Which maris otter

Proctor, the spring variety, is a cross between a Danish variety called Kenia and a traditional English variety called Plumage Archer. The new variety was dubbed Maris Otter. The name is a homage to the location of the BPI.

Maris Otter dominated the British brewing scene until the s when it slowly started to be replaced by newer varieties with higher yields and better disease resistance.

Another blow came in when the protections that made Maris Otter a proprietary variety expired, giving seed companies less reason to carry it. It seemed Maris Otter would fade away completely.

But a few tenacious farmers and brewers hung on, determined to continue producing and using the variety. Maris Otter is still grown in the same place it was 50 years ago. Maris Otter celebrated its 50th anniversary in with a celebration that included a competition of 50 beers brewed with Maris Otter.

Diastatic power ranges from 40 to 60 O L Lintner depending on the manufacturer. You might like the results. Same with malts and hops. It is largely used in a derogatory sense, but always with the underlying association with masturbation. As with most use of swearing in this country it comes down to tone and circumstance as to whether you take offence. Exactly TB. It means jerk, or dolt, or doofus, dummy, fool — depending. I recall being a few pints deep when I went to walk into the flat at a party.

The screen door, which was previously left open, was now shut. I go face first into it and partially spill my beer on my shirt. I squeezed the drink from my shirt into the glass and redeemed myself. I take issue with people who serve English beer cold. I wonder if the results would have showed an even greater significance had the recipe been a very lightly hopped, single malt blonde with a clean ale yeast?

This might show more of the unique attributes of each malt. In my opinion it was lightly hopped. I think once the British ales get much above 5. I am always going back and forth on how to brew these beer. Should I give the variable to the best chance — in this case I lowered the IBU and late hops, or should I just brew the beer as most of us would brew them and as I would prefer to drink them? You guys are awesome!

Thank you for posting and being part of the experience on your end. We need readers, posters, and interaction to make it more fun and educational. This aligns better with the Mallett quote you provide in your first paragraph. Am I mistaken on that one? I took it as both. Potentially more sugar per pound, per gallon, but also ease of lauter or recovery of that sugar. I could certainly be wrong. I do tend to get about 2 gravity points 0. Each malt lent a character to the beer that the other lacked.

This is definitely one I was excited to see done. I have at least twice carried out Maris Otter and local Australian base malt comparisons. Each time I brewed ordinary bitters around 3. I usually brew two 22L batches at a time, with a 15 minute difference between batches. Each time the batches were treated in the same way e.

Each time 9 to 0, 12 to 0 the Maris Otter beer was preferred. The difference was kept secret until after the comparison. This was a few years ago, and it is only comparisons so take it for what it is worth.

Really I need to do another comparison with a three way component. Thanks for the motivation. But how can 22 out of 47 possibly be a statistically significant result? A number that extreme or more so would appear, in repeated infinite trials, about 4 times in So We had 25 select the different beer but only 22 were required,.

Anytime I used it, I had to crank up my expected mash efficiency by points to get reasonably close, while Fawcett seems more in the neighborhood of my typical efficiency rate. In a focused response on what makes MO different not better as some here seem to think this was trying to say he submitted the following — which I loved — as follows:.

Assuming that the water is correctly treated to bring out the best in the brew a thesis worth of discussion in itself!

The maltsters about at that time were making Marris Otter malt for the regional intermediate sized brewers, it was generally only the smaller maltings who were supplying the small brewers as they could package into the smaller bags required by the smaller brewers, and they would supply pre-crushed malt. Otter was far more forgiving , it would mash from 63 to 67c and still produce good wort many of the newer malts, I have found, need a spot on 65c initial mash temperature , it may not run off so quickly, it may have a lower extract, BUT it has flavour and character not seen with the higher extract cheaper , malts.

Warminster maltings recently demonstrated this to the industry by brewing 5 beers to identical recipes, the malt variety being the only variable, the spectrum of flavours produced surprised many of those who thought of malt as a component rather than a flexible friend and valued ingredient.

At that time, the huge variety of hops seen today was not known, Golding, Fuggle, Brambling Cross, and Target were about the limit of UK hops, we used Cascade and some New Zealand varieties, but that was about it. A full flavoured malt like Otter enables the brewer to relax, cut down on the hop additions and celebrate the flavour of the hop, enjoy a deep kiss of hops, not a teeth shattering full on smack of Iso-alpha acid and hop resin.

You will need a good assertive malt in the foundation to do this. As mentioned, it has a lower yield per acre than newer varieties, hence the price differential — the Farmer has to be compensated for the loss per acre compared to a modern variety.

To try to sum it all up, Marris Otter brings the perfect foundation to the presentation of your hops and your skill as a brewer, it adds another dimension of ingredient flavour when building the recipe, and , when suitably understood, Otter can make a huge difference to the presentation of the recipe.

There is far more to brewing good beer than how much of a hop charge the copper wiill take, less can be more , and Otter can help to achieve this. The brewers who dismiss malt and look to hop bombing are really stewed hop infusion technicians, not brewers.

If you want to brew an authentic British Real Ale, or any other beer with enough foundation to stand up to overloud, bossy, hops, then Otter is for you. If you want your beer all hop, no grain, then you have my pity, but to get what you want just go for any high yield low character malt, you will have my pity, but I am sure that you will be happy.

I only keep Canadian 2-row on hand as my base malt, but I use specialty malts to mimic the flavors you would get from MO. This has worked well for me, though I have never done a formal experiment with it. This method assumes there is a significant difference in the base malts themselves, but attempts to make up for that difference when needed.

I like this method, as it allows me to use the Candian 2-row for just about all that I brew. I recently did this same exact experiment, but wonder if for the purpose of your experiment it would have been better to eliminate all other grains from the bill.

You can buy it, but it's more fun to make your own. I use Crisp. It tastes good, converts easily, and always results in a clear beer. LHBS seems to always carry Muntons, which as often as not, doesn't give me as much extract and is often hazy.

Haven't used Fawcett but don't really have a need to look past Crisp. I prefer Thomas Fawcett. It hasn't let me down yet.

Both are fantastic and IMO hard to discern a difference between the two. I personally really like Halcyon quite a bit. Although most barley varieties have a commercial life cycle of perhaps a decade from introduction to phase out, Maris Otter kept going strong for almost 3 decades. Agronomically, Maris Otter thrives particularly well in the maritime climate of the British Isles, but less so in continental climates, which is why it has never become a significant barley crop in such brewing barley-growing powerhouses as Australia, Ukraine, Russia, Germany, France, and the prairies of the United States and Canada.

In addition, although a great—albeit high-priced—performer in the malt and brewhouses, farmers consider it an only moderate, even poor, performer in terms of disease resistance and yield. For these reasons, it is no longer listed as recommended by such official bodies as the National Institute of Agricultural Botany of the United Kingdom.

For all practical purposes, it has largely been replaced by such varieties as Halcyon.