Do you believe in the efficacy of published Water Profiles?
Poll: The Efficacy of Published Water Profiles
- Thread starter Silver_Is_Money
- Start date
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2015
- Messages
- 587
- Reaction score
- 1,020
- Points
- 93
Although I said yes in the poll, I struggle with understanding whether efficacy is the exact term. For example, if I choose to use the Pilsen water as a target, and add to my water in such a way as to come close to the water in Pilsen, I think maybe I am trusting the ACCURACY of the profile. But EFFICACY implies a desired result. Will I be able to create a beer like Pilsner Urquell? Maybe not. And maybe I am only trying within certain parameters - clean, crisp, light, refteshing - in which case I am trusting both accuracy and efficacy. It's Friday. I'm four beers into a holiday weekend. Maybe I'll try again or edit. Be safe out there y'all. Don't drive like my brother.
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2017
- Messages
- 2,471
- Reaction score
- 5,115
- Points
- 113
Like @soccerdad, I'm not entirely clear on the question. The way I interpreted the question is you are referring to the efficacy of brewing using a specific city or region's water profile. I answered "no" because you don't know what water adjustments the breweries using that water made when brewing. Also, water supplies change over time; and I'm not just talking about changes over a century or two. An example is Waukesha, Wisconsin which has high radon levels in the water they get from their wells so they will start drawing water from Lake Michigan*. Once that project is complete, the new water report for Waukesha will likely be very different from the old one.
* Because Waukesha is on the other side of the Great Lakes Watershed (meaning their rivers and ground water do not flow back to one of the Great Lakes) they need to return the water back to Lake Michigan when they are done with it and of course treat it.
* Because Waukesha is on the other side of the Great Lakes Watershed (meaning their rivers and ground water do not flow back to one of the Great Lakes) they need to return the water back to Lake Michigan when they are done with it and of course treat it.
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2021
- Messages
- 164
- Reaction score
- 206
- Points
- 43
I answered it as if the question was "do I trust the accuracy of my towns published water reports" which I do not. I'm on well water not my towns but I don't even trust the lab results on my water as I think at the time they were accurate but that's it as aquifers constantly change, although probably not drastically. I also plan on getting a water testing kit soon so I can profile my own water about once a month and track the changes. But I'm also OCD that way. I have great tasting soft like Pilsen well water but will likely install an RO water filter kit soon just for my brew water. That way I can add back what I want and not worry about it... as much anyway. But I don't think I'm normal so....
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2019
- Messages
- 2,650
- Reaction score
- 8,039
- Points
- 113
At the risk of getting flogged, I vote a resounding “no”.
For me, water profiles are a bedtime story.
Setting aside the fact that I can’t perceive a difference between an “Amber Dry” vs a “Pale Balanced” water profile in almost any beer, I am of the opinion that I need to define my own personal water profiles for the beer I make.
Can I honestly raise my hand and tell the class at what ppm of SO4 I begin to perceive a drier and more hop forward beer? Can I tell the difference between a beer mashed at a pH of 5.3 vs 5.4? How do I know that 300ppm Cl isn’t the ideal for a Porter?
This is all very relative.
For me, water profiles are a bedtime story.
Setting aside the fact that I can’t perceive a difference between an “Amber Dry” vs a “Pale Balanced” water profile in almost any beer, I am of the opinion that I need to define my own personal water profiles for the beer I make.
Can I honestly raise my hand and tell the class at what ppm of SO4 I begin to perceive a drier and more hop forward beer? Can I tell the difference between a beer mashed at a pH of 5.3 vs 5.4? How do I know that 300ppm Cl isn’t the ideal for a Porter?
This is all very relative.
Sorry for the confusion. What I was envisioning was more along the lines of build it yourself water profiles found in books, on line, and in software. I was not envisioning local or regional water profiles.
I can say this on water:
My old house and my old well water certainly made very different beer than my new house! My old house had harder water and I did nothing to adjust it.
My new house has soft water - not much in it at all. I now adjust my water to achieve a balanced or malty profile - but mostly just for the desired levels of calcium etc. for yeast health.
I notice a difference in these beers compared to my old house for sure! I have also noticed a difference between beers where I adjusted the profile from balanced to malty or very malty.
However, I have never tried to replicate a specific region's water...
Thus, I cannot speak to "published water profiles" - I did not answer the poll and I am sorry if I totally derailed it with my comment. lol
My old house and my old well water certainly made very different beer than my new house! My old house had harder water and I did nothing to adjust it.
My new house has soft water - not much in it at all. I now adjust my water to achieve a balanced or malty profile - but mostly just for the desired levels of calcium etc. for yeast health.
I notice a difference in these beers compared to my old house for sure! I have also noticed a difference between beers where I adjusted the profile from balanced to malty or very malty.
However, I have never tried to replicate a specific region's water...
Thus, I cannot speak to "published water profiles" - I did not answer the poll and I am sorry if I totally derailed it with my comment. lol
No derailment. Lot's of good info there.
