Introduction
This is the third post in a series where I will try to find what (to me) results in the best pint of Guinness. First up I plan to test different aerator discs. Eventually, I will test different faucets, pouring methods, and glassware.
Part of the process of pouring a nitrogen beer is pouring it through an aerator or creamer. This is a disc with holes punched through it that the beer is forced through. In theory, the size and number of the holes could have an impact on what ends up in your glass. To test this out I purchased a set of aerator discs. In my last test I compared a disc with three 0.7mm holes to one with one 0.7mm hole. But it was very difficult to tell the difference. In this test I wanted to compare the three 0.7mm holed disc with one of the 0.5 mm discs. I thought that the single holed disc would offer the widest difference so that’s what I’m trying first.
Testing Method
- Each disc is installed on a different stout spout. This is just to make switching between pours easier. Other than the disc, the spouts should be the same.
- Before pouring a pint I will run off some beer. This should ensure that there are no variations in the temperature of the faucet between the first and second pour.
- I poured each Guinness by holding the beer close to the faucet at a about a 45 degree angle, aiming to hit the center of the harp. Beer was poured until it reached near the top of the glass (while being held at a 45 degree angle) then I set a timer for two minutes. When the timer went off I pushed the tap handle backwards and poured straight into the glass until it reached the top.
- Once each beer was finished I let them rest for to let the temperature stabilize.
- I did my initial tasting without knowing which pour was which.
Comparison
My first pour was with the three holed disc that I used in both of previous tests. No surprise, everything looks similar to previous tests:
Like with previous tests, the disc with less smaller diameter holes pours a lot slower. The disc with one 0.5 mm hole was roughly 3 times as long to pour. I timed around 40 seconds to get to the bottom of the harp and 75 seconds to get to the top of the glass (while being held at an angle). Because the top of the glass gets exposed to the stream of beer for longer, the lacing of the head has a more visible presence:
Similarly with the settle, the cascade effect only went half way down the glass. It was like I was pouring the best kind of half-and-half beverage: Guinness and Guinness.
Here’s a side by side once they were both finished pouring. Three 0.7mm holes on the left and one 0.5mm hole on the right. The one holed disc has a head that is slightly, but noticeably larger:
Conclusions
Like the previous test, these were very similar pours. I did think there was a very slight difference in the texture of the foam. Similar to how different espresso drinks can have different textures of foam. One of the pours seemed to have a slightly finer, tighter foam that – if I had to pick – I would have marked down as my preferred pour. My guess was that this was the single holed 0.5 mm disc but I was wrong. So that, along with the faster pour is another win for the three holed 0.7mm disc.