Captain Lawrence Kid gloves on Nathan

[Zen_Brew]

I listened to the Captain Lawrence X-tra gold show. I do understand all the intracacies that were being debated with yeast generation and pitching rates, but it certainly seems like the beer was possibly borderline on being cloned. In his recap Nathan admits to Mashing at a lower temp, not letting the ferment temp get as high as the brewer, and using different sugar than the brewer did. No-one called him out on any of these changes, but I remember a time or two when Tasty made a gut change to a recipe and he caught hell for it. Why the kid gloves on Nathan? I'm sure he is a skilled brewer, but he did apparently deviate from the brewers procedures. Not trying to be hyper critical, I enjoy the shows, just making an observation.

Also one comment on the sanitized foil over the airlock. During this highly active period of fermentation it is certainly unlikely that any bad guys are going to fall into the fermentor, but I read a post last year from a person using that method that had a fruit fly crawl in there and leave some lovely larvae behind in the fermentor. After reading about that I prefer to keep a carboy cap with blowoff tube, or airlock on my fermentor.

[robert4136]

I do agree that the process is part of the recipe and you can't call a beer cloned at a very fundamental level if they taste different in any way and not just because you would't change any physical ingredients.

However, at the same time, if the beer is indeed considered non-cloned, by the rules of the show it would need to be re-brewed. IMO, this seemingly on the fence non-cloned beer would not need to be re-brewed because the brewer has enough knowledge to make small changes.

So in the end, i feel like the consensus should be Not Cloned but no need to re-brew.

[jamilz]

There are lots of little tweaks that are made to the information the brewer provides. If we just took the information from the interview and brewed it, chances are it would not work out. You need to make lots of adjustments between a pro scale brew and a home scale brew and it isn't just the amount of grain.

Of course if you want to disagree with our consensus, since you weren't there and couldn't taste the beer.... I guess that makes perfect sense.

[andy77]

Ohhh snap!!!

[breyton]

There are lots of little tweaks that are made to the information the brewer provides. If we just took the information from the interview and brewed it, chances are it would not work out. You need to make lots of adjustments between a pro scale brew and a home scale brew and it isn't just the amount of grain.

Of course if you want to disagree with our consensus, since you weren't there and couldn't taste the beer.... I guess that makes perfect sense.

If I remember correctly, isn't this the same issue everyone jumped on Tasty because he altered the brewers recipe to match his brewing process? I am just saying....dont change the rules in the middle of the game.

After listening to the show, I have to say this beer should be in the NOT Cloned category because Nathan clearly made a different beer (used different ingredients, different mash & fermentation temperatures) than what the Capt. Lawrence brewery described. IF the beer did hit the mark, then fine... the altered recipe worked, but in this case it did not, so by the definition of the show.. it is NOT cloned...

[Dubba_Brew]

I would think that you judge the cloning issue on the final product. You're not reproducing their beer to the "T"... you're trying to clone it. So... if you set them both down, side by side and tried them... could you tell the difference? That's what really matters. You could get their exact recipe and brew it on your system at home and it might not come out the same... systems are different and that needs to be accounted for.

[Chupa LaHomebrew]

On the process issues you mention, if the brewers did not alter the recipe from the commercial version somewhat to accommodate their brewing and fermentation system, these things would almost never be cloned. Things like hop timing and fermentation temperature have to be adjusted somewhat. Take the Levitation clone for example, I don't think you want to ferment that at 72 even if the brewery is doing it. It would be too estery and maybe show some alcohol heat.

The only thing I think Nathan should have stuck with is the use of cane sugar, instead of switching that to clear candi. But I don't think that would show up in any major way in a beer. You would have to have all the other fermentation variables dialed in before that had a chance of showing up.

Also, the clone batch was brewed before the commercial batch was sent out to them, so Nathan and Jamil did not have a chance to try the beer before brewing it. More props to them for getting so close on the first shot.

Anyway, great show guys. I'm glad you guys liked the beer, since I'm pretty sure most of you had not tried it before.

[robert4136]

There are lots of little tweaks that are made to the information the brewer provides. If we just took the information from the interview and brewed it, chances are it would not work out. You need to make lots of adjustments between a pro scale brew and a home scale brew and it isn't just the amount of grain.

Of course if you want to disagree with our consensus, since you weren't there and couldn't taste the beer.... I guess that makes perfect sense.

i am the silent guest at every beer tasting, lol. yes of course all i can go by is the info provided by the dialog of the show, i suppose the heart of the debate lines within people's definition or perceived definition of what a cloned beer is, i think justin was even a bit confused with that as well.

thanks, and as always, i love every second of the brewcasts

rob