Cask Ale in the late 1800`s and before

[G.M. Gillman]

http://books.google.ca/books?id=tQU9AQA ... le&f=false

Interesting quote here from 1864 in England (read from "obs" two-thirds down the column on left side, pg. 644). It shows that cask-conditioning, i.e., beer racked unfiltered to which finings generally were added to clarify it quickly, was not an age-old process but a stop-gap, something resorted to when beer had to be sold quickly after production. As the author notes, the very process required this, since it prevented the beer from keeping very long, as anyone today knows who is familiar with real ale.

The adding of sugar to racked cask ale to ensure the necessary carbonation at dispense was a common expedient (and still is) as well, amongst others to ensure rapid conditioning.

But before the 1800`s, it appears as this extract suggests, that beers were allowed to stand a long time to clarify naturally and acquire special flavours which were probably the result of secondary fermentation, in some cases from wild yeasts and lactic bacteria.

Cask ale as we know it today, by many accounts in the 1800`s in Britain, is relatively new, not an age-old process. So what is "real" does depend on time and place very much.

The closest we have today to these old long-standing beers is bottle-conditioned beers (albeit I have read these do not replicate exactly storage in oak containers - makes sense given the differing proportions of air and yeast and lack of porosity) and beers long-stored possibly in tank at the brewery. It is always hard to know since beers stored at the brewery in metal casks or tank usually will be kept cold, which is a sort of lagering. So bottle-conditioning is probably the best way to try to approximate these old beers.

It`s interesting too that the modern (in North America anyway) production of cask beer doesn`t concern itself with invariable clarity. Often the beers are cloudy. Sometimes they are clear. It may vary from brewer to brewer and even batch to batch. So this part of 1800`s cask-conditioning has been abandoned I would say, at least in North America.

It would be interesting to have a tasting which compares:

1) a fined cask ale
2) the same beer racked unfiltered but unfined
3) the same beer aged in wood on the lees ideally at cellar temperature for 6 months, say
4) the same beer bottled with its yeast and a "dosage" if necessary and consumed 6 months after bottling.

Which is the best? Maybe there is no best.

Gary

[JeffPorter]

Interesting.

Where does Black Creek's process fall into this? They essentially rack to wooden casks, but without extra sugar, and then bottled into growlers...

[G.M. Gillman]

Jeff, I have been there and my understanding is, they do one ferment and then rack as you say into casks from which growlers are filled. They don't do a secondary in the casks. It doesn't stay there long enough. However, you can, and I have, bottle-conditioned the growlers. I have kept them in a corner of a warm room and from being completely (or almost) flat they carbonated naturally. This is because there was enough residual yeast and enough extract in the beers, no need to add sugar. I kept one about 4 weeks, maybe 6 weeks, but not six months! I would have kept them longer but wasn't sure how much pressure was building. They tasted just great, really.

Gary

[JeffPorter]

However, you can, and I have, bottle-conditioned the growlers. I have kept them in a corner of a warm room and from being completely (or almost) flat they carbonated naturally. This is because there was enough residual yeast and enough extract in the beers, no need to add sugar. I kept one about 4 weeks, maybe 6 weeks, but not six months! I would have kept them longer but wasn't sure how much pressure was building. They tasted just great, really.

Definitely have to try this, Gary - thanks!

[JasonTremblay]

A couple other things to add ...

By the mid-18th century, the production (both malting and brewing) of porter had become industrialized in the UK. The larger breweries were producing enough to age (we're talking months to a couple years) in enormous oak vats (thousands of litres) which sound an awful lot like Rodenbach's "foeders" (you can see some photos here http://www.mateveza.com/belgium/trip-to ... rodenbach/ ).

It makes me wonder if porter tasted Flemish ...

From that point on, beer and technology marched forward hand in hand: pale malts; thermometers; hydrometers; refrigeration; single cell culturing (i.e., pure yeast cultures). And on. And on.

The roots of the craft beer industry in the UK and North America go back to the world's first industrialized, mass-produced beers. Oddly enough.

Only with better sanitation and less funk.

I'll leave it up to you folks to debate whether anyone's carrying on with the tradition of funky British ales

Jason

[icemachine]

I've got 4G of a porter I'm letting condition for 6 months with the intention of blending it with a fresh porter in the spring, something to submit for next years TBW homebrew contest.

I've based this idea off what I've read about how vatted porter would be mixed with fresh before being sent to pubs

[Tapsucker]

Thanks for this. Fascinating post once again, Gary!

[JK]

Thanks again for a very informative post but what caught my eye is

1) a fined cask ale
2) the same beer racked unfiltered but unfined
3) the same beer aged in wood on the lees ideally at cellar temperature for 6 months, say
4) the same beer bottled with its yeast and a "dosage" if necessary and consumed 6 months after bottling.

This sounds like a most excellent cask/bottle type event. The best brewers in Ontario or anyone else for that matter ,all do a one off and all treat their beer to the four situations proposed by Gary.

[G.M. Gillman]

Thanks gents, all excellent points and information.

Gary

[mintjellie]

http://books.google.ca/books?id=tQU9AQA ... le&f=false

Interesting quote here from 1864 in England (read from "obs" two-thirds down the column on left side, pg. 644). It shows that cask-conditioning, i.e., beer racked unfiltered to which finings generally were added to clarify it quickly, was not an age-old process but a stop-gap, something resorted to when beer had to be sold quickly after production. As the author notes, the very process required this, since it prevented the beer from keeping very long, as anyone today knows who is familiar with real ale.

The adding of sugar to racked cask ale to ensure the necessary carbonation at dispense was a common expedient (and still is) as well, amongst others to ensure rapid conditioning.

But before the 1800`s, it appears as this extract suggests, that beers were allowed to stand a long time to clarify naturally and acquire special flavours which were probably the result of secondary fermentation, in some cases from wild yeasts and lactic bacteria.

Cask ale as we know it today, by many accounts in the 1800`s in Britain, is relatively new, not an age-old process. So what is "real" does depend on time and place very much.

The closest we have today to these old long-standing beers is bottle-conditioned beers (albeit I have read these do not replicate exactly storage in oak containers - makes sense given the differing proportions of air and yeast and lack of porosity) and beers long-stored possibly in tank at the brewery. It is always hard to know since beers stored at the brewery in metal casks or tank usually will be kept cold, which is a sort of lagering. So bottle-conditioning is probably the best way to try to approximate these old beers.

It`s interesting too that the modern (in North America anyway) production of cask beer doesn`t concern itself with invariable clarity. Often the beers are cloudy. Sometimes they are clear. It may vary from brewer to brewer and even batch to batch. So this part of 1800`s cask-conditioning has been abandoned I would say, at least in North America.

It would be interesting to have a tasting which compares:

1) a fined cask ale
2) the same beer racked unfiltered but unfined
3) the same beer aged in wood on the lees ideally at cellar temperature for 6 months, say
4) the same beer bottled with its yeast and a "dosage" if necessary and consumed 6 months after bottling.

Which is the best? Maybe there is no best.

Gary

Want to have a bit of fun? Go on beeradvocate and post this in the UK & Ireland forum. Sit back and watch the shitstorm the "cask is always best under every circumstance" crowd whips up.