HOMEBREW Digest #1137 Mon 10 May 1993

Digest #1136 Digest #1138

		Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator

  Re: Sammy Adams (Paul Jasper)
  Re: Help! Overbubbling! (Lou Casagrande)
  Re: Help! Overbubbling! (Jay Kirschenbaum)
  Re: Methanol (aka wood alcohol) (Steve Dempsey)
  Beer Machine Infomercial (Randall Holt)
  another drinkers opinion on Clear Beer (Jim Sims)
  Sam Adams & other "microbrewers" (Ming-chung Lin)
  RE: Effects of Light on Beer (David Ferguson)
  Miller Genuine Draft Mini Kegs (greenbay)
  All grain instructions - how's this look? (David Hinz)
  Oatmeal Stout (RBSWEENEY)
  Cornelius repeat (oops) (drose)
  SPARGE, Skunks, Bidal (Jack Schmidling)
  Dextrins vs temp (korz)
  Mash stiffness vs. enzyme activity (korz)
  Isomerized Hop Extracts vs. Skunkiness (Mark Garetz)
  Re: filtering--Why? (florianb)
  Re: Legal Probelms for Sam(tm)Adams(tm) (Drew Lawson)
  HBD submission (rdeaver)
  membership (CBOSWELL)
  Miller CLEAR (Bill Fuhrmann)
  CLEAR BEER (thomas ciccateri)
  Collecting yeast abroad (/O=vmspfhou/S=dblewis/DD.SITE=JSCPROFS/)
  Belgian caramel pils (KLIGERMAN)

Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew at hpfcmi.fc.hp.com (Articles are published in the order they are received.) Send UNSUBSCRIBE and all other requests, ie, address change, etc., to homebrew-request@ hpfcmi.fc.hp.com, BUT PLEASE NOTE that if you subscribed via the BITNET listserver (BEER-L at UA1VM.UA.EDU), then you MUST unsubscribe the same way! If your account is being deleted, please be courteous and unsubscribe first. Archives are available via anonymous ftp from sierra.stanford.edu. (Those without ftp access may retrieve files via mail from listserv at sierra.stanford.edu. Send HELP as the body of a message to that address to receive listserver instructions.) Please don't send me requests for back issues - you will be silently ignored. For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to lutzen at novell.physics.umr.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 5 May 1993 10:32:49 -0700 From: paul at rational.com (Paul Jasper) Subject: Re: Sammy Adams On 4 May, 10:03, Jeff Frane wrote: > Subject: Re: Sammy Adams & Belgian Malts > > Sam Adams is not and never has been a microbrewed beer. From its > inception it was contract-brewed, originally in Pennsylvania and for the > last couple of years here in Portland at the Blitz-Weinhard Brewery. > >-- End of excerpt from Jeff Frane You mean the claim that Sam Adams Boston Lager(tm) is a microbrewery beer is a "momily"(tm)? ;^) BTW, a sign has appeared on a huge billboard on the way into San Francisco from the airport proclaiming Samuel Adams to be America's best beer... I think a few of the city's Anchor drinkers might have a word or two to say about that (let alone the Celis aficionados, local brewpub fanatics, Red Tail Ale swiggers, etc, etc)! - -- - -- Paul Jasper - -- RATIONAL - -- Object-Oriented Products - -- Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 7 May 93 09:07:10 EDT From: casagran at gdstech.grumman.com (Lou Casagrande) Subject: Re: Help! Overbubbling! Jay wrote back in HBD1129 (sorry, but I'm just catching up on my reading): > A friend and I are making our first batch of Irish Stout. He has > brewed a lager before, but this it my first batch of beer. We > followed the directions that came with the beer kit (Irish Stout from > Eastern Brewers Supply) but used a liquid yeast instead of the dry > yeast supplied (on the suggestion of EBS). > > We are fermenting in a ~6.5 Gal plastic primary fermenter, but now, > two days after we pitched the yeast the wort is bubbling VERY > vigerously. It is bubbling so much that it is getting in to the > fermentiation lock, which was 3-4 inches above the level of the brew > when we began. > > Did we do something wrong, or is a stout supposed to ferment that > violently? I have had the same thing happen with my two previous batches. The first was the Sparrow Hawk Porter from TNCJOHB, which had an OG of 1.054. The second was the Dark Sleep Stout from TNCJOHB, which we perked up a bit by using 3 lbs of the dark DME rather than 1 lb. This had an OG of 1.067. The latter was so vigorous that it actually pushed up the lid on my fermenter (when the air lock became clogged) and spilled about a pint of foam on the floor. The stout is still aging in the bottles, but the porter turned out to be very smooth, so this was probably simply an inadvertant blowoff. By the way, both brews were fairly highly hopped. I didn't use a liquid yeast, but I do rehydrate religiously. That didn't change from previous batches, though, so I'm not sure that that can be the answer. In any event, just clean up any mess, make sure your fermentation lock stays clear, and let it ferment to completion (which has probably already happened, considering the lateness of my posting wrt Jay's :~O). Lou Casagrande casagran at gdstech.grumman.com Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 7 May 93 09:29:08 EDT From: jkirsch at dolphin.uri.EDU (Jay Kirschenbaum) Subject: Re: Help! Overbubbling! I wrote: [Story about a very vigerous fermentation] Well...Yesterday we bottled--a week ago we transferred the brew to a secondary fermenter, and everything seems fine!! I snuck a taste as we were bottling, and it tastes great!! although perhaps not quite as bitter as it should be, but these things happen. I will report back in two weeks or so and tell how it finally comes out, but thanks to everyone who responded (I don't have all the old messages, sorry that I didn't respond individually) Thanks, Jay Kirschenbaum jkirsch at dolphin.uri.edu University of Rhode Island Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 07 May 93 08:01:49 -0600 From: Steve Dempsey <steved at longs.lance.colostate.edu> Subject: Re: Methanol (aka wood alcohol) In HOMEBREW Digest #1136 you write: > Specifically, WHY isn't methanol produced during homebrewing >or I guess the question could be asked as how DO you produce >methanol? Thanks for the info in advance. Methanol production requires: 1) the proper yeast (wild yeasts) 2) unique fermentables (cellulose == wood, grain husks) As a homebrewer, you use a known yeast type that does not yield methyl alcohol as its primary waste product. The homebrewers of days gone by could not keep things clean; wild yeasts would get in and start eating the wooden vats used for fermenting, or in the case of moonshine production, the grain is left in the mash during fermentation and provides enough fiber for methanol production. After distilling the product, the methanol concentration is high enough to do serious damage. Nearly all methanol casualties are caused by consuming distilled spirits produced from an improperly controlled fermentation. Occasionally someone stupid mistakenly procures the cheapest alcohol he can find to spike his drink, not realizing that it's poisonous. Traditional beer/ale homebrewing has never been a problem so long as the right yeast strains are employed. The wrong yeasts are hard enough to come by that it's not going to be a problem unless you ferment in wooden vats/barrels, or leave lots of grain in your wort during fermentation. Even so, the resulting beer would have lots of other off-flavor byproducts of the unusual yeast and you wouldn't want to drink it. ================================ Engineering Network Services Steve Dempsey Colorado State University steved at longs.lance.colostate.edu Fort Collins, CO 80523 ================================ +1 303 491 0630 Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 7 May 93 10:14:03 -0400 From: rxh6 at po.CWRU.Edu (Randall Holt) Subject: Beer Machine Infomercial I haven't seen the ad mentioned yesterday for a homebrew video, but I did catch the last few minutes of the Beer Machine (tm?) Infomercial. Since I haven't noticed any mention on this letter, I thought I'd bring it to attention. The device they sell looks like a 2.5 gal. glass keg, laying on it's side, with a support stand, a tap and a screw-cap up on top. They demonstrate pouring in extract, adding water straight from the tap, add the yeast and screw on the cap ( I assume there's some kind of CO2 release). Wait for five days, then refrigerate (presumably after closing the release) and draw your own. They only want $34.95 for the kit (oh, times four easy payments, a typical infomercial small-print bullshit trick), so the real cost with shipping is about $150. The extract they sell is Sun Country, which they will gladly supply for refills for about twice the cost at my local HB shop. But, hey, business is business. Despite the excessive cost, this may introduce people into real homebrewing. The question I have, has anyone tried this system, or even tried brewing in this fashion, by fermenting and carbonating in the same container? I can imagine how tangy this beer would be, being poured right off the trub. Of course the happy smiling 'real people' are quaffing crystal clear, perfectly carbonated, 1 inch head, beer. I don't recall them ever mentioning the word yeast, which I would guess is a marketing strategy, but they do call their system "All natural". (So is the aboriginal practice of spitting in the mash pot to hasten the conversion of starch). I also object to the trademarking of MY nickname. Randy 'The other Beer Machine' Holt Bibo Ergo Sum - -- Randall W. Holt rxh6 at po.cwru.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 7 May 93 10:41:13 EDT From: sims at pdesds1.atg.trc.scra.org (Jim Sims) Subject: another drinkers opinion on Clear Beer Hans is local to DC... jim > Return-Path: <tallis at starbase.mitre.org> > Date: Fri, 7 May 1993 10:21:05 -0400 > From: Hans Tallis <tallis at starbase.mitre.org> > In-Reply-To: Jim Sims's message of Fri, 7 May 93 07:46:12 EDT > Subject: more Clear Beer silliness > > > I've had a clear beer, down in C'ville. It tasted like dirty, weak >vodka. I think I almost threw up. (But it was like the 10th beer for >the evening, so maybe that had something to do with it.) > > - --Hans Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 7 May 1993 11:26:17 EDT From: Ming-chung Lin <MARS at suvm.acs.syr.EDU> Subject: Sam Adams & other "microbrewers" Last year I visited the F.X. Matt brewery in Utica, NY and was delighted to see a room full of GOOD BEER (not the usual Matt's fare). There were tanks full of Sam Adams, Harpoon Ale Brooklyn Lager, and others that I don't now remember. Matt's contract brews for many microbreweries, although I think the tour guide (whose knowledge I sincerely doubt since he claimed "beer is beer") said that they didn't brew Sam Adams, they just aged and bottled it. The others were brewed there. For those of you in other parts of the country, Matt's is the nation's 11th largest brewer, far behind the likes of Miller and A.B. It's named after and owned by Frances Xavier Matt and also his brother. They produce a very low budget (and taste) line called Utica Club, a middle of the road line called Matt's (kind of like PBR), and also Saranac Lager which won some best beer of its kind award. I find it curious that the brewers that are brawling in Boston all send their stuff to Utica. Lisa St. Hilaire <MARS at SUVM.ACS.SYR.EDU> Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 7 May 93 08:57:06 PDT From: David Ferguson <davidfer at microsoft.com> Subject: RE: Effects of Light on Beer Ed Westemeie writes: "Get a six-pack from a freshly opened case in the back room, rather than a cold one that has been sitting in the display case under fluorescent lights for a week." I'm curious if there is any relation between the protection from light and the better flavor of draft beer. I would imagine that there really are several reasons why draft beer tastes better including freshness and less temperature variance due to higher volume, but is light exposure a significant factor? Would any brewing gurus care to illuminate me (us) on the issue? Dave Ferguson Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 7 May 93 11:09:36 CDT From: greenbay at vnet.IBM.COM Subject: Miller Genuine Draft Mini Kegs I was at the bar last night and saw something new. Little plastic Miller Genuine Draft kegs with a turnspout. They looked like they would be pretty cool for storing homebrew in. The are made of heavy-duty plastic and the screw on top forms quite a seal (I sprained my thumb opening it.) Has anyone ever tried to put homebrew in these things? (Size-wise they are a little larger than the average pitcher.) So, does anyone know where I can get grass from lambeau field so that I can brew Green Bay Packer beer? Later, Bob Crowley Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 7 May 93 11:39:58 CDT From: hinz at memphis.med.ge.com (David Hinz) Subject: All grain instructions - how's this look? Greetings! I've decided to jump in with both feet, and go for an all-grain batch. I've purchased a lauter tun, and will construct a cooking kettle out of a Stainless Steel 1/2 bbl and a water heater element tonight. I wrote up a checklist, and would like to run it past people here to see what comments you have. Obviously, it's a very basic checklist, but I want to make sure I have things in the right order, haven't missed anything, and so on. I'm doing Papazian's "Silver Dollar Porter", with an extra pound of Munich malt per the suggestion of the local brewshop. My lauter tun is sort of a Zapap-type, but with a rotating sprinkler for the sparge water (probably fluff, but I'm lazy & impatient, so I didn't buy or build an easy-sparger.....yet) So, here's my list: >Select recipe & obtain ingredients. >Start Yeast pack (2-3 days before brewing) >Add yeast to quart of starter wort (~12 hours before brewing) >Preboil 10 gallons of "brewing water", put in carboys when cool. (night before brewing) >Bring 1.33 qt H2O per pound of grist to 130 degrees (f) in mash kettle. >Add above water to grist, protein rest for (60?) minutes at 122 deg. >Adjust pH to about 5.3 if needed >Start sparge water in cooker kettle, bring to 170(?) degrees. How much? >Raise mash temp to 155 deg, hold at this temp until conversion is done. (Can I do this with boiling water? How much do I use?) >Adjust pH if needed >Test for conversion with Tincture of Iodine >Raise temp of mash to 175 deg, for (20?) minutes, to mash-out. >Pour mash into lauter tun, let it compact, recirculate runoff until clear. >Put sparge water into sparging vessel, start the sprinkler. Keep the liquid level right around the top of the grain bed by regulating flow in and out of lauter tun. Collect this wort in the cooker. >Plug in cooker, bring to boil, add hops per schedule, boil per recipe. >Immersion chill, rack, pitch, shake, ferment, rack, settle, rack, prime, bottle, keep in kitchen for a week, put it in the basement, wait, wait, wait, drink, MMMMmmmmmmmmmm. - --- Note that some of the times may be inaccurate, I'm doing this from memory, 30 miles away from my books. Those, obviously, will be adjusted as needed. Please e-mail or post if you can suggest improvements. I can't read R.C.B, so posts to the HBD would be better. Thanks for any input, Dave Hinz Return to table of contents
Date: 07 May 1993 12:08:17 -0600 (CST) From: RBSWEENEY at memstvx1.memst.edu Subject: Oatmeal Stout Does anyone on the HBD have a good all-grain recipe for an oatmeal stout. ? Last month at the Bluff City Brewers and Connoisseurs awards banquet (Memphis,TN) Dave Miller was the guest speaker and brought along a keg of his delicious oatmeal stout--my kind of guest. Unfortunately, I was not able to talk to him long enough to get the recipe, but the idea of oatmeal stout will not go away. The hop bouquet on Dave's was heavenly, so I assume he must have dry hopped, and he did say the beer had been filtered using a DE? filter. Emails would be appreciated. As an aside, some of Miller's comments on making the transition from homebrewer to microbrewer (his is in St. Louis) related to the brewers individual perspective on brewing. He basically divided the brewing community into 'Germans' and 'Belgains'. The Germans being those who meticulously brew to style, while the Belgains never want their brews to taste the same way twice. His opinion was that as you make the transition to microbrewer you lose some of your Belgain influence and become more German. He also strongly recommended the filtering of beer, which he claimed brought out entirely new (and presumably better) flavor profiles. As I said, if his oatmeal stout is any indication, he must be on to something. Thanks in advance for the recipes. Bob Sweeney Department of Management Information Systems Memphis State University P.S. Oops, make that 'Germans' and 'Belgians'. ^^ Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 7 May 93 13:45:46 -0400 From: drose at husc.harvard.edu Subject: Cornelius repeat (oops) Hello. I recently posted a question about sources for Cornelius kegs. Thanks to all who replied with some good input. One person in particular sent a lenthy piece on keg cleaning and reconditioning which was very useful. Unfortunately, I deleted it before I could get it on paper; could the person who sent it (whose name I also deleted) please send it again. I offer my sheepish thanks. Also, regarding the use of yeast in medfly traps (HBD#1136): yes, fruitflies in fact do not eat fruit, they eat wild yeast that grows on fruit. In the lab (drosophila melanogaster is a favored organism for studying development) they are grown in little vials with yeast and some food for the yeast to eat. As a yeast geneticist working in a building populated by fly geneticists, this relationship is a particularly painful one. I will probably never recover from the repeated taunts of "my organism EATS your organism". d. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 7 May 93 12:51 CDT From: arf at genesis.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) Subject: SPARGE, Skunks, Bidal >From: gjfix at utamat.uta.edu (George J Fix) >Subject: Sparge Water >I personally let the mash thickness float, and indeed have found this to be a relatively unimportant variable within a reasonable range. In particular, plots of yield vs. mash thickness tend to be quite flat in the range 25-40 liters/kg. Not sure I can address what youse guys are talking about but I will use the discussion as a segue to what I want to talk about. I have found that there are far more advantages to using a thin mash than a thick one. In fact, I don't know of any reasons for fighting a thick mash. 1. A thin mash has more mass and makes temp maintenance far easier. 2. A thin mash is far easier to stir and thereby assure thorough mashing and temperature homogeneity. 3. A thin mash requires less sparge water in direct proportion to the amount of mash water used. 4. A thin mash has less tendency to scorch or caramelize when kettlemashing. 5. It takes longer to bring a thin mash to temp but the time is well spent as the mash gets a sample of every recommended "rest" in the book and has the possiblity of curing every il and adding a bit of every character possible. For the record, I use 4 gals of water to mash 12 lbs of grain. I consider this on the thin side but have no qualms about using more water, just haven't tried it. >From: WESTEMEIER at delphi.com >Subject: Effect of light on beer >OK, how much light does it take? If it's the right (actually, the wrong) kind of light, the answer is "not much.".... I was waiting with baited breath to hear the answer but "not much" is not very satisfying. All this science is real nice but when I see people putting bags over carboys of fermenting beer in the basement, I can't help but wonder if we haven't got another MOMILY out of control. As a teenager, we joked about "Skunky Millers", so I am a believer in the principles involved but have serious reservations about the potential damage from occasional fluorescent lights over a period of a few weeks. Seems easy enough to prove with a few simple experiments but I am so far from believing it, that I have better things to do. So, I offer a challenge to some incipient MOMILY BUSTER. Split a batch in half and keep half in the dark and expose the other to 8 hrs of fluorescent light per day. Bottle some of both when ready, then do the same every 30 days till you smell a skunk and report back. My bet is, you will run out of beer first. .......... Does anyone know anything about the Bidal Society Competition? i.e., can someone post the results? js Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 7 May 93 13:36 CDT From: korz at iepubj.att.com Subject: Dextrins vs temp While looking for some data for another post, I found the following info, which I think is very interesting. It's from a post by Todd Enders from July 1991: >Subject: Mashing, Dextrins, and American Lager Stats. > > > After the recent discussion about dextrins, mashing, etc. I went and did >a little research into just how much the mash temperature effects the >fermentability of the wort. I found the following in _Industrial >Microbiology_ by Prescott and Dunn, 3rd ed. (used without permission) > >Effect of the Temperature of Conversion on the Ratio of Sugars to Dextrins > > Conversion Ratio of Sugar > Temp. to Dextrins > ---------- -------------- > > 147.2F 1:0.37 > 150.8F 1:0.40 > 154.4F 1:0.48 > 158.0F 1:0.52 > 161.6F 1:0.57 > Very interesting, no? Back to my thick vs. thin mash search... Al. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 7 May 93 13:59 CDT From: korz at iepubj.att.com Subject: Mash stiffness vs. enzyme activity George writes: >These results are for infusion mashing only. The situation for decoction >is a good deal more complicated because of the volume reductions during >boiling. >Theoretically a thick mash provides more thermal protection for enzymes, and >this has been put forward as a point for a thick mash. On the other hand, >enzyme activity is inhibited by the concentration of the products produced, >and this tends to favor a thin mash. > >There appears to be some disagreement about whether the effects cancel, >or that they are simply weak effects. Our mathematical models (based on the >nonlinear differential equations of enzyme kinetics) suggest it is a >combination of both. In any case, it has been my personal experience with my >own system that mash thickness is not a major issue. It was Noonan that said: "...thick mash improves enzyme performance. In a thin mash, proteolytic and other heat-labile enzymes are destroyed in the course of the rest: in a thick mash, they may survive into the saccharification range." Greg brews some great beers, on the other hand, he sometimes goes to extremes. Therefore, I'd just take this more as a data point than a definitive answer. On the third hand (?), I've read, but cannot find it again (drat!), that a stiff mash favors one of the amylase enzymes and a thin one favors the other. Anyone have this data? Was that in Noonan also? Al. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 07 May 1993 10:49:58 From: garetz at brahms.amd.com (Mark Garetz) Subject: Isomerized Hop Extracts vs. Skunkiness >Paul dArmand asks about isomerized extracts and whether or not they are immune from ligh-struck or "skunky" effects. Regular isomerized extracts are no more immune to skunkiness than hops. However, there *is* a treatment one can do to the extract (or presumably, the beer) that makes the beer more immune. Sam Smith's claims to use such a process, but IMHO it doesn't work very well. I have had many of their Nut Brown Ales that were severely light struck. >Ed Westemeie states that isomerized alpha acids are much more bitter than their non-isomerized "natural" counterparts. Nothing I have ever read on hops supports this statement. However, the non-isomerized alpha acids don't dissolve very well in water or beer, and so they have a minimal effect on the bitterness. The isomerized AAs are much more soluble. Maybe Ed was actually trying to state this, but simplified it. Mark Garetz HopTech Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 07 May 93 12:58:08 PDT From: florianb at ying.cna.tek.com Subject: Re: filtering--Why? Scott Stihler writes: => I've got a question regarding filtering beer. I've been interested in filtering my homebrew for awhile but I'm somewhat confused as to what is the optimum filter size for beer. Does anybody out there happen to know? I'm afraid if I get too small a filter size I may lose body. Anyways, I'd appreciate here what => I was interested in this at one time also, due to some haziness I had with my brews. However, I figured out that instead of filtering out the haze along with body, I should fix the problems that caused the haze in the first place. I don't know what all was causing the haze, but I did a combination of things to fix it. These included: going all-grain, using a keg system, and changing how I did the mash. The old timers on this digest will remember me and my mashing technique. Someday I will get out from under all the piled up duties at work and ship out a description of my mashing technique. Basically, I put all the sparge water in the mash at once, stir, and wait until the whole thing settles. Saves time and hassle, and I get nearly the same extraction as with the old textbook method. I'll detail it someday, I promise. Florian Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 7 May 93 14:07:13 PDT From: lawson at acuson.com (Drew Lawson) Subject: Re: Legal Probelms for Sam(tm)Adams(tm) > From dalton at mtl.mit.edu (Timothy J. Dalton) > Boston Globe, Thursday May 6, 1993. Pg. 77 (Business Sect.) > and it didn't really reflect our mission," says association president Charles > Papazian. Charles? That's the first time I've _ever_ seen that. > Now New York is telling Koch that "there is clear potential for consumers > being misled when you refer in the aggregate to "winning" the Great American > Beer Festival without being specific as to the nature of what you won." Hmm. I seem to recall exactly that being discussed in the Digest about two years ago. I was impressed with the ad claims until I read just _how_ the "winner" was chosen. Drew Lawson If you're not part of the solution, lawson at acuson.com you're part of the precipitate Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 7 May 93 17:35:27 EDT From: rdeaver at tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil Subject: HBD submission A while back, I recall somebody posting a comment about boiling wort. The post mentioned that if you brought the wort over a certain temperature (I believe it was 153 degrees F), you would convert some of the sugars to a non-fermentable form. I only have a half-dozen batches under my belt, and most have seemed a bit sweet. The finishing gravities ave been around 1.002, but the brew had a heavy taste to it. Planning to launch off on another brewing session of Heavy Scottish Ale, I dropped into the local brewshop for a strainer bag. The question raised was that if I did not boil the wort, would I have sterilization problems. I will be using Briess DME, and this time will be using some specialty grains. I always boil water ahead of time, to get rid of chlorine. What is the general consensus? I have had this "sweet heaviness" with several batches; it is not recipe-specific. The last batch, I went as far as using yeast nutrient. Return to table of contents
Date: 07 May 1993 17:08:21 -0700 (MST) From: CBOSWELL at CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU Subject: membership Greetings, I am a member of the Old Pueblo Homebrewing Club, in Tucson, AZ, and I would like to expand my horizons by becoming a member of the homebrewing e-mail digest. My address is: cboswell at ccit.arizona.edu Thanks. I look forward to absorbing the wisdom of elders (in experience, only, of course) and maybe contributing some of my own, if I ever get any. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 7 May 93 19:00:41 CDT From: fiero at pnet51.orb.mn.org (Bill Fuhrmann) Subject: Miller CLEAR Just realized that we are a test market, the rest of you haven't had the "honor" of tasting Miller Clear yet. It looks and tastes like sparkling water. There is a very slight (very, very, very slight) bit of beer taste to it and a little bit more nose. To a quick sniff, it smells like you didn't quite rinse out your glass completely. You have to swirl it around your mouth to notice any taste. I expect that this will be popular with very under age drinkers since it does not require acquiring a taste for it, it won't be obvious what they are drinking (maybe also popular for drinking in cars for that reason), and won't be noticeable on their breath. I bought it once to see what it was like and it appears to have lived down to even lower expectations than most of the people in the beer world expected. The clerk in the store thought that I was buying an interesting combination of brews; Clear and Cerveza Caliente (cabos style chili beer). The Cerveza is brewed by the Minnesota Brewing Company in St. Paul (home of blonds and blond food). If you want to brew a clone, just put water in the bottle, add yeast and the priming sugar. You'll probably come pretty close to the taste but not the 4.6 % (by volume according to the label) alcohol. Just think, you can mix this with a low alcohol beer and get a light beer. Bill Fuhrmann, aka fiero at pnet51.orb.mn.org "You don't know what you've got till it's gone." - Joni Mitchell Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 9 May 93 1:51:18 MDT From: thomas ciccateri <tciccate at carina.unm.edu> Subject: CLEAR BEER I brought some Miller CLEAR BEER to this month's meeting of the Dukes Of Ale club for tasting. The label claims 4.6% alcohol / volume. Consumers can call 1-800-MILLER6 for more information. Most reviewer's comments reflected the following opinions: Aroma - CO2, Taste - Slightly sweet water, Body - like seltzer water, Aftertaste - none, Overall Impression - Good clarity, no hop bitterness or aroma, no malt character and no appreciable flavor outside that attributed to carbonation. And some people thought that it couldn't get any worse than light beer ! Tom Ciccateri -> tciccate at carina.unm.edu University of New Mexico Training and Learning Technologies Div. Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 9 May 93 08:54 PDT From: /O=vmspfhou/S=dblewis/DD.SITE=JSCPROFS/ at NASAmail.nasa.gov Subject: Collecting yeast abroad ***************************** PROFS Note ***************************** From: DBLEWIS --VMSPFHOU Date and time 05/09/93 10:54:40 To: POSTMAN --NASAMAIL FROM: Dennis B. Lewis <dblewis at jscprofs.nasa.gov> SUBJECT: Collecting yeast abroad I have the good fortune to be going to Germany (Cologne area) next month. I'd like to collect some yeast while I'm there. I have a few questions for the net: 1. How well does solid agar keep at approx room temp for maybe a week or so? I'm pretty careful with sanitation. 2. What does the Customs Dept think when you come back with small vials of yeast on slants that are capped and all taped up? I know they get bent out of shape if you bring plants or animal products, so does yeast count? 3. Pierre Rajotte, in the Zymurgy special issue, sez to mail the vials back home, along with a business card from the brewery, mark it yeast sample, etc., and leave it to the postal inspectors to yea or nay it. Does this work? 4. Anybody know of any must see breweries/biergartens in Cologne? Any responses would be greatly appreciated. If I get enough e-mail (as opposed to HBD posts) I'll collect the ideas and post them at once. Thanks in advance for all the expert advice. Dennis B. Lewis * (713) 483-9145 * NASA/JSC/DH6 Payload Ops Homebrew, The Final Frontier. Return to table of contents
Date: 09 May 1993 20:47:26 -0400 (EDT) From: KLIGERMAN at herlvx.rtpnc.epa.gov Subject: Belgian caramel pils I hope someone can clarify for me the use of DeWolf-Cosyns Caramel Malt Caramel Pils. I was under the impression that these were crystal malts that did not need to be mashed; with cara-pils being the lightest and special B being the darkest. Today I was making a Pilzen style honey lager and wanted to use a pound a very light crystal (Caramel Malt Caramel Pils). As I usually do with an extract recipe, I crushed the grain, added it to about 3/4 gallon of cold water, and slowly brought the "mash" up to about 180 F. I then sparged with about a gallon of hot water (about 190 F). After this I looked at the grain and it looked like gelatinized starch. I did an iodine test and the result was jet blue-black. I decided to add more water and 1 pound of crushed Klages Pale malt and mashed at about 155 F. I then added this to my honey-malt extract wort. Question: The Belgian malt did not act like typical crystal malt--it gelatinized instead of dissolving. I thought this was supposed to be a crystal malt or if not at least self convert. It seemed to do neither--just form gelatinized soft grain. Can anyone please tell me where my assumptions or processes are wrong, else I will worry without having a homebrew. Will my Pilzen be cloudy from the first sparge of the apparently unconverted starch? Thanks, Andy Kligerman Return to table of contents
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1137, 05/10/93