HOMEBREW Digest #2815 Thu 03 September 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: The most disgusting brew story ever. (Scott Murman)
  Starter ("David Hill")
  chimay (Brad Railsback)
  Re:Oatmeal stout (Rod Schaffter)
  Automatic Roller Mill, Filtering, Sensory Evaluation Workshop (Steve Potter)
  Moisture in grains (Christophe Frey)
  Storage of yeast slants? ("Marc Battreall")
  Re: Hops and light ("John A. MacLaughlin")
  Chest Freezer Questions (John E Carsten)
  Re: Film on your porter ("Greg Lorton")
  flow rate of wort vs. water (Hans_Geittmann)
  10 Gallon Fermenter or Demijohn (Bradd Wheeler)
  Old Brewing Procedures (George_De_Piro)
  oxygenation rates (JPullum127)
  Force Carbonating / CO2 Scrubbing (sbgr)
  Carbonation with yeast, microlight source, fermenter film ("David R. Burley")
  Film on your beer & Microscope light sources (Dave Johnson)
  Harvesting Hops (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
  Iodophor (Paul Niebergall)
  J. Kish's post on film being a contaminant (Jonathan Edwards)
  Liquid Malt Exract in Starters ("30hollywood")
  Alt hopping schedule (Al Korzonas)
  Re: old bench cappers (Richard Gardner)
  re: lightstrike/lauter rates/crunchy protein (Lou.Heavner)
  Near Disaster (Jack Schmidling)

Let a good beer be the exclamation point at the end of your day as every sentence deserves proper punctuation... 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: Tue, 1 Sep 1998 22:54:17 -0700 (PDT) From: Scott Murman <smurman at best.com> Subject: Re: The most disgusting brew story ever. > a MILL crushed coackroach floating in my Mash!! > > Jon Cockroaches supply protein and filter material. They're far more desirable than the usual bees and moths. You're one lucky dog. SM Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 17:01:15 +1000 From: "David Hill" <davidh at melbpc.org.au> Subject: Starter Question the first If word for a starter that has been aerated by vigorous shaking is then sealed in bottle and sterilised in autoclave, pressure cooker or canner is the effective aeration affected by the process? I suspect not, because the oxygen has no where to go unless some of the components of the wort are oxidised in the heating process.? . Question the second Where in a starter at high krausen are the majority of the yeast that we desire for pitching? In the foam? In the liquor ? In the sediment? in other words should one carefully decant off the supernatant and then just pitch the sediment/cake or should one give the lot a good swirl and pitch everything? . many thanks for the groups' wisdom . David Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 03:10:03 -0700 (PDT) From: Brad Railsback <rails2bier at yahoo.com> Subject: chimay Greetings from Holland! Here you can buy Chimay , La Trappe and Westmalle beers in the grocery stores. Chimay blue is usually around $1.40 or so, which explains why I haven't been homebrewing here yet. Also they don't heat the stores while they are closed(they don't have 24 hour shopping and the stores by law must close at 8:00 PM, which is a great improvement in the last year as it used to be 6:00 PM) so most of the time the Trappist beers are almost the perfect temp to drink right from the store. I've found that usually the Trappist and some other(Hoegaarden Gran Cru comes to mind) beers will foam excessively until they settle down after a rest of a day or so. Of course I might shake it up more as I ride my bike to the store. I think MJ in one of his pocket guides said to let the Gran Cru rest a few days. I'll look when I get home and find out what exactly he says. I've found that you just had to let the foam settle before drinking the beer if you want to drink it right away. Of course I don't mind the foam as much when it cost me less for a bottle of Chimay than a bud in a bar in America costs(not that I'd buy one, next time I go to the store I'll check the price of US Bud and compare it to Chimay). If I had paid $4 for a bottle I'm sure I'd have a different opinion. I must go now, I have a couple of bottles of Andecks Dunkel I hear yelling, come drink me! I hope this has been of help to everyone and not a repeat as I haven't had time to read HBD in the last 10 days. Brad Railsback Brad's Bier Tours and Research Leiden, The Netherlands _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free at yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 1998 08:13:31 -0400 From: Rod Schaffter <schaffte at delanet.com> Subject: Re:Oatmeal stout Doug wrote: > Charles Beaver wrote: > > >>I am contemplating making an oatmeal stout in the next few weeks. > >>As aveteran single step infusion masher I and wondering if it is > >> a*mandatory* that I include a protein rest. > > In a word, no. > > The main purpose of a protein rest is to break down large molecular weight > proteins that may lead to haze. As oatmeal stout is a very dark beer, even > if haze is present, it shouldn't be visible. A recent BT (Oct 97, I think) article on adjuncts said that a rest was needed to avoid stuck sparges. My only experience with oatmeal stout was a partial mash, which was a bear to sparge (but great to drink!), but that may have been due to incomplete conversion. Any comments from the veteran "oatheads" amoung us? Cheers, Rod Schaffter PS. Message to very serious thin-skinned people: oathead is not intended as an insult-it is a joke. We return you to your regularly scheduled program already in progress. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 1998 08:10:19 -0500 From: Steve Potter <spotter at meriter.com> Subject: Automatic Roller Mill, Filtering, Sensory Evaluation Workshop Dear Collective, I just received my new Williams Brewing Catalogue. (No financial interest - -- just a veeeery occasional customer) In it were two items that I thought were of interest -- a new (to me anyway) brand of roller mill and a new plate fillter for beer. Question one - Does anyone have any experience with the homebrew size mill from the Automatic Equipment Company? It appears to be stainless steel with two 1 1/2 by 6 inch rollers. The second roller is friction driven (no gears) and it has sintered brass bearings. Having been burned with a Glatt mill, I really want someone who has given the mill hard use to tell me what they think. Question Two - Does anyone have experience with the plate filter Williams is offering? (Yes I know that filtering can remove IBUs and body, but I can compensate in formulation...and I would only filter for competitions anyway) They say that it holds up to 5 psi pressure, filters a five gallon batch in about an hour, and only wastes about 12 oz of beer. They offer two filter pads - one medium and one fine. Any idea of the pore size ratings on these? What are the advantages of a plate filter over a cartridge filter? Lastly, are any HBDers going to attend the Milwaukee Area Technical College Sensory Evaluation Workshop on September 12? It will be presented by Dennis Davidson (President of the BJCP) and Laurel Maney (past commercial brew, consultant, brewing educator and occasional HBD contributer). I will be helping pass out samples, so I have been given a peek at the class outline. One part that I am looking forward to is the tasting segment where students will have the opportunity to discover what their personal tasting thresholds are for various flavor components including diacetyl, lactic acid and DMS. After the class students usually grab a late lunch and a few brews at a Milwaukee brewpub. If anyone is interested in attending, e-mail me for further details. (No affiliation -- just a satisfied customer of a previous class) Return to table of contents
Date: 02 Sep 1998 10:06:09 -0400 From: Christophe Frey <cfrey at ford.com> Subject: Moisture in grains to: post@hbd.org Recently I have noticed that a few of the grain bags that I opened over the last six months are absorbing moisture. I usually bag them in large trash bags, but I have gotten lazy lately and now I am wondering, can I/should I use these grains? I assume I can, but if I do, what are the downside consequences? Also, what are people doing who store a lot of different grains? The basement is my only true choice, and even with the dehumidifier running 24/7, there is excess moisture present.I purchase 50-55 lbs bags, so tupper wear doesn't real ly cut it and lining up 8-10 garbage cans probably wouldn't be too feasible either. Sincerely, Chris P. Frey Strategic Planning & New Product Development 337-1642 chris.frey-ford at e-mail.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 10:14:57 -0400 From: "Marc Battreall" <batman at terranova.net> Subject: Storage of yeast slants? Hello all, Just wanted to ask for some guidance and see if anyone has tried this before with good results. I have an extensive yeast bank (some 40+ strains) stored on malt agar borosilicate glass test tubes with screw tops. Up until now I have been storing them in baggies in the refrigerator at approximately 40-42F. I have 3 refrigerators and a deep freezer dedicated to brewing and fermenting and whatnot and this particular refrig stays at that temperature pretty much constantly because this is the one I use for serving out of with my Corny kegs and tap system. The other two have thermostats and are constantly changing temps for lagering and fermenting and the like and are not conducive to yeast storage because of the constant changing temperatures. The deep freezer is used for flash cooling of wort and Cornies prior to force carbonating them. I would love to set it up for lagering and storage but my wife thinks it is supposed to be used to store food! (Goofy girl!!) I want to lower the temperature at which I store my yeast bank at to about 34F as per what I have read regarding this issue and was contemplating the following set up: Place the slants upright in a slant rack and house the rack inside of a Tupperware container in the freezer. I set a thermometer inside the freezer section of the refrigerator I want to use and in the deep freeze for a half hour and the temperature was around 12-14F. I don't know if the slants will gain any insulating properties by being stored inside the container and maintain a slightly higher temp or if they will eventually settle down to the same temp as the freezer. Maybe some foam insulation? I know that yeast will be damaged and more than likely killed if it is below freezing temps unless it has been treated with glycol or something. I had a Wyeast pack that accidentally froze solid once and it was wasted. It is my understanding that the yeast's cell walls actually rupture there by killing them. But would this be the case of yeast cells merely "resting atop" gelled malt agar as opposed to sitting in frozen liquid wort? And if so, what could I do to insulate the slants to maintain around 34F without actually adjusting the temp of the entire refrigerator unit? Anyone ever heard of adding a glycol solution to gelled malt agar? I have read a few articles on storing yeast slurries in solutions of distilled water and glycol or glycerin (don't remember which one it was) at freezing temps for up to a year and was wondering if this is a similar procedure and could be adapted to slants? Any help or testimony will be greatly appreciated. Thanks and Have A Hoppy Day! Marc ======================= Captain Marc Battreall Backcountry Brewhouse Islamorada, Florida batman at terranova.net captainbrew at hotmail.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 10:17:47 -0400 From: "John A. MacLaughlin" <jam at clark.net> Subject: Re: Hops and light In HBD #2813 William Graham <weg at rmi.net> asks about packaging wild hops. I'd like to make a small addition to the responses of others in HBD #2314. Whenever packaging any hops it is worthwhile to take care to keep the outside of the packages clean so you can perform a very simple test of the adequacy of the seal: the next day after freezing the packages, take them out and sniff them. If you can smell the hops you need a better seal. An additional bag may be sufficient but I recommend a glass jar with a seal in its lid; a canning jar for example, or some honey jars are sufficient. - -------------------- In HBD #2813 "Mike Butterfield" <XPBRMB at sugar.org.za> asks about the effect of strong light on yeast. My understanding is that the problem is not with the yeast but with the hops. Charlie Papazian ('. . . Companion,' p. 400) claims that strong light around 520 nm can change some hop compounds to the odoriferous substances we associate with skunks and Corona. This suggests that exposing hopped wort to strong light before, during, or after fermentation is hazardous unless you like Corona. I infer that unhopped wort is not subject to this particular hazard. Return to table of contents
Date: 02 Sep 1998 09:43:38 -0500 From: John E Carsten <John.E.Carsten at oklaosf.state.ok.us> Subject: Chest Freezer Questions I purchased a used chest freezer last night (big sucker, like 21 cubic feet). I have finally begun brewing in enough volume that my spare refrigerator will not hold it all. I have a temperature control on it, (the dial kind, where you plug the freezer to it, then plug the controller into the wall). I have two concerns: 1. Last night, I set the controller at 60F, laid my meat thermometer at the bottom of the freezer and let everthing go. When I checked it this morning, although the controller was set at 60F, the thermometer read 40F. The controller worked fine a couple of weeks ago when I used it on my fridge, so there shouldn't be a problem there. Since there is no place to blow cold air into the freezer (like with the fridge), I'm assuming that the source of cold is from something just under the freezer surface. I'm also assuming that just like an electric oven's filament actually gets several degrees hotter than the temperature dialed into it, the freezer probably cools several degrees beyond set temperature, in order to maintain the set temp. So I guess this isn't a question, I'm just looking for a little corroboration here. I've put the thermometer off the surface of the freezer to see if the air temperature (since that's what the controller is reading) is somewhere in the desired temperature range. Is this correct? And how do I solve my problem with the freezer surface getting much colder than desired? Should I rest the carboys on something? (2x4s?) 2. This concern really is a question. When I felt the area near the compressor this morning, and the outside wall of the freezer on the side opposite of the freezer, they were both quite warm to the touch. Is this normal? Since I spent $175 and have a 30 day guarantee, I would appreciate any hints, suggestions, answers, etc. asap. Private e-mail works for me. Thanks John Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 08:47:21 -0700 From: "Greg Lorton" <glorton at cts.com> Subject: Re: Film on your porter Joe Kish responded to Peter Perez's question about a film on his (Peter's) porter by saying it was produced by acetobacter, and that ultimately Peter should nuke his beer and his equipment. Then Pat said "Whoa!" It could be something else, especially if it doesn't smell like vinegar. Don't pour the beer out yet! I just got done reading "Lambic" book of the Beer Styles books, and Jean-Xavier Guinard talks about a couple of yeasts (Brettanomyces, Candida, and Pichia) that produce a "pellicle" (film) on the surface of the beer. Brettanomyces contributes a "horsey" character, and the others reportedly add some esters, adding to the fruity character of the beer. Lambic brewers NEVER break the film. It supposedly protects the beer from oxidation. If Peter's film is one of these yeasts, it probably won't have a bad influence on the beer, on the other hand, it may make it more complex and interesting. I think I read somewhere that historically the yeasts for these ales contained a bit of Brettanomyces anyway. Greg Lorton Carlsbad, CA not a microbiologist, just naively believing everything I read! Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 10:17:05 -0600 From: Hans_Geittmann at notes.seagate.com Subject: flow rate of wort vs. water John Schnupp asks: My question: I know that wort is *thicker* than water and will have a different flow rate. Is there an easy correlation between water and wort? I know the tubing material will also play into this but I'm looking for general guidelines. If it took water 4 min/gallon, what will be the flow for wort? Most of my brews are in the 1.050-1.060 (FAG) range. John, IMHO, learn to use the ball valve to control your flow rate. Reynolds number (and thus viscosity) is likely to have a very small effect on the flow rate in a system like yours (especially if the wort is at 150F, viscosity decreases with temperature, for liquids). If you want to scale your data, start with a linear relationship between specific gravity and time to pour out a gallon- if your water flow rate is 1gpm, then for 1.050 wort you might expect 1.05gpm (a whopping 1.2 second difference to pour 1 gallon of water if your wort is at room temperature, even less at mash temps). The parameters that will make the biggest difference in flow rate are 1) ball valve position 2) liquid level in mash tun- your flow rate decreases as liquid level decreases. 3) diameter of tubes used for your plumbing (smaller tubes, lower flow rate) 4) length of tubes used for your plumbing (longer tubes, lower flow rate) I would concentrate on #1 since you've already got the other equipment. Hans - -- Hans Geittmann Seagate Technology Hans_Geittmann at notes.seagate.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 12:29:03 -0700 (PDT) From: Bradd Wheeler <braddw at rounder.com> Subject: 10 Gallon Fermenter or Demijohn In my search for the perfect fermentation vessel for 10 gallon batches I've come across a 46L plastic carboy from the folks at www.wineart.com Does anyone have experience with this particular item, or have access to a more suitable vessel for fermenting 10 gallon batches? TIA ......... - Bradd Wheeler Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 12:48:51 -0700 From: George_De_Piro at berlex.com Subject: Old Brewing Procedures Hi all, Badger writes in with questions about an old brewing procedure that he posted: - grind your grain, and set to boil your mash water - put half of your grain in your mash vessel - pour bit by bit "with scoops or pails" the boiling liquor over the malt, and stir - add rest of malt - let stand for an hour or more - "let the first liquor run gently from the malt" - put into boiling vessel, and add hops - boil for an hour or more - drain through a sieve to catch hops - cool overnight - pitch Ale Barm (yeast essentially) Badger is wondering what will happen to the enzymes when using this procedure. Modern brewers avoid overheating the mash. Why is this? Enzymes are irreversibly destroyed (denatured) when overheated. The procedure Badger describes will destroy a fair amount of the enzymes in the malt because of localized heating where the boiling water meets the malt. Alpha amylase is the most sturdy of the enzymes that are useful to brewers, and is likely to be the dominant amylase at the end of mash-in. This means that the wort will be fairly dextrinous and the final gravity of the beer would be high (if using a pure brewing strain). If too little malt was used the mash temperature would be so high that even a-amylase will be rapidly denatured, yielding a starchy wort. Such a wort would be *very* unfermentable with a pure brewing culture. So if the procedure Badger posted is so potentially damaging to the beer, why did they do it this way? Thermometers weren't invented until the 18th century, and were not in every household until many years after. The easiest and most reliable way to get some saccharification to occur was to heat a specific volume of water to a point that could be consistently measured without a thermometer (boiling) and mash in a specific amount of grain so that the temperature ends up somewhere near the saccharification range. Beers of old were likely to be phenolic, sour, etc. If a modern brewer is going to try recreating historical beers pure yeast cultures should not be used (especially if one is trying to recreate ancient homebrew). The highly dextrinous (and possibly starchy) worts of yesteryear could be attenuated by wild yeasts and bacteria. Some wild organisms produce quite agreeable flavors (as modern Lambic demonstrates). You could get lucky. I'm sure the best brewers of old were the ones that just happened to be microbiologically fortunate. As an interesting side note, there is a reproduction of an old illustration in Cindy Renfrow's _A Sip Through Time_ which shows the "yeastman" going from door to door with buckets of yeast hoisted over his shoulders. They are not covered. What do you think the beer brewed from that stuff tasted like? Why do you think lagers took the world by storm when the first pure yeast strains were isolated and used in breweries? Have fun! George de Piro (Nyack, NY) Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 13:05:48 EDT From: JPullum127 at aol.com Subject: oxygenation rates i have been following the wort oxygenation thread closely but haven't seen any flow rates mentioned. my setup can deliver 2-10 liters a minute through the filter. anyone have suggestions on what the best flow and timing would be for 5 gallons of wort? thanks Return to table of contents
Date: 2 Sep 98 13:09:00 -0400 From: sbgr at cbmsmail.cb.lucent.com Subject: Force Carbonating / CO2 Scrubbing All, I am interested in connecting my CO2 line (with a liquid out fitting) to the liquid out fitting on my keg when force carbonating. (this was suggested along with other methods in thread a short while ago) I have a question concerning bubbling CO2 through the beer like this when the beer has some ingredients with fairly mild aromatic properties. (specifically raspberries or vanilla beans). I add these ingredients to the secondary to protect the aromas from being scrubbed out by the CO2 of primary fermentation. Will this brief, but substantial, blast of gas through the beer perform CO2 scrubbing similar to that of primary fermentation? Thanks, Stacy Groene Columbus, OH Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 13:17:48 -0400 From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: Carbonation with yeast, microlight source, fermenter film HBDers, Matthew Arnold says: "I've had some problems with #1338 overcarbonating when I was bottle conditioning. Now with kegging, I find that I rarely even have to force carbonate with #1338! Yes, the fermentation was complete and if anyone suggests using a certain product that begins with "C," I'm going to throw them under a camel. Well, I would suggest Clinitest, if this is a persistent problem, to find out if you ARE waiting long enough to finish out the fermentation. You never know what you might learn when ignore narrow minded peoples' denigrations. Nevertheless, it sounds to me like #1338 may be continuing to ferment (as you want it to) even after you bottle it. Often low carbonation (opposite to you) is a result of not having enough active yeast in the bottle and that's why I suggest using the "kraeusening" starter method (made from beer and yeast from the secondary, malt extract and priming sugar )to which I have often referred. ( archives) This method guarantees an active yeast colony and rapid, smooth and dependable carbonation. The present method used by most bottlers is dependent on the strain of yeast ( viability) and the length of time in the secondary ( flocculation and settling) carboy. If you upped your priming sugar based on past experience with other yeast, then you may have gone too high. As far as the beers made with higher apparent carbonation in the fermented unbottled beer, I have also noticed that this is common with ales and suspect it has to do with the composition of the wort/beer. I have also had this problem when the beer wasn't quite finished and no amount of degassing would allow me to get a decent hydrometer reading. It may be that your beers aren't finished because you have a very flocculent yeast. "Any thoughts on this, or is it all a product of my non-technical mind?" If you have a flocculant yeast your beers may not be finishing ( despite a constant hydrometer reading) until you stir them up during priming. This would also explain why you observe such a large amount of carbon dioxide in the beer and excess carbonation in bottling- it is not quite finished and is still slowly fermenting. Try rousing (stir up the yeast or rack all of the beer - including the yeast) the beer about three days into the ferment and see if these conditions go away. - ----------------------------------------------------- George DePiro asks for suggestions for a light source for his microscope. A 75 watt light bulb is too disperse and too large to suit his purposes. When I was about 6 -8 years old I had a microscope which used a light bulb with a magnifying lens on it. It was a small bulb like seen in those penlights. Maybe you can try a penlight and see if that is sufficient light and rig something up from there. Also, maybe you could go to an auto supply shop and use a modified tail light and a lantern battery. Or try using a magnifying lens or ( shaving) mirror and the 75 watt bulb - ------------------------------------------- J. Kish says: '"To: Peter Perez The thin film on your porter is a contaminant, the dreaded Acetic Acid Bacteria,"Acetobacter". It's the same stuff that turns wine into wine vinegar. Your beer will slowly get sour. If you ever wanted to make Kosher Dill Pickles, you need that bacteria to get it to sour." Actually Kish is wrong on both accounts: 1) It is unlikely that that coating is actobacter, since it needs oxygen.Peter has just completed his fermentation and his fermenter should be full of CO2. Probably this is just a little yeast which rose to the surface. Don't worry about it. Most of all don't do anything about it. 2) Dill pickling and Sauerkraut are lactic fermentations - not acetobacter. The vinegar used to preserve the pickles is produced by acetobacter or by a big chemical plant.. - ------------------------------------------------------ Keep on Brewin' Dave Burley Kinnelon, NJ 07405 Dave_Burley at Compuserve.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 1998 14:10:59 -0400 From: Dave Johnson <djohnso at OPIE.BGSU.EDU> Subject: Film on your beer & Microscope light sources Greeting brewers, Pete Perez relates the presence of white film on his beer and Some Guy (nuttin wrong with plaid) advises to wait it out....sage advice. A few weeks ago, I too noticed a white film with large (up to golf ball size) bubbles in a clearing carboy, expletives followed. Since I play a biologist in real life, I grabbed my trusty turkey baster and took a sample that included a good portion of the film. I slapped that puppy under the scope and sure-as-shooting, bacilliform bacteria....DAMN!! Well, it smelled and tasted fine (I've had acetic acid and phenolic bacter infections before), so I just let it go. The film eventually disappeared and I proceeded to fine as usual. I tasted it again just a few min. ago and its a clear fine tasting pale ale thingie, which I will bottle tomorrow night. Pete, I wish you the same luck as I had. - ------------------- George De Piro laments the expense of quality micro- scope light sources and wonders about an alternative to his current set up. Unfortunately, quality coherent light is expensive and unavoidable, no matter the source. As an alternative to his current set up, I suggest replacing the soft white bulb with a full spectrum incandescent bulb...also known as a Grow Light. This should make some improvement in what you see at mags lower than 1000X (I assume its a 10X ocular lens and 100X objective lens). In order to get enough light through the condensor to make 1000x mags useable, a light source designed for microscopes is pretty much required. However in the current situation, if the light mirror is 2-sided, one side is likely flat and the other side slightly parabolic, using the parabolic side, lots of tweeking of the mirror, raising the condensor to its highest position, tweeking the aperature, and using a full sprectrum light may offer some improvement. As a rule of thumb, maximum light with a smaller aperature provides the best contrast. It is REALLY cool to peep into the world where our beloved yeastie beasties hang out!! I hope something above can pull the curtain back a bit further. Report back on improve- ments, please? Regards, - -- Dave Johnson aka Tall Dave djohnso at opie.bgsu.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 14:55:06 -0400 (EDT) From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker at welchlink.welch.jhu.edu> Subject: Harvesting Hops Greetings all, I have a question for those of you growing your own hops. This is my first season attempting to grow hops. While my Mount Hood and Perle bines did not flower this year I do have one very nice Liberty plant that is laden with cones. My question has to do with how to go about harvesting. The flowers began appearing/maturing from the lower part of the plant and proceeded upwards. It seems to me that many of the lower cones are ready for picking (as per published descriptions - they are light, papery, spring back when compressed, the internal strig snaps when the cones are bent..) However, as you go up the vine there is a definite gradient in maturity, in fact new flowers are budding at the very tips. So, how does one handle this? Should I harvest a section at a time? I certainly don't want to assay each cone seperately!! Is it better to harvest too early or too late? 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: Wed, 02 Sep 1998 14:12:06 -0500 From: Paul Niebergall <pnieb at burnsmcd.com> Subject: Iodophor Brewsters, The information comes from the oldest (and one of the most respected) home brew shops in the our area. In a newsletter that was recently issued, it was stated that Iodopher doesn't work in an alkali soution (specifically above a pH of 8.5). Tartaric acid was recommended to lower th pH of the Iodophor solution. Has anyone else ever heard of this. It kind of makes me worry since my tap water is usually above pH of 9. On an unrelated issue, has anyone else received an unsolicited email from Jessica Olson at brewing techniques <Jessica at brewtech.com> advertising their special subscrition rate. I sure hope that BT isn't in the practice of culling email addresses from the HBD. Paul Niebergall Kansas City Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 16:18:07 -0400 From: Jonathan Edwards <jdedward at us.ibm.com> Subject: J. Kish's post on film being a contaminant >Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1998 22:01:45 -0700 >From: "J. Kish" <jjkish at worldnet.att.net> >Subject: Film On Your Porter >To: Peter Perez > The thin film on your porter is a contaminant, the >dreaded Acetic Acid Bacteria,"Acetobacter". It's the same >stuff that turns wine into wine vinegar. Your beer will >slowly get sour. If you ever wanted to make Kosher Dill >Pickles, you need that bacteria to get it to sour. > I don't know if pasteurizing would kill the bacteria. >You could try racking the porter through your wort chiller >but with very hot water instead of cold water. > You will have to go through a super-sanitizing process on >all of your equipment. whoa! joe! how can you pronounce peter's beer infected unless you are actually there sniffing and tasting it? or better yet running labortory tests on it? from my experience, i've seen film on my brews that had me worried but they've always turned out great. even with 3+ months of aging. how you can not only pronounce it infected but identify the culprit is beyond me. my advice to peter, ignore joe's ravings and let your beer age. smell it, taste it. if it tastes okay and smells okay, bottle/keg it. chances are it's okay. jonathan Joe Kish Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 16:22:53 -0400 From: "30hollywood" <30hollywood at email.msn.com> Subject: Liquid Malt Exract in Starters How much liquid malt extract do you use in a starter from a Wyeast pack? How much water? I have always used DME but have extra liquid. Mr. Sammy Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 15:37:44 -0500 (CDT) From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com> Subject: Alt hopping schedule Chuckm writes: >In the latest issue of Zymurgy there is an article on Alt. I was interested >in the hopping schedule. Bittering hops as usual, flavoring hops added when >heat turned off, and then aroma hops added after wort has cooled to 180 >degrees F. > >This is a new twist to me. Has anyone else used this schedule? Is this >typical/unique for Alt? I'm not caught up on reading HBDs and someone may already have posted on this, but I cannot contain myself on this topic. I also know that I should not be posting while emotionally charged, so I'll try to be brief so I don't say too much of the wrong things. I feel that both the book Altbier and the Altbier article by Horst Dornbush are extremely misleading, self-contradictory and are counterproductive to the betterment of Altbier homebrewing and presumably commercial microbrewing. Chuckm has noted but one inconsistency in the article, namely that few Altbiers have much hop flavour or aroma (only the Sticke variant of Duesseldorfer Altbiers has any hop aroma) yet the author's recommened recipes call for both flavour and aroma hops! There are numerous similar inconsistencies in both the book and the article, the latter being nothing more than a distillation of the former's misinformation. In the text he claims that dark and crystal malts are used sparingly if at all, yet in the recipes he uses crystal malt in every one and as much as a POUND of crystal malt in what he calls his "Altstadt Altbier" (Old Town Altbier)! My most credible clone of Zum Uerige is about 89% (8 pounds for 5 gallons) Weyermann Dark Munich, 11% DeWolf-Cosyns Aromatic (1 pound for 5 gallons), 50 IBUs as Spalt hops (I think it was 3 ounces, but check with a reputable formula) added at the beginning of the boil and Wyeast #1338 European Ale (NOT the over-attenuative and poorly-flocculating Wyeast #1007 German Ale the author suggests). Every authentic Altbier I've tasted and all my experience with Altbiers is in direct disagreement with the recipe section of the book. I critically tasted a half-dozen Altbiers made in and around the Altstadt of Duesseldorf and I feel that the most traditionals ones (the ones that score the highest in Jackson's book, also) taste as if they are virtually all Munich malt with possibly just a touch of very dark malt. NO crystal and the base malt is MUNICH... NOT 2-ROW! I urge everyone to be wary of the recipes and guidelines presented in this article and the book "Altbier" from whence this article was extracted. Can you tell I'm passionate about Altbier (and thank goodness I got through this without any name calling... whew!)? Al. Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL korz at xnet.com http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/ Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 21:23:45 -0500 (CDT) From: Richard Gardner <rgardner at monarch.papillion.ne.us> Subject: Re: old bench cappers If all else fails, bench cappers are good collectables. Here in the plains states, they go for $10-15 usually and I have a row of them on my chimney mantle (5 - get lots of questions, what are those? ANS: prohibition....not as complete as you think...). They also work relatively well. My modern capper won't work on champagne bottle (mead), but the antiques will. I've looked at numerous antiques pricing guides and have yet to find on with significant discussion on cappers (a market?). Some need a rubber grommet/washer on the inside that is guaranteed to have turned to dust by now. In small town antique stores I ask for "root beer cappers," the nom de guerre. Does anyone know of a decent guide to these great collectables? Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 20:52:46 -0500 From: Lou.Heavner at frco.com Subject: re: lightstrike/lauter rates/crunchy protein Steve Mansfield <steve at nw.verio.net> writes: >>>>> > From: "Mike Butterfield" <XPBRMB at sugar.org.za> > > I am a beginner brewer, and have been following the yeast thread with > interest. One more question - there has been a lot posted about > oxygenation, yeast growth etc, but what about light ? Does light affect yeast > growth, and should brewing be done in the dark, or is it OK to have a > glass fermentation vessel standing in sunlight? I havent seen anything on > this in the texts I have read. My understanding is not that it will affect the yeast so much, but that there are other chlorophyll-based bits in the wort, which can react to sunlight and produce off-flavors. I have always kept my carboys covered with either a blanket or a cardboard box to keep light away. <<<<< I believe those chlorophyll-based bits are hops. After hops have been boiled in wort some of the hop compounds are converted to a form that reacts undesirably to light. Hence the term lightstruck. In a starter, whether hops are used or not, it probably isn't an issue. In a full fermenter with hopped wort, light is bad! just like it is in bottled beer. Hence the expression "greatest thing since canned beer" (cans are usually opaque to light). ;) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- John_E_Schnupp at amat.com writes: {snip} >>>>> My question: I know that wort is *thicker* than water and will have a different flow rate. Is there an easy correlation between water and wort? I know the tubing material will also play into this but I'm looking for general guidelines. If it took water 4 min/gallon, what will be the flow for wort? Most of my brews are in the 1.050-1.060 (FAG) range. <<<<< While wort may be thicker, I think the bigger difference in testing your system is the effect of the grain-based filter bed. That will do more to restrict your flow than the piping diameters you mention. I think I'd look for a smaller valve than 1/2" at any rate. If you have an espresso maker, try this: 1)brew water with no coffee, 2) brew with conventional grind coffee, 3) brew with espresso grind, 4) compare the flow rate. It will be very clear. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon bovard <jonbovard at geocities.com> writes: {snip} >>>>> As i stirred the mash something darted over the grain bed again, I stopped and fished it out. NOW ive stumbled upon some preety sick things on the NET but none as foul as a MILL crushed coackroach floating in my Mash!! {snip} Oh by the way, I kept brewing with that same mash. <<<<< I hope you did a protein rest! ;) Cheers! Lou - Austin err uhhh I mean Blacksburg, VA today Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 1998 21:11:23 -0700 From: Jack Schmidling <arf at mc.net> Subject: Near Disaster It seems to come in waves when one gets old. First I turned off the fridge to get rid of some ice and forgot to turn it on and had rather warm beer the next day. Then, when I turned it on, instead of switching to the control mode I set the switch to "ON" which turns the chest freezer back into a freezer. So this morning when I went out to transfer the cool wort from the kettle to the fermenter, the monitor said "LO" and I knew I was in trouble. I doubt the 10 gal kegs were frozen solid yet but they have sight glasses which could burst as any moment and the yeast was frozen solid and I have no way to get new yeast in less than 3 days. I added a gallon of room temp wort to the yeast cake and it started fermenting within 15 minutes and I really relaxed. Moral of the story,..... THINK ........... Solved my pump problem with a nifty controller from Granger that someone pointed me to and it works like a charm. I can't find the part number at the moment but it's under "speed controls". It will control any motor with brushes up to 10 amps. I was able to transfer from fermenter to keg with only about a quarter inch of foam on top by slowing it way down. Strangely enough, it seemed like it actually took less time than when running at full speed. Something to do with all the foam, I guess. Neat gadget. Made my day. js - -- Visit our WEB pages: http://user.mc.net/arf ASTROPHOTO OF THE WEEK..... New Every Monday Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 09/03/98, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96