HOMEBREW Digest #2875 Sat 14 November 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

  Random yeast musings (Matthew Arnold)
  Wyeast (John_E_Schnupp)
  Setting the gap on a Corona mill ("Bill G. Riel")
  Re: Home malting (Spencer W Thomas)
  Stuck tripel update (Dean Fikar)
  Re: another newbie question (Robert Arguello)
  yeast ("Penn, John")
  oxidation datapoint (Scott Murman)
  iSN'T IT PRONOUNCED "VORT"? ("Spinelli, Mike")
  carbonating stone, and transferring carbonated beer ("silent bob")
  Re: Rotten Egg Porter (Alan Edwards)
  Details on dessicant (Paul Shick)
  Question on yeast: Nottingham dry (Paul Shick)
  Wyeast "small" packs live on! (Tim Anderson)
  eric my parrot is not dead (Jim Liddil)
  clear beer ("Keith Menefy")
  Fermentor dimensions?? ("Gregg Soh")
  Re: Roggenbier ("Chuck Mryglot")
  Flip top vs. cap top ("Victor Farren")
  Re: Cooking Questions (Mike Isaacs)
  mea culpa: wyeast not phasing out small packs (Charles Epp)
  Experiences with Clearfine (tm)? (Michael A. Owings)
  MPT v. NPT (John_E_Schnupp)
  Fermentability of crystal/dextrin malts ("George De Piro")
  Re: mounting a thermometer in a SS pot? ("Bonnell, Doug")
  Just Hops Info (Jim Layton)
  RE: Site glass (Robert Arguello)
  Fermentation aroma (dbgrowler)
  sparking mead not sparkling (Shane & Laura)
  More Stokes (Paul Niebergall)
  Super Trub (Shane & Laura)
  re. Wyeast 2308 tips (Dean Fikar)
  What's That Smell? (Richard Johnson)
  Champ yeast, help, the deal ("Jan Brown southern U.S.A.")
  re: lauter flow rate (MaltHound)
  re. beer transfer under pressure (Dean Fikar)

Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! Send your entries in for Hoppiest Event On Earth yet? Details: http://members.tripod.com/~BrewMiester_2/Home.html 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: Thu, 12 Nov 1998 17:02:04 GMT From: marnold at ez-net.com (Matthew Arnold) Subject: Random yeast musings Charles Epp wrote: >Here's the problem: the local homebrew shop guy tells me that Wyeast told him >they're planning to phase out the smaller packs in favor of the larger ones. >To my mind, that's bad news, because I'll have to pay several dollars more >for my yeast and I STILL have to build starters. I'd much prefer using the >older, small packs, which I've used for years (with starters) without >problems. In short, with the new packs you and I pay more but get no real >benefits. I don't know if this information (on the phase-out) is correct, but it would make sense. For my money, I think that the "pitchable" yeasts (White Labs, Wyeast XL) are useful in that they help you overcome the most dangerous stage of starters: the initial starter, when you're pitching an itty-bitty (technical term) bit of yeast into some wort and hoping your cleanliness is up to scratch so it can out-compete anything else that might be in there. More yeast = greater chance of first-starter success. - ----- I picked up the Zymurgy special yeast issue the other day and had two questions as I read through it. 1) In the article "Yeast is Yeast . . . Or Is It?" author Dan Rabin and a group of tasters tested 12 different yeasts--a noble endeavor. The article is interesting, but I couldn't help wondering if the taste-tests were done blind. It sure doesn't sound like it. The reason I wondered is because the three dry yeasts they used (Edme, Munton's, and Danstar's Nottingham) were all slammed quite severely. A concluding comment from the article: "We also found, to no one's surprise, that the liquid yeasts produced better beer than dry yeasts." (p. 82) If the testing were not blind, it sounds like there was a major prejudice on the panel against dry yeast, that would call their conclusions and comments on said yeasts into question. Anyone involved in this test on the HBD? 2) Also, what must one do in order to win Ninkasi or Homebrewer of the Year? Not that I have aspirations for that or anything . . . Thanks, Matt - ----- Webmaster, Green Bay Rackers Homebrewers' Club http://www.rackers.org info at rackers.org Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1998 08:58:21 -0800 From: John_E_Schnupp at amat.com Subject: Wyeast >problems. In short, with the new packs you and I pay more but get no >real benefits. Can we convince Wyeast to continue producing the smaller >packs? Or is my information wrong regarding Wyeast's plans to phase out >the smaller packs? --Chuck in Lawrence, KS If this is true, maybe we should start a snail mail/e-mail campaign and try and get them to continue the small packets. It's amazing the pen can be a powerful resource/weapon. John Schnupp, N3CNL Colchester, VT 95 XLH 1200 Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1998 09:26:13 -0800 From: "Bill G. Riel" <briel at ibm.net> Subject: Setting the gap on a Corona mill Hello, First time poster (and relatively new brewer here). I've acquired a Corona mill, and I was wondering if any owners of this mill could tell me how to set the gap correctly for the best crush? I searched the hbd archives and found one suggestion to use a dime between the plates, then turn an extra 1/4 to 1/2 times, but that seems like it would be a pretty narrow gap. Any ideas (or is trial and error my best bet?) Thanks, Bill Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1998 13:03:39 -0500 From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer at engin.umich.edu> Subject: Re: Home malting You can express extract efficiency in percent, as follows. The number you get represents the percentage of the mass of the grain that is extracted as sugars into the wort. For reference, the "theoretical" extract efficiency of commercially malted grain is about 80%. The extract efficiency for sucrose (the standard for the Plato scale) is 100% and corresponds to about 10P (1.040) if you dissolve 100g of sucrose in 900g of water (i.e., so that the total mass is 1000g). Compute your extract efficiency by dividing the total mass of your wort (kg = volume in liters * specific gravity) by the mass of grain you used, then multiply by 10. Continuing the sugar example, 10 * (1kg "wort") / (0.1kg "grain") = 100% Thus, if you used 5kg grain to make 20 liters of wort at 1.040, your extract efficiency is 10 * (1.04 * 20) / 5 = 41% =Spencer Thomas in Ann Arbor, MI (spencer at umich.edu) Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1998 14:11:30 -0600 From: Dean Fikar <dfikar at flash.net> Subject: Stuck tripel update Several months back I had considerable problems with a high gravity Belgian tripel fermentation. The original gravity was 1.078 and the fermentation stuck at about 1.024. I had pitched a three quart starter cultured from the dregs of a bottle of Chimay. I think that part of my problem was fermenting at too cold of a temperature (60 degrees). I tried raising the fermentation temperature up to 70 degrees to no avail. After posting to the HBD, I received many good suggestions regarding what to do next. I ended up pitching a one pt. volume of actively fermenting beer at high krausen from a Scottish ale fermenting with Wyeast 1728. I figured that the high alcohol tolerance of this yeast would be useful in this setting. It did take the SG down to about 1.020. I still thought that the beer tasted a little sweet. I was pretty discouraged at this point and seriously considered dumping the batch. As a last resort, I pitched packets of champagne yeast and Nottingham dry yeast, both properly hydrated. The beer fermented down to 1.016 and tasted very good with little residual sweetness. Most of these rescue measures were performed with the beer sitting down in my basement at about 78 to 80 degrees (yes, it was that hot in my basement during this rather warm Texas summer). I am quite pleased with the result. The only ill effect of all this manipulation, as far as I can tell, is that the beer has a slightly estery nose which is probably not appropriate for a tripel. It tastes great though and my wife loves it, which is the true test. If I were to try this exercise again, heaven forbid, I probably would go straight to the combination of champagne and Nottingham dry yeast and skip the Wyeast 1728 step. Thanks again to all those who offered very helpful suggestions. I hope that this messy story with a happy ending will help someone in the future who may have similar problems with a stuck high gravity fermentation. Dean Fikar - dfikar at flash.net - Fort Worth, TX Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1998 13:26:27 -0800 (PST) From: Robert Arguello <robertac at calweb.com> Subject: Re: another newbie question