Author
Topic: Beer
(Read 174882 times)

Cincydawg · « **Reply #868 on:** June 17, 2024, 03:32:07 PM »

I can understand use of rice to produce a more "palatable" lighter lager preferred by working men, back in the day.

It might not be just a cost factor involved.

utee94 · « **Reply #869 on:** June 17, 2024, 03:36:47 PM »

You've got the cause and effect reversed. Rice was historically cheap and plentiful, American macro-brewers used it, and it shaped the taste of generations of Americans.

Before Prohibition there were thousand of breweries in the US, all making various styles of beer that was not strictly limited to what we now call the "Amercian pale lager" or "American light lager." Indeed, the beer styles were all European, because that's where the brewers were coming from. In 1870 the US hit a peak of over 3,200 breweries. By 1915 that was down to around 1,300 but then Prohibition came and the story got much worse. In 1934 there were just 756 breweries and by 1980 that number was down to 101. Most of them had shifted from making a diverse range of tasty beers, to the standard American macro-swill light lager.

Here's some historical rice pricing, it wasn't always expensive and that's why macro-brewers used it.

[img width=500 height=242.983]https://i.imgur.com/pCqrEoY.png[/img]

https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/rice

Cincydawg · « **Reply #870 on:** June 17, 2024, 03:48:29 PM »

I get that, I merely suggest that the "working man" of the day may simply have preferred the lighter more refreshing style and the macrobrewers provided it. Or, as you say, it was cheaper to make and they were forced to liking it because of lack of alternatives. Or both.

I've been told that Budvar is quite good beer, the Beer of Kings as it were. I wonder if Budweiser of say 1910 tasted about the same as today or if it was quite different.

utee94 · « **Reply #871 on:** June 17, 2024, 04:13:52 PM »

Original Czech Budvar is pretty good, certainly much better than American Budweiser, but nobody on the planet makes pilsners as good as the Czechs do, so it has tons of competition in its home country.

I'd imagine original American Budweiser tastes pretty different but I don't really have any direct knowledge of it.

Cincydawg · « **Reply #872 on:** June 17, 2024, 04:37:32 PM »

I found these responses on line:

The Budweiser recipe and trademark was at the heart of a trademark lawsuit in the 1890’s. Busch had searched all over Europe for a beer recipe he that he could use ( abundant and cheap) corn in that did not develop off flavors. In the Czech-Bohemian town of Budweis they found such a recipe, brought it back to the US and perfected it.

There were several American imitators of the brew, also calling themselves “Budweiser”, which in German simply means “ from Budweis” or “"of the style of Budweis”; the competitors said Busch couldn't trademark the general term , any more than someone might claim exclusive right to “Texas style” barbecue, or “Chicago style” pizza. The court disagreed , determining that Busch could trademark their distinctive name for their distinctive brew recipe, and that other brewers use of the term was a deceptive attempt to sell a different and inferior product by confusing the public as to the origin of the beer.

I have never drunk any 1890’s Budweiser and I bet that no one alive has done so, so I cannot speak with 100 per cent certainty, BUT, Given all of the above, it is my expectation that Budweiser that you buy today pretty much is exactly the same beer with the same taste and color and body as the beer they fought the lengthy and expensive lawsuit over. That recipe is jealously maintained and adhered to, and it is the basis for the development of Anheiser-Busch into the brewing colossus that it is today.

Cincydawg · « **Reply #873 on:** June 17, 2024, 04:38:15 PM »

Budweiser, originally brewed in the 1800s, was quite different from the modern Budweiser that we know today. In the 1800s, Budweiser was brewed as a lager by Adolphus Busch, who was a German immigrant. The beer was brewed using traditional methods and ingredients available at that time.

In terms of appearance, Budweiser in the 1800s would have likely had a similar golden color to what it has today, as lagers typically have a pale to golden hue. However, the clarity and carbonation levels may have been different due to variations in brewing techniques and equipment.

As for the taste, 19th-century Budweiser would have likely had a more robust and complex flavor profile compared to the modern version. The beer would have been brewed using different strains of yeast, malted barley, hops, and water sources that were available at that time. It may have had a more pronounced malt character and hop bitterness, with potentially more variation in flavor due to the lack of modern brewing technology for consistency.

It's important to note that the recipe and brewing methods for Budweiser have evolved over the years, and the taste of the beer has been adjusted to appeal to a wider audience. The Budweiser available today is a product of modern brewing techniques and ingredients, so it may not taste exactly like the 19th-century version.

Cincydawg · « **Reply #874 on:** June 17, 2024, 04:39:48 PM »

The American light lager came from an unusual problem: the barley that was grown in 19th century North America had higher protein than the barley that was grown in Europe at the time, and that meant that the beer got hazy, which was a problem at a time when pale beers were rapidly displacing dark beers in popularity. The result was the use of adjuncts to keep the alcohol content at a consistent level while reducing the suspended protein in the finished beer; in the eastern US in particular, that generally meant using corn, while in the west, that meant rice. Adolphus Busch left Germany to settle in Missouri, where presumably rice was the standard practice at his father-in-law’s brewery that became AB, so that’s what Budweiser became. The flavor has been lightened over the years (reducing hop levels in particular), but Busch’s success in marketing made Bud the standard for American light lagers. It is now reasonably easy to get European-style barley in North America, and craft brewers in general tend to prefer it for their brews, but there’s plenty of American-style barley grown as well, and the American light lager style, pisswater though some deem it, is a practical solution to a rather esoteric problem.

(There are still corn-based American lagers, both in and outside the US (Rolling Rock, Corona, and my local choice for this style, Narragansett, all come to mind), and corn is a significant ingredient in the pre-Prohibition American lager some homebrewers favor.)

utee94 · « **Reply #875 on:** June 17, 2024, 05:08:35 PM »

So the answer is-- nobody knows.

Just a bunch of speculation.

Pretty much all of the Czech and German breweries follow the Reinheitsgebot German beer purity law which forbids the use of any adjunct. Only barley, hops, water, and yeast can be used. So any recipe that was actually taken directly from Europe, would not include corn or rice.

Which is why I know that all American macro-brew recipes that include corn or rice, are most certainly different from the European recipes they are descended from.

Cincydawg · « **Reply #876 on:** June 17, 2024, 05:22:36 PM »

The Rice is Right | TheBeerProfessor

In the craft brewing world, rice is what is considered an adjunct. An adjunct is anything outside of the beer’s four traditional ingredients of malt, hops, water, and yeast. Rice, as an ingredient in beer, has a bad reputation among some craft beer drinkers due to its association with macro brews such as Budweiser and Bud Light. In her 2006 book Ambitious Brew, Maureen Ogle made the statement that “craft brewers treat rice almost as if it’s rat poison.” A little tongue-in-cheek perhaps, but you get the idea that rice might have a reputation problem. In a 2009 video titled “I am a Craft Brewer” several dozen craft brewers from across the county extol the virtues of craft beer and the people that make it. At one point in the video a craft brewer disparagingly notes that corporate breweries put rice in their beer. This is followed a few seconds later by anothet craft brewer proudly stating that “I don’t put rice in my beer”.

For some years now, however, some craft breweries have been putting rice in their beer – it has not been every brewery and those that do are doing so very selectively. So we see headlines like Craft Brewers Rethink Rice in Beer and The Rice Renaissance. Breweries that are utilizing rice as an ingredient in their beer appear to be in places that were at the forefront of the craft beer revolution back in the 1980s – places in states such as California, Colorado, and Washington. Could it be that the initial innovators are still leading innovation today? Fieldwork Brewing in Berkeley, CA brew a Citra Rice Lager that they have named Sushi Beer. Bottle Logic Brewing in Anaheim, CA brew a Japanese Rice Lager called Hanamachi. And it’s not all Rice Lagers that craft breweries are producing. As far back as 2007, Great Divide Brewing Co. in Denver, CO released Samurai, an unfiltered rice and barley ale. Great Divide is still brewing Samurai today, and includes it in its year-round portfolio of beers. Some breweries are using locally grown rice to produce their rice beer. Crying Eagle Brewing Company in Lake Charles, LA used Louisiana-grown rice in its Louisiana Lager.

utee94 · « **Reply #877 on:** June 17, 2024, 05:25:12 PM »

There are plenty of brewers experimenting with rice and corn adjuncts these days.

It doesn't mean the beer they are making actually tastes good.

I've tried a bunch of them, and every time I have one I can't help but think to myself-- You know, this beer could be so much better if they hadn't used corn or rice.

Cincydawg · « **Reply #878 on:** June 17, 2024, 05:26:11 PM »

Traditionally, barley was the main grain used in brewing beer. And for the most part, it still is. However, many brewers use other grains along with barley to create their beer. Most of the beer sold in the world is made with rice or corn included in the grain variety.

Beer purists accuse the big beer brewers of adding rice or corn to the beer as a way to make cheaper beer as rice and corn often cost less than barley. There is no proof that adding in these other grains is done merely as a cost-savings technique. Major brewers do not make a secret of the grains these use to make the beer—anyone touring their breweries is told openly about the ingredients that are used. In fact, Budweiser bottle labels clearly tout the quality of rice used to make the beer.

It's All About the Color

The alternate grains, like rice and corn, certainly make the beer lighter than barley does, and that seems to be the goal of most makers of pale lager. Lighter colored beer is quite popular and many beer brewers adhere to "the lighter the better" adage.

"Adjunct" Grains

A term widely used in the brewing industry, adjunct grains refer to any ingredient, besides barley, that is used to make beer, by adding sugar to the fermentation process. Adjunct grains include corn and rice, along with well known and more accepted beer-making grains like rye, wheat, and oats. The rise in craft brewers has led to more small-batch beers produced with adjunct grains and other ingredients. With more options to choose from, a beer drinker may be more aware of the beer's ingredients and the impact on the flavor profile of the beer.

The Effects

Corn adds a slightly sweet smoothness to the beer and is often included in light lagers and cream-style ales. It can also be used to lighten a fuller, denser English style beer. It is hard to taste an actual corn flavor in most beers, however, its impact results in smoother, light beers. Rice is even less flavorful than corn and produces a dry, clean taste.

Cincydawg · « **Reply #879 on:** June 17, 2024, 05:27:07 PM »

Well, I learned a few things in all of this uncertainty. I presume Sam Adams does not use rice, they follow the German purity regime, and I like the taste of it.

utee94 · « **Reply #880 on:** June 17, 2024, 05:36:56 PM »

Quote from: Cincydawg on June 17, 2024, 05:26:11 PM

Traditionally, barley was the main grain used in brewing beer. And for the most part, it still is. However, many brewers use other grains along with barley to create their beer. Most of the beer sold in the world is made with rice or corn included in the grain variety.
Beer purists accuse the big beer brewers of adding rice or corn to the beer as a way to make cheaper beer as rice and corn often cost less than barley. There is no proof that adding in these other grains is done merely as a cost-savings technique. Major brewers do not make a secret of the grains these use to make the beer—anyone touring their breweries is told openly about the ingredients that are used. In fact, Budweiser bottle labels clearly tout the quality of rice used to make the beer.
It's All About the Color
The alternate grains, like rice and corn, certainly make the beer lighter than barley does, and that seems to be the goal of most makers of pale lager. Lighter colored beer is quite popular and many beer brewers adhere to "the lighter the better" adage.
"Adjunct" Grains
A term widely used in the brewing industry, adjunct grains refer to any ingredient, besides barley, that is used to make beer, by adding sugar to the fermentation process. Adjunct grains include corn and rice, along with well known and more accepted beer-making grains like rye, wheat, and oats. The rise in craft brewers has led to more small-batch beers produced with adjunct grains and other ingredients. With more options to choose from, a beer drinker may be more aware of the beer's ingredients and the impact on the flavor profile of the beer.
The Effects
Corn adds a slightly sweet smoothness to the beer and is often included in light lagers and cream-style ales. It can also be used to lighten a fuller, denser English style beer. It is hard to taste an actual corn flavor in most beers, however, its impact results in smoother, light beers. Rice is even less flavorful than corn and produces a dry, clean taste.

Disagree with these two statements completely, I can immediately tell when adjuncts are used. It's quite easy to taste the corn or rice, just as it's easy to taste the wheat in a Hefeweizen, and the rye in a rye ale is probably the most distinctive of them all.

So, why then is it acceptable by the general beer-nerd public to add wheat or rye to the grain bill, but not corn and rice?

The simplest reason of them all-- wheat and rye enhance the flavor, they taste good. Rice and corn diminish the flavor, they do not taste good.

And here's an all-malt pilsner that doesn't require any adjuncts in order to be beautifully clear and pale:

Cincydawg · « **Reply #881 on:** June 17, 2024, 06:53:03 PM »

I’m not a beer connesewer, I don’t even taste wines that critically.

The B12 (XII) Forum, home of the 'Front Porch, y'all' at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.

Topic: Beer

Cincydawg

Re: Beer

utee94

Re: Beer

Cincydawg

Re: Beer

utee94

Re: Beer

Cincydawg

Re: Beer

Cincydawg

Re: Beer

Cincydawg

Re: Beer

utee94

Re: Beer

Cincydawg

Re: Beer

utee94

Re: Beer

Cincydawg

Re: Beer

Cincydawg

Re: Beer

utee94

Re: Beer

Cincydawg

Re: Beer