HOMEBREW Digest #2714 Fri 15 May 1998

[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]

		Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org
		Many thanks to the Observer & Eccentric Newspapers of 
		Livonia, Michigan for sponsoring the Homebrew Digest.
				URL: http://www.oeonline.com

  re:Dr. Pivo and oxidation ("Dr. Pivo")
  stainless steel cleaner (sbgr)
  Spray drying, civility, stout butts, thermal loading, big brews ("Michel J. Brown")
  RE: Evaporation during the boil ... one more time! (John Wilkinson)
  Chill Haze (Jorge Blasig - IQ)
  newbie grainers and the best brewing funny ever (AlannnnT)
  Counter Pressure Bottler ("Raymond C. Steinhart")
  S.S. perforated screen ("George Techentine")
  The Jethro Gump Report ("Rob Moline")
  Come & get it !!!!!! (michael wiley)
  Small beer from Big Brew ("Jeffrey M. Kenton")
  Steam Injected RIMS Feasible? (macher)
  BW Yeast / T Loading /  priming / tuns ("Frederick J. Wills")
  DMS Sensitivity, Sensory Description, and DMS Production (Sully)
  Off Flavors Evaluation Kit (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
  Champagne yeast in BW (David Kerr)
  More Malting (George_De_Piro)
  Best reader for HBD??? (brian_dixon)
  Big 10/20 status and q's (Jeremy York)
  Sanitizer (Mark Hillman)

BURP's Spirit of Free Beer competition is June 6-7 and entry information is available by contacting Jay Adams (adams at burp.org). NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS: hbd.org Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org (Articles are published in the order they are received.) If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!! To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to request@hbd.org. **SUBSCRIBE AND UNSUBSCRIBE REQUESTS MUST BE SENT FROM THE E-MAIL **ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!! IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, the autoresponder and the SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE commands will fail! For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to brewery at hbd.org Homebrew Digest Information on the Web: http://hbd.org Requests for back issues will be ignored. Back issues are available via: Anonymous ftp from... ftp://hbd.org/pub/hbd/digests ftp://ftp.stanford.edu/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer AFS users can find it under... /afs/ir.stanford.edu/ftp/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 13:28:55 +0000 From: Jim Liddil <jliddil at azcc.arizona.edu> Subject: AHA ANNOUNCES "HOLIDAY CHEER" BEER COMPETITION AHA ANNOUNCES "HOLIDAY CHEER" BEER COMPETITION April 30, 1998 - Boulder, CO The American Homebrewers Association (AHA) announced today that they were starting a new homebrewing competition, 'Holiday Cheer.' The Annual event will attempt to pick the best cinnamon/ginger/nutmeg/orange peel brown ale brewed by North American homebrewers. Judging will be held on Christmas Eve every year and will moved around the country in an attempt to annoy as many BJCP judges as possible. When asked why December 24th was picked as the judging date, an AHA spokesperson replied, "We've had such a positive response this year from holding the AHA National First Round on Memorial Day weekend that our Board of Advisors recommended that we extend this to a judging event during the winter. We considered New Year's Eve but opted for XMas eve instead since Santa's elves obviously won't be busy and can help us do the stewarding at the event. Although we won't pay them, we will give them each an AHA TShirt for helping out." Multiple entries will be allowed by homebrewers at a cost of $100/entry or $250 for three entries. Charleee Poopoozian, head Cheerleader of the sponsoring organization, justified the entry fee by saying "Look, it's the holidays and everyone is loaded with cash. Just think of us an another charity. A small charge of $100 or so won't even be noticed by most people, especially if they put it on their charge card. By the way the AHA is now happy to report that we take Visa, Mastercard, or AMEX in lieu of cash or checks. And if you use our new AHA Platinum Visa Plus card, 1% of all purchases will be donated to my bank account." The Board of Directors of the BJCP, a national beer judging organization, was quick to applaud the new competition. "We think that this is a super, just super, really super super idea," said Dannis Devisson, President of the Board. "Any BJCP judge that doesn't want to get involved in this is obviously responsible for the decline of homebrewing and the failure of numerous brewpubs and microbreweries throughout the country." First prize for winning the competition will be an AHA TShirt, a copy of the newest Classic Beer Styles book 'All Beer made by Homebrewers Sucks' by Michael Lewis, PhD, and a six-pack of Pete's Wicked Spiced Winter Brown Ale . Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 22:40:20 +0000 From: "Dr. Pivo" <irv at wireworks.se> Subject: re:Dr. Pivo and oxidation A fellow named Al Korzonas seems to have missunderstood nearly everything I posted in my recent ramblings on "Redox". The "quoteing wars" are one of the reasons I have avoided this forum, and I certainly don't want to become one of the select few that engage in it, and give new meaning to the key labled "page down". I think the point that I was making about redox and how one can view it without returning to the same haggered, brow beaten models were important enough, however, that if everyone missunderstood me so completely as Mr. Korzonas, I better do some clarifying (and I don't mean Irish Moss). OK I'll take them in turn (god I hate this, and I'll really try and keep my varying opinions away from this pool of homogenicity in future). <I have had the misfortune of judging a lot of wet cardboard beers Ya poor bugger. I've rarely encountered it..... the ones I've tasted with that taste were brewed by others, and I can't say for certainty how they arose. The difference is, I have tasted a car load WITHOUT that taste, that I know involved varying degrees of splashing. >I read all of Miller's books and don't recall him mentioning oxidation >of hot wort at all. I don't even recall *any* author mentioning oxidation >in the mash tun until it was brought up in the HBD. And I'm pretty sure >that it was George Fix who coined the phrase "hot-side aeration" Try the Complete Handbook of Home Brewing 1988, page 147 (ain't total recall just disgusting?)... As to George Fix af"fix"ing the current title in use, there is a lot of current terminology that is hugged to the breast until smothered... the concepts are old. As to the rest of the comments, (I won't quote here), I've heard a lot of rationale quoted in many posts with the like of "my beer really started improving since I..." or "I've won some Blue Ribbons with".... I'm sure this is all gratifying, but there is absolutely nothing more gratifying than finding confirmation for what one already believes.... We all do it..... Sift through the endless information around us, and scrape together the few data points that do the least rocking of our belief paradigms. I base my supposition on temperature effects on oxidation tastes on the following... I ALWAYS split up my ferments (I brew at least 120 litres at a time, and that gives me a fair ammount of raw material to work with). I have two or three going (depending on my mood) and subject them to different variables just "to see" what's up. What I am fiddling with that time can be in the primary or the secondary, and can have to do with temperature, fermenting condition or technique, or yeast nutrients available. The "rising temperature in the secondary" phenomenon, has certainly proved to be one of the most consistant "beer wreckers" I know (as in completely repeatable). Another thing I like to do is present these beers for "blind tastings" to knowledgable beer tasters. The reason i do this, is that I think that I am no less fallable than the next person when it comes to "colouring" my own perception of what I'm tasting, and I trust my own judgement in this as little as I do others (we taste what we want to taste). As a half comic (and half tragic) illustration of human nature when it comes to this; when I give a blind tasting, after I have collected all the ballots, I explain what two things I was trying to compare. Nearly INVARIOUBLY there is someone who would like to have their ballot back, because there was "one more comment they forgot to write". Yep, folks just can't stand to have reality not measure up to their expectations.... ya don't know whether to laugh or cry.... I laugh, being an irreverent bastard. If someone wants to stumble through some of my rambling on this kind of stuff, a typical example is at http://www.magma.ca/~bodnsatz/brew/columns/jirvine/trub.html >Some of the most damaged beers that come across the big pond are from those >modern low-oxygen beer factories, so I don't think that argument will wash. That comment and what followed is part of the reason I wrote my diatribe in the first place. Mr. Korzonas still seem to be confusing "oxygen" and "oxidation" (the "flagstone and the fishtails" at Tadcaster may be charming, but have utterly nothing to do with what I was talking about). What I was speaking about, were the big booming tones of a classic English Ale, leave a lot of things that can be oxidized (NOT bind oxygen, dammit!), and are therfore more susceptible to "transport damage" (which I am assuming is a form of "oxidation", is quite recognisable, and still can happen (like any oxidation) whether there was any "oxygen" introduced, or not!)...... On the other hand, some wimpy tasting modern commercial lagers are virtually "indestructable".... A Buweiser sold in the U.K. is just as innocuous and insipid as it is in St. Louis (personal opinion).... There's nothing there to oxidize! My real point being that should I create a beer that I was going to make money off of, all over the world, I would certainly follow the latest trends in sustainable (wimpy) beer...... that's not why I brew. The kinds of beer I like do NOT transport and store well ..... they oxidize (ed. note: "no oxygen required") >Transport damage is really time, agitation and heat Agitation is enough....I PROMISE. Any how, I would encourage Mr. Korzonas and all others who have developed strong opinions about "what made a big improvement in my brewing" to back track a little. Try and recreate that assumed important variable side by side with the change you have instated, and send it through a "blind tasting". It might turn out that what you have become is a "better and better brewer", and you have tagged the wrong heroes for being responsible for the improvement. If you are as gullable as I (you know, the type that tends to believe what he reads) you might find some stringancy in your testing regime (instead of "I added "this" and it tasted like "that""), will make you suddenly question whether you've been kidding yourself for a long time about a lot of things..... I certainly had been, and continue to do so. Sorry for the wasted band width... I just hated to think my comments might possibly be so wrongly interpretated by many, and also dislike seeing them so missgrieviously represented. I've been practising my English of late, and mistakenly thought I could present my thoughts somewhat clearly.... course, then again, the problem could be that my thoughts aren't that clear... but my testing methods bloody well are. Dr. Pivo as to John Wilkinson's: >Now I know who Dr. Pivo is. >Dan Quayle. Now, THAT was funny. (BTW, I'm a bit unsure, but he's a popularly elected American official, isn't he?) Return to table of contents
Date: 13 May 98 16:58:00 -0400 From: sbgr at cbmsmail.cb.lucent.com Subject: stainless steel cleaner Hi, I have been trying to buy some "Barkeeper's Friend" or equivalent stainless steel cleaner, but am getting tired of the blank stares from the people at the local Lowes/Home Depot/Builders Square. I have also tried a selection of grocery stores, but to no avail. Any suggestion are appreciated. Stacy Groene sgroene at lucent.com Columbus, OH Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 14:32:06 -0700 From: "Michel J. Brown" <homemade at spiritone.com> Subject: Spray drying, civility, stout butts, thermal loading, big brews David Burley says in HBD 2712: "I have never tried it (using corn sugar), because I began using Clinitest long before corn sugar was available in its spray dried form and I had no other form of pure glucose readily available." Geez, Dave, just how old *are* you? Spray dried products have been in general production since the 1920's (can you say instant coffee?) ;^) Also, what ever happened to HFCS (high fructose corn solids/syrup) or Belgian Candi Sugar? Do not these qualify as pure sources of glucose (yes I know that some contain fructose and sucrose fractions, but is this not practically speaking a moot point)? It would seem of late that some of us on the HBD are getting a little (?) acerbic :-O What ever happened to factual discourse and proper social intercourse? Are we straying so far afield from the hobby we love that we cannot tolerate dissention, even from those of us who have proven credentials (a la published R&D)? It saddens me to think that we cannot at least keep an open enough mind for possible misunderstandings of posted or printed material from other HBDers without degenerating to the level of politicians ;-7 WRT Stout and Butt (AKA Porter), Al's right on -- especially if you noticed that when Stout is capitalized it refers to the appellation. Whereas if in lower case it would refer to the adjectival form of whatever beer or ale is being referenced. Who wouldn't prefer a stout Butt to a Stout butt ;^) ? After using and comparing my beers being made with a gas burner vs. electric stove, I've come to the conclusion that the results (at least in my case, system dependency, etc.) are >NIL: I made a batch of my ESB (house specialty) just prior to going with gas heat. Then my first (gas) batch was with the same recipe, including times and volumes (an 8850 watt Jenn-Aire really cooks!) produced two beers that were completely the *same*! Color, flavor, and aroma were all within human sensorineural detection, both had good head and retention, and both were very clear and bright beers without noticeable defects. IMHO, home brewing is probably on the lower end of an asymptotic scale, which doesn't reflect on the methods, or procedures followed by large(r) capacity breweries. When my 55 gallon system is completed, and ready for production, I'll make another ESB, and see how it compares with my benchmark standard. On the subject of big beers (like the Gump's 10/20), what is the best recommendation for a stuck ferment? I got around 50% AA with the Belgian Strong Ale yeast from Wyeast, and raising the yeast only helped a little. I'm considering repitching fresh yeast from a high gravity starter, oxygenation with O2, and yeast energizer (or any combination of these that gets me to 65~75% AA). Suggestions? Dr. Michel J. Brown, D.C. homemade at spiritone.com http://www.spiritone.com/~homemade/index.shtml "In the field of observation, chance favors only the prepared mind" L. Pasteur Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 13 May 98 16:34:06 CDT From: jwilkins at wss.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson) Subject: RE: Evaporation during the boil ... one more time! Brian Dixon wrote of the 10% evaporation discussion: > Since I typically brew for 5.5 post-boil gallons (allow 1/2 gal. for > kettle loss from the pot to the fermenter), I will take the above > suggestions and try the following: > > 1) Stop sparging when I have 6.1 to 6.5 gallons in the fermenter (5.5 > gallons divided by 0.90 to 5.5 gallons divided by 0.85), > > 2) Continue to top off with boiling water during the boil to maintain > approximately 5.5 gallons, > > 3) Continue to use the same rolling boil that I always use, but do #2 > as appropriate. > > > As a further, fun, test, I'll do a test mash or two to determine my > extraction efficiency with this shortened sparge. Then when I brew a > batch of beer this way, I'll do it with a friend and we'll brew the > same recipe ... one with approximately 33% evaporation, and one with > about 10% evaporation. If I am reading this correctly, I think it misses the point of the 10% evaporation rule. The 10% evaporation, as I understand it, is merely a measure of the thermal loading of the boil. If the evaporated water is replaced during the boil to result in 90% of the original wort volume, the wort will still have been exposed to greater thermal loading than if it had been boiled at such a rate as to lose only 10% without additions. John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins at wss.dsccc.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 20:29:10 -0300 (GMT-0300) From: Jorge Blasig - IQ <gisalb at elmer.fing.edu.uy> Subject: Chill Haze Dear friends, I recently prepared an english ale. I used basically pale malt (around 3600 g), homemade crystal malt (450 g), homemade malted wheat (230 g) and homemade biscuit malt (230 g). I also used fuggle hops and irish moss (carrageen) at the end of the boil. Do not exactly remember the amounts of malts I used though they are close to these values. I cooled the wort immediately after boiling using an immersion chiller and obtained a thick cold break which I separated during racking to the primary. The beer is finished now and it tastes good. However I have chill haze though I thought I would not have any. I would like to have a clear beer even at cold temperatures. Any explanation? And suggestions for next batches. I have silica gel. Should I use it? When? Thanks for your reply. Jorge Blasig Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 22:27:38 EDT From: AlannnnT <AlannnnT at aol.com> Subject: newbie grainers and the best brewing funny ever Some newbies asked about grain, To , Rich and Susy and Tim Runnette As the sneakers say, just do it. Don't be scared off by the techno-ranting on the HBD. We have no lives, so this is what we do. :( Really, the only things you might mess up are sanitation, which you already know about, and your first time crushing grains. Stuck sparges are bad. So, ask a friend with a mill to help you grind or trust your brewshop to crush for you. Nothing else will go so wrong that you won't love the results. Sure your beers may get better, but unless you make your own mistakes you will never learn. So- go rapidly amidst the noise and haste and seek what peace there may be in mashing. - --------------- True story to follow. A brewer drags his non-brewing wife to a homebrew store on Mother's Day. The brewer, a newbie, wants to buy stuff for his second batch. His wife says he shouldn't be buying stuff for himself on Mother's Day, seeing as how she is yet sans Mother's Day presents. The brewer picks out tubing, funnel, bottle brush, carboy brush, cleaner etc. etc., while insisting it's all necesary. The wife says,"you didn't have all this before and I liked the beer you made - what did you use for the first batch" To which he replied, "the stuff from the fish tank". The brewer now has new stuff and his wife is no longer complaining. It's true- I swear. Best Brewing, Alan Talman Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 21:46:29 -0500 From: "Raymond C. Steinhart" <rnr at popmail.mcs.net> Subject: Counter Pressure Bottler Anyone have advice on building a counter pressure bottler. I would like to use a fixture similar to a bench top capper to hold the fill tube and bottle. I would also like to be able to purge the bottle with CO2 prior to filling. What about CO2 coming out of solution by being passed through a small orifice or valve? Has anyone used a commercially available device and can make a recommendation? Thanks. Ray Steinhart Brewers of South Suburbia - -- My All Electric RIM Brewing System "http://www.mcs.net/~rnr" Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 22:14:13 -0500 From: "George Techentine" <gtechen1 at tuelectric.com> Subject: S.S. perforated screen I am slowly getting my all-grain equipment together (on the cheap) and have already made a slotted copper manifold. Recently, I have found a source of stainless steel sheet metal (about 1/16" thick) with holes that are 1/8' diameter on 3/16" centers. The pieces are about 13" wide and 18" long. These are currently rolled into a cylinder, but with some sawing and hammering I can make them flat. I haven't completely assembled all of the parts and pieces of my system yet, so changing to a false bottom wouldn't be a problem. Is my screen size suitable for a false bottom, or would the 1/8" holes provide too much of a restriction? I will be mashing in a converted keg with propane burners for temp boost (3-tier gravity fed). I don't mind the manifold, but it seems that the screen would be easier to clean. George Techentine Baker Street Brew Granbury, TX geotek at hpnc.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 23:01:49 -0500 From: "Rob Moline" <brewer at ames.net> Subject: The Jethro Gump Report The Jethro Gump Report >From: blacksab at midwest.net (Harlan Bauer) >Subject: delayed yeast count .<SNIP> > The *snapshot* I'd like to >take is the number of cells pitched at 4pm, but if I take the sample at 4pm, >the cells will continue to multiply in the sample.....<SNIP> Have you thought about bringing your microscope or haemocytometer to work and checking on the spot? You are not trying to culture from the samples, so extreme clean handling isn't required. >One solution I've thought of would be to take the sample and immediately >plunge it into salted ice ....<SNIP> I cannot think of a reason this wouldn't work...... Presuming your collection and pitching practices are similar to others I have seen, you collect the 'middle' yeast, and pitch that into the new fermenter, after stirring it into a 'thinner' liquid with fresh wort. Collect your sample, measure total volume of the now diluted yeast slurry, add the rest to the fermenter, and bring on the oxygenated wort. >BTW, we pitch from one fermenter to another so there is no way of knowing >the pitching rate except to count the cells in the recieving fermenter right >after pitching. Only if you are able to guarantee complete homogenization of the slurry into the wort Presuming you are filling the new fermenter immediately after chilling in the HE and O2'ing, and filling a fermenter without integral stirring or blending capabilities, (and I have never seen such an animal in contemporary 'Micro" practice). there simply is not enough agitation to ensure a complete blending of the yeast into the wort. You might find vastly different results from a series of samples collected immediately post pitching. The stirring you give to the slurry/wort blend should give a more 'homogenous' sample than your fermenter Just my .02, after a quick read of your situation. BTW, please give more info on your methods. What size system, how much slurry do you collect, (by weight, or volume?), etc. Evaporation... Siebel sez 8 percent, with a stack that is 1/6th the diameter of the kettle. "Beer Bullets" When visiting Colorado, hearing of the "Beer Bullet Theory" and then running into Curt Schroeder, who gave his consent to be identified as the originator, I present the following...... As avid brewers, folks such as ourselves like to attend beer events, such as homebrew club meetings, beer festivals, the unveiling of the new brew at the pub, having the fella's over for a few brews and football on the TV. etc.... Each attendance at such an event uses a "Beer Bullet." Now, assuming the above, the "Beer Bullet' Theory states that each month all brewers are given a certain number of "Beer Bullets" by their S.O., but they are unable to determine how many are in each month's magazine, and the number varies each month. But, they are ALWAYS able to determine when they have run out! >From: "Timothy Green" <TimGreen at ix.netcom.com> >Subject: Extract Brewing, All Grain Brewing & Chemistry >If that is what I have to look forward to if I switch to all-grain brewing, >I want no part of it. No, what you have to look forward to in all-grain brewing is better beer, more control over your process, less ingredient expense, and an ever increasing satisfaction with your art, should you continue. Your observation of the Digest will from time to time be clouded by all manner of rubbish, but for the most part the participant's are all in it for the learning , or teaching, of their craft. From time to time, old idiots like me will bark a bit, or just get a few things off our chests that have been building for sometime, and sometimes there are remarks that need to be made. If anything I have said recently has caused you to feel uneasy about the Digest, I apologize to you. Occasionally, some remarks are undeserved, inappropriate, and in the case of 'Nokomaree' some years ago, deliberately hostile and taunting. But, be assured by one who has benefitted by the knowledge and experience of the participant's of the HBD over the 10 years I have followed it, any correlation of recent events with your development as an ever more competent brewer is unfounded. Pound for pound, it's the best way to learn brewing. I hope you hang around.... Jethro Gump Rob Moline Court Avenue Brewing Company, Des Moines, Iowa. brewer at ames.net "The More I Know About Beer, The More I Realize I Need To Know More About Beer!" Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 00:49:40 -0500 From: michael wiley <mwiley3 at pdq.net> Subject: Come & get it !!!!!! HOWDY - HO !!!!! You all smell kinda FLOWERY..... Mr. Hankey says its time to get all the info on LUNAR RENDEZBREW V ... Check out the goods at: http://www.ghgcorp.com/rlivingston/ Home of the BAY AREA MASHTRONAUTS Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 08:52:52 -0500 From: "Jeffrey M. Kenton" <jkenton at iastate.edu> Subject: Small beer from Big Brew Howdy folks. I too made a small beer from my Big Brew. I also have read with some very close interest the discussion about DMS and the large amount in canned worts (as described by GDP). Then in the swiss cheese that is my brain, I remembered that CAPilsener (as described by Jeff Renner) has DMS as an allowable taste component. See where this is going? Would it be appropriate to use by DMS soaked canned wort as a basis for a CAP? Are there other beer styles that allow DMS as a flavor component? If so, what are they? I love the HBD, Jeff As usual, please email me personally, and if enough people show interest, I'll post the collected results. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 10:14:54 -0400 (EDT) From: macher at telerama.com Subject: Steam Injected RIMS Feasible? Hi Everyone! Greetings from Pittsburgh, Pa...USA OK, I admit it. I've been bitten by the RIMS bug! Are there any steam injected RIMS systems operating out there? It is likely that I will build a conventional 2-tier, electrically heated, single-pump system, but it is still in the design/scrounge-parts stage and I am examining various other possibilities. After reading Kelly E. Jones' article" Direct Injection of Steam for Mash Temperature Control", which was originally published in the July/August 1994 issue of Brewing Techniques, I was struck by the idea of using steam injection in the mash tun as an alternative to the electrical heating element of the conventional RIMS. I should think I could still sense temperature of the circulating liquid and have an electronic controller toggle a solenoid valve in the steam line to maintain temperature...after all, most RIMS designs that I have seen pulse the electrical power to the heating element [as compared to the continuous, variable power of phase-angle control]. The pressure relief valve on the steam source [otherwise referred to as the weight on the top of the pressure cooker lid :-)] would prevent excessive pressure buildup when the valve in the steam line was closed. I could even have a solenoid valve arrangement in the gas line feeding the burner, and rig things to have a high and low burner setting, for generating more steam when the steam line to the mash tun was open. And so on... So the question is: Is this a hair-brained idea? Any and all comments/advice welcomed! I will post a general summary if the feedback warrants it. Thanks... Bill Bill Macher macher at telerama.lm.com Pittsburgh, Pa USA Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 10:23:41 -0400 From: "Frederick J. Wills" <Frederick_Wills at compuserve.com> Subject: BW Yeast / T Loading / priming / tuns Greetings, Many posts from "Big Brew"-ers have asked when the champagne yeast should be added. I would just like to throw out that with the use of Nottingham Ale yeast as was specified in the recipe it may well be unnecesary and undesired to use a second (more attenuative) yeast. In a Barley Wine that I made and also used the Nottingham, the brew fermented from 1.110 to 1.024 without repitching any yeast. I would advocate the allowance of larger quantities of time and then testing the gravity and tasting before a 2nd pitching. In the above cited BW, I later wished that it had finished just a bit higher to be closer to my intended target (T.Hardy Old Ale). *************************** I think a lot of readers are missing what I believe to be the main point WRT the thermal loading / evaporation thread. You should forget entirely about the evaporation and simply consider the amount of heat absorbed by the wort during the boil to better understand the relationship. Evaporation should only be used as a rough indicator of the heat input. Adding water during the boil will not effect the thermal loading. Covering the pot alone will also not effect the thermal loading except to the extent that you can reduce the heat input (turn the burner down) and still maintain a given boil. One other thought that I have in comparing the average homebrew set-up to the average commercial facility is that the heat input per unit volume is propably significantly higher for the homebrewer. This may mean some adjustment to process is called for such as reduction of boil duration or heat input during the boil to more closely approximate the commercial conditions. *************************** From: "Michael R. Tucker" <mtucker at frii.com> "Another question- Is there a product at the grocery store that is a suitable replacement priming sugar? Like maybe...... corn starch??? :-)" No, starch doesn't ferment. How about cane sugar (sucrose)? Works for me... *************************** From: Rich and Susy <cinnamon at erinet.com> "...In spite of this and your concern about loss of temperature, I'm planning on using a rectangular cooler for mashing, then scoop the grains to an igloo-type cooler with false bottom for sparging. I'm curious about the pros/cons of this approach vs. the single cooler mash/lauter tun." The main con for use of two coolers IMO is the additional work required (PITA factor) and the heat loss that occurs with transferring. I would highly recommend making a slotted copper pipe manifold for either of your coolers and mashing and lautering in a single vessel. The folks that have problems with stuck sparges are most often using a (p)false bottom arrangement where the weight of the grain bed causes excess compaction on the filtering surface. Also the situation you describe where grain gets under the false bottom and plugs up the plumbing. I have never had a stuck sparge with my pipe manifold (slots down, thank-you) except with use of large amounts of adjuncts and too rapid an initial run-off. It is much more convenient than having to transfer a 170 deg F mash into a lauter tun, IMO. If you make the manifold such that it just fits snugly inside the dimensions of your cooler, you can stir the mash to your heart's content and it will not cause lautering problems. As long as you don't stir too vigorously I wouldn't be afraid of HSA due to occasional mash stirring. Regards, Fred Wills Londonderry, NH Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 07:26:01 -0700 From: Sully <sully at drunkenbastards.org> Subject: DMS Sensitivity, Sensory Description, and DMS Production At the risk of expanding on a theme, I'll suggest that Jeremy was pretty close to the mark when he commented in #2713 that: "IMneverHO there is no shame in not being able to detect compound X, it seems to be something you are stuck with." I was one of those that apparently couldn't smell DMS. I was embarassed enough to have an American Standard Lager kicked from a comp in prelims for "overwhelming" DMS, which I had apparently entirely failed to perceive. During a visitation from the Grand Hydrometer, Marybeth Raines pointed out the DMS. I realized that what I was perceiving as an aromatic "sweet" was in fact what other people were perceiving as "cooked corn." So I recalibrated my descriptors. The Beer Flavor Terminology descriptors are words; use them, but don't get tied to them to the point that you say "I can't smell <compound X>." I was smelling DMS just fine, only the words "cooked corn" didn't accurately describe what I was perceiving. If you don't smell "cooked corn" in a known DMS beer, describe what you DO smell. You may be perceiving DMS just fine, but it isn't triggering the commonly recognized descriptor. Once you recognize your "sweet" as everyone else's "cooked corn," recalibrate (translate) your descriptor so you can use the commonly accepted terminology, and others will understand what you are describing. Sometimes you have to train (read "educate") your palate, is all. For example, which tells you more: "Malty sweet character predominates in aroma and flavor with some toasted chocolate malt character" or "Bock"? I've had plenty of the former that were nothing of the latter. On the related note of DMS production, full boil, evaporation, kettle covering, etceterola, a potential source of DMS may be aged malt. Emperically, I noticed increasing DMS production in beers with malt that aged beyond roughly 6 months, notwithstanding 90 minute vigorous, uncovered, outdoor boils. Initially, no DMS, up to around 6 months, when It first became apparent, increasing up to the point where I ran out of malt. New malt, same supplier, similar analysis, DMS gone. Not enough data to draw conclusions, but enough to formulate hypothesis. Cheers! Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 10:47:17 -0400 (EDT) From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker at welchlink.welch.jhu.edu> Subject: Off Flavors Evaluation Kit Jeremy Bergsman mentions an "Off flavors spiking kit" from Seibel that he'd used to spike into Budweiser for the purpose of practicing the identification of such compounds as DMS and acetaldehyde in beer. This sounds like a great idea! Does anyone out there have any info about such kits? Are they commercially available? Pricing? Sources? Specific components? Any personal experiences using such kits? I think this would be a fun and informative exercise for our brew club. Thanks in advance... Alan - ------------------------------------------------------------------ "Graduate school is the snooze button on the alarm clock of life." -Jim Squire -Alan Meeker Johns Hopkins Hospital Dept. of Urology (410) 614-4974 __________________________________________________________________ Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 11:05:18 -0400 From: David Kerr <dkerr at semc.org> Subject: Champagne yeast in BW I'd like to agree with Al K. on the Champagne yeast, although the attenuation rate for such a big beer is a matter of taste... Although I was unable to participate in the Big Brew, I took the advice posted by Jim Busch a year or so ago when I brew my "Mine Goes to Eleven" BW - huge pitching rate (Wyeast 1056 slurry from prior week's 1.056 APA batch, infused another active 2 quart starter after 10 days) and plenty of aeration pre-pitch. Went from 1.110 down to 1.021 in less than 3 weeks. It's almost a year old now and is still improving with age. Like Bigfoot, I guess, in the sense of being a barleywine style ale. Dave Kerr - Needham, MA "Be good and you will be lonely" - Mark Twain Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 11:24:57 -0700 From: George_De_Piro at berlex.com Subject: More Malting Hi all, Hans asks about making crystal malt. As you can see from Ken S's excellent posts (and my earlier one), you can start with pale barley malt (or wheat malt, too). The way I actually did it, though, was from raw barley. Raw barley was very difficult to find in the New York City area (even feed-grade barley that wasn't crimped was impossible to find). If you can get raw barley, I encourage you to try malting from scratch. If you can't get raw barley, but have a few hours to kill and want to taste fresh crystal malt, try it the way Ken and I have already written about (starting with pale malt). My source for the raw barley was Briess, but it was a one-time deal, so it isn't a viable supplier for the homebrew world. I'm writing a piece about malting/home malting, and thus was able to obtain the barley. I am grateful to Roger Briess for his generosity and support of this project. While I'm here, I'll babble a bit about making malt from scratch. The full story will be published in Brewing Techniques in the somewhat near future, so look forward to the details then... I started with 2-row Harrington. I used my old "bucket in a bucket" lauter tun arrangement as a steep tank (the inner bucket has a perforated bottom, which allowed for quick and easy draining of the steep water. I used plain, cold tap water for the steep. The temperature was about 55F (12.8C). I put the barley in the steep tank, filled it with water, and stirred it around by hand while allowing the water to overflow the bucket. This helped carry away debris and turned my arm blue (55F water will do that...) There was an amazing amount of dirt on the barley (it looked clean, but looks can be deceiving). I continued this until the water was running fairly clean and my arm was numb and purple. I then allowed the barley to soak ~4 hours (changing the water every hour or so), then drained the water out and aerated the barley by pouring it back and forth between two buckets. I then allowed the moist barley to sit in the bucket w/o water for ~20 hours (this is called an air rest). During that time I rinsed and aerated the barley (as above) every couple of hours (yes, even twice during the night). At the end of this rest the rootlets were starting to emerge (a day earlier than I expected). I then filled the bucket with water again and repeated the procedure for the initial wet steep (although I think I shortened the time because the barley was already near 40% moisture content). After the 2nd wet steep I was going to do another air rest, but the barley was at 45% moisture and was growing pretty rapidly. I spread out the germinating barley in aluminum catering trays in my basement (the floor is far from sanitary) and misted and turned the barley every few hours. I did my best to keep the temperature low, but the germinating barley generated quite a bit of heat. At night the barley was at ~57F (13.9C), but during the day it got near 68F (20C). The young barley malt smelled strongly of acetaldyhde (pumpkin-like). In ~1.5 days the barley was fully modified and ready to kiln. It was pretty evenly germinated. I was hoping to undermodify the barley, so that I could do a decoction mash and not worry about avoiding the protein rest, but this barley had other plans. I'm lucky it didn't over modify. Note that I adhered to the Reinheitsgebot by not using Gibberellic acid. Germination was so rapid I couldn't imagine wanting to speed it further! According to Kunze and Jim Basler at Briess, aeration is key to achieving rapid, uniform growth. Jim at Briess was a bit surprised at the speed of my germination, but said it was understandable given how much I aerated the grain (and the small batch size, which exposed a greater surface area to the air). I then spread the grain out in an even thinner layer on the floor of a room with a space heater in it. The room was maintained at ~87F (30.5C), and a fan was blowing air over the barley. In this way I dried the barley to the desired moisture content before higher-temperature kilning. The barley destined to be crystal malt was not dried in this way, though. It was put straight into the oven from the germination tray at ~40% moisture). In the near future I'll post my "kilning" schedules for Pilsner and Munich malts... Have fun! George De Piro (Nyack, NY) Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 May 98 08:48:35 -0700 From: brian_dixon at om.cv.hp.com Subject: Best reader for HBD??? I'm curious ... which reader is the most popular for reading the HBD? I've used my email reader (sux), and one of the others ... but which reader is the most preferred (by you of course ... opinions may vary!)? Thanks, Brian Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 08:47:19 -0700 From: Jeremy York <jeremy at ThemeMedia.com> Subject: Big 10/20 status and q's I made a 5 gallon batch of extract Big 10/20, and exhibited a momentary loss of intelligence while cooling it. More on that in a sec, but the end result was that the wort had been agitated too much during cooling for the hot break to settle out, and I got most of it in the primary. OG 1115. Initial fermentation has been going fine - a starter of about a liter got it going very quickly, blew like crazy for two days and then settled down, is burping through an s-shaped lock about 10-12 times a minute now. After nearly 2 weeks of it sitting on this big gob of trub I'm getting itchy and think that I'll rack it into a secondary very soon now. I'm also inclined to wait until the ale yeast (White Labs British) is entirely pooped out, then check gravity and taste before deciding whether to add a champagne yeast. One thing that worries me a little is that between blow-off and trub, I'm going to have about a gallon of headspace in the secondary. Something I've tried with meads is adding lots of glass marbles to the secondary to displace some of that air, but that's a real PITA. Any comments or suggestions on any of this gladly taken. The new Barley Wine book suggests that the bulk aging after fermentation should be done at cold (38-40F) temperatures. I was thinking of putting the carboy in a big cooler that I have, with water and a splash of iodophor, and a frozen jug/bottle or two. Cover the thing with one of those cheap heat reflective blankets from an army surplus store. Replace the ice bottles as needed. Any suggestions? I'm easily 2-3 months away from being able to get a spare fridge/freezer set up for lagering. As for why I got so much gunk into the primary: when I was cooling, my little immersion cooler was doing its best but was only half the height of the wort in the pot. While the bottom half of the wort was approaching room temperature, the upper half was still probably >100F. My solution at the time was to slosh the stuff around with the chiller a few times, which brought it down to a nice temp, but also got all of the hot break re-suspended I suspect. Unless I can figure out some reliable way to suspend the thing so that the immersion cooler is sitting in the topmost part of my kettle, I think I'll just bite the bullet and get a bigger chiller. I figure I'll hook the new and old chillers together, and put the little one into a bucket of ice water to pre-chill the cooling water. - -- Jeremy York Projectionist "Immersed, I explore. ThemeMedia Inc. VOX 425 602-3557 Text, not read, is understood. jeremy at ThemeMedia.com FAX 425 602-3570 Words into wisdom." vmail 425 298-5933 http://thememedia.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 11:57:35 -0400 From: Mark Hillman <mhillman at ebtech.net> Subject: Sanitizer Hi, My brewing buddy picked up a jug of "Sunlight No-Rinse Quaternary Disinfectant" made by Lever Industrial. Has anyone heard of this stuff or tried it? I have the Material Safety Data Sheet, unfortunately it tells me little. The key ingredients are n-Alkyl Dimethyl Benzyl Ammonium Chloride and n-Alkyl DimethylEthyl Benzyl Ammonium Chloride. So is it worth a try or will we wind up killing our selves? Mark Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 05/15/98, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96