HOMEBREW Digest #2783 Fri 31 July 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

  reply to Mega IBU? (Herbert Bresler)
  RE: carboy safety (John Wilkinson)
  Brewer's Gold Backyard Hops (Charley Burns)
  German malting (Al Korzonas)
  Yeast Concentration Prior to Fermentation Stage ("LordPeter")
  Kubessa and polyphenols (Al Korzonas)
  Oven mashing? (Badger Roullett)
  Fermenting in Cornies ("Larry Maxwell")
  Wheat Beers ("Bob Zamites")
  Oh, yeah, I forgot ("Bob Zamites")
  Teaching Brewing ("Bob Zamites")
  Sanitation ("Michel J. Brown")
  women brewers? (Jon Macleod)
  Jim's post-Siebel post (Al Korzonas)
  Fermenting in Cornies ("Ludwig's")
  Sierra Nevada Recipie ("Mark Phillips")
  PBW - ok for glass? (Charles Burns)
  Re: pitching temps (hollen)
  re: Wheat Beer flavor profile (David Elm)
  re: Perry (Dick Dunn)
  re:not re: better starter methods ("Steve Alexander")
  New Belgium Brewery (Dan Ryan)
  Brewery Finance 101 (Results)
  Conical Fermenters (randy.pressley)
  Pitching temps - second thought (Samuel Mize)
  BrewU evaluation program (Cathy Ewing)
  Dan Cole's BYO discussion; speling/spellling; force carb technique (Samuel Mize)
  simplest force carbonation ("Anton Verhulst")

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, 29 Jul 1998 14:31:21 -0400 From: Herbert Bresler <bresler.7 at osu.edu> Subject: reply to Mega IBU? Greetings all. Rob Jones <robjones at pathcom.com> asked if his recipe really had Mega IBUs? since it didn't taste THAT bitter. Since he provided the %AA, we can now attempt to answer his question. I plugged the numbers into Glenn Tinseth's Hop Bitterness Calculator http://realbeer.com/cgi-bin/hops/Bitterness.exe (that's the one that uses metric units) and came up with 62.2 IBU. That's much lower than the 84 IBUs! that Rob calculated. If you assume that a change in 5 IBU can be detected by the mouth of the beer drinker, then this is a large difference, i.e., very perceptable. If you consider the hop bitterness in terms of its balance with the malt you might look at the BU/GU ratio (the IBU divided by the starting gravity units). An IBU of 62 yields a ratio of 1.2 (62/52 = 1.2), on the high end of what you'd probably find for the style that Rob was brewing, an English-style Pale Ale (IPA?). Whereas, an IBU of 84 would yield a ratio of 1.6 (84/52 = 1.6), way bitter (even for an IPA). Given Rob's target style, and his comment that the recipe was "a British style pale ale that I really like after hopping up the original recipe a bit," I'd say he got just what he was aiming for. [Rob, may I have some more of that brew, please.] The details and my assumptions. Rob's recipe: >45g Northern Brewer 8%AA 75 minute addition >30g Fuggles 4.4%AA 75 minute addition >30g Fugles 4.4%AA 15 minute addition >60g East Kent Goldings 5%AA dry hopped in pop tank >Final volume post fermentation is 19.5L (5.14 gal). >Equipment losses probably total about 2L ( 0.53gal). >OG at 19.5L was 1.052 My assumptions: For the purposes of calculating I assumed there was no significant effect of wort gravity on hop utilization, so I left the boil gravity at the default 1.050. I added the equipment losses to the final volume and used 21.5 liters as the Final Beer Volume. I also assumed that the dry hops did not add to hop bitterness. Good luck and good brewing, Herb Columbus, Ohio Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 98 14:30:22 CDT From: jwilkins at wss.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson) Subject: RE: carboy safety Scott Murman wrote: >The best advice I got for handling glass carboys was this - whenever >sanitizing or cleaning them, do it in a bathtub (the sanitizing or >cleaning that is). The only carboy I have broken is one I was cleaning in a bathtub. The thing slipped out of my hands and found the porcelain too hard for its liking. I only got a small nick but never cleaned carboys in the bathtub again. I went from that to taking them outside to clean in the yard on the grass. Much softer than porcelain. That may not be true in the current Texas drought, though. Now I keep them in plastic crates, place them on a bench, add 5-6 tbs of TSP, fill with warm water, and let sit. When they have soaked clean I siphon the TSP solution into the next thing to be cleaned or down the drain. When they are empty I pick them up out of the crate and rinse over my plastic laundry sink. They are not long out of the crate and handled very carefully and for very short distances when they are. One has a handle which I use when the carboy is empty. I probably should get one for each. Love those plastic crates. I feel much better about putting the crate on the concrete floor instead of the glass carboy. - ------------------------------ Jeff Winkler asked about getting TSP stains out of his carboy. I have left TSP in contact with glass for extended periods without getting any film or residue. However, my water is extremely soft so I suspect the deposit is from minerals in the water, probably calcium. I would try rinsing with vinegar. John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins at wss.dsccc.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 98 13:20 PDT From: caburns at egusd.k12.ca.us (Charley Burns) Subject: Brewer's Gold Backyard Hops I should probably consult my books tonight at home, but... A friend who grows Brewer's Gold hops in his backyard harvested a bunch of them and gave 'em to me last week. Some were ready some didn't really look ready. I don't have a food dehydrator so I laid them out on a papersack on top of my asphalt driveway in 105F heat for a couple hours. They were crispy when I brought them back inside. I immediately stuffed them into a plastic (not oxygen barrier) baggy and into the freezer. The hop chart from the last special zymurgy doesn't list Brewer's Gold as recommended for ANY style of beer. My friend only grows them due to their looks (he drinks corona) and easy maintenance (cut and throw away every year). These are 3rd year bines. Any recommendations on what to do with these? I thought an aroma addition to a pale ale might make sense. Charley (with extra hops) in N. Cal Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 16:00:19 -0500 (CDT) From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com> Subject: German malting Jim writes, quoting Steve: >>This description of the economics of undermodified malt makes little >>sense. The *very* big energy cost in malting is in drying the green malt, >>not in allowing it to continue to modify. > >Every hour the malt spends in the malt house is a cost. Air has to be cool >and humidified and force through the malt. This all requires energy and >ties up resources that could be used to make more malt. Germans are so >concerned with energy costs that they have all kinds of energy recovery >systems built into the breweries (Klaus Zastrow said this and it was >confirmed by a person in the class from Warsteiner). Molson looked at >doing this and decided it was not worth it do to the lower energy costs in >Canada (as reported by a person in the class from Molsons). Actually, when I initially read Jim's post, I interpreted it backwards and thought that he was saying that the German maltsters were modifying the malt more due to the higher energy costs of *brewing* with undermodified malt. This is my understanding, which is contrary to what Jim wrote and coincides with what Steve said. At the 1st Spirit of Belgium conference, Eric Toft (who was formerly a brewer in a large Belgian brewery and is now a brewer in a medium-sized German brewery) said a few things about German malts and methods during his talk which was primarily on Belgian methods and malts. Eric said that the small- and medium-sized brewers are reluctantly having to change from triple- to double-decoction and from double-decoction to single- decoction (i.e. they are simplifying their mash schedules -- removing the protein rest!) because the malt they are getting is overmodified for their traditional mashes. The BIG brewers dictate the specs for the malts and the smaller brewers have to adapt. The big brewers want the malt to be more modified because of the energy costs of multiple decoctions. Al. Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL korz at xnet.com http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/ Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 16:13:24 -0700 From: "LordPeter" <BARLEYWINE at prodigy.net> Subject: Yeast Concentration Prior to Fermentation Stage Steve Writes in concerning my yeast growth question: >From: "Steve Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net> >>The rate of fermentation will depend on the rate and extent of yeast >>growth. >Hmmm - this isn't really right - it's the total viable yeast mass that is >proportional to the fermentation rate. Certainly NOT the growth rate. I quote my source: Lyn Kruger, in notes from Siebel Short Course, 1997: "Governing principal in fermentation: The rate of fermentation will depend on the rate and extent of yeast growth." >Peter's notes are pretty good, but there is some nomenclature that bears >repeating. Lipids are any material that can be dissolved in non-polar >solvents, fatty acids, phospholipids, sterols and a lot of others. It's a >pretty generic term and doesn't represent much about the structure or function. >There are a lot of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids, and relatively >smaller amounts of sterols in yeast. Again, Siebel Course 97: "Lipid is a generic term given to a group of alcohol, ether, and fat solvents." >>The fermentation stage will only begin when the yeast reach an approximate >>concentration of 50,000,000 cells per ml. The longer it takes to reach that >>point, then the longer it will be before fermentation begins. >Nonsense. Do you really think the yeast wait around for a population increase >before fermenting ?? Where is their census bureau located ? Ok, admittedly this is silly, and upon further review, I realize I took it out of context: Siebel Short Course Notebook 1997 "Yeast pitched at about 10,000,000 cells/ml, usually increases to about 50,000,000 before active growth ceases." Now, during this time many carbohydrates are taken up and metabolized by the yeast. So, I concede my earlier post was incorrect in this respect. But: "Once sufficient oxygen has been adsorbed from the wort to build up the ergosterol concentration, and the sugars and amino acids are utilized by the yeast, the cells begin to multiply. Multiplication continues in geometric progression, called the logarithimic phase of growth, until the material in shortest supply is used up, growth then slows down and finally the number of yeast cells remains constant." And: "Under normal brewery conditions the factor that usually limits yeast growth is the amount of oxygen available in the wort." And: "When the rate , on a per cell or per gram basis, at which yeast uses the sugar in wort when growth has ceased is measured, it is found to be very slow. In contrast, sugar is utilized relatively rapidly when growth is occurring." So, my thinking here is: 1) Oxygen is the primary limiting factor in yeast growth. 2) The yeast will not begin the logarithmic growth phase until they have proper amounts of aforementioned ergosterol. 3) The lag time is the period between pitching and the logarithmic growth phase. 4) Therefore, O2 in sufficient quantities will remove this limiting factor of growth. The yeast did not have to wait around to get the proper components they need to begin the growth phase. 5) Does this not mean that not only will the fermentation proceed at a faster rate because of increase growth, but also that it will begin the fermentation sooner because it had the proper tools to begin with? I have not seen any reports or studies that directly rule out O2 sat as a factor in lag phase length, nor have I seen any that directly support this. What I do see is a lot of evidence that points me to believe that O2 sats do indeed influence the length of lag. Please, someone quote a reliable source to dispel my thoughts, and / or point to the holes in my logic. Timo? Cheers. Peter Gilbreth barleywine at prodigy.net www.barleywine.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 16:28:04 -0500 (CDT) From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com> Subject: Kubessa and polyphenols Steve writes: >3/ Also I'm not an advocate of the Kubessa process - I've never tried it nor >see the need. It *may* reduce excessive phenolic level and produce stable >beer. <snip> If you'll recall where Jim originally snagged the text for this issue, it was my post questioning how the Kubessa process decreased polyphenols. (For those of you that have forgotten, the Kubessa process is where the malt is separated from its husks which are reintroduced to the mash only at the very end.) Ironically, I pointed out in that post that according to Malting and Brewing Science, beer made from de-husked malt was *not* significantly lower in polyphenols (although it was much lower in silicates). My point is not that the Kubessa process was worthless, but rather that I don't believe that it reduces *polyphenols*. Al. Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL korz at xnet.com http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/ Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 15:02:20 -0700 From: Badger Roullett <branderr at microsoft.com> Subject: Oven mashing? A quick question for the homebrewing collective. can you use your oven for mashing? like simple steeping of specialty grains but real mashing? toss all teh grains in your brewpot, put it into the oven, turn it to 150, let it sit for an hour, (or more to let it heat up?), then crank it up to 170? pour it into a collander (big one) and pour 170 deg water thru it? no brainer all grainer? this can't be this easy.. (no experiece yet with all grain, just 4 max lb, specialty mashes of grain + extract) badger *************************************************** Brander Roullett aka Badger Homepage: http://www.nwlink.com/~badger Brewing Page: http://www.nwlink.com/~badger/badgbeer.html In the SCA: Lord Frederic Badger of Amberhaven Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 15:25:54 -0700 From: "Larry Maxwell" <Larry at bmhm.com> Subject: Fermenting in Cornies I'm a longtime lurker on HBD, and while I haven't seen this addressed, the recent thread on fermenting in 5G cornies rekindled my interest in an idea I had. It seems to me that the major drawbacks of fermenting in cornies are that the dip tube and poppet valves are prone to clogging, and that if racked off the sediment one will be left with less than a full five gallons. I have been considering a possible solution. I'd be surprised if I were the first to think of it, so I'm hoping for feedback. The idea is to ferment in cornies laying horizontally rather than standing vertically. My thinking is that the keg could be laid horizontally with the inlet and outlet ports vertically aligned. The ports are fairly close to the walls, so I'd guess that not very much space would be wasted if one were to fill it such that the wort level is just below the upper port. The upper port would be used for blowoff and, later, for gas pressure. The beer would be drawn off through the lower port. Yeast and trub would deposit between the lower port and the wall. Why do I want to do this? Because while carboys are unwieldy, cornies could be stacked in this orientation like cordwood or fitted into a rack of some kind. Moreover, they allow closed fermentation and transfer under pressure. And no dip tube to clog. The only real drawback that I can think of is that I suspect at least a gallon or so of space above the upper port is wasted. Anyone tried this or have any comments? Larry Maxwell Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 16:29:48 -0600 From: "Bob Zamites" <bamzam at trail.com> Subject: Wheat Beers In HBD #2781, Tom Barnet posts: >I've brewed a few batches of wheat beer this summer and have been somewhat unsatisfied with the results. <snip> >The flavor however does not seem to have the character i've read it should. For example, there isn't really any bannana or clove-like flavors, and there seems to be a somewhat bitter aftertaste--also some smoke-like flavor. <snip> >Are the high fermentation temps. my problem? What do these 'Fusel Alcohols' and 'Esters' taste like? Well, I'm certainly not the Wheat beer expert Eric Warner is ;^), but I have made some pretty mean ones. The ferment temperature, I found, does effect the flavor, however, the smoky flavor you are describing reminds me of some porters I did. The smoke characters are phenols, and many of the smoky tasting ones are caused by wild yeasts ( particularly S. Cerevevesiae var. Bayanus)....I would check my sanitizing procedures. The wheat beers I did using #3068 were extremely tasty, with lots of banana and clove flavor, in fact my notes say, "...is very reminiscent of Spaten Club-Weisse ! ...." I fermented at 75 deg.F BTW...your mashing procedure seems allright, and I would surely point the finger at wild yeasts as the culprit. Hope this helps... Bob Zamites ( First Fire Brewing Co.), Santa Fe, NM **Current Offering: Apricot Cyser (not a beer, but what the hey?!) Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 16:31:12 -0600 From: "Bob Zamites" <bamzam at trail.com> Subject: Oh, yeah, I forgot BTW, fusel alcohols, to me, tasted like the smell of rubbing alcohol.....ecch! Bob Zamites (First Fire Brewing Co.) Santa Fe, NM Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 16:39:05 -0600 From: "Bob Zamites" <bamzam at trail.com> Subject: Teaching Brewing My next door neighbor makes great wine, but wants to make beer! I make great beer (IMHO) , but want to make wine -- it's a great exchange of info. The AHA really seems lame on this point of promoting homebrewing, but I am doing my part to get it going in my neck of the woods (besides, then if I'm out of brew, my neighbor will have some ;^) ) Do as Dwayne McKeel posted, "Teach a friend to brew" ! Bob Zamites (First Fire Brewing Co.) Santa Fe, NM Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 16:07:32 -0700 From: "Michel J. Brown" <homemade at spiritone.com> Subject: Sanitation There's been a lot of press lately on cleanliness, and on infections with processes and procedures to combat them. As a physician, and also a food technologist (my first career), I know of no foolproof or guaranteed route to success (something about royal routes to learning?) with keeping the good bugs happy, and the bad ones at bay. In the food industry, three types of sanitizers (one being an actual sterilizer) are currently in use. First, there is polyphosphoric acid, and at 5% concentration, not recommended for home use -- unless you don't like having fingernails ;^) Second, there is Iodophor, which when used at cold temperatures, 25ppm for 3~5 minutes makes for a good inexpensive alternative. I use it 4/5 of the time, and then use number three on the list of USDA approved agents. What could it be? (hint: it's in your kitchen, and you can make it up in seconds and it's NOT bleach). Give up? Try peracetic acid! I make it up all the time, and it works great, except that it will eat up your skin, so gloves are important!!! To make it up, get one pound of glacial acetic acid (99% acetic acid) and dilute to 10% in water -- remember to add acid to water, OK? Then add it to 3% hydrogen peroxide in a 1:3 ratio (i.e. 1/4 acetic acid to 3/4 H2O2) and use immediately as this stuff is unstable, and will deteriorate quickly. I use it at 0.25% for 3~5 minutes, and it kills all bugs I have in my brewery (mostly acetos and lactos) verified by gram and methylene blue staining. Try this stuff sometime, and let it no rinse air dry, and see if it makes a difference in your brewery. Drop me a line if you need help, or have problems. TTYAL! Dr. Michel J. Brown, D.C. {Portland, OR} 2222 miles due west of Jeff Renner homemade at spiritone.com http://www.spiritone.com/~homemade/index.html "In the field of observation, chance favors only the prepared mind" L. Pasteur Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 19:18:05 -0400 From: marli at bbs2.rmrc.net (Jon Macleod) Subject: women brewers? I've been kinda perplexed about the lack of women brewers too (in my own dumb guy sort of way). I certainly know plenty of women who drink beer. Many of them even like guys like us who brew it (although that narrows the field more). Here's the only idea I can come up with... Most brewing is done in 5 gallon batches. At some point, (regardless of equipment for most everyone) you've got to pick up the beer and move it. That means being able to routinely lift at least 40 to 50 pounds, without a good way to hold it. I know I grunt and groan a lot, maybe this is the barrier. I'll accept a flame from a woman, but you guys know about as much as I do. Mike Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 13:31:14 -0500 (CDT) From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com> Subject: Jim's post-Siebel post Jim writes: >One of the instructors at Siebels >went on about this at great lengths when I asked about Irish Moss. He >viewed it as a band aid approach for poor brewhouse techniques. In his >experince of brewing millions of barrels of beer he saw no need what so >ever. After making sure you have these two things covered. Then you can >worry about HSA. And if you bottle HSA goes way to the bottom of the list >becasue you need a really good low oxygen bottler more than you need to >worry about HSA. That "millions of barrels" experience suggests to me that he was brewing Industrial Light Lager (maybe not... maybe he was brewing in Germany). In Industrial Light Lager, one reason for the corn and rice is as a *protein dilutant*. Could it be that this instructors' view that Irish Moss is not needed be due to the fact that the American Industrial brewers handle protein reduction in a different way than we homebrewers? Now that I think of it, even the German brewers would find less use for IM... decoction mashes (yes, the more modern breweries are going to infusion and direct-heat mashing) extract a lot more polyphenols than we typically do (when we watch pH and sparge temp) and so they have a lot more protein reacting with polyphenols in the kettle. Finally, the long lagering times they use are partly needed for clarification. In my experience (and I did a series of side-by-side boils with varying amounts of Irish Moss), the correct amount of Irish Moss improves clarity and yeast flocculation *significantly*. According to my research, I believe that for refined, flaked Irish Moss, 1/4 teaspoon is proper amount for average-gravity extract beers and 1 teaspoon is the proper amount for average-gravity all-grain beers (per five gallons). Increased gravity means you need more. How many of those instructors and brewers at Industrial breweries have done side-by-side boils on all-malt worts with varying amounts of Irish Moss? My guess is none. For as much heat I'll probably get for questioning the accuracy of methods and information presented at Siebel, I say nobody's perfect (including me) and there is the possibility that those at Siebel using the Clinitest have not fully investigated the range of sugars that do and don't cause a positive reaction. I'll offer that if they had, they probably would not use it. As for measuring pH at room temperature, Jim presented several more "votes" for *not* compensating for change in pH with temperature. I've read it both ways in professional texts, so I'm still slightly confused as to how to interpret it when a book says "the pH should not be allowed to rise above 5.8 during the sparge." Do they mean 5.8 at 170F (which would be between 5.9 and 6.1 after cooling to 68F) or 5.8 at 68F? Let me ask you this, Jim: did you mention to them the fact that the pH is physically lower at higher temperatures and if you did, what did they say in response to that? Hell of a report... I'd like to hear even more! Al. Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL korz at xnet.com http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/ Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 21:57:33 -0400 From: "Ludwig's" <dludwig at us.hsanet.net> Subject: Fermenting in Cornies I'm going to try fermenting in a corny soon, but I'm sure going to miss watching the ferment. Thats the prime advantage of using a carboy. If you're just starting out, you owe it to yourself to use a carboy if only to observe the ferment. Simply fascinating! Dave Ludwig Flat Iron Brewery SO Md Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 21:58:00 -0400 From: "Mark Phillips" <phillipsmj at erols.com> Subject: Sierra Nevada Recipie I am looking for an authentic Sierra Nevada clone in a 10 gallon batch size. All the recipes I have found are for 5 gallons, and I don't want to give more life to the % grist by weight vs. % extract thread by just doubling the recipie. Any help appreciated. Hopfen und Malz, Gott erhalts! Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 98 20:29 PDT From: caburns at egusd.k12.ca.us (Charles Burns) Subject: PBW - ok for glass? In one of our local HB shops this afternoon I got a couple of "sample packs" of Five Star PBW. Says to use it "warm". HB shop dude says use 175F water if possible. My questions are: how long is it supposed to soak (2 min, 2 hours, 2 days????) and can I use it on glass carboys? The directions only say to dissolve one packet into 2-5 gallons of warm water. Charley Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 20:13:13 -0700 From: hollen at woodsprite.com Subject: Re: pitching temps >> Samuel Mize writes: >> From: hollen at woodsprite.com >> Subject: Pitching Temps??? >> >> Today ... my CF chiller only managed to cool the wort to 82F. >> Well, I pitched anyway. As normal, within an hour, I had activity in >> my blowoff hose. So, the higher than normal pitching temperature >> appears to have been OK for the yeast. SM> Sure, the yeast love it. They'll work fast and create many unusual SM> and exciting flavors for you, esters and higher alcohols, which is why SM> we usually try to pitch cooler. Thanks for the info. I agree that this can be the case, but as I was talking to a yeast biologist, he seemed to think that the period of high temperature would be so early in the life cycle, that any precursors to higher alcohols and esters would not yet be present. Since the wort cooled down soon after to the ambient temperature of 70F at which the bulk of the fermentation would occur, it most likely will not have off flavors. However, the proof to this theory will be in the tasting. Will keep all informed. dion - -- Dion Hollenbeck Email: hollen at woodsprite.com Home Page: http://woodsprite.com/hollen.html Brewing Page: http://hdb.org/hollen Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 21:36:26 -0600 From: David Elm <delm at cadvision.com> Subject: re: Wheat Beer flavor profile >Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 12:16:47 -0500 (CDT) >From: Tom Barnet <barnets at physics.auburn.edu> >Subject: Wheat Beer flavor profile >Hello all, > I've brewed a few batches of wheat beer this summer and have been >somewhat unsatisfied with the results. I've been employing a step-mash >procedure, with rests at 100F,122F,155F and 170F, followed by a thorough >sparge. I've made a starter with Wyeasts Weihenstephan yeast and have >had strong fermentation. The flavor however does not seem to have the >character i've read it should. For example, there isn't really any >bannana or clove-like flavors, and there seems to be a somewhat bitter >aftertaste--also some smoke-like flavor. I'm following the basic recipe in >Warner's book on german wheat beer. The fermentation temperature was >75-80F, and i'm wondering if this is the reason for the beers taste profile. >Warner suggests that these higher fermentation temps. result in >'Fusel Alcohols' and 'Esters'. I have know idea what that tastes like. >Are the high fermentation temps. my problem? What do these >'Fusel Alcohols' and 'Esters' taste like? thanks. tom barnett. I make a hefe weizen as follows: 70% wheat malt, 95,122,147,168F and primary fermentation at 70F with Wyeast 3068. Secondary can be at 70F or 45F in the winter. I suspect your main problem is the high fermentation temp. - --------------------------------------------------------------------------- David Elm delm at cadvision.com (403)932-1626 888-660-6035 fax:(403)932-7405 Box 7, Site 16, RR 2, Glendale Rd., Cochrane, Alberta, T0L 0W0, Canada Return to table of contents
Date: 30 Jul 98 00:40:36 MDT (Thu) From: rcd at raven.talisman.com (Dick Dunn) Subject: re: Perry David R. Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> wrote: > ...Dick > Dunn's excellent dissertation on Perry omitted what I consider to be > critical with pear fermentation and that is to treat every 5 gallons of > juice with 1/8 tsp of potassium metabisulfite immediately after pressing. Dave - I omitted it because I don't do it (and thus, *I* don't consider it to be critical). But YMMV and I grant that sulfiting *will* improve your odds against a failure. I don't do it because it's a step that I haven't found to be necessary (yet?!?). I'm curious about the amount, too. 1/8 tsp is approximately one Campden tablet. The usual recommended dose is 1 tablet per _gallon_ (not per 5). Not to argue for adding any excess of a chemical agent, but if you're going to use it, you need to use enough to do the job. And then again, on the other end of the scale, Correnty recommends _2_ tablets per gallon, which I think is really overkill. > Failure to do so or if at any time the juice is transferred will result in > what the Brits call "Pear Drops". We call it finger nail polish remover > aroma. Failure to sulfite *might* cause you problems. I'm not trying to argue against sulfiting; I'm just saying you don't need to be dogmatic about it. Oh, one more thing: If you do sulfite the juice, you need to wait about a day and then inoculate it with a yeast starter, since the sulfite is pretty good at killing off the natural yeast you might otherwise use. - --- Dick Dunn rcd at talisman.com Hygiene, Colorado USA ...Mr. Natural says, "Get the right tool for the job." Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 07:25:57 -0400 From: "Steve Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net> Subject: re:not re: better starter methods I asked for better starter methods. Alan Edwards responded that he had a simpler method. I critiqued the method and Alan responded indignantly. First - if Alan or anyone is happy with their product(beer) more power to them. I asked a very specific question about how to improve starters, not how to do a quick and easy job of it. A few points should be made however. >Actually, I said I have a *simpler* method. I said nothing about having >a better method. But the subject line may have made it look that way. You responded to my thread about a better method with a "re: better method" subject line. >> a 0.8L extract >> only starter should produce a marginal sized yeast crop at best. You'd be >> better off with 1+L for ales, 2L for lagers and some yeast nutrient that >> includes amino acids or an ammonia source. .. >If you say that 1.0L is fine for ales, then why must you put down my >"marginal" 0.8L? The difference in volume is insignificant; and not as >nearly as important as process. Commecial practice would require about a 2L starter for ales. 0.8L is marginal, particularly w/ extract which tend to be low in amino acids. I said 1+L would be better, not that 1L is adequate. If you have never tried adequate pitching levels don't knock it. >| I wanted to take this opportunity to show those of you who think making >| a starter is a hassle, that it doesn't have to be hard at all! We certainly agree here Alan - nearly any starter is better than no starter. And you method isn't particularly bad. It's just that I was asking about improved methods, not methods that match the standards of HB books from 10 years ago. >If you perfectionist types want to step up your starters four times I can taste the differnce Alan. That's the bottom line. Ad hominem attacks ('you perfectionists') just display that you can't support your point by evidence. Maybe you 'lazy types' should try a commecial sized starter for a change. >But what I'm saying is that you don't *have* to go to all that trouble ... >Two words: diminishing returns. We agree again, 75% of the advantage is available by stepping up to a 1qt starter, like yours. There is no doubt. Why leave the other 25% on the table ? >> You also didn't mention aerating/oxygenating >Acutally, I did. I said shake it until it foams Mea culpa - I missed that - tho' I'd suggest shaking rather vigorously, not gently. >I challenge your definition of "critical". I stated that oxygenation of a wort like yours is critical to attain adequate growth rates. I think we may be miscommunication here. The introduction of oxygen, by shaking, airstone or O2 injection is critical. Please review Tracey Aquilla's article on yeast in BT and the followup editorial letters between AlK and John Palmer for a review of the necessity of oxygen to yeast metabolism. ... >; but if I always make great beer, then isn't that "adequate"? Depends, could you make greater beer with a little more effort ? >> Pitching the dregs from several bottles of SNPA is also a formula for >> more serious underpitching problems. >Pitching the dregs of a few bottles of beer into an 0.8L starter *may* >be asking for problems;[...] In your original post it appeared that the footnote about pitching the dregs of a few SNPA was IN PLACE of creating a starter, which others have advocated here. Not as a method of creating a starter. >Take it or leave it. I'm leaving it Alan. Yours is a very conventional method of creating starters and similar methods and amounts have appeared in HB books for years. It's not particularly bad and it has huge advantages over no starter. Nothing wrong with repeating it on HBD - but it really wasn't a followup response to my thread - try to pick a new subject line. More important -Try a full sized nutrient added starter sometime - you might really like the result. Steve Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 06:23:27 +0000 From: Dan Ryan <kcmoryan at gvi.net> Subject: New Belgium Brewery Jim Busch provided information about the New Belgium Brewery's equipment . . . Fat Tire is, as he points out, their most popular, but, on a lark, I tried their Old Cherry Ale. Absolutely fantastic. Of course, I e-mailed the brewery with praise and requests for assistance in replicating the product, and received a very helpful and informative response from Brian Callahan, the production manager. He did not suggest firing up the soldering iron to make fermenters from triangular steel, though he did insist that extracts were not going to get me to my goal. Now, if the Canadians will send down enough cool air so that Kansas City becomes cool enough for brewing, I'll give it a cherry ale a try . . . Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 07:56:52 -0500 From: Results <results at win.bright.net> Subject: Brewery Finance 101 >>...about a year+ ago. At that time it was possible to contract >>brew beer for less than it cost A-B to produce !! > >I am sure this equation still holds. The small contract brewer doesn't >have AB's overhead sucking precious $ away from operating earnings. AB >has to pay all those accountants, financial analysts, HR folks, >researchers, etc. etc., just to produce one drop of beer. Ah, but the small brewer has to amortize all that depreciation over a very small amount of beer. It is true that we don't have all the other expenses, but our equipment cost per bbl and cost of ingredients is *way* larger than even the regionals... It gets to be real expensive and I don't think that this formula holds true; I know that my cost of production is above the wholesale price of our local regional. The reason that micro style beer is so expensive is a) there is more stuff in it and of better quality and b) there is less of it. You aren't going to see A-B putting out imperial stout... >>but still the point is that production capacity isn't the limiting >>factor in making a success in the beer market today. > >And this is the critical point. If you develop the distribution >channels you can then "expand it and they will come". Most micros seem >to do just the opposite, build the capacity and then try to find a home >for it. Some micros do this, yes. Summit is in this process now. You have somewhat of a chicken and egg problem here; it is hard to expand substantially. This can be seen with Summit. They had a largish facility (for a micro) and built a brand up. They then built huge and are now finding homes for the beer. You go in streaks that way. We are now in a similar situation. We had more capacity than market, now we have more market than capacity.. It'll be the other way around for awhile when we expand. The point here is exactly the same for us and Summit and A-B; all else being equal, marketing is everything - production capacity needs to reflect current and *future* markets. One of the major points overlooked here is that the *local* market is the major market for a micro. Once out of this market any micro is just another bottle on the shelf with a houndred other micros. This was the basis of the beer industry untill the likes of Miller and A-B started going national with advertizing. Once a micro attempts to do this, they are in the same boat as Miller and can build market only by advertizing right along with the big boys. > Rest assured that the megas do it because of $$$. And so, in the end, do micros.... Randy Lee Viking Brewing Company Dallas, WI http://www.wion.bright.net/~results Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 9:05:43 -0500 From: randy.pressley at SLKP.COM Subject: Conical Fermenters Has anyone ever used the plastic connical fermenter sold by Afordable Conical (http://members.aol.com/aconical/index.htm)? It's a 6.5 gallon fermenter which looks just like the ones the pro's use except it's plastic and little. Looks like it would take away the hassle of the secondary transfer. I'm a little concerned about using plastic, however. I also investigated in a gadget that can be used to make your glass carboy an inverted fermenter. I friend of mine bought one and said he did not like it because the yeast stuck to the glass. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 08:41:18 -0500 (CDT) From: Samuel Mize <smize at mail.imagin.net> Subject: Pitching temps - second thought Dion commented on pitching ale yeast at 82F, and Sam Mize replied that this was a little hot. What a maroon. It's warm for fermentation, but should be fine for pitching if the batch cools to fermentation temperature in a few hours. I haven't seen advice suggesting that an ale needs to be pitched cooler than that. Heck, *I* pitch at that kind of temp, so it *must* be right. Pitching a lager too hot, then cooling it rapidly, can "crash" the yeast into dormancy (I've heard), but cooling from 82F to 70F or so should not be a problem. Sorry, cerebral arhythmia. Best, Sam Mize - -- Samuel Mize -- smize at imagin.net (home email) -- Team Ada Fight Spam: see http://www.cauce.org/ \\\ Smert Spamonam Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 08:15:34 -0600 From: Cathy Ewing <cathy at aob.org> Subject: BrewU evaluation program Sam Mize wrote- >Is there any news on this? I assume they may have changed the name to >avoid conflict with "Brew U" in Houston. I'm interested in actual >announcements, inside info, speculation, slander BrewU has been holding a few classes at various organized events - like a festival/homebrewing event in Anchorage Alaska, the National Homebrewers Conference and various regional events - specifically geared toward providing more in-depth information about various beer styles. This was just one piece of our original plan. The other piece includes self-study guides and guides for people to teach classes. We have contracted to have these completed twice and both writers were unable to complete the project. So, we are trying to contract with writer #3. There is an AHA committee who is planning to oversee development of the project, but again, without the person to build the guides there hasn't been a lot to develop. If your interested in being on the committee and are an AHA member or know someone who is contact Paul Gatza at paulg at aob.org. >Also, please let me know if it's OK for me to forward your comments >to other interested parties (if any). Definately okay. Cheers! Cathy Ewing - -- Cathy Ewing Vice President Association of Brewers (303) 447-0816 x 120 (voice) 736 Pearl Street (303) 447-2825 (fax) PO Box 1679 cathy at aob.org (e-mail) Boulder, CO 80306-1679 info at aob.org (aob info) U.S.A. http://beertown.org (web) Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 09:09:30 -0500 (CDT) From: Samuel Mize <smize at mail.imagin.net> Subject: Dan Cole's BYO discussion; speling/spellling; force carb technique Dan Cole asks: > Has anyone seen my discussion with the editor in BYO magazine > regarding the validity of HSA? Am I wrong, or is he giving bad advice re: > splashing of hot wort? With no prejudice toward either magazine or its readers, I think this is more a Brewing Techniques crowd. Can you summarize? - - - - - - - - - - Spelling: the style was named when a warrior had a few, then went to practice and saw three target poles instead of one. So the correct spelling is tri-pell. You see, the poles they use for practice are called pells. Never mind. Hi, Badger. - - - - - - - - - - Marc Battreall writes a testimonial paen about a force carbonating technique, then writes: > Get your copy of this procedure at Robert's web page at: > http://www.calweb.com/~robertac/carb.htm Could you summarize it, or get permission to copy it to HBD? Web pages come and go, HBD is archived. Best, Sam Mize - -- Samuel Mize -- smize at imagin.net (home email) -- Team Ada Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 10:22:38 -0400 From: "Anton Verhulst" <verhulst at zk3.dec.com> Subject: simplest force carbonation Every body seems to have the simplest way of force carbonating - so here's mine: I rack straight from the fermentor into the keg, hook up the CO2 line, and go away. That's it! After a week the sediment has setled to the bottom and the beer is fully carbonated and ready to tap. The keg is completely unmodified (dip tube not cut) so the first half glass has sediment and is discarded. After that, it's clear beer the whole way. - --Tony V Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 07/31/98, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96