Tuesday, 23 September 2014

Mashing in Denmark in 1960

We're getting to the real meat of A. J. Mayfield's article of German and Danish brewing. Stuff about the nuts and bolts of brewing.

Unsurprisingly, Mayfield seems to have concentrated his attention on Carlsberg and Tuborg, at the the time the country's largest breweries.

"Brewing.—Both Carlsberg and Tuborg have recently carried out extensive modernization, and it seems probable that the pattern of large-scale brewing in Denmark has now been set for many years to come. Complete standardization in brew types and sizes has been achieved, with each process timed to fit a given number of brews into the 24-hr. working day.

In the Carlsberg brewery, basic simplicity combined with rigorous control at all stages was striven for and, where possible, a control test with easily reproducible numerical limits was employed. The brewing plant was double as far as the plate coolers, with mashes on alternate sides giving a regular run of worts to the fermenting cellers at 2-hr, intervals. With a separate maize mash, this necessitated a third mash-kettle on each side to hold the mash for the final rest before filtration. Ten beers were produced with gravities ranging from 1026° to 1080°; seven of these were pale types with separate maize mashes, and mashing procedure was arranged to keep the schedule shown in Table I.

Mashing Schedule for Pale Malts Time
Mashing stage (min.)
In-mash malt at 95° F 15
In-mash maize at 124° F. -
Maize to boil 40
Maize boiling 20
2-stage addition of maize mash to malt with 10-min. rest at 124° F then raise to 149° F 35
Saccharification rest at 149° F. 60
Pump off decoction 10
Decoction to boil 25
Decoction boiling 25
Return to head mash, raising temperature to 169° F 15
Rest at 109° F. to complete the mash 25
Total 255

Mashing Schedule for Dark Malts Time
Mashing stage (min.)
In-mash malt at 124° F 15
Pump off first decoction 5
Decoction to boil 30
Decoction boiling 25
Return to head mash, raising heat to 158° F 15
Rest at 158" F. 20
Pump off 2nd decoction 10
Decoction to boil 25
Decoction boiling 25
Return to head mash, raising temperature to 169° F 15
Rest at 109° F. to complete the mash 65
Total 250

The maize mash contained about 25% of highly diastatic malt to assist in starch liquefaction. Dark beers also conformed to the 4.25-hr. timing, but with a single all-malt mash, and a typical schedule is given in Table II."
Journal of the Institute of Brewing, Volume 66, 1960, pages 495 - 496.

Carlsberg was obviously running its brewing kit pretty much non-stop. Having new wort ready every two hours is impressive. That's twelve brews a day.

I'm pretty sure both those methods are double decoction. Using a cereal mash as a decoction is a trick Dann used when brewing Younger's No. 1. It worked remarkably well, with the temperatures coming out spot on. Both methods here have three rests, though not exactly the same temperatures. Not sure why the second rest was warmer for the dark malt schedule.

Now for a really fun topic: milling.

"Milling was performed on 5- and 6-roll mills fitted with vibrating screens which gave a good separation of husk, grits and meal. Roller settings were carefully controlled to maintain an average grits diameter of 0.38 mm., which gave best results for extract and filtration with this plant. The grist cases were suspended on weighing bridges coupled to automatic recorders which gave the weight of malt as ground."
Journal of the Institute of Brewing, Volume 66, 1960, page 496.

I don't feel qualified to make any comment on that.

Now more mashing details:

"For mashing, the required length of liquor was prepared at the prescribed temperature in the kettle, and a simple dry drop of grist was stirred in with the propeller. Temperature recording was continuous on one chart from in-mash to casting, and a master control panel prevented the flow of mash or wort in the wrong direction. The pH was adjusted by standard additions of permanently-maintained lactic mash, followed, if necessary, by a calculated addition of lactic acid; no other liquor treatment was needed for the town's water supply, and the pH of the boiled Pilsner wort was thus maintained between 5.2 and 5.4. With mash-filters for separation of spent grains, a 50-Qr. mash was filtered and sparged in 2.5 hr.
Journal of the Institute of Brewing, Volume 66, 1960, page 496.

Heating the water and then adding the grist is very different from how British breweries usually operated. They would use a Steel's masher - a screw which mixes grain and water in the right proportion as they enter the mash tun. Steel's mashers are still common in British breweries.

Interesting that they sometimes used lactic acid to control the pH of the mash. That's something that wouldn't be allowed in Germany because of the Reinheitsgebot. What is that telling us about Carlsberg's water? That it was soft?

Mmm. I seem to have asked more questions and provided few answers.

Boiling next time.

Monday, 22 September 2014

New cover for the 1919 Beer Style Guide

The title says it all, really.

Lexxie was short of a few bob over the weekend. Seemed like a good chance to replace one of the last crappy old covers that I designed. Have to take advantage of his art services while I can. Never know when he might become wealthy.

What esle do I have to say (tea awaits)? I know:

buy my books!

Belgian Brewing in WW II

I can't believe I've never used this article. It ticks so many boxes. More proof that I've more material than I can cope with.

It was written by De Clerq, a distinguished Belgian brewer and writer. First he describes the situation in the early part of the 20th century.

"Before the first world war, there were many breweries in Belgium, more than 3,000. Beer consumption was very heavy, more than 200 litres per inhabitant per year (44 gallons). Almost exclusively top fermentation beer was brewed and sold in barrels. A few breweries started making lager beer; their products were more regular; they gained in the favour of the public and soon these breweries grew to become very large ones. In between the two world wars, two-thirds of the breweries disappeared and it was chiefly the bottom fermentation breweries that extended. The consumers lost their taste for the flat draught beer and the top fermentation brewers readjusted their methods by conditioning their ales; so doing they succeeded in competing successfully with the lager type. The flat draught beers disappeared completely."
Journal of the Institute of Brewing Volume 55, Issue 5, 1949, page 291.

Belgium had crazy numbers of breweries before WW I. As did the bit of France bordering it. Exactly where most of the fighting on the Western Front took place. War damage and German looting of copper put lots of breweries out of action. Many never reopened.

What does he mean by "conditioning their ales"? Some sort of lagering? Were Belgian brewers doing something similar to their American counterparts? It sounds like they were replacing cask-conditioned beers with filtered and carbonated ones. Depressing the way De Clerq nmakes that sound like progress. You can see that Belgium came to bottom fermentation quite late - only between the wars.

Now something about WW II:

"Beer prices going up steadily because of continuous rise in taxation, the consumption per capita fell to 175 litres (about a barrel). The sale of bottled beer grew continuously. During the last war beer became necessarily very weak as the shortage of malt was severe, gravities ranging from 2.4 to 4.7 per cent. extract (sp. gr. 1.009-1.019). The small quantities of malt brewers had at their disposal were not sufficient to provide these gravities and it was necessary to look for other materials. At first, sugar was used, but these supplies soon ran out and finally beetroot was the only material available. The beet was cut in strips, dried on a kiln and then ground, so as to get grits or flour. For those light beers, beetroot gave reasonable results. A simple extraction was sufficient and very often beers were brewed with 50 per cent, malt and 50 per cent, beetroot. Fermentations were good and the foam on the beer was firm and persistent. Even today, certain breweries still use beetroots, because this material gives a good head, perhaps through the pectin it contains. This pectin often produced a persistent turbidity in the tanks, but the flavour of the beetroot was not noticeable, because the beers were so light that they did not, in fact, contain much of this material.

In order to give a pleasant flavour to these war beers, the brewers used chiefly sweetening products, colour and hops, which were still plentiful, but the latter could easily produce an astringent taste in the light beers. Vinegar was also used. In Belgium the sour beers, like Lambic, still meet with a certain favour and blendings were made of Lambic with ordinary beer. As there was no Lambic left during the war, beer-vinegar was manufactured to take its place. Notwithstanding all these efforts to keep one flavour, if nothing else, in the beer, the consumption dropped to one half of the pre-war figure."
Journal of the Institute of Brewing Volume 55, Issue 5, 1949, pages 291 - 292.

1009 to 1019 even weaker than British beer got during WW I. Isn't that fascinating about the use of beetroot? No reason why you shouldn't, I suppose. It's as good a source of starch as anything else. But I would have thought the colour might have been a problem. Beetroot stains like buggery, as i'm sure you know. I wonder if there's still anyone using beetroot for head retention? I doubt it. Making a beetroot war beer might be fun. Though I suspect professional brewers might take some persuading.

There are those who would argue that Lambic is beer vinegar. Why did Lambic run out? Maybe they didn't make any after 1940. A low-gravity beetroot Lambic probably wouldn't work.

It may sound odd ending up with a surplus of hops, but that happened in Britain in WW I. As beers weakened, fewer hops were required.

Now what happened after war's end.

"After these innumerable difficulties with which the brewers had to cope, all their hopes lay in the return of peace; but it turned out to be a deception. When beer came back to its normal gravity in the beginning of 1946, consumption went up, but the beer was too expensive, because the State had naturally raised the taxes and cereals remained very dear. The total of brewing materials used dropped to 70 per cent, of the quantities of 1938. Since, in Belgium, the excise duties are calculated on the weight of materials used, they are the only correct basis to appreciate the beer consumption. The beers remained, however, slightly lighter than before the war, so that it must be said that the consumption fell by 25 per cent. The reasons for this setback are naturally much discussed among brewers. The opinion is often expressed that the habits of the population have changed. In fact, more coffee, fruits and chocolate are imported into Belgium than before the war. Nevertheless, the principal cause must be the price of the beer, which is too high; indeed, considering the purchasing value, in glasses of beer, of the workman's salary, it will be found that it lost exactly one-quarter since before the war. This fall in consumption is the cause of a grave economic crisis in the Belgian brewing industry. The means of production being so important, and competition so strong, each brewer tries to keep his customers, selling the best possible quality at the lowest price. It is this crisis which stimulates the technical developments in the breweries; they are dominated by the necessity to manufacture at a lower cost without impairing the quality. Some of the innovations designed to achieve this will now be examined."
Journal of the Institute of Brewing Volume 55, Issue 5, 1949, page 292.

Brewers the world over love a good moan. Especially about being over-taxed. They were lucky to be able to brew full-strength beer again in 1946. In the UK gravity continued to fall. As this table shows:

UK average OG 1939 - 1952
Year OG
1939 1040.93
1940 1040.62
1941 1038.51
1942 1035.53
1943 1034.34
1944 1034.63
1945 1034.54
1946 1034.72
1947 1032.59
1948 1032.66
1949 1033.43
1950 1033.88
1951 1036.99
1952 1037.07
Brewers' Almanack 1955, p. 50

Gravity never returned to its 1939 level.

It's true that Belgian beer consumption was lower after the war. But it had been insanely high. The only other place I can recall averaging over 200 litres a head is Bavaria. You can see in the table below that between 1930 and 1950 consumption per head almost halved. I can see why that would worry a brewer.

Belgian brewing 1900 - 1960

1900 1910 1920 1930 1939 1950 1960
No. breweries 3,223 3,349 2,013 1,546 1,120 663 414
Production (hl) 14,617,000 16,019,000 10,408,000 16,099,000 12,488,000 10,140,000 10,110,000
Imports (hl) 149,000 272,000 201,000 228,000 65,000 97,000 378,000
Exports (hl) 5,000 9,000 47,000 10,000 7,000 5,000 205,000
Consumption (hl) 14,761,000 16,282,000 10,562,000 16,317,000 12,546,000 10,232,000 10,283,000
Consumption (per head) 221 219 143 202 149 118 112
"Het Brouwersblad" June 2004, p.6, p.7

Note, too, how WW I and the Depression whittled down the number of breweries. By the start of WW II two-thirds of them had disappeared.

There's plenty more of this to come. Unless I hear the siren call of Lager again.

Sunday, 21 September 2014

Brewing in Denmark and Germany in 1960

I didn't want to let up on the Lager deluge while I was busy harvesting analyses. In the meantime I'll be plucking the plums from a 1960 article from the Journal of the Institute of Brewing about brewing in Germnay and Denmark. I don't know about you but I can't get enough of this stuff.

It was written by A. J. Mayfield of Truman. He'd won an award in 1959 and it seems to have allowed him to study in Denmark and Germany for a year. The article is a report of his studies.

First a quick introduction to brewing in the two countries:

In this study of certain Continental brewing methods, it was found essential to relate variations in procedure both to local taste and to the brewing laws prevailing in the areas concerned, in order to see how individual brewers satisfied local demands with the means at their disposal. Thus, Danish brewing, although founded on the Bavarian methods of last century, is now allowed far more scope in the matter of adjuncts and beer additives than is its German counterpart, and this provision is reflected in many aspects of the brewing process.

Classification for duty in the two countries is rather similar and involves a few well-defined groups of beers covering the whole gravity range, the tendency being for certain popular gravity types to be brewed at the top of the range allowed. The common beer in Denmark was at 1043° and in Germany at 1044°. German export beer, pale or dark, was generally at 1052°, Bock was at 1065° and Double Bock at 1075°."
Journal of the Institute of Brewing, Volume 66, 1960, pages 494 - 495.

Though not mentioned there by name, the Reinheitsgebot dictated differences in German and Danish brewing practice. The Danes had indeed founded their modern brewing industry on Bavarian traditions and techniques. Carlsberg's first Lager was in the dark Munich style.

I'm not sure what the "common beer" in Germany was. 1044º is at about the bottom end of a Pils gravity. But in 1960 Export was the most popular style. I'm a bit flumoxed because the gravity is too low for Helles.

Now a little more detail about Danish brewing:

Malt adjuncts and soluble chill-proofing agents are allowed and artificial carbonation is practised. Maize was the usual adjunct, up to 30% being used, and tannic acid and enzyme treatments were employed in the lager tank and at bottling."
Journal of the Institute of Brewing, Volume 66, 1960, page 495.

30% is a lot of maize. English brewers rarely used more than 10-15%, though William Younger in Scotland sometimes had 40% maize grits in its beers.

Now malting:

"Malting.— Malting barley consisted mainly of the Scandinavian varieties, Carlsberg II, Herta and Hafnia, with nitrogen contents usually 1.6-1.8%. Pilsner was the basic brewing malt, with the high diastatic power essential for maize conversion; values of 50-60° L. were normal. Extract (Congress wort) ranged from 98 to 104 lb. per Qr. and the difference between fine and coarse extract could be as much as 6 lb. per Qr., the resulting malt having a characteristic gritty bite.

The two major maltings visited (Carlsberg and K.B.) provided extreme variations in the production of this type of malt. One favoured a long cool process with 45-65 hr. in steep at 50° F. and an 8-day germination rising to 60° F.; the other preferred 40-60 hr. in steep at 69° F. and a 6-day growth to 64° F. Subsequent kilning was identical, with the temperature rising to 190° F. in 24 hr."
Journal of the Institute of Brewing, Volume 66, 1960, page 495.

98 to 104 lbs of extract is very high. Somewhere in the 90's is the best I've seen in British brewing records. Though this is doubtless a lab extract rather than one from an actual brew.

Hang on. I've analyses of British malt from the 1930's. here you go:

2 row Malts in the 1930's  
Pale Ale malts Mild Ale malts malt from foreign 2-row barley
Spratt-Archer Plumage-Archer Plumage-Archer Spratt-Archer Yorkshire plumage Moravian Chilean Chevalier Bohemian Hanna
moisture % 1.5 1.8 1.7 2.1 2 1.8 1.6 2.5
Extract, lb. 336 lb 100.5 100.6 100.6 99 99.4 98.9 99.9 99.8
colour, 1 inch cell 4.5 4 6.5 6 7 6.5 6.5 4
cold water extract % 18 18.7 19.1 18.7 17.7 17.1 18.7 20.2
diastatic activity Lº 36 37 32 35 32 37 38 35
extract on dry malt 102 102.4 102.3 101.1 101.4 100.7 101.5 102.3
total nitrogen % on dry malt 1.342 1.314 1.322 1.4 1.469 1.518 1.48 1.52
PSN % 0.51 0.509 0.488 0.541 0.469 0.562 0.618 0.6
PSN % on total nitrogen 38 38.7 36.9 38.6 33.3 36.9 41.8 39.5
PSN % on total wort solids 0.67 0.67 0.64 0.72 0.65 0.75 0.82 0.79
"Brewing Science & Practice" H. Lloyd Hind, 1943, p. 254, 256 & 258
PSN = permanently Soluble Nitrogen

You can see that the moisture content and extract are pretty similar to the Danish malt. The diastatic power of the latter is indeed much higher, by something like 50%. Doubtless the pale malt was darker in colour, too, than Danish pilsner malt.

You can probably guess what I'll say next. Loads more of this to come.

Saturday, 20 September 2014

A load more Lagerbiers from the North

I'm a bit reluctant to say "North Germany" because many of these beers are from places no longer in Germany. They were at the time, though.

One of the columns in my enormous spreadsheet of beer details is country. For place that have switched nationality over the last century or so, my choice is always likely to be arbitrary. More based on my convenience rather than being a political statement. So breweries in Prague and Pilsen I class as Czech, ones in Vienna and Graz as Austrian. It can't possibly be perfect. Where's the right country to assign to Königsberg? Russia? I don't think so.

But I'm wandering off again. As you can see, these are odds and sods or anonymous. Not the best sets ever. You'll probably be delighted to hear that his will be the Lagerbiers done. I've only just started extracting the Exports so there may be a small pause in this series. You know me, I'll get to it eventually.

As I'll eventually get to discussing these beers. Beginning with those from Königsberg, formerly capital of East Prussia, now part of Russia. I wonder if there's a brewery there today?  All five beers from Königsberg are towards the top end of the scale. Interesting to see an Autumn beer - Herbstbier - for the first time. It looks like a Bock to me. With that crap degree of attenuation it resembles a Munich Bock of the period

Random Northeast German Lagerbiers 1880 - 1897
Year Brewer Town Beer Style OG FG OG Plato ABV App. Atten-uation lactic acid % CO2 %
1880 Wickholder Königsberg März-Bräu Märzen 1054.6 1019.0 13.51 4.60 65.20% 0.230
1880 Ponarther Königsberg Sommerbier Sommerbier 1056.3 1025.0 13.91 4.03 55.60% 0.250
1880 Woriener Königsberg Sommerbier Sommerbier 1056.5 1017.2 13.96 5.10 69.56% 0.180
1880 Schönbuchser Königsberg Sommerbier Sommerbier 1062.0 1018.8 15.23 5.60 69.65% 0.190
1880 Schönbuchser Königsberg Herbstbier Herbstbier 1065.4 1026.5 16.01 5.01 59.45% 0.240
Average 1058.9 1021.3 14.52 4.87 63.89% 0.218
1887 Brauerei-Aktien-Gesellschaft Berlin Königstadt Lagerbier Hell Helles 1056.0 1015.7 13.84 5.24 71.96% 0.141 0.346
1887 Brauerei-Aktien-Gesellschaft Berlin Königstadt Lagerbier Dunkel Dunkles 1061.9 1023.8 15.22 4.93 61.55% 0.148 0.323
1887 Brauerei-Aktien-Gesellschaft Berlin Friedrichshain Lagerbier Lagerbier 1065.8 1024.6 16.12 5.33 62.61% 0.295
Average 1061.2 1021.4 15.06 5.16 65.38% 0.145 0.321
1894 Unknown Breslau Lagerbier? Lagerbier 1045.7 1010.0 11.40 4.64 78.12% 0.247
1897 Unknown Breslau Lagerbier? Lagerbier 1048.7 1014.6 12.10 4.41 69.99% 0.161 0.322
Average 1047.2 1012.3 11.75 4.53 74.05% 0.161 0.285
Chemie der menschlichen Nahrungs- und Genussmittel by Joseph König, 1903, pages 1102 - 1156

Talking of Munich Bockbier, there are a whole load of Salvator analyses coming up. Lots from Zacherl, but also other breweries.

Where was I? Königsberg beers. Pretty poor attenuation overall. They must have had a lot of body, these beers. No lactic acid number, so I've no idea how acidic they were. The Märzen actually looks much like a modern version, apart from the crappy attenuation.

Next three random beers from Berlin. Note the big difference between the attenuation of the Helles and the Dunkles. You quite often see that today, too, that Dunkles has a lower degree of attenuation. I suppose because drinkers expect more body. The acidity is, as with just about every other set, quite high. You'll see something very odd when we get to Berliner Weisse. But I won't spoil that now. The CO2 level is the highest we've seen. Does that mean they liked their beer fizzier in Berlin? Too small a sample to really say. Though Berliner Weisse, a very highly-carbonated style, was popular in the city.

Now for the Erfurt beers. Did I mention that I spent my wedding night in Erfurt? The next day we lost Eddie when he was distracted by a group of Russian soldiers. The Erfurt beer was really good. Angerbräu Pils was one of my favourite DDR beers. Lovely stuff, especially on draught, Really nice and hoppy.

Erfurt Lagerbiers 1879
Year Brewer Style OG FG OG Plato ABV App. Atten-uation lactic acid % CO2 %
1879 Unknown Lagerbier 1045.9 1010.6 11.45 4.59 76.91% 0.16 0.25
1879 Unknown Lagerbier 1047.0 1016.5 11.71 3.94 64.89% 0.15 0.15
1879 Unknown Lagerbier 1047.5 1014.1 11.83 4.33 70.32% 0.15 0.20
1879 Unknown Lagerbier 1048.7 1013.9 12.12 4.51 71.46% 0.09 0.15
1879 Unknown Lagerbier 1048.7 1015.0 12.12 4.36 69.20% 0.15 0.21
1879 Unknown Lagerbier 1049.1 1011.5 12.21 4.89 76.58% 0.12 0.27
1879 Unknown Lagerbier 1050.6 1016.4 12.57 4.43 67.59% 0.06 0.20
1879 Unknown Lagerbier 1050.8 1017.6 12.61 4.30 65.35% 0.10 0.18
1879 Unknown Lagerbier 1051.0 1019.0 12.66 4.14 62.75% 0.11
1879 Unknown Lagerbier 1051.3 1015.3 12.73 4.66 70.18% 0.11 0.25
1879 Unknown Lagerbier 1051.7 1021.2 12.83 3.94 58.99% 0.09 0.10
1879 Unknown Lagerbier 1052.0 1013.7 12.90 4.98 73.65% 0.13 0.20
1879 Unknown Lagerbier 1054.1 1015.6 13.39 5.00 71.16% 0.06 0.15
1879 Unknown Lagerbier 1054.2 1013.3 13.40 5.31 75.44% 0.15
1879 Unknown Lagerbier 1055.2 1016.7 13.65 4.99 69.75% 0.15
1879 Unknown Lagerbier 1055.4 1016.3 13.70 5.08 70.58% 0.11 0.10
1879 Unknown Lagerbier 1055.5 1016.3 13.72 5.09 70.63% 0.10 0.20
1879 Unknown Lagerbier 1057.5 1018.7 14.19 5.03 67.48% 0.09 0.20
1879 Unknown Lagerbier 1063.7 1015.1 15.63 6.34 76.30%
1879 Unknown Lagerbier 1067.6 1022.8 16.53 5.80 66.27% 0.09 0.08
Average 1052.9 1016.0 13.10 4.78 69.77% 0.11 0.18
Chemie der menschlichen Nahrungs- und Genussmittel by Joseph König, 1903, pages 1102 - 1156

Right, Erfurt Lagerbiers. There's a fair spread of gravities but, once again, the average comes out to about 1053. Attenuation, at just under 70%, is a bit worse than most other sets. Though for once, at 0.11%, the lactic acid content is almost reasonable. Interesting how much lower the CO2 content is compared to the Berlin samples.

As a special treat, here are some modern beers from Erfurt - including Angerbräu Pils:

Walhaus-Bräu, Erfurt beers in 2014
Beer Style OG FG OG Plato ABV App. Atten-uation
Waldhaus-Bräu Helles? 1048.6 1010.2 12.1 5.00 79.03%
Stock-Dunkel  Dunkles 1049.1 1009.9 12.2 5.10 79.82%
Märzenbier  Märzen 1056.7 1015.9 14 5.30 71.95%
Weizen  Weizen  1050.3 1011.9 12.5 5.00 76.35%
Maibock  Maibock  1069.2 1020.7 16.9 6.30 70.09%
Rotbier  Rotbier  1049.1 1013.6 12.2 4.60 72.28%
Rauchbier  Rauchbier  1050.3 1011.9 12.5 5.00 76.35%
EM-Festbier  Helles 1048.2 1009.8 12 5.00 79.67%
Oktoberbock  Bock 1067.5 1017.6 16.5 6.50 73.98%
Doppelbock  Doppelbock  1076.2 1018.8 18.5 7.50 75.33%
Weihnachtsbier  Festbier 1058.8 1016.5 14.5 5.50 72.04%
Rauchbierbock  Bock Rauch 1067.9 1019.5 16.6 6.30 71.35%
Rauchweizendoppelbock  Doppelbock Rauchweizen 1079.3 1025.5 19.2 7.00 67.91%
Waldhaus WM-Bier  Festbier 1055.4 1015.4 13.7 5.20 72.30%
Average 74.17%
Waldhaus website

Braugold, Erfurt beers in 2014
Beer Style OG FG OG Plato ABV App. Atten-uation
Braugold Festbier Festbier 1052.01 1007.6 12.9 5.80 85.39%
Braugold Spezial Spezial 1046.95 1009.3 11.7 4.90 80.19%
Braugold 1888 Helles 1050.32 1011.1 12.5 5.10 77.94%
Braugold Hell Helles 1046.11 1009.2 11.5 4.80 80.05%
Braugold Bock Bock 1068.33 1018.4 16.7 6.50 73.07%
Erfurter Angerbräu Premium Pils Pilsener 1050.32 1010.4 12.5 5.20 79.33%
Riebeck Premium Pilsener Pilsener 1046.53 1008.9 11.6 4.90 80.87%
Braugold Porter Porter 1048.21 1017.3 12 4.00 64.22%

Average 77.63%
Braugold website

The degree of attenuation is far higher, with the exception of the Waldhaus Märzen and the Braugold Porter.

As I said, there will probably be a gap before the next set. I'll maybe fill in with stuff from an 1960 article of Danish and German brewing.