HOMEBREW Digest #3225 Tue 18 January 2000

[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: bottling a few ("Vinbrew Supply")
  come on, folks (Dick Dunn)
  Zapap / Listermann mashing ("John Herman")
  Re: Water Treatment Tricks (KMacneal)
  Burst Sparging - Clarification ("Paul Smith")
  Leap Years ("Paul Ward")
  brewing texts ("Paul Smith")
  Zapap - Phil's Phalse Bottom (Dan Listermann)
  Palmetto State Brewers ("H. Dowda")
  re: VERY old can of Bud (Brian and Shirley Cornelius)
  SS fittings (Susan/Bill Freeman)
  Economies of Scale ("Jack Schmidling")
  PMMA as an adhesive for Pump Fittings ("Dan Schultz")
  Hot Sauce and fermenting ("Peter J. Calinski")
  1st All Grain----Zapap ("Peter J. Calinski")
  Lemon ("FLEMING, JOE")
  Converting Propane Cooker to Gas ("Timmons, Frank")
  racking/kegging techniques (Jonathan Peakall)
  Re: Mills n Drills ("Brian D.")
  Best non-auto sparging technique? ("Brian D.")
  Mouthfeel, (Dave Burley)
  Caustic Sanitizer ("Eric R. Theiner")
  pH questions with RO water ("Chris Beadle")
  Stout/Sour Mash ("Richard")
  brewchem books ("Alan Meeker")
  Saison ("Leak, Brad")
  pumpkin light ale (Warandle1)
  Re: adding DME to distilled water (Project One)
  Jack's mill (ALABREW)
  Handling fees (Marty Brown)
  SS Fittings & Quick-Connects ("Dana H. Edgell")
  Spruce Beer/Brewing Techniques Vol. 4, No. 2 (WayneM38)
  Rauchenfels (RBoland)

* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! 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 FROM THE E-MAIL ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!** IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, you cannot subscribe to the digest as we canoot reach you. We will not correct your address for the automation - that's your job. The HBD is a copyrighted document. The compilation is copyright HBD.ORG. Individual postings are copyright by their authors. ASK before reproducing and you'll rarely have trouble. Digest content cannot be reproduced by any means for sale or profit. More information is available by sending the word "info" to req at hbd.org. JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 00:55:11 -0500 From: "Vinbrew Supply" <devans at greenapple.com> Subject: RE: bottling a few Dan Michael asks about bottling some beer before kegging most of it...... I find the Prime Tabs to be an excellent resource for this. Doug Return to table of contents
Date: 16 Jan 00 23:20:57 MST (Sun) From: rcd at raven.talisman.com (Dick Dunn) Subject: come on, folks Could we stop mincing about? "Teet" is not a word. The word is "teat". Pronounced like "tit". Used in phrases like "useless as teats on a boar", meaning about the same as "useless as a screen door on a submarine",...,or like "teats up" (wrong-side-up, dead). Cows have 4, goats have 2, humans have 2 (duh!), pigs have 8, cats have...ummm...6 I guess (thanks, Fred, and sorry to bother you). Try as I may, I can't make this not OT, even using milk stout as a tie-in. - --- Dick Dunn rcd at talisman.com Hygiene, Colorado USA Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 06:19:09 -0500 From: "John Herman" <johnvic at earthlink.net> Subject: Zapap / Listermann mashing I've been using the Listermann 2 plastic bucket setup for about 2 years no. My advice to those using it is to mash in a heatable pot, I use a 5 gal. stainless steel cooking pot. I then using the buckets for spargeing only. When calculating my extraction rates I generally figure on 70%, although yesterday I did my first decoction mash and was in the 80s! The biggest problem I've had with the stainless steel mash has been temperature adjustment. I've been using the stove as a temperature adjustment, perhaps infusions of boiling water would make sense. John Herman Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 06:50:11 EST From: KMacneal at aol.com Subject: Re: Water Treatment Tricks In a message dated 1/16/2000 6:40:16 PM Eastern Standard Time, Jesse Stricker writes: << I'll second Patrick's request for quick and easy water treatment tricks, though. All-grain brewing is a bunch of fun, but there's so many refinements and variables, and it gets dark so early in winter, that I don't mind simplifying the process at all. >> Jesse, There are a few water treatment calculators out on the net. I've been using one that is pretty simple. I also stumbled across information on my city water supply on the net. They've posted their yearly analysis results on the DPW webpage. There was a lot more information on the web page than I was able to get from the phone call I made a few years ago. I don't know if other cities are doing the same, but it's worth a look. Keith MacNeal Worcester, MA Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 07:03:42 -0600 From: "Paul Smith" <pksmith_morin at msn.com> Subject: Burst Sparging - Clarification I would like to clarify what I mean by "burst sparging," in case there is any confusion. Some have written of a technique which entails essentially recirculating as normal, then adding a great volume of the batch water, and running off completely. This is what I have heard of as "batch sparging" and differs from the technique I employ, burst sparging. Whereas batch sparging entails a complete runoff (to a dry grain bed) between "dumping" sparge water onto the bed (often, the sparge is thoroughly mixed into the grain bed again, a recirculation is completed, and the runoff is again run to a dry bed), burst sparging entails a recirculation and runoff as per normal. The only difference is that you allow the runoff to proceed until the sparge water column on top of the grain bed gets close to the top of the grain bed (don't shoot until you see the whites of their eyes!), then dump another 2-3 inches on top. Continuous sparge obviously differs here in that a constant 1.5-2" water column is maintained above the grain bed. I have never "batch-sparged." From the discussions in BT and elsewhere, a "batch sparge" has the rep of resulting in a more malty wort, although the brewhouse effiency is considerably reduced. On the other hand, burst sparging is known to increase brewhouse efficiency (in my case, from 85% to 95%). Hope this clarifies. Paul Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 08:11:21 -0500 From: "Paul Ward" <paulw at doc.state.vt.us> Subject: Leap Years O.K. - I guess I was skipped school that day. I honestly didn't know that leap years are not applied on the century years unless they are divisible by 400. Who made up these goofy rules. Next thing you know 'i' won't come before 'e' all the time iether. Chagrined. Paul in Vermont paulw at doc.state.vt.us Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 07:22:20 -0600 From: "Paul Smith" <pksmith_morin at msn.com> Subject: brewing texts Will Randle wants to recommendations on a good brewing chemistry text. These are mine: George Fix's "Principles of Brewing Science" is good, laying out in very elegant terms the biochemical components and processes of wort and beer production. It is also reasonably priced. However, for brewing chemistry, I would recommend the Hough, Briggs, et al, Eds.,' Malting and Brewing Science series. It is definitely geared towards the professional brewer, but then, it's the same chemistry. The costs may be prohibitive but I think they are well worth the money, if you want an exhaustive look at the subject. Wolfgang Kunze's "Technology Malting and Brewing" is also excellent, but I would hold off if all you wanted was chemistry. While chemistry and biochemistry and thoroughly discussed, the real value in my view is his additional in-depth discussion (as the title suggests), of the technology involved in malting, wort and beer production (e.g., schematics and drawings of lauter tuns v. mash filters, pneumatic v. mechanical malt conveyors, etc.). Both the Stevens and Kunze texts are pricey, but again, great texts if you want to pursue it. The Practical Brewer is available via pdf download at the Master Brewer Association of the Americas website. It takes forever, but it's free. A good text. Paul Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 09:28:22 -0500 From: Dan Listermann <72723.1707 at compuserve.com> Subject: Zapap - Phil's Phalse Bottom Brian Dixon (briandixon at home.com) writes: < The difference between the Phalse Bottom and the Zapap was actually quite significant ... a 5-gallon batch with 8 lbs of grain would end up differing by almost 4 points! (Difference in ppg is 2.41 ppg, so 8 lbs would result in a difference of 19.3 total points. Divide this by 5 to get the difference in SG points for the batch ... 3.9 pts! Or for this example batch, 1.054 versus 1.050!) Charlie Papazian strikes again!> A bit of history here. Phil's Phalse Bottom is a direct descendant of Charlie Papazian's Zapap. The very first Phalse Bottom was made from the bottom of a Zapap. I still have it, stained from stout and all. Dan Listermann dan at listermann.com 72723.1707 at compuserve.com Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 06:35:27 -0800 (PST) From: "H. Dowda" <hdowda at yahoo.com> Subject: Palmetto State Brewers The competition info is at: http://www.sagecat.com/psbcomp2.htm If that doesn't work PLEASE let me know. The club site is at http://www.psbrewer.org __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 06:39:44 -0800 From: Brian and Shirley Cornelius <corneliu at colfax.com> Subject: re: VERY old can of Bud Jeff McNally writes < A good friend of mine gave me a very old, full, can of Budweiser.... On the front of the can it says: "brewed and canned at Newark, NJ, USA by Anheuser-Busch, Inc. St. Louis - Newark - Los Angeles" Any ideas/guesses as to how old this can is?> The AB Newark plant opened in 1951 and is still operating. The LA plant opened in 1954 and is still operating. In 1958 they opened a plant in Florida. So, you'd be looking at a can produced sometime between 1954 and 1958. < Any ideas/guesses as to what this may be worth (and no, it's not for sale)?> Largely depends on the condition of the can. Rust? Humidity spots? Scratches? Dents? A full can often eliminates much of the market that would be worried it will leak. e-Bay is the natural place to start on a price. Brian Steptoe, WA Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 08:54:13 -0600 From: Susan/Bill Freeman <potsus at bellsouth.net> Subject: SS fittings IMHO, stainless fittings for brew kegs are best welded on or through the keg wall with a TIG. It is possible to thread a MPT through the wall and lock it on the inside, but I think this begs a blowout at some time or other at worst and leaks at best after several brew sessions. By putting a 1/2 SS union through the wall, you gain threads on the outside and inside for anything using a 1/2 FPT. You really don't want to know what a true SS bulkhead fitting sells for. A source of SS fittings is here: http://www.plumbingsupply.com/stainles.html Pipe threads are much easier to use than ferrule or compression fittings. A little teflon tape and the seal is made. On tubing a simple screw clamp works just fine. The quick disconnects I use are brass and are most often found in the graden hose supplies part of your local mega home inprovement store. Brass must be treated for lead by soaking in a solution of 1 part hydrogen peroxide and 2 parts vinegar before you use them. "the perfesser" is all plumbed with 1/2 inch hard copper except for silicone tubing on short runs. Hope this helps. Bill Freeman aka Elder Rat Birmingham, AL Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 21:59:12 -0600 From: "Jack Schmidling" <arf at mc.net> Subject: Economies of Scale From: "Matthew A. Cosenza" <MCosenza at KAPLAW.com> >All this Shipping and Handling stuff has gotten me irritated. I realize that there is extra cost in "handling" an item to be shipped-- But there's an added benefit in that you are increasing your target customer base my millions!..... You don't seem to understnad the market out there if you think there are millions of folks who would buy a MM if they just knew where to get it. > It's the Wal Mart theory-- sell more stuff at cheaper prices. If I cut my price in half, the most I could get is a 10 or 20% increase in sales that would result from wiping out the competition. If I had all the business, I still would not have the volume to buy parts off shore and my costs would not change by one percent. There simply are no economies of scale in a product like this and comparing to to Walmart is nonsense. >Every cent does not need to be passed on. The smart e-sellers will offer NO shipping or handling costs.... The "smart" e-sellers are making zero profit or losing money. They also manufactur nothing, have no investement in engineering or design and are simply service business. Different program entirely. >It's insulting to me that stores add a handling cost. I know the boxes cost more-- but this is the way that e-business is going to be..... Just because one has a web site or email address does not make them an "e-business". We have been building mills since years before that word even existed and just for the record, our price has not change since the first year we were in business. > Make up your costs with volume. That sounds like an old joke. You can not make up in volume what you lose in profit. js PHOTO OF THE WEEK http://user.mc.net/arf/weekly.htm HOME: Beer, Cheese, Astronomy, Videos http://user.mc.net/arf Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 07:33:03 -0800 From: "Dan Schultz" <dschultz at primenet.com> Subject: PMMA as an adhesive for Pump Fittings Chester notes: >I've found an answer to a problem that I've seen mentioned in >several RIMS/HERMS web sites but can't remember being mentioned in >HBD: How to get a PERMANENT water-tight seal between the mag impeller >pump body and the threaded connectors. <snip> > I note that its basic material is (poly)methylmethacrylate - >essentially the same stuff as bone cement in surgery, and plexyglas, >so it should be chemically inert once cured. Be carefull of PMMA (super glue) type adhesives. They tend to give up their adhesion properties at 100C depending on the specific type. If you were gluing the two pieces together, let me recommend a two part epoxy instead as epoxy systems will have higher thermal capabilities. Because of the differences between the thermal expansion coefficients of the plastic fitting (typically Ryton R4, a 40% glass fiber PPS) and the metal fitting, the high number of thermal cycles makes this a difficult at best area to seal. Typically, an elastomer type sealant would work best so that it can absorb the different expansion rates without losing a seal. So maybe a silicone sealent might be better. Hmm, you noted that didn't work either? Maybe a fluoro silicone sealent which has higher temp capabilities? One note on plastic pump fittings: Always get the plastics fittings in the male style as the female style are stressed to much by the expansion of an NPT male pipe. The plastic will fail very easily. Burp, -Dan Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 09:34:04 -0500 From: "Peter J. Calinski" <PCalinski at iname.com> Subject: Hot Sauce and fermenting I started to post this information last week but decided it was off topic. Now, Paul Niebergall's question brings it back. This was Paul's question: "Now I have made my own hot sauces before but never tried to ferment them. Has anyone ever tried this? Any hints on how to go about it?" I heard a piece on a Toronto news radio station (no news stations in the Buffalo area) last week about a Hawaiian company that was recalling its hot sauce. It seems that when the bottle is opened, the contents erupt and can spray the persons hands and eyes with hot sauce. The recalling company claimed that the garlic in the sauce was fermenting and causing the pressure buildup. Pete Calinski East Amherst NY Near Buffalo NY Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 10:27:51 -0500 From: "Peter J. Calinski" <PCalinski at iname.com> Subject: 1st All Grain----Zapap Bruce Carpenter said: "my aching hand, I put the two buckets together. I noticed that the space between the bottom of the top bucket and the bottom of the 2nd bucket is about 3.75 inches (beneath the "false bottom")." Go one step further. After you finish the holes, take a carpenter's knife (I assume Bruce Carpenter has a carpenter's knife ;-)) and cut the bottom off the bucket about 1" above the bottom. Now you have a false bottom. It will go all the way down in the outer bucket, bumping on the outlet hose. This will also eliminate another problem. Before I did this, I had air leaking between the inner and outer buckets. Sometimes I would hear a loud sucking sound as the air leaked between the buckets and aerated the wort. Using just the bottom solved this problem. One caution. This bottom will float so keep something handy to hold it down as you add the grain. Also, if you make another one, instead of a drill, I used a soldering iron to melt the holes. The soldering iron I have makes ~ 1/8" diameter holes. I scribed a 1/4" by 1/4" grid on the bottom of the bucket and melted holes at the grid crossings. It took less than 2 hours to do the melt. Pete Calinski East Amherst NY Near Buffalo NY Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 10:42:00 -0500 From: "FLEMING, JOE" <JOE.FLEMING at spcorp.com> Subject: Lemon Don mentions he uses finely chopped lemon peel in the secondary for his lemon-fresh beers. I know that in the culinary world only the zest (yellow outside) is used as the pith (white inside) tends to be bitter. I guess that time spent in the lower pH, evolving wort may offset this. I'll have to try it. An HBDer tipped me on this: zest in the bottling bucket gives a great lemon scent but with little taste to compete with your beer. However the zest does not dissolve and may, in an unappealing fashion, float about your glass! Someone mentioned RealLemon (reconstituted lemon); my favorite description of RealLemon is: "a gastronomic effrontery." Joe PS I've been away from the HBD for a few years and it's good to see that its lost none of its flavor; real malt body (great info) with balanced hop bitterness (tempers & unrelated postings for perspective). And I'm pleasantly surprised to see some of the same brewers diligently adding to the collective wisdom. You know who you are -- thanks! Is my beer ruined? Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 09:12:44 -0700 From: "Timmons, Frank" <frank.timmons at honeywell.com> Subject: Converting Propane Cooker to Gas Greetings! I have a Cache Cooker (high pressure jet-type propane cooker made in Utah) that I want to convert to Natural Gas. I have just gotten permission to run gas to the house (too bad it cost me the price of kitchen remodel to do it) from the s.o. I have looked at it and don't see any kind of restriction orifice, like the ring type burners have, just a dial-type pressure regulator. I know I can't just hook up the regulator to the gas line and expect it to work, the supply pressure of the gas is much less that the pressure in a propane tank. Has anyone ever successfully converted one of these things? Or does anybody have a contact at the company that made it? I have done a web search with no success, and can't find a phone listing either. Frank Timmons James River Homebrewers Richmond, VA Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 08:29:38 -0800 From: Jonathan Peakall <jpeakall at mcn.org> Subject: racking/kegging techniques >>Okay, am i the only one who has thought of this? I first fill the >>destination keg with sanitizer and after the appropriate amount of time push it out with c02, I now have a sanitized keg with no air. When i transfer from one keg to another I use connect C02 to the In side of the full keg and go from the Out of the full to the OUT of the empty keg - elimiates foaming. On the In side of the target keg i put a blowoff tube into a jar with sanitizer - allows ac02 out and no air in. I thus get no exposer to air during the transfer. That's exactly what I do. Works great, no siphon, no air. If you keg, it's the only way to go. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 08:42:10 -0800 From: "Brian D." <briandixon at home.com> Subject: Re: Mills n Drills > "Contrary to all popular > belief and Jack, I use a 3/8 drive drill motor to power mil JSP. It has > worked for the last 3 years without a hitch. > > Actually, the reason we do not recommend using a drill on the MM is because it > defeats the self-destruct mechanism. When a drill is chucked up to the mill, > the magnetic flux lines are parallel to the roller with the detonator in it and > not enough energy is transmitted to set it off. > > One of the dumbest things I ever did was to design the mill with a 3/8" shaft > that would fit any electric drill on earth. We lose a great deal of business > not only on the $472 motorized option but we can't even sell a drill adapter. > > js Uh oh! I finally understand why I had to buy a Valley Mill ... my MaltMills kept blowing up while I was cranking them! If I had only known! brian Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 08:51:02 -0800 From: "Brian D." <briandixon at home.com> Subject: Best non-auto sparging technique? Ok, for those who have a 3-tier (or other) system with a sparging arm and all the 'works' for doing this task automatically, you can skip this post ... For those of us that have an open lautering system and pour water into it in various ways, read up! Here's a question or two for you (idea generators) ... and please, for myself anyway, I'm not looking for batch sparging or "put the sparge water in all at once" ideas. Noble in their cause, I'm used to the trickling method(s) and get good results, so I don't want to change (yet). Q) I pour hot sparge water through a SS colander with a 2-cup Pyrex measuring cup so that the sparge water forms little streams and drops and doesn't cause channeling ... what's the best non-hand-holding answer to the colander? I don't mind pouring water in to keep the sparge water from 0" to 1 1/2" deep on the grain bed, but I hate holding the colander ... duh ... been doin' it this way for years. I've heard of using drilled cake pans that are suspended above the grain (wires and gizmos), floating (large) Rubbermaid container lids that have been drilled (just set it right on the grain bed), etc. Any votes on the best and easiest method? If I suspend something from higher up (so it'll accommodate deep OR shallow beds of grain), is there a problem with the sparge water passing through lots of air before it strikes the grain/water? Aeration? Cooling? Channeling? I most of all want to hear from those who have come up with something that you can pour in to and are now currently using that method ... and love it. Ideas? Brian Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 12:14:03 -0500 From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: Mouthfeel, Brewsters: Steve Worth's suggestion to go back and re-read Papazian's book after brewing a few is a good one. But if Charlie is the origin of Steve's concept that dextrins contribute to mouthfeel, he's wrong. Soluble proteins contribute to mouthfeel and dextrins do not, acccording to many scientific investigations. Keep on Brewin' Dave Burley Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 11:12:18 -0800 From: "Eric R. Theiner" <logic at skantech.com> Subject: Caustic Sanitizer This may already have been addressed ad nauseum, but I'm behind on my HBD's and had to respond to what I just read-- Graham Sanders' thoughts on caustic as a sanitizer. First-- why no problems with infection? Cleanliness is 99% of sanitation. Generally speaking, microbes don't live on glass, plastic or metal-- they need food and a hospitable environment. Remove the gunk, dust and so forth, and you're going to remove the bulk of the microbes. The odd single-celled organism or spore remaining may not have an ample opportunity to infect your brew due to your large, healthy yeast slurry (one of the reasons for using that slurry). Second-- caustic destroys microorganisms? Some, not all. Not by a long shot. You have your spore formers which are very good at resisting many sanitizers, let along cleansers, and you have organisms surrounded by a proteinaceous cell wall which is a good shield from alkali. Then you have large colonies which will allow the outer edges to be attacked by the caustic, keeping the inner organisms safe and free from harm (caustic has a bit of surface tension that prevents effective penetration). Caustic's a great cleanser, but I'd use a sanitizer to be safe. Rick Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 12:28:56 -0500 From: "Chris Beadle" <cbeadle at fischerUS.com> Subject: pH questions with RO water Hi all - I hope someone can shed some light on my pH problems. I recently started using RO (reverse osmosis) water to brew with, and was surprised to find the pH of the water itself was quite low (4.7). I have to add calcium carbonate (1 tsp) to the mash (pale ale malt, 55L crystal and 1/4 lb wheat)to bring the pH up from 4.7 to 5.0. I then must add two more teaspoons to the boil to bring it up from 5.0 to 5.3 (Miller's recommended minimum). (On the positive side, I don't have to acidify my sparge water!). My next batch with this water yielded the same results. My problem, aside from the fact I don't want to add this much chalk, especially when brewing lager, is that I didn't get a very good hot break, and my beer had a bad permanent haze. I have been told that the pH of RO water should be neutral (7.0), so I tested a bottle of commercial RO water and it measured 5.0. I use the ColorpHast strips to measure the pH. Thanks in advance for any answers, insights, or random musings. Chris Beadle Macomb Twp, MI Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 10:14:18 -0800 From: "Richard" <seaotter at orland.net> Subject: Stout/Sour Mash I'm going to try my hand at a stout, the recipe states that it is similar to Guinness (Toad Spit Stout from Joy of Home Brewing) but is lacking the "twang" of the real stuff due to it's lack of soured beer which Guinness uses. For those not familiar with it, the recipe is a DME and extract syrup recipe. Being adventurous, I turned to the appendix in which Papazian gives a sour mash procedure. Basically, you dissolve your malt extracts in hot water, stabilize at 130, add 1/2 pound crushed pale malted barley, and try to hold at elevated temperature for 15 to 24 hours to sour. Then boil, add hops, etc. I was wondering if anyone has tried this procedure. Is the result *very* sour? Too sour for a Guinness type stout? Should I make up a very small batch of soured wort and add it into the regular recipe? I've heard Guinness uses about 3% in the final mix. I want to play with this but want to see what y'all might have tried along these lines also. Thanks! Rich Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 14:01:43 -0500 From: "Alan Meeker" <ameeker at welchlink.welch.jhu.edu> Subject: brewchem books Will Randle asked about chem books: >I want a good chemistry text on the brewing process. I am thinking of buying >either "Analysis of Brewing Techniques" (Fix) or "Principles of Brewing >Science: A Study of Serious Brewing Issues, 2nd Ed." (also Fix). I can't >page through them to decide, and will have to order via mail or internet >without really knowing what to expect from either one. I have a degree in >chemistry and have been homebrewing for 2 years (12 batches made). Does >anyone have an opinion to share regarding one or both of these books? For >instance are these written for the homebrewer in mind or the professional >brewer? Does it matter? Will, are there any particular aspects of brewing chem you are interested in or do you want info on all of the process steps? The first edition of POBS contained several errors and had a significant amount of irrelevant material (IMHO) so I wouldn't recommend this. I haven't seen the second edition which has just come out, presumably it has been updated and the errors corrected. However, this means that you can pick up the first edition of POBS for a song (I got mine for $4 at the local bookstore) so it might be worth getting after all if it can be had cheap, with your background in chem you will easily navigate around the basic science errors. The info in AOBT is of better quality than the first ed of POBS and is complimentary in many respects, for instance it has a nice section on the characteristics of many of the commercially available yeast strains which I haven't seen gathered together and published before this. There are a few things in AOBT that are annoying (like wasting space by including a picture of a microscope and such) and I wonder about some of the info like Fix's "modeling" of amylase activity - the graph of the pH dependence looks backwards compared to actual activity profiles as measured in laboratory studies but he gives little detail as to how this graph was actually generated so I'm not sure what is going on here. All in all, I prefer AOBT to POBS but as I said perhaps the second ed of POBS is worth buying. The target audience seems to be a mix of the serious homebrewer / micro brewer. Other sources: There is a little paperback called "Brewchem 101" By Janson that might be worth a look, it was reviewed a while back in Brewing Techniques. Speaking of Brewing Techniques, If you can get a hold of back issues there are many good articles sprinkled about on topics like water chemistry, amylases, phenols, etc. Especially nice was the series of articles by Scott Bickham entitled "Focus on Flavor" in which he went into great detail covering many of the chemical species responsible for beer flavor (both good and bad flavors) as well as their sources, how to do doctored beer tests to help recognize the relevant species and commercial examples which highlight some of the key flavor contributors. MBAA has an entire book on their website downloadable in Adobe Acrobat format that's definitely worth a look. There's a lot of chemistry in here including wort production/boil, yeast fermentation biochem, hop chem, etc. The appendix also has a section on many of the off-flavor compounds found to cause trouble and their characteristics and taste thresholds. This is a nice reference to have and the price (FREE!) is certainly right! I would highly recommend Brigg's "Malts and Malting" though it is a bit pricey. It has TONS of chemical info on malting and mashing. Lots of info on grains other than barley, on the various specialty malts and how they are produced too. There's also Lewis and Young's book "Brewing" which is along the lines of Fix's original POBS but does a much better job (again MHO) especially in outlining basic chemical and biochemical principles (though since you already have a chem degree this would probably be of little benefit). This was published in '95 so is also more up to date than the original POBS but again there is that new edition out there... (thanks to Dave Humes for loaning me these two books!!) Supposedly the two volume set "Malting and Brewing Science" (Hough) is excellent but I haven't read it and it is quite expensive (~ >$120 per volume). Hough's "Biochem of Malting and Brewing" is reputedly very good though I haven't seen it. Bamforth's "Tap into the Art and Science of Brewing" is easy to read and entertaining but not rigorous, still worth the read. Hope this was helpful to you -Alan Meeker Baltimore, MD Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 13:25:46 -0600 From: "Leak, Brad" <BradL at stratadvise.com> Subject: Saison Greetings, I've been searching for a recipe for a Saison and have not encountered much. I did find one recipe on Gambrinus' Mug, but it's an extract recipe and I would like to try an all-grain. If anyone has successfully brewed a Saison please email me (private email okay). On a related note, I have a bottle of Fantome Saison in my fridge and was wondering if anyone knew if the yeast was fermenting yeast and if it could be cultured. Thanks in advance for your input. Brad Leak Chicago, IL Shocka at mcs.net Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 15:38:23 EST From: Warandle1 at aol.com Subject: pumpkin light ale Michael K. asks about a light ale recipe with pumpkin. Here is mine. Basically a recipe from Ray Daniels Homebrew Fun book, for 5 gallons (mini mash): 2 lbs crushed two row malt 0.5 lbs crushed crystal malt (light or 20L) 5 lbs extra light malt extract 0.75 oz Cascade hops for boil 0.5 oz US Saaz hops for 30 minutes 0.5 oz US Saaz hops for 5 minutes two pumpkins-each 9 inches in diameter 1 tsp pumpkin pie spice last 2 min of boil Wyeast 1098 British Ale Yeast 5 oz (3/4 cups) corn sugar for bottling Clean out guts of pumpkins and cut into chunks. Bake at 250F for 1.5-2 hrs or until soft. Puree or squash/crush soft pumpkin. I cut off the skin as it scorched in the oven. I did not read any where to do this it just seemed wise (actually this is recommended by Dawnell Smith in Brew Your Own, July 99). Add pumpkin puree and crushed grains to 3 qts water and steep at 155F for 1 hour. Strain and sparge into brew pot and bring to boil; add extracts, hops etc as usual. This should fit your request for a light ale. The color was golden orange. I followed the above directions except I did not add my pumpkin to the mini-mash grains. I read from someone elses post this was a mistake as no enzymes worked on the pumpkin starches. I did not have room for all the "mash" ingredients to go into the mash pot (I had three gallons of pumpkin puree), so I just steeped my pumpkin in 145F water for one hour in a different pot and strained it into my brew pot. I essentially added pumpkin flavored water to my brew pot. Regardless, the beer to me and two other homebrewers was thought to be quite good. It was a tad hazy but typical of my homebrew. I use Irish moss and chill the wort. In no way could I detect the flavor of the pumpkin pie spice. I could not tell you how much nutmeg to add. The beer has a slight but noticeble pumpkin flavor. Pumpkin by itself is relatively mild. I did not get an original gravity, but it finished quite high at 1.030. I've read that canned pumpkin does not taste as good as fresh pumpkin (Daniels); Papazian (Complete Joy) says canned pumpkin has preservatives that a brewer should stay clear of, but Sal Emma (in Brew Your Own, Jan 00) wrote that canned pumpkin was better cause the heat process used to treat pumpkin for canning converts much of the pumpkin to sugar. For this recipe, Daniels recommends two 15 oz cans of pumpkin should you decide to go with the canned stuff to lighten the work load. It took me three hours just to prepare the fresh pumpkin--cutting, baking, pureeing. Will Randle My thoughts are my own and may not accurately reflect what I might think in the future. P.S. This post was rejected the first time. Due none ascii characters. Was this due to apostrophes in word like didnt? All the lines in error had that in common. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 13:59:28 -0800 From: Project One <project1 at pond.net> Subject: Re: adding DME to distilled water Jeff Renner said: >I think your problem may lie in your water - I've never heard of adding DME >to distilled water as a treatment. Was this a typo? Did you mean gypsum? >If not, then you had none of the calcium needed for efficient conversion. >I'd suggest 1-2 tsp. gypsum for the whole batch. I'm getting caught up here, so forgive me if this has already been covered... This is the same thing I do. The advice came from Ken Schwartz' website. I don't have the text in front of me here, but paraphrasing, he said in a paper on converting extract to partial mash batches, that if your water was an unknown, the easiest thing to do is to use distilled water and add 1 Tbsp./gal. DME to it. He claims that is creates a chemical "signature" in the water that will in effect adjust it properly. He says that this is easier and more certain than hit and miss treatments. I use well water and don't have a full analysis, so I switched to this method. It seems to have increased my efficiency by at least several points. ----------->Denny Conn a long way from Jeff Renner, but close to the center of the beer universe in Eugene OR Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 18:42:47 -0600 From: ALABREW <alabrew at mindspring.com> Subject: Jack's mill Jack wrote, "Actually, the reason we do not recommend using a drill on the MM is because it defeats the self-destruct mechanism. When a drill is chucked up to the mill, the magnetic flux lines are parallel to the roller with the detonator in it and not enough energy is transmitted to set it off." I must have used the wrong drill. My malt mill did self-destruct (personal use only). The (small) hopper came apart and the base broke. It does make a nice, though expensive door stop. That's why we have used a PhilMill here at the shop for the past three years. - -- ALABREW Homebrewing Supplies http://www.mindspring.com/~alabrew Birmingham, AL Home Beer and Wine Making Specialists Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 17:47:05 -0800 From: Marty Brown <ms_brown at pacbell.net> Subject: Handling fees Donald Lake posts that he doesn't like handling fees. But in so doing, he impugns the integrity of a long time home brew vendor that has sold hundreds (thousands? Tens of thousands?) of reliable and well built mills. To call a fairly common trade practice a deception is really uncalled for. The logical reason for the charge is that which you call a "nice try", but refuse to accept. If I order two or three mills, as a small homebrew shop, I'll pay a lesser overall price than if Jack builds an average cost to ship each individual mill into his basic pricing. Donald then goes onto to asking all to avoid buying from those who charge handling fees. I think most homebrewers are intelligent enough to look at the total cost of a transaction and decide when the goods are worth the price. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 18:50:46 -0700 From: "Dana H. Edgell" <EdgeAle at cs.com> Subject: SS Fittings & Quick-Connects Rod Prather asks about s.s. bulkhead fittings and quickconnects. Rod, I use Swagelok brass bulkhead fittings (male pipe to compression) on my kegs. The aren't too expensive ($4 each?) and work well. I beleive they are available in s.s. at a higher cost. check out http://www.swagelok.com for your local distributor. NOTE: I use a homemade teflon washer to make the seal with the curved keg sides. As for quick-connects, I have tried brass ones made for high pressure washers but I noticed many small bubbles and feared they weren't an airtight seal. To avoid HSA concerns (if you beleive in HSA) I now use Acetyl plastic fittings from Colder Products (http://www.colder.com). They are also available in polysulfone if you want to pay more for ones rated up to boiling. I have had no problems with the acetyl probably do to the relatively short contact time and temp losses as the wort leaves the kettle. NOTE: I use an electric system. I probably wouldn't put plastic QC's on a direct fired kettle w/o a proven heat shield. Dana Edgell - -------------------------------------------------------------- Dana Edgell mailto:EdgeAle at cs.com Edge Ale Brewery http://ourworld.cs.com/EdgeAle San Diego Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 23:02:19 EST From: WayneM38 at aol.com Subject: Spruce Beer/Brewing Techniques Vol. 4, No. 2 I am looking for Brewing Techniques Vol. 4, No. 2 "Specifics on Using Spruce in Beer" Anyone have this issue? Helping a friend with a spruce beer for Revolutionary War reenactment weekends. Thanks in advance Wayne Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 23:51:53 EST From: RBoland at aol.com Subject: Rauchenfels Jeff and Pat talked recently discussed the smokey flavor, and inconsistency, of Rauchenfels steinbier. I watched it being mad this past November. Porous rocks are heated in a natural gas furnace (no beechwood here). The hot rock is repeatedly dipped into about 50 gallons of wort and sugars caramelize in the pores and on the rock surface. The rocks are then added to the lagering tanks, the burned/carmelized sugars dissolve into the wort, and voila, steinbier. It is all handwork, a pitchfork of sorts is used to handle the hot rocks, so variability is not surprising. The Rauchenfels folks were great hosts and justifiably proud of their beer. Give them a call if you're headed for Bavaria and you'll not be disappointed! See you at MCAB. Bob Boland Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 01/18/00, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96