HOMEBREW Digest #3161 Thu 04 November 1999

[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

  Ah...ah...ah-choo! (ThomasM923)
  Zymurgy bashing ("Dan Kiplinger")
  Mash Thickness (CLOAKSTONE)
  brownish color on deleaded brass ("Ratkiewich, Peter")
  Re: HERMS plans (RobertJ)
  iodophor question ("Sieben, Richard")
  Hoppy Pilsners, MIcrowaving mashes (Dave Burley)
  Re: Aventinus clone (KMacneal)
  What can I expect?... ("Darrell Leavitt")
  first pilsner (Dave Hinrichs)
  Homemade wine and Bucket seals (Dan Listermann)
  re:Idophor troubles (tmorgan)
  RE: Dan Kiplinger/Schmidling ("Donald D. Lake")
  yeast growth ("Alan Meeker")
  RE: beer vs. wine making (LaBorde, Ronald)
  White Horse Old Ale festival ("Nigel Porter")
  cleaning up old corny kegs (Mark Tumarkin)
  re: Iodophor Troubles (Mark Tumarkin)
  winemaking vs. homebrewing (Scott Birdwell)
  Brains and humility ("Jack Schmidling")
  RE: The Microwave? (Bob Sheck)
  My PBW Story (phil sides jr)
  Hop teas (Part 2) (Bob.Sutton)

* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! * The HBD now hosts eight digests related to this and a few other hobbies. * Send an email note to majordomo at hbd.org with the word "lists" on one * line, and "help" on another (don't need the quotes) for a listing and * instructions for use. Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org 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! Contact brewery at hbd.org for information regarding the "Cat's Meow" Back issues are available via: HTML from... http://hbd.org 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 COPYRIGHT for the Digest as a collection is currently held by hbd.org (Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen). Digests in their entirity CANNOT be reprinted/reproduced without this entire header section unless EXPRESS written permission has been obtained from hbd.org. Digests CANNOT be reprinted or reproduced in any format for redistribution unless said redistribution is at absolutely NO COST to the consumer. COPYRIGHT for individual posts within each Digest is held by the author. Articles cannot be extracted from the Digest and reprinted/reproduced without the EXPRESS written permission of the author. The author and HBD must be attributed as author and source in any such reprint/reproduction. (Note: QUOTING of items originally appearing in the Digest in a subsequent Digest is exempt from the above. Home brew clubs NOT associated with organizations having a commercial interest in beer or brewing may republish articles in their newsletters and/or websites provided that the author and HBD are attributed. ASKING first is still a great courtesy...) JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 00:38:37 EST From: ThomasM923 at aol.com Subject: Ah...ah...ah-choo! In the HBD #3159 Dave Burley wrote: "Rather than a hop tea added to the secondary, I routinely add hops at the nose for lagers." Uh, you mean like snuff? Wow, that's going for the gusto all right... I assume you recommend pellets... Thomas Murray Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 02:28:57 -0500 From: "Dan Kiplinger" <knurdami at iname.com> Subject: Zymurgy bashing In response to: >Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 07:52:35 PST >From: "Foster Jason" <jasfoster at hotmail.com> >Subject: Zymurgy Criticisms >Now, this is clearly a factually accurate statement. However, it misses the >point. Zymurgy is not intended as an "advanced or technical" magazine. It >does not bill itself to be one and does not promise to satisfy the advanced >homebrewers needs. I agree totally! If all of the magazines go to such high degrees of technical talk than we can kiss goodbye all of the future homebrewers that may end up as technically inclined as some of us think that we are. I highly doubt that anyone who is a homebrewer started out knowing everything. I have read and will continue to read and support Zymurgy. They have done marvelous things for our cause. Dan Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 06:34:51 EST From: CLOAKSTONE at aol.com Subject: Mash Thickness Nathan writes re: mash thickness: >don't forget that PU undergoes an extensive decoction mash which could provide for the "rich dextrinous wort "... I don't believe the decoction method is related to dextrin/maltose balances, rather the relative enzymatic activity of beta and alpha amylase. The true test would be to do two single infusion mashes (1) with the same water to grist ratio PU uses (I believe about 4 qts/pound) and (2) "Standard" 1 qt/#, both conducted at 145, and see what one ends up with. In fact, now that I'm inspired, I'll conduct a minimash and do a forced ferment and report on the results. Cheers, Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 07:52:50 -0500 From: "Ratkiewich, Peter" <PRATKIEWICH at ci.westport.ct.us> Subject: brownish color on deleaded brass I was deleading a couple of brass fittings the other day. Using a solution of 1 part Hydrogen Peroxide to two parts white vinegar, as has been previously suggested in this forum, I soaked the parts for 24 hours. Upon removing them from solution, portions of the brass parts had a brownish coloration to them. The rest of the surfaces appeared to be normal with a dull tinge to the brass color. Can any of the resident metallurgists out there tell me if this is normal, and what the brownish color is? Should I worry about removing it? The fittings are off-the-shelf brass compression fittings to be used in my heat exchanger, so there will be contact with Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 08:11:12 -0500 From: RobertJ <pbsys at pbsbeer.com> Subject: Re: HERMS plans "Jeff Hewit" <aleman_ at excite.com> wrote: I have seen some discussion on HERMS systems. (I forget exactly what "HERMS" stands for, except that "RM" means "recirculating mash.") My understanding is that wort is pumped through a heat excahanger in the hot liquor tank as an alternative to using an electric heating element in the traditional RIMS set up. ... I'm sure someone has posted details on these set ups. Does anyone know of any Web sites that include HERMS plans? We include plans with our HERMS (tm) kit. A discussion of HERMS (tm) and it's performance can be found on our web site http://pbsbeer.com/pbs/pbscat.html Our home page, pbsbeer.com, includes links to brewers systems , some of whom have built there own versions of HERMS (tm) Bob Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 08:18:45 -0600 From: "Sieben, Richard" <SIER1 at Aerial1.com> Subject: iodophor question Bob Fesmire related a no rinse use of iodophor yesterday and wanted to know if he ruined a batch of beer. Well, that depends. It sounded like you transferred into the just sanitized carboy before letting it dry, that would be bad, especially if you made a lighter bodied beer. Iodophore becomes inactivated when it dries, so you should always have your equipment sanitized and dried before you use it. All you need do is turn your carboy upside down a couple days before you need to use it to let all the liquid drain out and have time to dry, bad stuff won't crawl up into it, bacteria rains down into things. Ok, so did you ruin your beer? Taste will tell, you may get away with it this time. I have only ruined one batch of beer and it was because one of my brew buddies had used iodophor at double the recommended rate AND the beer was a very light bodied beer that can show every defect. The beer was visually perfect, clear, good head....but the taste was IODINE! YUCK!!! So the moral of the story is, use per instructions and let equipment dry before use. Rich Sieben Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 09:22:14 -0500 From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: Hoppy Pilsners, MIcrowaving mashes Brewsters: Spencer Thomas sent me the following notes to help straighten out what I thought was a mantra among BJCP judges regarding no hoppy nose and lagers. He said to me: " Dave> I disagree with many BJCP judges and others who say a good Dave> lager should not have a hop aroma. Who said that!? I have seen comments that a continental pilsner should not have a *dry hop* aroma. Which, judging by the examples we get here, is true. (Of course I'm sure there are hausbraueries in Germany that dry hop their lagers...) I quote from the official BJCP guidelines in support of hop aroma: 2A. Bohemian Pilsner Aroma: Rich with a complex malt and a spicy, floral, Saaz hop bouquet. 2B. Northern German Pilsner Aroma: May feature grain and distinctive, flowery, noble hops. 2C. Dortmunder Export Aroma: Low to medium German or Czech hop aroma. On the other hand: 9A. Oktoberfest/Maerzen Aroma: ... No fruitiness, diacetyl, or hop aroma. With which I disagree. I find a nice spicy hop character to be very attractive in an Oktoberfest. 14A. Traditional Bock Aroma: Strong aroma of malt. Virtually no hop aroma. I agree with this one. " Ahhhh! I feel better. I guess my taster and likes in Eastern European, including the Bohemian ( Czech), Pilsners are not so far off after all. Thanks Spencer!! But, then, there's that hoppy Bock I've been planning...... - --------------------------------------------- Nathan Kanous asks if anyone has used a microwave for cereal mashing. I have used the microwave as an experiment to prepare a small mash for my acid worts added to my Irish Dry Stouts. The temperature control probe works fine for one or two cup quantities with occasional stirring. However, I would think that on larger quantities this might be a problem as the outer edge will be significantly hotter than the middle. Why not just heat and store in your oven to maintain a temperature? When I do a cereal mash, I just boil the cereal until it thickens to gelatinize it, add cold water to a temperature of ~160F and add a pound of crushed malt. Wait 15 minuntes until it thins down and add this to my regular mash along with the rest of the grist at the start. No need for stirring and holding 45 minutes or whatever. Correct the mash liquor for the amount of water you added in the cereal mash. Keep on Brewin' Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 09:38:36 EST From: KMacneal at aol.com Subject: Re: Aventinus clone In a message dated 11/2/1999, 11:18:22 PM, Mercer, David" <dmercer at path.org>: <<Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 08:44:48 -0800 From: "Mercer, David" <dmercer at path.org> Subject: Aventinus clone Dan asked about making an Aventinus-type weizenbock. First, get Eric Warner's book, if you can find it. >> I agree wholeheartedly. Mr. Warner's book helped me win a gold medal in the Nationals this year. My recipe (Weizen Christmas) is in this month's Zymurgy and is closely based on one of the recipes in Warners book. One of the judges' comments was even that it was very close to Aventinus. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 10:00:36 -0400 From: "Darrell Leavitt"<Darrell_Leavitt at sln.esc.edu> Subject: What can I expect?... I just brewed a Hefe and because I was a little short of ingredients I experimented a bit: 8lb Maris Otter 2 row 1 lb Malted Oats <= 1 lb Torrified Wheat single stage infusion at 148 F added 2 cups wheat dme in boil used 1 oz Tetnang at start 1 oz Saaz at 30 Whitelabs Hefe yeast What can I expect? Has anyone brewed such an animal before? Did I make a mistake? ..Darrell Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 09:04:31 -0600 From: Dave Hinrichs <dhinrichs at quannon.com> Subject: first pilsner >Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 20:59:46 -0800 >From: "scott" <Cuckold at cornerpub.com> >Subject: first pilsner >Been brewing 10 gal. Hefe's with very good luck. Haven't done the water >analysis yet, as we just bought our house and insufficient funds. Did >install a charcoal filter, however. If you have municipal water contact your supplier they are required by law to provide this information for free. *************************************************************** * Dave Hinrichs E-Mail: dhinrichs at quannon.com * * Quannon CAD Systems, Inc. Voice: (612) 935-3367 * * 6101 Baker Road, Suite 204 FAX: (612) 935-0409 * * Minnetonka, MN 55345 * * http://www.quannon.com/ * Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 10:14:54 -0500 From: Dan Listermann <72723.1707 at compuserve.com> Subject: Homemade wine and Bucket seals Curt Speaker (Speaker at Safety-1.safety.psu.edu) writes: < A novice winemaker, on the other hand, cannot make wine as good as a small winery. Homemade wine is better, but still pales in comparison to commercial stuff.> On one hand I have had some really sad commercial wines and on the other, some very good homemade wines, althoughI don't have much of a taste for wines generally. Homemade wines are taking off quite nicely. I wonder why there is such a division between wine and beer. Very few people make both and yet they are closely related. David Luck (Jeffry.D.Luck at aexp.com) writes about 7 gal buckets leaking CO2 during fermentation. This is very common and, aside from being anoying, perfectly harmless. Try to see that the lid is wet when the bucket is closed. I still use these buckets sometimes and am surprised when they don't leak. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 08:10:42 -0800 From: tmorgan at esassoc.com Subject: re:Idophor troubles Fear not! You have done things exactly correct. 37 batches of home brew stand behind attesting to this method of use with idophor. I usually just make sure that I have drained the last few drips of the stuff out first and commonly transfer beer or whatever with things still wet. Your beer should not exhibit any hint of the stuff. Tim Morgan Black Cloud Home Brewery Petaluma, CA email: tmorgan at esassoc.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 11:25:23 -0500 From: "Donald D. Lake" <dake at gdi.net> Subject: RE: Dan Kiplinger/Schmidling Dan wrote: "Is Jack Schmidling that much of a defensive prick or am I missing something." I think you are definitely missing something. I could hardly define Jack using the vulgar colloquialism, "prick." In my interpretation, Jack's antenna was up because someone mistakenly said he was "hocking" his wares. Jack (mistakenly) interpreted the statement as derogatory and responded in kind. Now, his response was mistakenly interpreted by you to mean something it didn't. And so you responded with more derogatory statements (and rather rude language at that). This is how wars between small countries start! It's interesting to watch the "keyboard testosterone" at work. Some of the attacking comments that have been posted would never be said in person. Because in person, there is a risk we would get an ass whoopin (as we say in the South) by the party we offended. Let's all cool our jets. Don Lake dlake at amuni.com "It takes a big man to cry .......its takes a bigger man to laugh at that man. - Deep Thoughts by Jack Handy Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 11:49:41 -0500 From: "Alan Meeker" <ameeker at welch.jhu.edu> Subject: yeast growth Dave Burley writes: > I think Alan Meeeker misunderstood Kyle's > question about how one limits the number > of growth cycles of yeast. Actually Dave, I think YOU misread the question. You're not supposed to use big words like "Ox-y-gen!" ;) But seriously folks... > The answer is that yeast reach a certain > concentration and level off in all cases at > about the same value. Well, not quite. As I tried to (succinctly) point out in my post, the total amount of yeast cell division will depend upon various factors such as: the amount of ergosterol/unsaturated fatty acids present in the starter yeast. the amount of dissolved oxygen (if any) and/or malt-derived lipids in the wort. the size of the yeast starter. other (possibly limiting) growth factors such as nitrogenous compounds, sugars or metals like zinc. >By starting with a > certain size starter you can limit the number > of growth cycles the yeast have to go through > to reach this number. Larger starter, fewer > growth cycles. True, a larger starter will more quickly "eat up" the available nutrients till one of them becomes growth-limiting. However, I think it is important to realize that it is not necessarily "number of growth cycles" per se that should be the focus of attention, but rather other factors such as the total amount of wort materials going to create yeast cell mass, total yeast cell mass, and metabolic state/health of the fermenting yeast that are the important considerations. For instance, a large starter that was poorly oxygenated during its growth will be low in membrane sterols. Once pitched this large starter will rapidly utilize all available dissolved oxygen in the wort and will (if no other nutrient becomes limiting) divide till the sterols become so diluted that division is no longer permitted. At this point the yeast will have compromised membranes and may result in an unhealthy fermentation. In addition, the starter may have only been able to divide a total of one or two times (due to limited sterols) and this may not result in enough yeats to conduct the fermentation in a timely manner - or even to finish the job! Here, you are ending up with too few yeast, whose membranes are stressed which could easily lead to all kinds of problems - long lag times, stuck fermentations, decreased EtOH-resistance, increased susceptibility to infections, increased autolysis, etc. On the other hand, a large well-aerated starter may have enough reserve sterol capacity that it will use up some other wort nutrient (say wort sugars) before the sterols become limiting for continued yeast division. Here, the cell division would be repressed due to low sugar and the yeast would be signalled to go into its dormant phase/flocculate out, etc. Note that here there would not have been a period of fermentation taking place while the yeast were in a poor state of "membrane health" due to low sterol concentrations. > Ales typically have a smaller starter, since the > by-products of the growth are the various > sensory agents like esters, aldehydes and > ketones which we expect in British Ales. > Lagers, on the other hand are expected > to be cleaner, so we start with a larger starter > to limit the number of growth cycles. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm isn't part of the reason to use larger starters for Lagers is because the lager yeasts' growth rate will be slower therefore we want to assure that fermentation will be completed in a reasonable amount of time (this helps prevent the possibility of contaminants getting a foothold...). > This larger starter is also good, since we > typically ferment the lagers cooler for the > same reason of cleaness in taste. This > larger starter allows a faster fermentation. Which is the more important consideration? Also, there seems to be an innapropriate division between "yeast growth phase/aerobic growth" versus fermentation. Aside from a true "lag phase" in which the yeast population is gearing up for growth in its new environment, the yeast will grow (increase in cell size) and divide as long as environmental (temperature, pH, lack of toxins) and nutritional (sugars, nitrogenous compounds, metals, oxygen, etc.) conditions allow it to do so. There is nothing magic about aerobic vs anaerobic respiration - these are simply different mechanisms by which the cell derives energy and metabolic building blocks; either pathway can be used to support cell division. There seems to be an impression that pitched yeast at first "grow" (read: divide) in an oxygen-dependent phase and that only later, after they have stopped growing, do they get down to the serious work of fermentation. This is incorrect - the yeast will be dividing throughout the process and, in fact, it has been demonstrated that the bulk of fermentative activity takes place in actively dividing cells. All this is to say that, to my way of thinking, I want my yeast to be as healthy as possible all the way through the fermentation to the point where they go dormant and flocc out. I want this dornmancy to be due to the fact that they have eaten all the wort sugars, not because they have used up the nitrogen sources or that they have run out of sterols or unsaturated fatty acids - deficiencies that will result in stressed yeast and undesireable metabolic changes. -Alan Meeker Baltimore, MD Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 11:23:27 -0600 From: rlabor at lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald) Subject: RE: beer vs. wine making >From: "Curt Speaker" <SPEAKER at SAFETY-1.SAFETY.PSU.EDU> >a novice brewer, with a bit of time and >patience, can make beer that is just about as good as a >commercial microbrew. A novice winemaker, on the other hand, >cannot make wine as good as a small winery. Homemade wine is >better, but still pales in comparison to commercial stuff. My thoughts, exactly, so well put. True wine, is made from grapes, and as suggested above, very difficult to beat the commercial stuff. But where us homebrewers can excel, is to make fruit/country wines from other than grapes. Here, commercial examples are rare and we can conjure up some very enjoyable product. The local homebrew shop had a winemaking class a couple years back, and made of all things a grapefruit wine, well, let me tell you it was very good. So many fruits to experiment with, oranges, berries, etc. The cost is very minimal if you have access to the fruit or berries. Here is where the rewards are for homebrewers. >Just had to add my $0.02 on this: Yup, and here is my $0.01 on this. Ron Ronald La Borde - Metairie, Louisiana - rlabor at lsumc.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 17:52:44 -0000 From: "Nigel Porter" <nigel at sparger.freeserve.co.uk> Subject: White Horse Old Ale festival Following my post yesterday, I have now done some digging. The White Horse (Parsons Green, London) re-opens after its refurbishment on 24 November. The Old Ale festival is Saturday 27 November, and starts around midday. Hopefully might see you there? Is this thanksgiving time - we don't have it over here. Nigel Porter Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 13:00:56 -0500 From: Mark Tumarkin <mark_t at ix.netcom.com> Subject: cleaning up old corny kegs Dan Kiplinger askss: >Also, (to all of you metallurgists out there) what is the best way to make >those ugly corney exteriors look new? I've had pretty good success by first scrubbing with TSP - inside and out. That does a great job of cleaning by itself. But if you really want to make the outside shine, then hit it with BarKeepers Friend. It takes a little elbow grease but the kegs end up looking great. Obviously, it's not going to make a dinged-up, abused keg look new, but it will get it looking as good as possible. You can also get stainless steel buffing compound that can be used with a cloth buffing wheel on your electric drill, but the BarKeepers Friend is less expensive and works very well. Mark Tumarkin Gainesville, FL Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 13:13:29 -0500 From: Mark Tumarkin <mark_t at ix.netcom.com> Subject: re: Iodophor Troubles Bob Fesmire is concerned about iodophor - >I recently transferred idophor(iodine) out of a carboy and >transferred beer from the primary carboy into this carboy. I did not rinse >the carboy containing the idophor, or the siphon hoses before i transferred. >I usually use bleach and rinse evrything, but i was under the impression that >idophor was more effective and did not need to be rinsed. Now I am >concerened, should I have rinsed? Is my first all-grain of the new brewing >season down the tubes? Will I have to dump this batch? No way, iodophor is truly no-rinse (as well as being very effective). I usually let it air dry, and would suggest that you do the same. However, I have occasionally used a racking tube or hose direct from soaking. I don't believe anyone will detect any taste of iodine from this - at least if used in proper dilution strength. There's no need to use a stronger solution, it won't sanitise significantly better and it will be more expensive. The dilution rate varies depending on the manufacturer. For the one I use the recommended rate is 1/2 teaspoon per gallon. Keep in mind that iodophor is just a sanitizer, not a cleaner. You have to clean off any organics, crud, etc before sanitizing or your beer is at risk. That said, I've found iodophor very easy to use and effective. Mark Tumarkin Gainesville, FL Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 15:28:04 -0600 From: Scott Birdwell <defalcos at insync.net> Subject: winemaking vs. homebrewing Curt Speaker posted some comments regarding winemaking versus beermaking supplies at the local homebrew shops and invited shop owners to comment. He said: "I have been having this discussion with several folks here in central PA regarding the increased interest in home winemaking versus homebrewing. I honestly think that winemaking ingredients have gotten significantly better in the past few years. The end result of this is that you can make pretty damn good wine at home now." This is definitely true. The quality of winemaking ingredient kits has improved dramatically over the past five years or so. Almost all of these are manufactured in Canada, where there is a tremendous demand for user-friendly, high quality, "quickie" wine kits. Quality wine concentrates have been available for many years, just not as well packaged and as ready to use as these "new" wine kits. "It is no longer a couple cans of Welsh's grape juice, half-a-cake of Fleishmann's bread yeast and a couple pounds of sugar (just like homebrewing is no longer a can of Blue Ribbon syrup, a couple #s of sugar and the same Fleishmann's yeast)." Quality ingredients, in the form of high quality grape concentrates or malt extract have been on the market in the U.S. for almost thirty years. There have no excuses to use inferior ingredients unless you've been un-informed or just plain cheap. "The argument to this (as a winemaking & homebrewing friend of mine pointed out) is that a novice brewer, with a bit of time and patience, can make beer that is just about as good as a commercial microbrew. A novice winemaker, on the other hand, cannot make wine as good as a small winery. Homemade wine is better, but still pales in comparison to commercial stuff." While its true that a beginning homebrewer can easily make a good quality homebrew, even on his first attempt (given quality ingredients and information), I think that a beginning winemaker can make comparable quality wine right out of the chute. Just as a beginning homebrewer is not likely to make a better beer than Sierra Nevada, the beginning winemaker is not going to make something better than the best small wineries. This isn't to say, however, that neither is going to make a very good beverage straight away (again, given quality ingredients and information). Even with the high quality wine kits, though, the beginning winemaker is going to have to wait longer for that first batch to "come around," than his beginning homebrewer counterpart. Hey, this is a good reason to do both. Drink the homebrew while the wine is maturing! "All of this, coupled with what is likely a higher mark-up on winemaking kits (yuppies have more $$ and will likely pay more for wine kits), and it is only natural that homebrew stores are catering more to the home winemakers." I can't speak for other homebrew shop proprietors, but I can say that at my shop, the wine kits do not have a higher mark-up than beer ingredients. In fact, if anything, my mark-up on wine kits is slightly lower than my beer ingredients. However, consider that while a wine kit averages around $50, a batch of homebrew will average about half that. Of course, I will make more money on a $50 sale than a $25 sale. This really isn't a question of mark-up, it;'s a matter of of volume and finding growth areas for our business. The homebrew end of the business has been stagnant for 3 - 4 years now, and the winemaking end is beginning to show signs of growth after many years of just treading water. Heck, we still run 75 - 80% beer at our shop, but when I see an area that I can nurture and help grow, I'm going to do it. Anything that helps cash flow in this small business will eventually benefit the homebrewers, because we will have more money to invest in inventory (all kinds of inventory). Actually, one thing you may not have picked up on is that these posts were initiated by some of our Canadian neighbors. The business is much different up there than here in the States. A typical shop in Canada may run 75 - 80% wine instead of beer. The way a shop in Canada stocks their shelves will reflect this trend. Understandably, these guys are concerned about availability of ingredients and information for their hobby and passion. I'm sure there is variation there from province to province, just as there is variation here in the states, but you get the idea. That's my two cents worth, anyway. Scott Birdwell Proprietor - DeFalco's Home Wine & Beer Supply Houston TX (considerably south of Jeff Renner) Former president of the Home Wine & Beer Trade Association Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 15:58:48 -0600 From: "Jack Schmidling" <arf at mc.net> Subject: Brains and humility From: "Phil and Jill Yates" <yates at infoflex.com.au> > I have produced vast amounts of homebrew but am still working at well over forty. What is your secret Jack? Vast amounts hyper-intellegence. - ------------------------------ From: "Dan Kiplinger" <knurdami at iname.com> >I am relatively new to the post but I am confused. Is Jack Schmidling that much of a defensive prick or am I missing something..... I will let you judge the former but I think you will find the answer to the latter in the above response to Phil. > He obviously is not retired if has his name on what the neighbor kids are producing. Who's in charge of quality??!! The neighbor's kids of course. Of the billions and billions we have shipped, we have never had a single return. >Hey, the Easymasher is a cool invention to get people into all-grain with a minimal investment....... Funny how it always comes to that. I have no problems pleading guilty of being an obnoxious genius. > I am all for that and I respect it also. But "the better mouse trap" is (I think) going a bit too far. (ask Mike Zindler) Not sure who Mike is but sending the false bottom to the museum is vastly more profound than a better mouse trap. I just used that expression in a futile attempt to be humble. js PHOTO OF THE WEEK http://user.mc.net/arf/weekly.htm HOME http://user.mc.net/arf Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 21:20:08 -0500 From: Bob Sheck <bsheck at skantech.net> Subject: RE: The Microwave? Nathan Kanous <nlkanous at pharmacy.wisc.edu> writes about "Has anybody ever used the microwave to conduct a cereal mash?" I dunno. Maybe we should also ask if anyone's used a pressure cooker too? only by experimenting will we know. And for hop taste or not in lagers- I guess if you're talking about Budweiser <TM> then I wouldn't expect to taste them (must get over-run by the beechwood chips) ! Bob Sheck bsheck, me-sheck, abednigo! Greenville, NC email:bsheck at skantech.net or see us at: http://www.skantech.net/bsheck/ (252)830-1833 - ------------- "Madness takes its toll -- Please have exact change!" Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 21:26:44 -0500 From: phil sides jr <psides at carl.net> Subject: My PBW Story I originally chose to not post this for two reasons: Firstly, I didn't want to waste bandwidth on something people did not want to read about and secondly, it is an embarrassing story. I have received close to thirty personal emails requesting to hear the story now and I have had time to deal with the impending humiliation so here goes... Summer before last, I was living in a house where I had to brew outdoors. I had a beautiful wood deck under a giant sugar maple and with the exception of being at the mercy of New England's dynamic climate, it was not a bad place to brew. One afternoon, I was brewing a Foreign Style Stout I call Rockinfreakapotamus and near the end of my boil some rain started up pretty quickly. I was able to finish the boil and pump the batch out of the chiller into my waiting primaries, but the bottom fell out before I could do any cleanup. I quickly dragged all of my equipment into my screen enclosed porch and left (read forgot about) it for a few days. The hot liquor tank was clean, but in the mash tun I had 29 pounds of spent grain and a gallon or two of souring wort. The boil kettle had two hopsocks and a pile of coagulated break material left behind. I vowed to get to the cleanup in a "few days". The few days turned into about two weeks and when I started to tackle the job the first time, I decided I had underestimated the project and did not have enough time allotted to clean the equipment properly. I postponed the cleaning again. An unexpected business trip and a few other of life's surprises turned this postponement into weeks. I think I did not clean the kegs until about seven or so weeks after brew day. Around two months in the summer heat (even in New Hampshire) produced results I am unable to even approximate with words. I would give anything to have a picture of the resultant mess. The closest thing I have seen is that stuff you grow in your refrigerator when you leave something in there for six months or more. Lots of colors, hairy, moldy... all of that stuff in the mash tun. It smelled like a barnyard... come to think of it, like a fine lambic ;-). The boil kettle was worse, because the goo had rusted to the false bottom and inside surface of the keg. I had to rip the hopsocks to get them out. I resigned myself to the fact that my kegs were ruined and I needed to build two new vessels. I even started looking for new Sanke kegs to cut up but I still wanted to try to salvage what I had already built. I had no idea where to even start cleaning this mess when I remembered I had picked up a 5 Star cleaning kit to try a few months prior. I have a brewing buddy that swears by the stuff and I had wanted to try it, but I always thought it was too expensive. I figured I'd give it a shot... First I scooped everything that was scoopable out of the vessels, then soaked them in hot (160 F ) water for about an hour. This loosened up quite a bit of chunky stuff but the rust and most of the caked-on stuff were undisturbed. I then filled the kegs again with hot water, around 140 F this time and added two packets of PBW to each keg. I held the 140 F for two hours. I drained the kegs and rinsed with hot water and DID NOT scrub a thing. They were shinier and cleaner than I had ever seen them. It goes without saying that I use PBW on stainless exclusively at home now. I work part-time in a BOP and we do not use it there... yet ;-). I have used B-Brite, C-Brite, TSP, TSP substitute, Bromite, and plain ol' bleach (not on stainless) in the past and none of these even come close to the cleaning ability of PBW. Nothing against the other cleaners; I used them for many years effectively and it is hard to beat TSP for the money... but PBW is simply amazing for the tougher jobs like when I do something moronic although I do NOT plan on doing it ever again. Phil Sides, Jr. Concord, NH - -- Macht nicht o'zapft ist, Prost! Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 03:12:23 GMT From: Bob.Sutton at Fluor.com Subject: Hop teas (Part 2) There's been a number of posts addressing hop teas... so I thought I'd share my approach as it's so darned simple... too simple in fact. I toss a few ounces of hops (pellets, plugs or whole leaf) into my drip-style coffee maker and add 5-7 "cups" of water to the reservoir and let 'er rip. The paper filter seems to retain the pellets quite well. I cool the pot externally with ice and, depending on my mood, add it to the secondary or keg. If I'm seeking a dry-hopped brew, I typically use about half as much hops as compared to a conventional dry-hop, where the hops are added late in the fermentation cycle. This is particularly useful when you only have pellets, since the carryover from the green muck is pretty much eliminated. Cheers! Bob Fruit Fly Brewhaus Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 11/04/99, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96