I promised you some more Amsdell fun and here it is. The same table as before, just this time with added analysis. Exciting or what?
Let's start with the old table:
Amsdell of Albany beers 1901 – 1904 | |||||||||||
Date | Year | Beer | Style | OG | FG | ABV | App. Atten-uation | lbs hops/ qtr | hops lb/US brl | hops lb/Imp brl | boil time (hours) |
22nd Jan | 1901 | Polar | Ale | 1054 | 1019.2 | 4.61 | 64.55% | 6.01 | 1.15 | 1.61 | 1 |
24th Jan | 1901 | XX | Ale | 1052.6 | 1016.4 | 4.8 | 68.93% | 6.33 | 1.8 | 2.52 | 1 |
20th Mar | 1901 | Diamond | Stock Ale | 1081.7 | 1028 | 7.11 | 65.76% | 8.08 | 2.42 | 3.39 | 1 |
1st Apr | 1901 | XX | Ale | 1054.6 | 1019.6 | 4.63 | 64.16% | 6.23 | 1.61 | 2.26 | 1 |
24th May | 1901 | Scotch | Scotch Ale | 1066.6 | 1023.6 | 5.7 | 64.64% | 5.55 | 1.95 | 2.73 | 1.5 |
27th May | 1901 | XX | Ale | 1059.7 | 1022.4 | 4.94 | 62.56% | 5.82 | 1.23 | 1.72 | 1.25 |
22nd Oct | 1901 | Pale XX | Ale | 1054.2 | 1017.2 | 4.89 | 68.33% | 5.51 | 1.02 | 1.43 | 1 |
1904 | Burton | Stock Ale | 1075.8 | 2 | |||||||
12th Apr | 1904 | Diamond | Stock Ale | 1074 | 1020.8 | 7.04 | 71.96% | 8.29 | 2.27 | 3.18 | 1 |
14th Nov | 1904 | XX Winter | Ale | 1058 | 1019.2 | 5.13 | 66.95% | 5.75 | 1.12 | 1.57 | 1 |
24th Mar | 1905 | India Pale Ale | IPA | 1077.6 | 1029.2 | 6.4 | 62.35% | 4.85 | 2.25 | 3.15 | 1 |
1st May | 1905 | Scotch | Scotch Ale | 1062.7 | 1019.2 | 5.76 | 69.46% | 5.26 | 1.15 | 1.61 | 1 |
And here's one of the beers from Whitbread in London from around the same time:
Whitbread beers 1901 - 1902 | |||||||||||
Date | Year | Beer | Style | OG | FG | ABV | App. Attenuation | lbs hops/ qtr | hops lb/brl | boil time (hours) | boil time (hours) |
14th Mar | 1901 | P | Porter | 1055.1 | 1015.0 | 5.31 | 72.79% | 7.37 | 1.72 | 1.75 | 1.75 |
8th May | 1901 | S | Stout | 1072.5 | 1028.0 | 5.89 | 61.39% | 8.57 | 3.15 | 1.75 | 1.75 |
8th May | 1901 | SS | Stout | 1085.9 | 1036.0 | 6.60 | 58.08% | 8.57 | 3.72 | 1.75 | 1.75 |
8th May | 1901 | SSS | Stout | 1095.7 | 1043.0 | 6.98 | 55.08% | 8.57 | 4.15 | 1.75 | 1.75 |
29th Jun | 1901 | X | Mild | 1052.4 | 1012.0 | 5.34 | 77.08% | 5.99 | 1.39 | 1.75 | 1.75 |
20th Feb | 1902 | IPA | IPA | 1049.9 | 1013.0 | 4.88 | 73.93% | 11.97 | 2.65 | 1.5 | 1.75 |
27th Jun | 1901 | FA | Pale Ale | 1051.8 | 1013.0 | 5.13 | 74.90% | 10.92 | 2.54 | 1.5 | 1.75 |
25th Jun | 1901 | 2PA | Pale Ale | 1053.7 | 1014.0 | 5.26 | 73.95% | 9.85 | 2.39 | 1.5 | 1.42 |
15th Jun | 1901 | PA | Pale Ale | 1058.4 | 1017.0 | 5.48 | 70.91% | 10.98 | 2.93 | 1.5 | 2 |
27th Jun | 1901 | XK | Pale Ale | 1060.7 | 1019.0 | 5.52 | 68.71% | 6.02 | 1.63 | 1.75 | 1.75 |
31st May | 1901 | KK | Stock Ale | 1073.0 | 1030.0 | 5.69 | 58.91% | 12.00 | 4.03 | 1.75 | 2 |
31st May | 1901 | 2KKK | Stock Ale | 1078.7 | 1033.0 | 6.05 | 58.07% | 12.00 | 4.35 | 1.75 | 2 |
31st May | 1901 | KKK | Stock Ale | 1082.8 | 1036.0 | 6.19 | 56.53% | 12.00 | 4.58 | 1.75 | 2 |
Sources: | |||||||||||
Whitbread brewing records held at the London Metropolitan Archives document numbers LMA/4453/D/01/066, LMA/4453/D/01/067 and LMA/4453/D/09/095. |
There's one obvious difference: Whitbread brewed a much wider range of beers. The lack of a Porter or Stout is particularly striking. Amsdell really was a specialist Ale brewery. With only really 4 products: XX Ale, Diamond Ale, Scotch Ale and IPA. An odd set, especially the Scotch Ale. Whitbread also brewed a wider range of gravities, from 1050º to 1096º, compared to Amsdell's 1053º to 1082º.
Attenuation is a funny one. The standard-strength Whitbread beers are mostly around 75% apparent attenuation, while Amsdell's are around 65%. That changes with the Stouts and Stock Ales, with the Whitbread examples all under 60%.
Amsdell's boil times are much shorter than Whitbread's, mostly just one hour, while Whitbread mostly boiled for an hour and three quarters.
Let's take a closer look at some of the specific types. We'll start with the commonest of the Amsdell beers - XX Ales and Polar. Here's a comparison with Whitbread's X Ale:
Date | Year | Brewer | Beer | Style | OG | FG | ABV | App. Atten-uation | lbs hops/ qtr | hops lb/US brl | hops lb/Imp brl | boil time (hours) | boil time (hours) |
22nd Jan | 1901 | Amsdell | Polar | Ale | 1054 | 1019.2 | 4.61 | 64.55% | 6.01 | 1.15 | 1.61 | 1 | |
24th Jan | 1901 | Amsdell | XX | Ale | 1052.6 | 1016.4 | 4.8 | 68.93% | 6.33 | 1.8 | 2.52 | 1 | |
1st Apr | 1901 | Amsdell | XX | Ale | 1054.6 | 1019.6 | 4.63 | 64.16% | 6.23 | 1.61 | 2.26 | 1 | |
27th May | 1901 | Amsdell | XX | Ale | 1059.7 | 1022.4 | 4.94 | 62.56% | 5.82 | 1.23 | 1.72 | 1.25 | |
22nd Oct | 1901 | Amsdell | Pale XX | Ale | 1054.2 | 1017.2 | 4.89 | 68.33% | 5.51 | 1.02 | 1.43 | 1 | |
14th Nov | 1904 | Amsdell | XX Winter | Ale | 1058 | 1019.2 | 5.13 | 66.95% | 5.75 | 1.12 | 1.57 | 1 | |
Average | 1055.5 | 1019.0 | 4.83 | 65.91% | 5.94 | 1.32 | 1.85 | 1.04 | |||||
29th Jun | 1901 | Whitbread | X | Mild | 1052.4 | 1012.0 | 5.34 | 77.08% | 5.99 | 1.39 | 1.75 | 1.75 | |
Difference | -3.2 | -7.0 | 0.5 | 11.2% | 0.0 | -0.5 | 0.7 |
And, because I noticed that the Whitbread hopping rate was quite low, here's a comparison with Barclay Perkins X Ale:
Date | Year | Brewer | Beer | Style | OG | FG | ABV | App. Atten-uation | lbs hops/ qtr | hops lb/US brl | hops lb/Imp brl | boil time (hours) | boil time (hours) |
Average | Amsdell | XX | Ale | 1055.5 | 1019.0 | 4.83 | 65.91% | 5.94 | 1.32 | 1.85 | 1.04 | ||
5th Jun | 1900 | Barclay Perkins | X | Mild | 1052.8 | 1010.0 | 5.67 | 81.11% | 8.01 | 1.75 | 2 | 2.5 | |
Difference | -2.7 | -9.0 | 0.8 | 15.2% | 2.07 | -0.10 | 1.0 |
In general, Amsdell XX Ale looks quite like a London Mild Ale with one exception: the rate of attenuation is considerably lower.
Moving on, we'll next consider Amsdell's Stock Ale, Diamond. Again, I've compared it with both Whitbread and Barclay Perkins Stock Ales.
Date | Year | Brewer | Beer | Style | OG | FG | ABV | App. Atten-uation | lbs hops/ qtr | hops lb/US brl | hops lb/Imp brl | boil time (hours) | boil time (hours) |
20th Mar | 1901 | Amsdell | Diamond | Stock Ale | 1081.7 | 1028 | 7.11 | 65.76% | 8.08 | 2.42 | 3.39 | 1 | |
12th Apr | 1904 | Amsdell | Diamond | Stock Ale | 1074 | 1020.8 | 7.04 | 71.96% | 8.29 | 2.27 | 3.18 | 1 | |
Average | 1077.9 | 1024.4 | 7.08 | 68.86% | 8.19 | 2.35 | 3.29 | 1 | |||||
31st May | 1901 | Whitbread | KK | Stock Ale | 1073.0 | 1030.0 | 5.69 | 58.91% | 12.00 | 4.03 | 1.75 | 2 | |
Difference | -4.8 | 5.6 | -1.38 | -9.9% | 3.81 | 0.75 | 0.75 |
Date | Year | Brewer | Beer | Style | OG | FG | ABV | App. Atten-uation | lbs hops/ qtr | hops lb/US brl | hops lb/Imp brl | boil time (hours) | boil time (hours) |
Average | Amsdell | Diamond | Stock Ale | 1077.9 | 1024.4 | 7.08 | 68.86% | 8.19 | 2.35 | 3.29 | 1.00 | ||
21st Nov | 1900 | Barclay Perkins | KK | Stock Ale | 1073.0 | 1019.4 | 7.09 | 73.44% | 14.03 | 4.20 | 2 | 2.5 | |
Difference | -4.8 | -5.0 | 0.02 | 4.6% | 5.84 | 0.92 | 1.00 |
Whitbread's KK, with its high FG, sticks out. Barclay Perkins KK looks very similar to Diamond Ale, except for rather heavier hopping. And, of course, a longer boil.
Finally, it's the turn of IPA.
Date | Year | Brewer | Beer | Style | OG | FG | ABV | App. Atten-uation | lbs hops/ qtr | hops lb/US brl | hops lb/Imp brl | boil time (hours) | boil time (hours) |
24th Mar | 1905 | Amsdell | India Pale Ale | IPA | 1077.6 | 1029.2 | 6.4 | 62.35% | 4.85 | 2.25 | 3.15 | 1 | |
20th Feb | 1902 | Whitbread | IPA | IPA | 1049.9 | 1013.0 | 4.88 | 73.93% | 11.97 | 2.65 | 1.5 | 1.75 | |
Difference | -27.7 | -16.2 | -1.5 | 11.6% | 7.1 | -0.5 | 0.5 |
Date | Year | Brewer | Beer | Style | OG | FG | ABV | App. Atten-uation | lbs hops/ qtr | hops lb/US brl | hops lb/Imp brl | boil time (hours) | boil time (hours) |
24th Mar | 1905 | Amsdell | India Pale Ale | IPA | 1077.6 | 1029.2 | 6.4 | 62.35% | 4.85 | 2.25 | 3.15 | 1 | |
13th Jun | 1908 | Barclay Perkins | PA | Pale Ale | 1060.4 | 1011.5 | 6.47 | 80.96% | 12.00 | 3.00 | 2.5 | ||
Difference | -17.2 | -17.7 | 0.1 | 18.6% | 7.2 | -0.2 | 1.5 |
It's pretty obvious that Whitbread's IPA isn't really in the same style as Amsdell's. The gravities are just too different. Though it is apparent that Amsdell's IPA was, taking into account its gravity, more lightly hopped. The low attenuation of Amsdell's IPA means that although Barclay Perkins Pale Ale had a much lower gravity, it almost had the same ABV. I've never seen a pre-WW I British IPA with as high an OG and as low a hopping rate as Amsdell's. It's really very different.
I'm sure I'll be returning to North American Ales. They're just so entertaining.
Your absolutely correct about the lack of Stout in the Amsdell logs. I did see a least one Porter entry in 1901—but that was about it. Even IPA was fairly rare. As I've promised before, I'll get to the Institute and get photos of everything. The main problem is that it's only open on Thursdays, to the public. If I can scoot away this week, I will.
ReplyDeleteI really want to see those Polar entries, again!
Craig, it would be great to see more entries. Should help make sense out of it all.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if this has anything to do with the different interpretation of the IPA between America and UK (other than type of hops)?
ReplyDeleteThe Amsdell OG looks a lot like typical modern American IPA OGs. Obviously, would need to see a lot more American recipes to draw a conclusion.
Ya' know what's interesting, Ron? Both of BPs high attenuation levels happen in their beers brewed in June. Both their PA and X hit neat 81%, while the November KK is far lower at 73%.
ReplyDeleteWould love to know more about this beer called polar
ReplyDelete@Arctic I don't know if there's any connection to Allsopp's/Ind Coope by name or style. Polar seems to be far weaker. I am stopping by the Institute tomorrow, so I should have more photos of the logs to share by the weekend.
ReplyDelete