Declining bitter.

[foxy]

When I were but a wee lad, I only remember there being one bottled bitter and that was Whitbread English Ale Stock Bitter. I've always understood that bitter was keg or cask and the bottled equivalent was pale ale. Is this the case or was I brought up badly.

I read of an award winning Golden Bitter which was bottled, on Barclay Perkins, heavily hopped I haven't got a recipe but I focused mine on that, 75.8 IBU on BF

 

[Sadfield]

When I were but a wee lad, I only remember there being one bottled bitter and that was Whitbread English Ale Stock Bitter. I've always understood that bitter was keg or cask and the bottled equivalent was pale ale. Is this the case or was I brought up badly.

That fits with Boddingtons brewing IP (India Pale) but it appearing as Bitter in pubs. Beers and vocabulary evolving over time.

 

[Sadfield]

Here's an interesting one. Same brewery, same beer. Three pump clips.

 

[Northern_Brewer]

What's a good example of a Bitter?
I enjoyed a Boddingtons can recently but I assume that's not what we're talking about as it doesn't look anything like most Bitters

It was always sold as a bitter, and it's OK to think of bitter as covering a range from the southern ones with lots of crystal through to the likes of Landlord which only have 2-3% to Boddies which has none (although their Pub Ale for the US market looks like it does have some). In some ways Boddies should be viewed as a throwback to the 19th century before crystal became common. As the government forced gravities to drop in WWI, and Chevallier was replaced by new varieties of barley that didn't have such a full flavour, many breweries introduced some crystal to compensate for the reduction in body. Whereas northern breweries never did, or at least not to the same extent. I suspect part of that is regional tastes, partly the different water, and also I suspect Manchester was particularly wary of changing their beer after the 1900 scandal in which dodgy Scousers sold sugar to fine upstanding Manc brewers that was contaminated with arsenic leading to the deaths of over 100 people. So all the Manc brewers immediately stopped using adjuncts and their beers didn't "evolve" as much as in other parts of the country.

Just in general - don't get hung up on colour, British brewers have always manipulated it with caramel and other colourants. Landlord Dark is the most blatant example at the moment, it's just Landlord + caramel.

And the whole idea of "pale ale" is one of those things that means different things to different people. In the 19th century it was pretty much interchangeable with India pale ale - Bass is a famous example of a beer that was sent to India and always sold as just a pale ale, but Draught Bass now looks pretty much indistiguishable from any other best bitter at 4.4% (even if the export bottles are 5.1%). I don't think "pale ale" is a particularly helpful term these days - if it's yellow call it a golden ale, if not call it (best) bitter. Personally coming from Boddies homelands I don't have a problem with brewers calling their brown bitters "amber" particularly now we have line extensions like Spitfire Golden that need distinguishing from the "parent" brand.

 

[Northern_Brewer]

When I were but a wee lad, I only remember there being one bottled bitter and that was Whitbread English Ale Stock Bitter. I've always understood that bitter was keg or cask and the bottled equivalent was pale ale. Is this the case or was I brought up badly.

It was often the case but not always, people's views on this will be heavily influenced by how their local family brewer did things. ISTR Ron Pattinson doing some articles on how one of them changed through time. Pale ale was usually a premium product, so it was more common in richer areas. But eg see this from Ron :
Pale Ale had been called Bitter, Bitter Beer, Bitter Ale, etc before the first running Pale Ale was brewed. Bitter was not coined to describe running Pale Ales and after they had appeared continued to be used in relation to Pale Ales of all types.
Running Bitter wasn't darker than Pale Ale. The two beers were brewed from the same ingredients. In fact they were often parti-gyled together. I've yet to find a single case of crystal malt being used in a Pale Ale or Bitter of any kind before 1900.

 

[peebee]

Well, I feel compelled to chip into this one!

McMullan's "AK" and their despicable description of it as "Mild". Boddington's "Bitter" which I can best describe as "despicable"! And IBUs to describe historical beers ...

I can bundle them all up into ... hang-on, while I just take a swig of the subject matter ... my latest creation (creations?) of a Ron Pattinson unearthed recipe for "Boddington's 1901 AK" (estimated IBUs of 43). I've two on tap at this moment (they're part of my "Invert Sugar" ... No2 ... evaluations).

The recipe is in Ron's "AK" book: "The Story of a Light Bitter". So I think I can leave any comment about "AK" being "Mild" to Ron's outpouring on the Internet (clue; the comment I've seen don't need, perhaps shouldn't be, repeated here). AK could perhaps be described as a "mild bitter" if using "mild" in its arcane definition, but McMullan make no attempt to connect it that way (they mean "mild Ale"; I don't see how it could be interpreted any other way).

"Boddington's"? Enough in itself to exclude from my list of beers to brew, but 1901! One has to give "time" a chance to remedy any preconceptions I might have, although I did put together Ron's unearthing of "Boddington's 1901 Stout" (it was a rubbish recipe, and the results, which did include No.3 and No.4 Invert Sugar, were ... well, "rubbish"!).

I'd never consider a 43IBU bitter recipe to be drinkable (I never got on with many northern Bitters 'cos they were so "bitter"). My preference was sub-30IBU beers. But as @Northern_Brewer has said, Chavallier barley malt has a very "full" flavour (compared to the likes of limp-wristed "Maris Otter", etc.) and it counters any high "IBU" offerings. And I used Chevallier in the AKs I brewed 'cos that was the barley dominant at the time (1901). We are so lucky having Chavallier barley malt available to us, ten years ago we didn't! CAMRA should have formed in the 1920s to support it, not later to stem use of CO2.

But IBUs are a useful guide, if considered in relation to the other ingredients in the beer. And the retrospective application of IBUs to historic situations has worked for me, so I have no reason to denounce the efforts of those who provide the figures. Especially as those that do denounce the use of IBUS in historic recipes don't offer an alternative.

I'd also disagree with "bitter" not being a term in the 19th century. I've spent a jolly time brewing "Victorian Bitter" in the last two or three years. They were "little brothers" to the mighty "Pale Ales" of the day, but they certainly existed. Perhaps paving the way for the more recognisable (as modern 20th century bitter) "AKs"?

 

[Sadfield]

McMullan make no attempt to connect it that way (they mean "mild Ale"; I don't see how it could be interpreted any other way).

My interpretation, too. I read is a beer brewed as if it were for keeping, but served mild. Which is pretty much what all cask ale is, mild in the old sense.

In fairness to Mac's, ORIGINAL MILD could be read either way mild or Mild.

Anyway, I feel, this how Bitter was used as way of asking for cask pale ale. Beers remained as pale ales in the brewery, the point of sale terminology is what changes.

 

[Scrattajack]

I get some ridiculous figures using the Brewers Friend calculator so I always check a more reliable source

I'm pretty confused by Brewers Friend IBUs, often nearly double the figure in a recipe I'm using. Would you advise on which more reliable resource to use, please?

 

[Nicks90]

I don't care about what is and isn't to style, whether this or that tool calculates ibus correctly, or even if modern beers are even accurate to what they were 100 years ago.
I was lucky enough to have received my beer education being brought up in Yorkshire during the 80 and 90s. , drinking at pubs that would regularly have cask tetleys, John smiths, Taylor, theakston and Black sheep beers on tap. And more importantly still valuing the skill of good cellar management for the beer!

 

[Pennine]

An interesting read, sounds like casks short life might be the issue?

https://www.petebrown.net/2022/09/28/cask-ales-biggest-problem-is-solvable/

 

[foxy]

I'm pretty confused by Brewers Friend IBUs, often nearly double the figure in a recipe I'm using. Would you advise on which more reliable resource to use, please?

https://jphosom.github.io/alchemyov...mph-model/alchemyoverlord-blog-content31.html
https://jphosom.github.io/alchemyoverlord/.
Click on the above link put your data in, using SMPH then check with the Tinseth value on the same page. Their isn't a lot in it in the medium IBU range but a lot different to IBU's forecast on Brewers Friend.

 

[foxy]

An interesting read, sounds like casks short life might be the issue?

https://www.petebrown.net/2022/09/28/cask-ales-biggest-problem-is-solvable/

This hopefully is a solution for home brewers, long shelf life, no need for co2 and real ale at home. If it works which it should I will be using it on my Junior kegs and the Chubby.
10 litre Mini keg / Cask

 

[Pennine]

This hopefully is a solution for home brewers, long shelf life, no need for co2 and real ale at home. If it works which it should I will be using it on my Junior kegs and the Chubby.
10 litre Mini keg / Cask

The pump inflates a bag in the keg to keep pressure in the keg?

I have been enjoying like cask carbonation by simply keeping the CO2 levels down to 6-8psi. I don't understand all the fuss about not using external CO2, seems a bit silly to be honest. I get how some oxidation can change the cask flavour but I'd prefer to focus on the recipe and yeast to get the flavour you want.

 

[peebee]

The pump inflates a bag in the keg to keep pressure in the keg?

I have been enjoying like cask carbonation by simply keeping the CO2 levels down to 6-8psi. I don't understand all the fuss about not using external CO2, seems a bit silly to be honest. I get how some oxidation can change the cask flavour but I'd prefer to focus on the recipe and yeast to get the flavour you want.

As someone who does use CO2 to dispense "cask beer":

I do realise the frustration relying on CO2 supplies to dispense beer, that has such little requirement of CO2, can have. I'm all in favour of exploring mechanisms that can use a bike pump (or the like) to do the job. For homebrew, the likes of "breathers" are just not viable options (there is an "acceptance" to using them in commercial settings) and use CO2 anyway.

But I do peg the pressure down to 1 or 2 PSI (requires special, but cheap, regulators). 2PSI retains 1.1 "volumes" of CO2; a CAMRA documented agreeable level of CO2 content. But 1.1 "volumes" is borderline "fizzy". Fizzy does not describe "cask beer".

As for "simply keeping the CO2 levels down to 6-8psi" ...

 

[Pennine]

As someone who does use CO2 to dispense "cask beer":

I do realise the frustration relying on CO2 supplies to dispense beer, that has such little requirement of CO2, can have. I'm all in favour of exploring mechanisms that can use a bike pump (or the like) to do the job. For homebrew, the likes of "breathers" are just not viable options (there is an "acceptance" to using them in commercial settings) and use CO2 anyway.

But I do peg the pressure down to 1 or 2 PSI (requires special, but cheap, regulators). 2PSI retains 1.1 "volumes" of CO2; a CAMRA documented agreeable level of CO2 content. But 1.1 "volumes" is borderline "fizzy". Fizzy does not describe "cask beer".

As for "simply keeping the CO2 levels down to 6-8psi" ...

I should qualify that usually I carbonate for a week at 8psi and then I usually disconnect the CO2 and top up to 1-2 psi as needed for serving. I would not describe this as fizzy by any means.

 

[foxy]

The pump inflates a bag in the keg to keep pressure in the keg?

I have been enjoying like cask carbonation by simply keeping the CO2 levels down to 6-8psi. I don't understand all the fuss about not using external CO2, seems a bit silly to be honest. I get how some oxidation can change the cask flavour but I'd prefer to focus on the recipe and yeast to get the flavour you want.

No mate, the beer is in the bag. The air compresses the bag. These for the home brewer aren't for single use as the bag can be discarded and a new bag fitted. These are the disposable ones you may have seen.

 

[Erik The Anglophile]

I use a normal keg setup, prime my kegs to ~2 vol of co2 and have the pressure set to equilibrium for that at 11c.
However i dispense through nukataps with stout spouts attached that knocks at least half the co2 out and gives a creamy white head.
I would not call it cask but I do get a sort of kind of similair effect as beer pumped with a sparkler, and I dont have to drink 2-3 18L kegs within a few days.
Since the beer is naturally carbonated and not filtered, pasteurised etc it IMO is still in spirit "real" or "living" ale, but on the dispensing method there obviously has to be some compromise to make it work on a homebrew scale...

 

[peebee]

In an attempt to haul this thread back on-track ...

Bitter disappearing? It is, but that started with the swing to gassy keg in the 1960/70s. I've been through this discussion before (it was probably @Northern_Brewer putting things in perspective back then too, like his post above). "Bitter" hasn't so much "disappeared" as got "rebranded" into a multiple of "descriptive" terms. "Golden", "Amber", you name it ...

Here's a piccie of one (two!) of my "Golden" Ales (the ones I mentioned earlier).

Not actually a "Golden" but an attempt to replicate 1901 Boddington's AK. And AK was the Victorian precursor to 20th century "Bitter" ("Bitter" existed back then but was strong, around the SG 1.060 mark, and often termed "XK"). But the colour! Okay, it is a Boddington's recipe and they never got out of the habit of making it pale. But although crystal malt had been created back then, very little made it to "Bitters" ("AK" or "XK").

Dark coloured Bitters, now more often called "Amber Ales", didn't really surface until much later in the 20th century (as for dark "Mild", well search my posts for "Hancock's 1898 XX"). The colour in that AK comes from Invert Sugar No.2 which might disappoint some folk expecting more colour from No.2 Invert. (Wait to you see the colour of that Hancock XX mild ale! That used No.3 Invert).

No worry then that the disappearance of "Bitter" is accelerating. It's all in a name.



Credits to Ron Pattinson for digging up the recipes I use and the history, which I probably, inadvertently, massacre.

 

[Davegase]

In an attempt to haul this thread back on-track ...

Bitter disappearing? It is, but that started with the swing to gassy keg in the 1960/70s. I've been through this discussion before (it was probably @Northern_Brewer putting things in perspective back then too, like his post above). "Bitter" hasn't so much "disappeared" as got "rebranded" into a multiple of "descriptive" terms. "Golden", "Amber", you name it ...

Here's a piccie of one (two!) of my "Golden" Ales (the ones I mentioned earlier).

View attachment 75840

Not actually a "Golden" but an attempt to replicate 1901 Boddington's AK. And AK was the Victorian precursor to 20th century "Bitter" ("Bitter" existed back then but was strong, around the SG 1.060 mark, and often termed "XK"). But the colour! Okay, it is a Boddington's recipe and they never got out of the habit of making it pale. But although crystal malt had been created back then, very little made it to "Bitters" ("AK" or "XK").

Dark coloured Bitters, now more often called "Amber Ales", didn't really surface until much later in the 20th century (as for dark "Mild", well search my posts for "Hancock's 1898 XX"). The colour in that AK comes from Invert Sugar No.2 which might disappoint some folk expecting more colour from No.2 Invert. (Wait to you see the colour of that Hancock XX mild ale! That used No.3 Invert).

No worry then that the disappearance of "Bitter" is accelerating. It's all in a name.



Credits to Ron Pattinson for digging up the recipes I use and the history, which I probably, inadvertently, massacre.

One of my favourite b is 30 years ago was London pride, it's now labelled as London pride amber ale !

 

[Agentgonzo]

One of my favourite b is 30 years ago was London pride, it's now labelled as London pride amber ale !

I have that regularly. I've never even noticed that it calls itself an amber ale! I guess I'm used to just seeing the red "London pride"