I've been playing with the Recipator on the HBD website (http://hbd.org/cgi-bin/recipator/recipator), in conjunction with a recipe that I've been working with help from this board.In post 869, 2Leos says:"Note: go easy on the Honey malt. It sounds great on paper but it's a type of dark Munich malt and in the large proprtions the flavor can get cloying."Of course, only after I brew the first test batch, do I realize that the Honey malt my local homebrew supply store gave me was not in fact a type of dark Munic malt, and was actually a light (~25L), well, Honey malt! (and they said honey malt is honey malt, not a type of Munich, FWIW)*shrug*Hey it tasted good, so I'm not worried at all, just looking for enlightenment. Are they wrong?2nd question - wanting to mess around with this recipe using the previously mentioned Recipator (thanks 2Leos for turning me on to that!), they don't have a "honey malt" available as a malt choice. For calculation purposes, what substitution would serve to have the least deviation for purposes of calculating bitterness, alcohol, color, gravity, etc?Oh yes, one last question. I'd like to give the brew a somewhat more coppery look. For a 3 gallon batch, does the addition of 2/3 oz roasted barley sound out of line?Cheers!
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |