HOMEBREW Digest #1196 Wed 04 August 1993

Digest #1195 Digest #1197


	FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
		Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator


Contents:
  Overnight mashing / Extract efficiency (npyle)
  Re: Decoction mashing (Timothy J. Dalton)
  Re: Counterflow Questions (Mike Zentner)
  Overnight mashing (McHarry)
  Gelatin question (lyons)
  decoction/hopping/misc (Jim Busch)
  misc (""Robert C. Santore"")
  *EXTRA* EARWAX KILLS BEER FOAM (ed fromohio)
  Re: pts-gal/lb NOT pts/lb/gal (Ed Hitchcock)
  Yet Another Grain Mill (wegeng.XKeys)
  Wyeast question (John Adams)
  confused hops (Russ Gelinas)
  Homebrew blindness ("Palmer.John")
  Chilis are Jalapenos (Wolfe)
  To those who attended the conference in Portland...  (davidr)
  when to harvest hops? (tims)
  Ammonia in water supply (Kevin Casey)
  pts/lb/gal /sprinkling spargers/AllAboutBeer/WyeastQuestions (korz)
  Japanese Homebrew? (npyle)
  overnight mashes (ghultin)
  "Washing" yeast (Derrick Pohl)
  Decoction mashing/Overnight mashing (korz)
  Wyeast Suppliers (John_D._Sullivan.wbst311)
  Flora & Fauna (korz)
  The FaceMail Project (Spencer.W.Thomas)
  Algebra and extraction rate (Geoff Reeves)
  Yeast Trick (roberts735)
  Wyeast 1007, (German) (SMUCKER)
  boiling hops longer / blindness / overnight mashes (Brian Bliss)

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: Mon, 2 Aug 93 9:40:11 MDT From: npyle at n33.stortek.com Subject: Overnight mashing / Extract efficiency William Kitch responds to Jack's post about starting the brew session the night before: >In HBD #1193 Jack Schmidling mentions doing the mash-in the night >before the rest of the mash. According to Jack, the overnight mash-in >"had far more malty flavor and seemed richer and fuller in body" than >the same recipe using a normal mash-in. > >Very interesting experience! I could certainly go for mashing-in the >night before. Have others tried this? With what sucess? Jack, what >temperature do you mash in at and how does it change overnight? Actually Jack didn't say he did mash-in the night before, he said he did "dough-in" the night before. I suspect he did dough-in at room temperature in order to dissolve the starch well. I seem to recall a thread about this months ago. I have done overnight mashes myself, ala Dave Line. It works, I have had no undesirable effects from this, although it seems ripe for having a sour mash type of event. A side note: Dave Line is (was) on of the more "relaxed" homebrewing authors around; draw your own conclusions. Martin Manning writes: >My personal preference is to measure the extract efficiency at the start of the >boil. It is, as someone said, the efficiency of the mashing and lautering >processes that are of the most interest. At this point, the character of the >wort is set, and you have recovered all of the sugars you are going to get. > >A point which no one has brought up is that if you are using any kettle >adjuncts (honey, sugars, etc.), you definitely want to do the calculation >before you add them. This is a point worth mentioning. If you are brewing a certain style and really want to nail that OG, measuring before the boil is a must. At that point, you can do several things: boil more/less to adjust the OG, add DME to adjust the OG, etc. If you don't care as much about the perfect OG, change the hopping schedule to balance the beer for more/less malt (this is what I typically do). After the boil, you have no such options, you are just measuring the efficiency of your process. Cheers, norm Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 93 07:37:08 -0400 From: Timothy J. Dalton <dalton at mtl.mit.edu> Subject: Re: Decoction mashing Don_Doyle at Novell.COM (Don Doyle) wrote: > I was wondering if many people use decoction mashing and what the > pro's/con's to it are. I have Noonan's book and he swears by decoction > for lager's however can one do an ale this way. I have a little voice > in my head saying "No" because you will impart unwanted flavors i.e. > astringency into the beer, but want feedback on this mashing procedure. Decoction mashing is used for more than just lagers. Eric Warner details the use of decoction mashing to produce Bavarian Weissbier in _German Wheat Beer_. With a large fraction of wheat (> 50%) as part of the grain bill, decoction mashing makes lautering easier by breaking down more of the high molecular weight proteins which removes the 'gumminess' typically associated with high percentage malted wheat mashes. Decoction mashing also tends to increase extract yield. I've used decoction mashing to make two weissbiers with good success (using double decoction mashes) and most recently, a triple decoction to make an Oktoberfest which yielded 32.4 pts-gal/lb (to follow Geoff's revised unit scheme). Boiling the grains does not cause a problem with tannin extraction as long as the pH of the decoction being boiled is correct i.e., acidic, around 5.5. Tim - ---- Timothy J. Dalton tjdalton at mit.edu MIT, Dept. of Chemical Engineering, Materials Etching Technology Lab ***** Searchlight Casting for Faults in the Clouds of Delusion ***** Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 93 07:16:25 -0500 From: zentner at ecn.purdue.edu (Mike Zentner) Subject: Re: Counterflow Questions >From: Jim Grady <grady at hpangrt.an.hp.com> >Subject: Counterflow Questions > >I am thinking about turning my immersion chiller into a counterflow >chiller and have a couple of operational questions: > 1. Some have mentioned that they sanitize their counterflow chillers > by running boiling water through them. How do you get the boiling Use something like a bottling bucket (bucket with a spigot, thought I never use one of these things for bottling), connect the spigot to the inlet of your chiller, and let gravity do the work. > 2. Similar to the above, How do you get it started? I am assuming Same thing. One other note, for those who haven't been around for about a year. Now you will be running wort through the inside of your chiller. Make sure there are no nasties on the inside of your tubing, eg, oils from machining, mold from letting water sit in it, etc. To check for oils take some kind of solvent (rubbing alcohol, paint thinner, etc) and put some on the end of a Qtip. Swab arond the inside of your tube. If there's gunk on it or some dark discoloration, you should think about cleaning it. As in the past, I have my designs on line and will mail them to anyone who wants them for free. Mike Zentner Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 93 09:05:10 EDT From: mcharry at cwc.com (McHarry) Subject: Overnight mashing I have bee mashing overnight in my oven for quite some time now. I dough in at room temperature and shove the kettle (my EasyMasher) in the oven set on warm. It is a bit too warm at the lowest setting, but that seems not to be a problem. The temperature rises overnight to about 160 F. This seems to produce a nice, highly fermentable wort with a good extraction rate. I have mashed all sorts of stuff this way, including batches with unmalted wheat flour in them. No problems. I just get up in the morning and put the sparge water on with the coffee. One other note, I have been draining the lauter tun about half way through the sparge, refilling with sparge water, and stirring well. This seems to prevent any sugars from hiding in gobs of goo, which can be a problem with some adjuncts. It seems to raise the yield a bit. John McHarry Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 93 09:22:44 EDT From: lyons%adc2 at swlvx2.msd.ray.com Subject: Gelatin question I have had excellent results obtaining clear beers when using gelatin during the last three days of secondary fermentation. However, I have been wondering just what the gelatin does to the beer. Is there any concensus on how gelatin affects the quality of beer (i.e. body, head retention)? Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 93 9:42:05 EDT From: Jim Busch <busch at daacdev1.stx.com> Subject: decoction/hopping/misc <From: lfk at veritas.com (Lynn Kerby) Subject: Hopping techniques (was Pale Ale Recipe) <Are there other brewers out there that are doing something similar with their hopping techniques? Sure. All my pale ales /ipas are multihopped. I usually go for centennial and cascade at 60 minutes boil to the end, about 60% of the total hop quantity. then at 30 minutes a aditional 10% or so goes in, and then tons of cascade from 12 minutes until the end of boil. <From: Don_Doyle at Novell.COM (Don Doyle) Subject: Decoction mashing <I was wondering if many people use decoction mashing and what the pro's/con's to it are. I have Noonan's book and he swears by decoction for lager's however can one do an ale this way. I have a little voice in my head saying "No" because you will impart unwanted flavors i.e. astringency into the beer, but want feedback on this mashing procedure. Decoction is a must for all grain weizens, and is very beneficial for many styles of lagers, pils and bocks in particular. It is not worth the extra effort for ales, esp if you are using domestic 2 row pale or any ale malt (M&F, Belgium...;). Its just not worth the effort. If you are looking for more body and chewyness, boost your dextrin pool by using lots of caramel malts. I love the CaraVienna and CaraMunich, as well as english caramel malts. Additional munich malts will also result in more malt/and body. I even gave up the protein rest on my pale ales, opting for a infusion at 160, resulting in rests of 152-154 for 60 min, then mash off at 170 and lauter. I really love making these "easy" beers. Best, Jim Busch Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 93 10:14:06 -0400 From: ""Robert C. Santore"" <rsantore at mailbox.syr.edu> Subject: misc >From HOMEBREW Digest #1195, 08/03/93 > From: reeves at lanl.gov (Geoff Reeves) > It occurs to me that a lot of the confusion over extraction rate, or yeild > may be due to the fact the people keep referring to pts/lb/gal (points per > pound per gallon). These are not the correct units and that may be why some > people are confused. The formula used is > > (OSG_beer - SG_water) * Volume_of_Beer / Pounds_of_Grain > > Specific gravity is dimensionless but is referred to by "points" in brewing > so the dimensions are gallons/pound or point-gallons/pound (pts-gal/lb for > the abreviation inclined). Pts/lb/gal and pts-gal/lb are EXACTLY the same thing. Think about it. > From: r.wize at genie.geis.com > Subject: Agar availability? > > I recently have become an all grain brewer and am now using the Brewers > Resource Culture kit. My question is does anyone know of a recipe or a > source for just Agar? Most of the catalogs I have seen sell Agar slants but > at a price of about .80 to $1.00 each (then adding shipping it hardly seems > worth it) I'm sure I could get my hands on some test tubes, it is the Agar > which mystifies me. Rick, I find it is much cheaper to buy food grade agar than the stuff sold as culture media. You can find it in oriental or natural food stores. Sometimes the oriental stuff comes in sticks (white or red) which is a less convienient form. The best stuff to find is in a flaked form. Make sure you use TWICE the recommended amount of agar for a given volume of wort. I find that if I make it up as recommended the agar throws off a lot of water that interferes with my using it as a culturing surface (of course the directions assume that you are going to eat the stuff). Since you're from Syracuse I can recommend Discount Natural Foods in DeWitt as a source. Feel free to contact me if you have any procedural questions. I've been culturing yeast for some time. > From: Don_Doyle at Novell.COM (Don Doyle) > Subject: Decoction mashing > > > I was wondering if many people use decoction mashing and what the > pro's/con's to it are. I have Noonan's book and he swears by decoction > for lager's however can one do an ale this way. I have a little voice > in my head saying "No" because you will impart unwanted flavors i.e. > astringency into the beer, but want feedback on this mashing procedure. The pros include better extraction, less trub, more complete degradation of proteins to soluble components, more well developed malt flavor in the finished beer. The cons include more hassle and more time. I do not brew any classic lager styles, but always use decoction for wheat beer and occassionally use it when I want a richer maltiness. Give yourself about twice the amount of time you normally need to do a mash. - Bob Santore, Syracuse University - rsantore at mailbox.syr.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1993 10:19:04 -0400 (EDT) From: dcm2 at bofur.unh.edu (ed fromohio) Subject: *EXTRA* EARWAX KILLS BEER FOAM I was with my friend ethan last night, enjoying some homebrew. well, he poured some into his glass with a marvelous head (maybe even too much head say about 4", and yes, he poured it correctly, of course, it was an old mayonaise jar, but that's beside the point). he then swirled his finger in his ear and said, "watch this." whilest swirling yonder finger in the beer foam, he said, "earwax kills beer foam," and it did, quite remarkably too... amazing.. now, it might have been mentioned on this forum before but I can't remember... anyway, if there are any follow ups to this article, please also Cc: them to me, dcm2 at kepler.unh.edu... thanks, as I unsubscribed a day ago, due to my going on vacation for a while... -chris P.S. dumb joke of the day: A guy walks into a bar... ouch! - -- - -- Chris Mackensen (dcm2 at kepler.unh.edu or cygnus at unh.edu) Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1993 11:37:25 -0300 From: Ed Hitchcock <ECH at ac.dal.ca> Subject: Re: pts-gal/lb NOT pts/lb/gal Geoff Reeves Writes: >It occurs to me that a lot of the confusion over extraction rate, or yeild >may be due to the fact the people keep referring to pts/lb/gal (points per >pound per gallon). These are not the correct units and that may be why some >people are confused. The formula used is > > (OSG_beer - SG_water) * Volume_of_Beer / Pounds_of_Grain > >Specific gravity is dimensionless but is referred to by "points" in brewing >so the dimensions are gallons/pound or point-gallons/pound (pts-gal/lb for >the abreviation inclined). I hate to nitpick, but the formula pts*gal/lbs is the same as the formula pts/(lbs/gal). I know it's mathematical smoke and mirrors, but just thought I'd point it out. Of course, we could also write pts*gal*lbs^-1 (that's pounds to the minus one). Or, for that matter, gal/(lbs/pts), or... ____________ Ed Hitchcock/Dept of Anatomy & Neurobiology/Dalhousie University/Halifax NS ech at ac.dal.ca +-----------------------------------------+ | Never trust a statement that begins: | | "I'm not racist, but..." | +-----------------------------------------+ Diversity in all things. Especially beer. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1993 07:39:48 PDT From: wegeng.XKeys at xerox.com Subject: Yet Another Grain Mill One of my goals for the Portland Conference was to determine which grain mill I should buy to replace the Corona that I`ve been borrowing. At the risk of starting yet-another flame war, I thought I`d mention that there was a mill on display at the conference that I don`t remember seeing discussed here before. This new mill is from Glatt Machining (address: 820 Stanley Drive, College Place, WA 99324, no phone number given). This is an adjustable two roller mill, with a 2.5 pound hopper capacity. Adjustments are made by loosening one of two screws (one for coarse adjusments, the other for fine adjustments) and then moving a scaled plate. It appeared to be very easy to repeat the settings on this mill. The rollers had large groves cut along their lengths, quite different than the rollers on the PhilMill (I haven`t seen the rollers on the Malt Mill). The handle was very easy to turn while crushing. The crush coming from this mill looked very good to my eye. The entire mill is made of heavy gage metal, with a powder coat finish. Guarantee is 90 days (defects and materials). Cost is $80 plus $5 shipping. Comparing Glatt Mill to the Phil Mill, I liked the fact that the Glatt Mill has two rollers, is easy to adjust, and has a integrated hopper. I didn`t get a good opportunity to compare it with the Malt Mill, except to note that it is much less expensive than an adjustable Malt Mill. Finally, the people from Glatt semed very honest about their product. At one point a friend and I took some grain crushed on a Phill Mill to the Glatt booth, to compare the two crushes. The Glatt Mill appeared to give better crush (eyeball determination), but then the Glatt representitive pointed out that it wasn`t a fair comparision (even though his mill seemed to win) because we didn`t run the same type of grain through both mills. He didn`t have to point this out. I`m probably going to order a Glatt Malt Mill in a couple days. /Don wegeng.xkeys at xerox.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 93 09:08:03 -0600 From: John Adams <j_adams at hpfcjca.sde.hp.com> Subject: Wyeast question There is no need to hydrate the liquid yeast (it is already hydrated). The problem you are experiencing is that the number of yeast cells in a liquid packet is far less than that of dry yeast. It will take more time for the yeast from the liquid (when pitched directly from the bag) to "get up to speed." The best method for liquid yeast to to make a starter thus allowing your yeast more time to grow before pitching into the fermenter. To make a yeast starter: obtain a 1/2 or 1 gallon juice jug (or any similarly size glass container). obtain an appropriate sized rubber stopper and fermentation lock. santitize your starter, fermentation lock, and liquid yeast packet. boil 1 pint water with 2/3 cup light dry extract for 5 mintutes. add 1 point cold water to your starter jug. add your "mini wort" to your starter. The addtional pint of cold water helps to bring the mixture's temp. down to 80-90degress. I usually fill my sink with more cold water and sit the starter jug in the water until the temp. drops to ~70. figerously shake the starter to help oxygenate the "mini wort." carefully open the liquid packet and add the contents to the starter jug. cap with the fermentation lock and wait. The starter should be ready in about 2 days, I usually prepare my starters 3-4 days prior to brewing. Remember the liquid yeast in the packet usually take 1 day to "puff up" so plan for 1 day for the packet + 2 days in the starter before brewing. You want the starter to be actively growing before you add it to your fermenter. If the yeast activity drops before you are ready to brew then make another 1/2 batch (1 pint & 1/3 cup extract) to the starter to keep the yeast growing and active. Starter's have two maoin advantages: 1) You lower the risk of contamination in your main fermenter by giving your yeast the advantage. 2) If your yeast gets contaminated then you only lose your starter and NOT your 5 gallon (or more) batch of beer. John Adams Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1993 11:30:19 -0400 (EDT) From: R_GELINAS at UNHH.UNH.EDU (Russ Gelinas) Subject: confused hops A warning to those of you growing your own hops: check for male parts. If you find any, cut them off before the plant self-pollinates. I just found some male reproductive parts on my flowering Cascade. I'm not happy about it. My question is, will this plant always be a hermaphrodite, or does it change yearly? The nice thing about being a hermaphrodite is, if someone tells you to "go **** yourself", you can. Russ Gelinas esp/opal unh Return to table of contents
Date: 3 Aug 1993 08:34:01 U From: "Palmer.John" <palmer#d#john at ssdgwy.mdc.com> Subject: Homebrew blindness Dan, I read your post to the Digest, the answer is no. There are two (main) types of alcohol: Ethanol and Methanol. Hmmm maybe thats spelled ethenol and methenol... Anyway, Methanol is the one that causes blindness and death. It is also called wood alcohol, de-natured alcohol, rubbing alcohol. It is made by the fermentation and distallation of cellulose ie wood. Grain alcohol is made by the distallation of sugars. The only way to get serious methanol contamination of your beer is to not strain the grain husks out of your wort (at all) in all-grain brewing when its put into the fermenter. The beer would be very nasty tasting to say the least. JP, Metallurgist. Space Station Materials and Processes Return to table of contents
Date: 3 Aug 93 11:29 CST From: Wolfe at act-12-po.act.org Subject: Chilis are Jalapenos With respect to my last posting on peppers in beer, a number of people pointed out that "chili" refers to a genus of plants under which there are many species of peppers including jalapenos. (Hey, I'm only a statistician.) The "chili" peppers I grew are actually called "Super Chili Pepper, F1 Hybrid." The peppers are about 2.5" long and are cone-shaped (similar to a miniature Hungarian Wax pepper, but they turn a bright red with age). They are still green but are already as hot as (and better tasting than) my jalapenos. The folks that responded to my first posting said that I could probably substitute these peppers for jalapenos in any recipe, noting that I need to be careful of the variability of heat of different chili species. I'm planning on using a standard amber ale recipe, lightly hopped. Which brings me to my next question. I've heard of three ways to introduce peppers into the brew: 1) boil them with the wort, 2) add roasted peppers to the secondary, or 3) add slices of roasted peppers to the bottles. I'm thinking about using method #2 (from Charlie P's book). Has anyone used this method successfully? Does anyone have any suggestions for "special ingredients" to sprinkle over the peppers as they roast (like garlic)? Also, How many peppers should I start out with? Should I put the peppers in a steeping bag so I don't get seeds and stray pieces of pepper in the bottles? Thanks, Ed Wolfe WOLFE at ACT-12-PO.ACT.ORG Iowa City, IA Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 93 09:47:57 PDT From: davidr at ursula.ee.pdx.edu Subject: To those who attended the conference in Portland... I'm not a beer-expert... in fact, I'm lucky if I have more than 2 beers a month. However, I do enjoy a nice brew every once in awhile. So... my question is this. To those who visited our little city to attend the conference: What did you think of Widmer Bock? I recently tried this, and thought it was fantastic... but since I'm used to drinking Henry Weinhard, or (ACK!) Miller Genuine Draft, I don't have much to compare to. I'd like to get the opinion of some of those who are "in the know" of what a fine beer should taste like. Thanks, David Robinson davidr at ee.pdx.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 93 10:29:16 -0700 From: tims at ssl.Berkeley.EDU Subject: when to harvest hops? I have two hop plants, (out of three planted last March), and I am wondering when to collect the flowers. There are already some nice big flowers on the Perle, and lots of tiny flowers on the Chinook. should I take each flower off as it reaches maturity (define that, please), or wait and harvest the whole mess at one time? The Perle flowers look to my mind just like what hops should look like, while the much smaller Chinook flower seems smaller than I was expecting. As one would expect, I haven't seen all that many flowers this first year, perhaps 2-4 oz total. Thanks, Tim Sasseen Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 93 13:44:52 EDT From: casey at bbt.com (Kevin Casey) Subject: Ammonia in water supply I have been brewing for about a year and always boil only about 2 gallons of the water I use for each batch. The remaining 3 gallons are simply unfiltered City water. In about 2 weeks they are going to begin putting Ammonia into our drinking water (CARY, NC). Will this be bad news for homebrewing? All comments would be appreciated as I would hate to waste time brewing a bad beer. TIA Kevin Casey casey at bbt.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 93 12:49 CDT From: korz at iepubj.att.com Subject: pts/lb/gal /sprinkling spargers/AllAboutBeer/WyeastQuestions Geoff writes: >It occurs to me that a lot of the confusion over extraction rate, or yeild >may be due to the fact the people keep referring to pts/lb/gal (points per >pound per gallon). These are not the correct units and that may be why some >people are confused. The formula used is > > (OSG_beer - SG_water) * Volume_of_Beer / Pounds_of_Grain > >Specific gravity is dimensionless but is referred to by "points" in brewing >so the dimensions are gallons/pound or point-gallons/pound (pts-gal/lb for >the abreviation inclined). I feel that it is still correct to say points-per-pound-per-gal if you remember what it means. Note that in addition to determining the average contribution to your OG from y pounds of grain in z gallons of wort, a more important use of these numbers is to predict an OG when you are formulating a recipe. What you want to know is "how many POINTS you will get if you were to use a POUND of this particular grain to make a GALLON of wort?" This can be also read as "POINTS gotten from grain x at a particular ratio of POUNDS PER GALLON" or finally, "POINTS gained PER POUND PER GALLON." Maybe parentheses would help: points/(pound/gallon) ******************************** Jack writes quoting Steve: > >My question concerns the aeration of and oxygen content of sparge water. One > >common technique in professional breweries to sprinkle the sparge water from > >a rotating arm (similar to the Phil Sparger). I would think that this would > >do I good job of aerating the water. > > I doubt that it would do a "good" job and suspect it is pretty much in the > noise. More importantly, sprinkling the sparge water is totally unnecessary > if the level is kept above the grain an inch or so. There simply is nothing > to be gained by spreading it around. Someone put a shower head in a mash tun > and they have been used and misuesed ever since. A homebrew equipment > manufacturer fell into the same trap and confused the hell out of beginners > with his rotating gizzmo. I've been thinking about this for a while, but not too intensely, since I make sure to keep the level of the sparge water about 1/2" above the level of the grain bed. I feel that all the spray-attachments for sparging are a waste of money. There is another reason for keeping the sparge water level above that of the grain bed: if the level drops below the top of the grain bed, the grain bed begins to compact. If you insist on sparging with a spray head, then you must shell out a few more bucks as well as add some elbow grease and add a raking mechanism to your grain bed. I have an experiment in mind that will take some of the mystery out of this topic, but I have to find the time to do it! ******************************* Sean writes: >lethargy enough to type up a short review of >the latest issue of _All About Beer_ magazine. >(I suggested to Chuck that he try this mag >because Jackson writes a column and does >a taste-testing panel for them). >I've been a suscriber to AAB for the >last couple of years, mostly to get Jackson's >and Fred Eckhardt's columns. Often >there has been info that is of value, >but many articles were just >press-release puffery. I've read rumors >that the cover of the mag was for sale >to an advertiser. It used to be, and maybe still is -- this would be indicated by the covers that keep repeating periodically -- the one that comes to mind is the one with the bottle of Harp on the cover over the background of some cliffs. >Mr. Daniel Bradford, late of the AHA >marketing Dept. and the GABF, has >taken over publishing the mag. Knowing >what we do about these endeavors, this >may or may not speak well for the future >of the mag, but I'm willing to give people >a break now and then (Bob knows I >need 'em). Hopefully, he has enlisted the services of some knowledgable technical editors. I've read a few past issues and have found numerous errors, for example "...the two Trappist Ales most available in the US are Chimay and Duvel..." >To the point, the latest issue looks >stupendous, had a decent article by... <praise deleted> >Anyone else read this thing and >have any thoughts, opinions or >rants? If I can find a copy, I'll give it another chance. **************************** Jim writes: > My wife purchased some Wyeast liquid yeast for the next coupla > batches of brew. I had read about possible infection of the nutrient > packs here, so I figured I play it safe and re-hydrate (what do you > call it since it's already liquid?) it myself. The date on the 'bag' > said July 1993 - it that the 'manufacture' date, or the 'use-by' > date? It's the date the yeast was packaged, having been grown up during the prior week. > I added the 'bag' of yeast to about a cup of slightly dilluted and > still warm (~80 degrees) wort while the rest was boiling. I've used > this method inthe past with dry yeast and by the time the wort cools, > the yeast has a head that's bulging out of the 2 cup container it's > in. This time, the yeast wasn't doing *anything*, just had a sediment > on the bottom of the cup. I pitched in into the cooled wort anyway, > not having much choice. This morning (brewed last nite about 9, > pitched about 11 PM), theres still no head on the fermenetr. > > Should I wait till this evening and if there's still no head > re-hydrate and pitch some other yeast? You probably won't see much activity for about three or four days. If your sanitation techniques are impeccable (very difficult to accomplish in the summer) you stand a chance that it will turn out alright. If you suspect your sanitation at all, I suggest you get some clean dry yeast, rehydrate that and pitch it. A four day lag time in the summer means your odds of infection are VERY high. Al. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 93 11:49:26 MDT From: npyle at n33.stortek.com Subject: Japanese Homebrew? Some friends of mine (Japanese) are having a baby in November and I'd like to brew a Japanese style homebrew to mark the occasion. This is a bit of a stretch because I refuse to brew a beer that is too light and tasteless, like the typical Japanese lager. I may brew a dark lager, which is not common but is available in Japan. I plan to use some rice, but not too much. How many SG points can I expect to get from a pound of rice? Will a 2-row pale malt have the enzymes to convert the rice? Any suggestions for hops, or for that matter a yeast choice? This could be a real challenge.... Cheers, Norm Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 93 11:09:59 PDT From: ghultin at sfu.ca Subject: overnight mashes The question was asked about experiences with long mash times: I have done two overnight mashes, and although I have only just tasted the results from one batch, found no problems. I mash in a plastic tub swathed in a garbage bag and a sleeping bag. When I put the lid on the pail, the temp is 154, in the morning when I take the lid off, the temp has fallen to 142-146. I don't know how to tell-other than by taste-if there is any contamination of this wort, but having tasted the beer last night, I think it is just fine. The book Old English Beers and How to Make Them (or something like that) has recipes calling for 4 hour mashes. This is for undermodified grain, granted. But 4 hours, 8 hours, as far as I can tell, no problem. geoff. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1993 11:14:04 -0800 From: pohl at unixg.ubc.ca (Derrick Pohl) Subject: "Washing" yeast A while back (HBD #1181) Jami Chism posted the following method for washing and storing yeast from the slurry: >I have been re-using yeast slurry for several years. My method is to >add a cup or so of cool water to the slurry after I've racked off of it >and swirl it around, mixing the slurry really good with the water, then >pouring it into a sterilized glass quart jar. I let this sit at room >temp for several hours until there is noticable seperation, then pour >the top liquid layer off. I again add about a cup of cool water to the >yeast, mix it up good, cover and let sit at room temp for several hours. >Pour off top layer, pour the resulting yeast cake into a sterile canning >jar, cap and store in the refridgerator until you're ready to brew again. >This is better know as washing yeast and the method can be used with >either dry or liquid yeasts. I have been usually re-use a package of >yeast anywhere from 7 to 10 brewing sessions before it starts to appear >suspicious. This is great, but knowing that there are always several ways to do anything in the realm of brewing, I am interested in other people's methods and observations on this topic, especially on the matter of storing the yeast for future use. The typical situation I have in mind is storing yeast from the slurry for a few weeks, until one has time to brew again. Also, is the primary or the secondary better for this? - ----- Derrick Pohl (pohl at unixg.ubc.ca) UBC Faculty of Graduate Studies, Vancouver, B.C. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 93 12:54 CDT From: korz at iepubj.att.com Subject: Decoction mashing/Overnight mashing Don writes: >I was wondering if many people use decoction mashing and what the >pro's/con's to it are. I have Noonan's book and he swears by decoction >for lager's however can one do an ale this way. I have a little voice >in my head saying "No" because you will impart unwanted flavors i.e. >astringency into the beer, but want feedback on this mashing procedure. Not many, probably due to the increased work, the increased time and the availablity of well-modified lager malts. When using undermodified malts, like those used by Pilsenski Prazdroj (sp?), the brewery that makes Pilsner Urquell, the decoction mashing method is the only way to get a good extraction efficiency. The flavor is also a bit different than with controlled temperature mashing or infusion mashing, or so I've read (having not done a side-by-side comparison using the same ingredients). Darryl Richman has hypothesized that: a reason that the decoctions do not extract copious amounts of astringent tannins from the grain is due to the pH of the mash. As yet, there has not been a confirmation of this theory, but there has been very little argument with it in the HBD. I don't see why you could not use it for an ale -- I've tasted a PU-clone made by Jack, imitating Pilsenski Prazdroj, which did not have noticable astringency. The bottom line is, you could do it, but the reasons would be mostly academic. *********************************** Jack writes (quoting WAK): > >Very interesting experience! I could certainly go for mashing-in the > night before. Have others tried this? With what sucess? Jack, what > temperature do you mash in at and how does it change overnight? > > I boil my mash water and either chill it or let it cool naturally, depending > on the time but in either case it is near room temp or cooler when I dough-in > and IS room temp by morning. > > There is no doubt a multicultural flora ready to do a number on the mash but > if it is kept cool and kept to a reasonable length of time, it will cause no > grief. Mashing and boiling will destroy its viability. If allowed to get > established however, it could impart an off flavor even if the organisms > that started it are long gone. Very true. Others in this same issue of HBD suggested overnight saccharification, which in the microbiologically active air of the summertime, I feel, will almost guarantee a sour mash. Indeed, keeping the mash cool overnight is key to making non-sourmash beer using this technique. Al. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1993 11:43:44 PDT From: John_D._Sullivan.wbst311 at xerox.com Subject: Wyeast Suppliers Hi all, I'm in search of a good mail order source for Wyeast Liq. yeast as the two local distributors refuse to carry it. Thanks alot, John Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 93 13:37 CDT From: korz at iepubj.att.com Subject: Flora & Fauna Jack writes: >There is no doubt a multicultural flora ready to do a number on the mash but I've read that yeast are technically a "slime mold" and that they are animals, which would make them fauna rather than flora. I would then assume that non-slime molds would then also be fauna. However, what are bacteria, flora or fauna? My guess would be, again, fauna. I have seen "microflora" and I think I've used the word myself, but I'm playing with this topic just for fun anyway (so don't take it too seriously). Al. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 93 16:49:41 EDT From: Spencer.W.Thomas at med.umich.edu Subject: The FaceMail Project Oh! This is too radical! Actually seeing (and hearing) fellow HBDers!?! Where's the mystery, the romance? Reduced to a handful of bits, we'll be ... :-) (Not me, I wasn't there). =S Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1993 16:31:05 -0700 From: reeves at lanl.gov (Geoff Reeves) Subject: Algebra and extraction rate I got quite a bit of mail regarding my assertion that extraction should properly be expressed as pt-gal/lb. Basically most people said that I had forgotten my algebra and that pt-gal/lb == pt/lb/gal. Their arguement depends on where you mentally draw the parentheses. pt-gal/lb = pt/(lb/gal). However this is not the common way of expressing things. Think of gravity. g = 32 feet per second per second. 32 ft/s/s is not the same as 32 ft similarly energy flux is expressed as particles/second/steradian/keV or similar units. Dimensional analysis assumes that a/b/c = a/(b*c). Similarly computer codes that evaluate a/b/c will evaluate a/b and then divide by c. Now this may seem nit-picky but it pisses me off when people tell me that I don't know algebra. I didn't get one of those mail-order physics PhDs. Finally to pick one more nit, some people said that SG was not dimensionless but has units of kg/liter. Nope. Specific gravity is density of liquid divided by the density of pure water at 4 degrees Centigrade. Since the density of water is 1 kg/liter the magnitude doesn't change going from density to SG but the UNITS do. Cheers Geoff +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Give me three more units up here nurse. | +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Geoff Reeves: Space Science Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory | | reeves at lanl.gov (internet) or essdp2::reeves (span) | | Phone (505) 665-3877 | | Fax (505) 665-4414 | +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+ Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 93 18:47:12 EDT From: roberts735 at aol.com Subject: Yeast Trick Is it possible to culture yeast from the last inch or so of a bottle of Sierra Nevada Pale Ale by pouring it into the starter I am making for a batch? I am re-hydrating from dry yeast, and adding the beery slurry from the SNPA. It was the cleanest ale Ihave made yet, very good. Do you suppose I picked up some viable yeasties? Bob Stovall Robert S735 at aol.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 1993 20:03:35 -0400 (EDT) From: SMUCKER at UTKVX.UTCC.UTK.EDU Subject: Wyeast 1007, (German) I brewed up a batch of German Dusseldorf style Alt over the weekend with about 20 % German wheat malt and Wyeast 1007, (German) and got the strongest fermentation I have ever seen. This is in a 15.5 gallon batch and by strongest I mean the speed and amount of blow off that was generated. I had between 1.5 and 1.75 gallons of blow off and after it settled I had a least 3/4 of a pint of yeast. (Of course the batch is still going strong.) Am wondering if this is the effect of the 1007 yeast, the wheat malt or both. The fermentation temperature was normal for me in summer at 68 degrees F. (Self heating took the temperature to 71 even with my water cooled keg as a fermenter set up.) Just a data point, we will see how this beer is in a few weeks/months. Dave Smucker, Brewing beer -- not making jelly! Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 93 21:59:09 -0500 From: bliss at pixel.convex.com (Brian Bliss) Subject: boiling hops longer / blindness / overnight mashes lfk at veritas.com (Lynn Kerby) writes about boiling all hops << 1 hour: >Are there other brewers out there that are doing something similar >with their hopping techniques? I would be interested in hearing about >experiences with beers that get a significant percentage of their IBUs >in later stages of the boil. Perhaps It's my water (soft, though certainly not softened), or the pH, or maybe something else, but I never seems to get as much bitterness out of my hop additions as would seem to be correct from HBU/IBU/boil time charts. For instance, a recent barleywine with 9.5 oz of fresh goldings/fuggle/N Brewer plugs, the longest of which was boiled for over an hour (should have had 150+ IBU) was criticized as being way too sweet in a contest. To compensate, I have taken to longer hop boils. So far, I have not had any problem with off-tastes in young beers (even barleywines). Note also that I use a blowoff, which loses some hop bitterness, and that I do not use high-alpha american hops. Many (Most?) breweries (PU and Traquiar I know for sure) boil the bittering hops 4+ hours. As long as you have an handle (from expreience) on how much hop bitterness to expect, I see no reason to boiling the bittering hops for an extended period of time. Yes, longer boils diminish hop flavor, but that's what the flavoring hops are for. - ------------------------------ djb at suned1.Nswses.Navy.Mil (Dan J Barnard) writes: Dear Fellow Homebrewers, >I have an unusual request. Recently my girlfriend went to child mediation >with her ex because he wants full physical custody of their two children >(7 and 9). He claimed to the mediator that we let his children drink home- >brew (of course this is absolutely untrue) and that drinking homemade beer >can make you go BLIND! (Her lawyer said `isn't that true about mastrubation >too?`) Anyways, the mediator wanted to know if that was true or not. Yes It can... but no more so that any other beer. When you're on your 20th pint of the night... At least the effect isn't permanent :-) High temperature fermentation can produce higher amounts of methyl and fusel alcohols. When they are concentrated by distilling at the improper temperature (question: too high or too low?), the resultant liquor has been known to cause blindness. - ------------------------------ From: SMUCKER at UTKVX.UTCC.UTK.EDU writes: >Like "William A Kitch" in HBD 1194 I an interested in the >potential, problems and effects of a mash that extends >beyond the conventional 2 hour time frame. ... >What would be the expected effects of a 6 to 8 hour mash vs. >the typical 2 hours? At what temperature do you have the >potential for a sour mash effect/problem? -- Something I >don't want for most of my beer. Do you leach tannins at a low >level at mash temperature such that the 8 hours mash will >have the potential for astringency? -- It is well accepted >that you leach tannins above 168 degrees F. I have had no problems with an overnight mash, but don't stretch it past, say, 12 hours. As long as the temp stays >> 120-130, everything keeps fine, but it doesn't take the mash more than a few hours to sour, once it drops back into the 80-100F range. I have NOT tried mashing in overnight and leaving the beer in this range for an extended period of time BEFORE mashing. With such such a practice, the majority of the malt sugars have not formed yet and souring may be less of a problem. bb Return to table of contents
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1196, 08/04/93