.30.201
| | Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2008 - 04:34 pm: |
|
Brett, I agree that a simple tasting to decide whether you like a particular batch may be good enough for your own purposes. However, it's hardly an objective evaluation that you can have confidence will stand up over repeated examples by multiple tasters. That's the kind of evidence you're seeking before you can make a blanket statement that a specific technique results in better beer. |
Kevin Kowalczyk
Intermediate Member
Username: Itsfunbrewingbeer
Post Number: 268
Registered: 10-2007
Posted From: 12.165.82.136
| | Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2008 - 05:46 pm: |
|
It would help if Vance hurried up and posted the results. |
Denny Conn
Senior Member
Username: Denny
Post Number: 6875
Registered: 01-2001
Posted From: 140.211.82.4
| | Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2008 - 07:02 pm: |
|
Wow, Bill, you were SO much more diplomatic than I was!  |
Vance Barnes
Senior Member
Username: Vancebarnes
Post Number: 3343
Registered: 03-2003
Posted From: 74.7.7.66
| | Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2008 - 07:15 pm: |
|
    
Form your own opinions |
Marc Rehfuss
Junior Member
Username: Marc_rehfuss
Post Number: 71
Registered: 03-2003
Posted From: 199.133.214.221
| | Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2008 - 07:24 pm: |
|
Has anyone conducted a test with non oxygenated and non oiled wort as a negative control? I wouldn't be surprised if the oil treated batches were the same as the non oxygenated ones.
Is only the starter receiving the treatment, or is the main wort only, or both? Pardon my questions. I'm just curious to try this, once I know what has already been done and what is standard practice. |
Kevin Kowalczyk
Intermediate Member
Username: Itsfunbrewingbeer
Post Number: 269
Registered: 10-2007
Posted From: 12.165.82.136
| | Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2008 - 07:47 pm: |
|
It looks like only 7 samplers got the triangular test correct, yet you're showing results for taste, aroma, and oxidation for 11. |
brett matthews
Intermediate Member
Username: Brettj
Post Number: 291
Registered: 06-2004
Posted From: 124.150.127.146
| | Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2008 - 10:25 pm: |
|
Denny, I'm just saying give it a shot, surely the best way to verify something is to see for yourself. I'm sure for every example or publication to show the beneifits of OO I can find, you would be able to find those to the contrary. Also, I tend to think we give more credence to those reports that prove for or against OO depending on what bias we have.
I'm certainly not wanting to portray my results as definitave proof that OO is a substitute for aeration, it's hardly that. What I'm saying is that there has been a quantum leap in my beer quality over the last 3 brews. The only thing that has changed is the addition of OO - malt, water treatment, de-chlorination, pitching rates etc have remained unchanged.
To exclude something as fundamental as aeration (and for quite sometime I was under-aerating my wort so I'm know the effect it has) is not something I'd entertain unless I was sure the substitute worked. I tried it once and it worked. Second and third time, worked again. If there was any sign of under-aeration I would immediately go back to the aquarium pump and air stone but I'm certainly not getting any signs of 'flabbiness' that for me anyway, was something I got time and time again when under aerating.
I'm not scientifically minded so I generally take the leap of faith and if something new gives me positive results time and time again I'll run with it. Don't need to know how and why everything works, just need to know that it does.
In the words of one of your great countrymen - 'There are known unknowns and then there are unknown unknowns' |
Vance Barnes
Senior Member
Username: Vancebarnes
Post Number: 3344
Registered: 03-2003
Posted From: 66.32.233.58
| | Posted on Saturday, August 16, 2008 - 05:43 pm: |
|
Kevin, I did enter all the info for the Prt 2 as they were told at that point which 2 were the same but not that they were OO and O2. The results for Part 2 were all over the place it seems anyhow. I will go back and delete the ones that didn't get part 1 right and see if it looks much different.
I don't have the file with the questions here at home with me but I'll post the questions for both parts next week. |
Kevin Kowalczyk
Intermediate Member
Username: Itsfunbrewingbeer
Post Number: 271
Registered: 10-2007
Posted From: 67.167.4.225
| | Posted on Sunday, August 17, 2008 - 03:29 pm: |
|
I thought that was the point of the triangular test, to get results from people who could differentiate between the two samples. I'm not trying to fault your results, I just wonder if it would make a difference. I've never done one of these before myself. Either way, the sample size is too small. |
HEU Brewer
Intermediate Member
Username: Heu_brewer
Post Number: 383
Registered: 01-2002
Posted From: 146.137.152.40
| | Posted on Monday, August 18, 2008 - 05:27 pm: |
|
So in summary there was not preference between the OO (4 votes) and O2 beers (6 votes).
(Message edited by HEU_Brewer on August 18, 2008) |
Denny Conn
Senior Member
Username: Denny
Post Number: 6877
Registered: 01-2001
Posted From: 140.211.82.4
| | Posted on Monday, August 18, 2008 - 08:01 pm: |
|
If you add the "no preference" and the O2, what it shows is that there was no clear preference for the OO beer. |
Vance Barnes
Senior Member
Username: Vancebarnes
Post Number: 3348
Registered: 03-2003
Posted From: 74.7.7.66
| | Posted on Monday, August 18, 2008 - 08:16 pm: |
|
This is the Part 2 data with only the folks that properly identified the 2 that were the same in Part 1. It now shows that the O2 beer had a cleaner taste but the OO beer had better hop flavor. |
Vance Barnes
Senior Member
Username: Vancebarnes
Post Number: 3349
Registered: 03-2003
Posted From: 74.7.7.66
| | Posted on Monday, August 18, 2008 - 08:19 pm: |
|
Part 1
1) These 3 samples are:
- The same
- One is different from the other two
- All three are different from each other
2) If two or more beers are the same, list which they are.
3) If you detected a difference, pick from the list what applied to each sample.
A. More hop flavor and aroma
B. Less hop flavor and aroma
c. More hop bitterness
D. Less hop bitterness
E. Cleaner fermentation flavor
F. More fermentation esters
G. Oxidation
H. No oxidation
Red Sample Yellow Sample Green Sample
4. Did you prefer one or more of the samples? Red, Yellow, Green, No preference
5. If you had a preference(s), what was it that you preferred about it?
Part 2
Identify the 2 samples and re-label as 1 and 2 (Red and Green = 1, Yellow = 2)
1) Thinking of clean taste, did one sample seem to have a cleaner taste?
1 2 No Preference
2) Subjectively describe your impression of the clean taste of each sample
1.
2.
3) Thinking of hop flavor and aroma, did one sample seem to have more?
1 2 No Preference
4) Subjectively describe your impression of the hop flavor and aroma of each sample.
1.
2.
3) Thinking of oxidation, did one sample seem to have any/more?
1 2 No Preference
4) Subjectively describe your impression of the oxidation of each sample.
1.
2.
Part 3
Write any comments you may have on the differences between the 2 samples. Continue on the back if you need to. |
HEU Brewer
Intermediate Member
Username: Heu_brewer
Post Number: 384
Registered: 01-2002
Posted From: 146.137.152.40
| | Posted on Monday, August 18, 2008 - 09:06 pm: |
|
So neither method has a "flavor" advantage.
Isn't that what the thesis was to begin with. |
brett matthews
Intermediate Member
Username: Brettj
Post Number: 292
Registered: 06-2004
Posted From: 124.150.127.146
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2008 - 10:18 am: |
|
I'm sure if you lined up a beer that received no aeration or OO for that matter, it would stand out like white balls on a black dog.
What it invariably will come down to is whether you prefer the flavour differences you get from conventional aeration or OO. |
Brews and Views Archive 2008 
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page