Brew Dudes Homebrewing Blog

Kentucky Common Beer – 4th Attempt

On July 22, 2026

Kentucky Common is one of those historical American beer styles that Mike has been exploring for some time now. He has brewed one over the last several years, but in this version, he changed the recipe and fermentation approach considerably.

For this batch, he wanted to respect the traditional concept while brewing something more enjoyable for his preferences. The result was a darker, malt-forward beer featuring plenty of corn without an overwhelming cooked corn character. We tasted the beer together and discussed the recipe, fermentation problems, and improvements over Mike’s previous Kentucky Common. Here is everything you need to know about his 4th attempt.

We Learn and Do

This is the 2026 version of Mike’s Kentucky Common Beer Recipe

The Fourth Kentucky Common Recipe

Grain Bill

50% Pale Malt
23% Pilsner Malt
23% Corn
2% Crystal 40
2% Blackprinz Malt

Hops

2 ounces Willamette hops at 60 minutes

Yeast

1 packet Fermentis SafLager S-23

Mash

Mash at 152°F for 75 minutes

Fermentation

Fermented initially between 62°F and 65°F
Later warmed to approximately 72°F after fermentation slowed
Lagered for an extended period before tasting

Original Gravity: 1.052
Final Gravity: 1.018

First Takes

Mike hoped the longer mash would encourage better fermentability, although the final gravity remained higher than expected. The fermentation stopped around 1.021 initially, so Mike gently roused the yeast and increased the fermentation temperature. Those changes only brought the beer down several additional points before fermentation appeared completely finished at 1.018. Despite the fermentation issue, the extended lagering period made a noticeable difference when we finally tasted the finished beer.

The beer poured very clear with an off-white head that remained persistent throughout much of our tasting. On the aroma, malt was clearly the dominant characteristic without much noticeable yeast character coming through. The flavor was considerably smoother than Mike’s earlier attempt at brewing a Kentucky Common beer. More importantly, I did not get the cooked corn character that stood out in some previous adjunct beers. Using 23 percent corn seemed like a good compromise between representing the style and keeping the beer enjoyable. Meanwhile, the pale malt provided additional malt character instead of relying entirely on Pilsner malt for the base. Even with only two percent Crystal 40, the finished beer had a surprisingly noticeable malt character.

Mike thought the S-23 yeast also helped support that malt character after spending considerable time lagering. One of our bigger discussions concerned why fermentation stopped considerably higher than Mike originally expected. His working theory involved pitching dry yeast directly onto the sanitizer foam remaining inside his fermentation vessel. Mike wondered whether some yeast remained trapped within that foam instead of immediately reaching the wort underneath. Recently, he has started rehydrating dry yeast before pitching, allowing the liquid yeast mixture to penetrate that foam. We do not know whether that explains the attenuation problem, but it gives us something worth testing. Even with the higher final gravity, this Kentucky Common remained balanced, smooth, and easy to drink.

Final Thoughts

This version was an improvement over our previous Kentucky Common experiments, particularly regarding the corn character. For my tastes, keeping corn around one quarter of the grain bill produced a much more enjoyable result. The combination of pale malt and Pilsner malt also provided enough character without making the beer overly heavy. Additionally, extended lagering appeared to smooth out fermentation characteristics that were unpleasant when the beer was younger.

The biggest unanswered question involves the stalled fermentation and whether yeast handling contributed to the higher final gravity. Mike has already changed his dry yeast process, so future batches should give us more information. Ultimately, this Kentucky Common respected the historical idea while still reflecting Mike’s preferences as a homebrewer. That is usually the right approach for us: understand the style, then adjust the beer to your tastes.

BREW ON!

Peach Mango Kettle Sour Wheat Beer

By John Krochune

On July 15, 2026

In Experiments, Recipes

Mike brewed a peach mango kettle sour wheat beer for hot weather and shared his complete process. This batch combined a simple wheat beer base with heavy fruit additions and controlled lactic sourness. We tasted the finished beer and discussed its aroma, flavor, acidity, and performance using older brewing cultures.

Peach Mango Kettle Sour Wheat Beer Recipe

Batch Size: Approximately 3.5 gallons

Water Profile:

50 percent tap water
50 percent spring water
Slight emphasis on sulfate

Grain Bill:

50 percent Pilsner malt
50 percent white wheat malt

Hops:

20 grams Centennial hops at flameout

Yeast:

1 packet of Lallemand New England yeast
1 packet of Mangrove Jack’s Hophead yeast

Mash Schedule:

Mash at 152°F for 60 minutes

Kettle Souring Process:

Bring the wort briefly to a boil for sanitation
Cover the kettle and cool the wort to approximately 95°F
Pitch two 10-gram packages of Lallemand WildBrew Sour Pitch
Hold the wort between approximately 85°F and 95°F
Taste after 24 hours and continue souring when necessary
Sour for approximately 48 hours total
Boil again to stop the souring process
Continue boiling approximately 60 minutes to reach the target gravity

Fermentation:

Ferment for approximately ten days

Fruit Addition:

2 pounds frozen mangoes
2 pounds frozen peaches
Thaw the fruit completely
Blend the fruit into a puree
Press the puree through a fine strainer

Packaging:

Add the strained puree to a 2.5-gallon serving keg
Transfer the fermented sour beer directly over the puree
Chill and carbonate before serving

Additional Details:

After mashing, Mike briefly boiled the wort to sanitize it before beginning the kettle souring stage. He cooled the covered kettle to approximately 95°F, then pitched two packages of Lallemand WildBrew Sour Pitch. The culture had expired in 2023, so he doubled the pitch and allowed extra time for souring. After 24 hours, the wort tasted mildly sour, but another day produced a noticeably stronger lactic character.

Mike then boiled the wort again, stopping further acid production and preparing the beer for fermentation. At flameout, he added 20 grams of Centennial hops for citrus and orange peel character without meaningful bitterness. He fermented for roughly ten days using Lallemand New England yeast blended with Mangrove Jack’s Hophead yeast. Both yeast packages were approaching expiration, but fermentation started quickly and completed without any apparent problems.

For fruit, Mike thawed two pounds each of frozen mangoes and peaches before blending everything into puree. The mixture remained too pulpy for keg service, so he repeatedly blended and pressed it through a fine strainer. That effort produced a smooth fruit base while removing enough solids to reduce the risk of clogged fittings. He added the puree to a serving keg, then transferred the fermented sour beer directly over it.

After chilling and carbonating the keg, the beer was ready for our summer tasting session.

Tasting Notes and Learnings

The finished beer showed restrained sourness rather than an aggressively puckering acidity, making the fruit easier to evaluate. Mango dominated the aroma, including a slightly underripe or cucumber-like quality that became softer as the beer warmed. Peach remained in the background, while the combined fruit contributed additional acidity and a smooth nectar-like texture. The lactic character reminded us of yogurt, although it stayed balanced enough for a refreshing summer beer. I enjoyed the first glass, but the intense fruit and acidity made this better as an occasional pour. Mike found it especially refreshing during hot Fourth of July weather and considered trying another fruit combination.

This experiment showed that kettle souring can remain simple when temperature, tasting, and sanitation guide the process. The expired culture still worked effectively, although fresh bacteria would probably reach the desired acidity more quickly. An all-in-one brewing system could simplify this method by controlling temperature and limiting unnecessary transfers. However, the fruit preparation required patience because heavy puree additions can create practical challenges inside a keg. Overall, the beer delivered noticeable mango, softer peach, balanced lactic tartness, and the refreshing character Mike wanted.

BREW ON!

American Blonde Ale with Citra Hops

By John Krochune

On July 8, 2026

In Recipes, Style Profiles, Videos

Mike brewed an American Blonde Ale with Citra hops for something light, crisp, and easy to enjoy. He wanted an ale that could work well during the warmer months, especially around the Fourth of July.

This beer had a clear golden appearance, a rocky head, and a clean fermentation profile. The goal was simple enough, but the Citra hops became the biggest variable in the recipe.

In this video, Mike walked through his American Blonde Ale recipe before we tasted the finished beer.

American Blonde Ale with Citra Hops Recipe

Here is the recipe from the video:

Batch Size: 3.5 gallons

Water Profile:
Balanced chloride to sulfate ratio

Grain Bill:
82% Pilsner malt
12% Crystal 10 malt
6% white wheat malt

Hops:
12 grams Citra at 60 minutes
60 grams Citra at flameout
72 grams Citra total

Yeast:
1 packet of Lallemand House yeast

Mash Schedule:
145°F for 30 minutes
152°F for 30 minutes
168°F mash out for 10 minutes

Fermentation:
Fermented around 68°F for about a week and a half

Other Process Notes:
Whirlfloc was added near the end of the boil

Our Hot Takes On This Cold Beer

The beer cleared well on its own, even with the small amount of wheat in the grain bill. That wheat likely helped the beer produce a persistent, rocky head that stayed around in the glass. The aroma had a big punch of Citra, with a clear citrus character coming through first. The flavor followed the aroma, bringing a light citrus quality that made the beer refreshing.

There was a small oniony and resiny note from the hops, but it stayed in the background. Overall, the Citra worked better than expected, especially for hops bought from a local homebrew shop. Mike thought he got lucky with this package, since hop freshness can vary quite a bit.

Overall, this American Blonde Ale with Citra hops showed how well this variety can work in a lighter, cleaner beer style. The beer had enough malt support from the Pilsner, Crystal 10, and wheat without becoming heavy. The clean yeast character kept the focus on the crisp body and citrus hop expression. For warm weather, this beer fits well as an easy-drinking alternative to a lager. If you feel that you can’t brew lagers, a blonde ale like this is a good style to keep around. The Citra hops were the biggest risk, but they helped make this batch bright and refreshing.

BREW ON!

Callista Hops SMaSH Beer Review & Tasting

By John Krochune

On July 1, 2026

In Hops, Videos

We brewed another SMaSH beer to learn more about Callista hops. Callista is a German hop variety with lower alpha acids. The packet I bought came in at 3.8% alpha acids. Since the hop was lower in bitterness, we kept the hops schedule balanced in this brew.

The goal was to taste the hop on its own. We wanted to understand its aroma, flavor, and best use. This beer gave us something different from many other SMaSH experiments. The fruit notes were present, but they were subtle. The herbal and green notes stood out more at first.

What We Did In The Video

We brewed a one-gallon SMaSH beer with two-row malt and Callista hops.

Callista SMaSH Beer Recipe

Batch Size: 1 gallon
Malt: 2 pounds of two-row malt
Hops: 28 grams Callista hops
Alpha Acids: 3.8%
Yeast: US-05
Water: Spring water

Hop Schedule:
7 grams Callista hops at 60 minutes
7 grams Callista hops at 15 minutes
7 grams Callista hops at flameout
7 grams Callista hops as a dry hop

The aroma was the most interesting part of this beer. Mike picked up briny cucumber, aloe vera, kiwi skin, and minty herbal notes. There was also a strange green quality that was hard to place.The flavor had some bitterness that reminded us of leafy greens. Mike described it as bok choy bitterness. There was also a green pepper note, but it was not harsh.

Underneath those green and herbal flavors, there was a light fruit character. The fruit was not loud, but it was there. We picked up pear, very light strawberry, and something close to prickly pear. As the beer warmed and opened up, the pear became easier to find. The aloe note also made more sense with that prickly pear character. We also thought Callista had a botanical bitterness. Mike compared it to Angostura bitters. It had a blended herbal quality, without the strong orange or spice notes.

This hop seems better suited for late additions and dry hopping. If I brewed with it again, I would use less early. I would push more hops into flameout and dry hop additions. Callista could work in Helles, Pilsner, or a modern dry-hopped lager. It may also work well behind brighter hops. It could add complexity without becoming the main flavor.

Conclusion

Callista hops gave us a strange but interesting SMaSH beer. The fruit notes were delicate, while the green notes were easier to find. Pear, prickly pear, aloe, kiwi skin, and botanical bitterness all came through.

This hop may not be the best solo hop for a bold beer. It could be useful as a background hop with more expressive varieties. We gave this one a thumbs up. It was almost there on its own. In a blend, Callista could make people ask, “What is that?”

BREW ON!

Homebrew Jar of Destiny: The Nineteenth Pick

By John Krochune

On June 24, 2026

In Style Profiles, Videos

The Jar of Destiny series keeps rolling with pick number nineteen. We are still working through the 2015 BJCP guidelines, one random beer style at a time. Each pick gives us a style to research, brew, and taste within a few months.

The Jar has been fairly kind to us in past rounds, but it is getting tougher. We have already pulled several familiar styles, so more oddballs remain in the mix. This round gave us two very different beer styles, and neither one feels like a simple brew day.

The goal remains the same: learn the style, brew the best version we can, and see what happens.

What Did The Jar Give Us This Time?

17B – Old Ale

For my pick, I landed on Old Ale from the Strong British Beer category. This is a traditional British style known for rich malt complexity and aging character. Historically, these beers were sometimes called stock ales because they were aged before serving or blending.

That aging piece is the big question for me. We usually give ourselves around three months between the pick and the tasting. Old Ale seems like a style that could benefit from more time, so I may need to get brewing quickly. There may also be some decisions around strength, malt character, and how much aged character belongs in the final beer.

We talked a little about how stock ales may have been used historically. They could be brewed strong, stored, and blended with younger beers. Today, homebrewers can make them as a finished beer, but that history still matters. It gives me plenty to think about before putting a recipe together.

27A – Sahti

Mike pulled Sahti from the Historical Beer category. That one got an immediate reaction from both of us. It is a traditional Finnish farmhouse ale, and it is not something either of us talks about every week. Sahti is known for a thick body, banana and clove fermentation character, and a sharp juniper flavor. It is also traditionally unfiltered, uncarbonated, and unboiled. Once you start hearing those details, you understand why this pick feels like a real challenge.

Mike remembered the traditional process involving juniper branches and a rustic lautering setup. That does not mean he will recreate every historical detail, but it does show how different this style is from a normal ale. He will need to research the style, figure out the juniper piece, and decide how traditional he wants to be.

See You Again In A Few Months

Round nineteen shows how unpredictable this challenge can be. I pulled a strong British beer with aging questions. Mike pulled a Finnish farmhouse ale with juniper, low carbonation, and a very different brewing tradition.

These are the kinds of styles that make the Jar of Destiny worth doing. They force us to learn more, think harder, and brew outside our usual routines. Some rounds are straightforward. This one is not one of those rounds.

We will get these beers brewed and come back for the tasting. By then, we should know whether we have met the Jar’s challenge.

BREW ON!