HOMEBREW Digest #3236 Mon 31 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

  Fullsail Ale ***Help with converting extract to all-grain (Bob (Ballsacius)
  Simple all-grain ("Doug Moyer")
  Ginger Beer Posting 2 (Lyn Howard) (Lynhbrew)
  raising mash pH (Marc Sedam)
  copyright/ Practical Brewer (Marc Sedam)
  re:  Brewers Best thermometer melting cap (Paul Kensler)
  So? Go brew! (Some Guy)
  Re: raw wheat in witbier (Jeff Renner)
  Re: repitching yeast (Jeff Renner)
  copyright (Marc Sedam)
  arts and crafts and beer (jliddil)
  Adobe Acrobat and PDF (John Adsit)
  Anyone have a Rheingold recipe to share? (RRodda5250)
  Wit beer wheat ("St. Patrick's")
  Re: Practical Brewer download & quality ("Frank J. Russo")
  Pressure Canner Woes (Nathan Kanous)
  Re: Practical Brewer PDFs ("Robert A. Uhl")
  Importance of wort clarity ("George de Piro")
  Stuck sparge with EM...Hmm... ("Jack Schmidling")
  BT Back Issue Clarification ("K. Reinhard")
  Regarding the difficult Practical Brewer Download: (WayneM38)
  Yellow Hefe's ("scott")
  when is enough enough already? (Dick Dunn)
  Re: Microwave bombs (Matthew Arnold)
  re: Microwave Bombs (Dick Dunn)
  Re: Caustic (phil sides jr)
  Troy's Water/Microwaving Water ("A. J. deLange")
  Re: re: Efficiency vs.Yield (VQuante)

* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! * Entry deadline for the Mayfare Homebrew Competition is 3/15/00 * See http://www.maltosefalcons.com/ for more information 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: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 06:56:40 EST From: Ballsacius at aol.com Subject: Fullsail Ale ***Help with converting extract to all-grain (Bob A patient of mine was in recently. He said he had been out west(we are in Pennsylvania) and asked if I have ever tried Fullsail Breweries product. I have not. He said they are from Oregon and have a super tasting amber. Have anyone on this forum tried this? I understand that they do not ship this far east? Would anybody like to "swap" a few of these brews for something local of mine? I have Victory Brewing very close by, and there HopDevil IPA is to die for!(no affiliation just a blah, blah, blah). Thanks for the input. Also, I am converting an extract recipe to a all-grain and would like to be sure on my guess of converting Extract Amber Ale 3.3 lbs gold liquid (I used M&F) 1lb light DME 2 lbs Lager grain 1lb British pale 1/2 lb CaraVienne 2 oz chocolate 1 oz Tettnanger Hop(boil) 2 oz Hallertuaer Hop( 1 at 40 min, 1 at knockout) Wyeast American Ale 1056 My all grain conversion Amber 8 lbs pale ale(am not sure if I will use Marris otter or Breiss pale ale) 2oz chocolate(for color) 1/2 caravienne 1 oz Tettnanger (boil) 2 oz Hallertuaer.(40 and finish) 1056 ale yeast Is this a good conversion? Pretty basic, but this provided me with a really good drinkable ale when I did extract. I finally decided to go back and give it a try. Thanks for the help Bob Fesmire Madman Brewery Pottstown, PA Ballsacius at aol.com Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 08:47:17 -0500 From: "Doug Moyer" <shyzaboy at yahoo.com> Subject: Simple all-grain Howdy ho, brewers! Bill Frazier <billfrazier at worldnet.att.net>, when explaining that it is simple to get into all-grain, sez: "I've brewed some very malty beers with one decoction." To simplify it even further, do single infusion mashes using Munich malt (I use Weissheimer) as your base malt. The best IPAs I've ever made used all Munich (sometimes with some malted wheat, sometimes not) for the grain bill. All that wonderful maltiness really works well with the big hops. About as simple as it gets, and you don't have to worry about the cloying sweetness from too much crystal. IPAs aside, you can make a wonderful ale that even works as a transition beer using 100% Munich malt, fairly lightly hopped with a noble-like hop (Liberty is nice) and a clean yeast like Nottingham. Talk about simple, malty & delicious! Brew on! Doug Moyer Salem, VA Star City Brewers Guild: http://hbd.org/starcity __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 09:18:45 EST From: Lynhbrew at aol.com Subject: Ginger Beer Posting 2 (Lyn Howard) Steve Owens Puff at netcom.com wrote << I often bring a keg of homebrew to my friends' poetry readings or art openings. The kids and various teetotalling adults get kind of left out, so I've been thinking about brewing up some batches of ginger beer (one of my favorite soft drinks - I prefer Stewart's ginger beer to the sweeter Jamaican Ginger beer), cream soda, and/or root beer. Can anybody suggest some good recipes for these? >> Steve, there are good soda extracts for this. I have used the homebrew soda extract (small brownish box) and added a little lemon and some fress ginger 'tea' for extra zing. I find making it in a keg a force carbonating it a lot more reliable than using champagne yeast. But either method should theoretically work. The Carib Shandy Lager (original recipe) that I referenced in my post has an OG of 1.014, and an FG of 1.003-4. The book say it is 1.3% alcohol by volume with an SRM of 1. Here is the recipe per the book. (Clone Brews) Yield: 5 gallons 1 oz. 20 Lovibond Crystal Malt Crush and steep in 1/2 gallon water at 150 degrees F for 20 min. Strain grain into brew pot and sparge with another 1/2 gallon water at 150 degrees F. Add water to bring brew pot level to 1.5 gallons and bring to a boil. Remove from heat and add: 1 lb corn sugar 1/2 lb M&F extra light DME 8 oz lactose Add water to bring brew pot total to 2.5 gallons. Boil for 45 min. then add 2 oz peeled and chopped ginger 1 tsp irish moss Boil 15 min. , then remove pot from heat and cool 15 min. Strain cooled wort into primary and add cold water to 5 gallons. Pitch yeast when temp. is under 80 degrees F. Recommended yeast: Wyeast 2007 Pilsen or 2035 American Lager Primary ferment 5-7 days, in secondary add 3 oz natural ginger flavoring. Bottle with 1 cup corn sugar when fermentation is complete. My version of this recipe follows. It turned out to be a very light and bubbly lager (I kegged it due to time limitations). It was served in champagne flutes as an aperatif at the Culinary Institutes Homebrew Dinner last winter. Carib Ginger Shandy Lager Recipe: O.G. 1.028 F.G. 1.010 1/2 lb Breiss Crystal Malt (20L) 1 oz Dewolf - Cosyns Special B Malt 1/2 lb Corn Sugar 1 1/2 lbs Honey 1 1/2 lbs Laaglander Extra Light DME 1/2 lbs Lactose 1/2 oz Cascade Hop Pellets at 3.5% alpha (60 min. boil) 2 oz grated fresh ginger root (last 15 min of boil) 1 tsp Irish Moss (last 15 min of boil) Reuse of Danish Lager Yeast from a friend Pitched yeast at 60 degrees F. Primary at about 50 degrees F for 15 days, secondary at 35-40 degrees F for 14 days. A strong tea of ginger boiled in 1 cup water was added when kegged. Enjoy, Lyn Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 09:43:08 -0500 From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam at unc.edu> Subject: raising mash pH Go to a canning store and buy "slaked lime" (NaOH). Make up a 3% (w/w) solution and add minute quantities to the mash water. I have a similar water profile and a few drops (2-3) brings the mash pH where it needs to be. Stir vigorously and check the pH after adding each drop. Oh, and Carmen has the Checker II pH meter. If I recall that's the one with the metal probe. Those meters are only accurate to 0.5 of a pH unit, which means your pH 5 measurement could be between 4.5-5.5. Sorry to rain on the parade, but the meter (IMHO) is not even as accurate as test strips. At least with the test strips you can see what "side" of the pH you are likely on because of the degree of color change. Of course a good, accurate meter is not only ~$100-$150, but the probes wear out extraordinarily quickly due to the protein content of the wort. I "burned" out two probes before figuring that the $90 replacement cost wasn't worth accurate pH readings for 5 beers. Just my experience. Cheers! Marc "Huisbrouwerij Zuytdam" Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 09:54:25 -0500 From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam at unc.edu> Subject: copyright/ Practical Brewer I would not recommend changing the formatting of the Practical Brewer and redistributing without the express permission of the MBAA. This is classic copyright infringement as you're taking the written words of a copyrighted publication and redistributing without paying royalties to the publisher. Someone undoubtedly will want to argue that the internet changes everything (if I hear "new paradigm" again I'm going to...brew) and that posting the stuff on the web in PDF format for free gives the public the right to do anything they want with the material. The laws may not have caught up with technology yet, but they're still valid. One data point: when I've published my works in magazines I retained the copyright to the written word, but the magazine retains the copyright to the format the words were published in. By altering the format of the publication and redistributing you would be violating the copyrights of both the author and publisher. That's called efficient infringement. Cheers! Marc "Huisbrouwerij Zuytdam", author, inventor, protecter of copyrights worldwide :-* Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 08:55:16 -0600 From: Paul Kensler <Paul.Kensler at cyberstar.com> Subject: re: Brewers Best thermometer melting cap Drewmeister Andrew Nix said: "OK, one more....those floating thermometers (Brewer's Best I think), anyone else have a problem with the rubber handle coming off if you put them in water that is getting close to boiling (the glue fails). I had BOTH of mine come off this past brew session, one was brand new, the other I've had for years!!!" To which Ronald La Borde said: "I tossed mine, it seemed like the quintessential mark of a beginning homebrewer. :^)" And I toss in my two cents worth: Yes, my Bewers Best thermometer's little rubber cap comes off in the mash. Its not much of a problem with mine, because I have found that if I push it down far enough, the cap creates enough of a vacuum to keep it on just fine. I'm just careful not to hold it over concrete when its hot! Regarding the usefulness of these thermometers, I used to think along the same lines as Ron (I figured it can't be good, it came with my first kit and isn't NEARLY as cool as my dial thermometers!). Then I bought a lab-grade mercury thermometer for calibration - I discovered that my dial thermometers were 5-10 degrees off and my Brewers Best was within 1 degree of the lab thermometer! Each time I check calibration I have to adjust the dial thermometers again, and the BB is always within 1 degree. Yeah its slow as molasses, and yeah its not cool looking, and yeah the cap comes off when it gets too warm. But I can depend on mine to be accurate at least, and I never have to worry about recalibrating it! Of course, YMMV and this is in no way an endorsement of the Brewers Best line of thermometers (flame suit on!). Paul Kensler Lansing, MI Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 10:49:46 -0500 (EST) From: Some Guy <pbabcock at hbd.org> Subject: So? Go brew! Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager... On Fri, 28 Jan 2000 Marc wrote: > changes everything (if I hear "new paradigm" again I'm going > to...brew) and that posting the stuff on the web in PDF New paragdigm! It's a NEW PARADIGM!!! Gee, dad! Fit in with the NeW PaRaDiGm! If you cannot follow the New Paradigm, we'll have to let you go. I cannot fathom this NEW paradigm. What can you get for a new PARADIGM? (A coffee is at least two and a half paradigms around here.) OK, Marc! THere's six of them. I'll stop by in a few weeks to sample all the beer you're gonna brew now :-) I've asked the MBAA to allow us to mirror the Practical Brewer on the HBD site. I'll keep y'all posted. - See ya! Pat Babcock in SE Michigan pbabcock at hbd.com Home Brew Digest Janitor janitor@hbd.org HBD Web Site http://hbd.org The Home Brew Page http://hbd.org/pbabcock "Just a cyber-shadow of his former brewing self..." Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 09:57:07 -0500 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Re: raw wheat in witbier "mike o,neill" <mikeo2624 at uswest.net> ia planning a witbier and says he has >gotten some conflicting information regarding the best >form of wheat to use. Martin Lodahl in a artical says to >use raw winter wheat Briess says to use flaked and others >say just to use malted wheat but I have read that this ends >up more like an American wheat beer. I am planning on doing >a triple decoction mash so the wheat protein should not be a >problem, I hope. You definitely don't want to use malted wheat for authenticity. Raw, coarsely milled wheat is what's used traditionally. Flaked wheat will work just fine (I used it once to see)- it's just been steamed and rolled thru heated rollers, which gelatinizes the starch, but that will happen with truly raw wheat in the mash kettle anyway. The protein is unaffected, which is not the case with malted wheat. One problem is that you may not know what kind of wheat you are getting. Of course, with wheat kernels, you may not know either. In Belgium, brewers use a low protein, soft white winter wheat. This is also favored for malting. The protein is low (<~9%) and also "weak," that is to say, it is non-glutenous. It's great for pastries, but not for bread. It seems to me that all of this is good for beer, too. White wheat has less tannin/phenolic components. This means potentially a more mellow, softer beer. However, this may be theoretical and may not make a big difference. When Pierre Celis set up brewing in Texas, he used the local hard red winter wheat. This is higher in protein and the protein is stronger. I don't know what brewhouse changes he may have had to make to accomodate this wheat. You didn't say where you live. Here in Michigan, we grow some beautiful soft, white winter wheat. Some is also grown in adjoining states, NY and Ontario, and in the Pacific NW (where they grow Michigan developed varieties!). This is what I use, but it may be hard to get elsewhere. My second choice would be soft red winter wheat, then hard white winter (Kansas and California), hard red winter (most of the plains), and last of all hard red spring (northern plains, high in very strong, glutenous protein). At the very least, try to get the protein level of the wheat or flakes yyou want to use. Anything over 12% would look like potential trouble to me. But remember, this is all supposition from me based on my experience with other wheats in baking, not brewing. A triple decoction seems like overkill but that's up to you, of course. I don't remember if it is traditional. Jeff -=-=-=-=- Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, c/o nerenner at umich.edu "One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 10:44:04 -0500 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Re: repitching yeast Nina Cohen <nina at swva.net> asks >what's the best way to store yeast sludge taken from the bottom? Is a week >about the longest one can reasonably expect it to stay good in the fridge? The very best way, I think, is to use a real top fermenting yeast and an open fermenter (with or without a cover) so you can skim it. This produces the cleanest, most active yeast, I think. Keeping the yeast from the bottom of the secondary also produces very clean yeast, but some argue that it selects for slow flocculating yeast. I don't think that should be a problem for small numbers of repitchings. Yeast from the bottom of the primary fermenter is most likely to have large amounts of trub, hop particles, and dead yeast, although it can be washed (see http://www.wyeastlab.com for directions. I haev certainly kept harvested yeast in the fridge for many weeks. I think a month is pushing it, but I've been successful with that long and even a little longer. If it's been more than a week, I boost it a day or two ahead with a quart of wort in a gallon jar (for lots of air). If there is a homebrew club near you, hook up with it. It's a great way to learn. Jeff (I'm heading off to Big Sur for a week. Goodbye sub-zero Michigan!) -=-=-=-=- Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, c/o nerenner at umich.edu "One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 11:20:52 -0500 From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam at unc.edu> Subject: copyright I don't want to beat a dead horse, but I just came across this succinct description of copyright infringement. Thought it might be instructive vis a vis the MBAA thread. I'll let it die now. Cheers! Marc ******************************* To prove a case of copyright infringement, the plaintiff must prove both ownership of a valid copyright and infringement of that copyright by invasion of one of the five exclusive rights of copyright. Three of the exclusive rights that seem at issue are the rights to 1) reproduce the copyrighted work; 2) prepare derivative works based on the copyrighted work; and 3) distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public. Additionally, the work that the defendant is reproducing, adapting, distributing, etc. must be a copy of the copyrighted work. Infringement of a copyright can occur without word for word copying. Generally, a plaintiff in an infringement suit needs to prove that the defendant had access to the plaintiff's work and copied it either consciously or unconsciously. Access and copying would flow from the companies interaction with students of the professor. Courts have defined a "Substantial Similarity" test for determining what level of similarity determines copyright infringement. A large volume of case law is devoted to the last issue. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 09:38:59 -0700 (MST) From: jliddil at VMS.ARIZONA.EDU Subject: arts and crafts and beer OK has anyone run across any one who makes a/c style beer steins. Like Grueby or Fulper? Also has anyone made an a/c style bar? You know mortis and tenon, quarter-sawn oak etc. I'm considering replacing the base on my Maltmil(tm) with a piece of quarter-sawn oak and suing oak cabinet plywood for the hopper etc. anyone done such a thing? Jim Liddil Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 09:51:52 -0700 From: John Adsit <jadsit at jeffco.k12.co.us> Subject: Adobe Acrobat and PDF I create PDF files nearly every day. I can give some input into the situation. When I saw the size of those files, I didn't even try them. If they are image files, that means that they were scanned as images and converted directly in Adobe Acrobat. They clearly were not optimized, a process which would have allowed page-by-page downloading, a process that makes it seem almost instantaneous. If you can get a good copy to scan, you should scan it INTO ADOBE ACROBAT as a bitmap at 300 DPI. When it is imported into Acrobat, this will produce an excellent reproduction at a reasonable file size. If you want to do better, you should then use the CAPTURE process of Adobe to do the OCR. If you do that, the size of the file will drop dramatically, and you will have searchable text. Unfortunately, the 4.0 version of Acrobat has several bugs, one of which is in processing images. Specifically, it does not compress them properly. The resulting images files are huge, and there is nothing you can do about it. I just received the 4.05 version in the mail, which I hope will correct that bug. If an original version exists in a word processing format somewhere, it should be converted to PDF from that format directly rather than being scanned. This makes a gigantic difference in file size. If anyone does try to redo these, make sure the files are optimized. This brings us to another big. If you create it in 4.0, optimize it, make any change whatsoever, and then save it, it is no longer optimized. You have to do the Save As... bit all over again every time to keep it optimized. I hope this helps someone. As I said, I didn't even try. - -- John Adsit Instructional Services Jefferson County Schools Golden, Colorado jadsit at jeffco.k12.co.us Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 11:58:46 EST From: RRodda5250 at aol.com Subject: Anyone have a Rheingold recipe to share? I went into my local bar the other day and they were serving Rheingold on tap. I tried it (what the hell) and found it was the beer of my youth. Fishing trips with my old man, mowing the lawn, BBQs with the family... I drank it the rest of the time I was there and enjoyed it more than any other american tap I've come across. Unfortunately, I have been unable to find it in a package store. Anyone else try the reborn Rheingold? Any suggestions on how I can replicate it at home? I'd appreciate any/all extract/partial mash recipes you can suggest. Private responses welcome. Thanks much, Rich Rodda River Edge, NJ Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 11:20:39 -0500 From: "St. Patrick's" <stpats at bga.com> Subject: Wit beer wheat Mike O'Neill asks about wheat for wit. Celis, who know a little about the subject, uses winter wheat (not malted). Briess flaked wheat is a good approximation because it is made from raw wheat--not malted. Lynne O'Connor St. Patrick's of Texas http://www.stpats.com Brewers Supply 512-989-9727 512-989-8982 facsmile Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 09:22:07 -0500 From: "Frank J. Russo" <FJRusso at coastalnet.com> Subject: Re: Practical Brewer download & quality I have download all but 3 chapters of this guide. I also am disappointed in the quality of the PDF files. I DO HAVE the complete Adobe program. I have not tried the OCR route just yet but will over the weekend and if successful I will use Adobe to restore the PDF files. I do have a personal home page and will put the pages up there as I get them finished and let anyone interested know. By the way I need chapters 4,12 and 18. Not likely anyone can e-mail them to me they are just to large. Frank Russo Havelock, NC FJRusso at Coastalnet.com "There is only one aim in life and that is to live it." Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 13:50:58 -0600 From: Nathan Kanous <nlkanous at pharmacy.wisc.edu> Subject: Pressure Canner Woes Hi All, My pressure canner is getting old. It still works, but leaks a bit until I get it up to temperature / pressure. Presto no longer makes replacement gaskets. Anybody got any ideas how to find / fabricate a new seal for my canner? Presto will give me 40% off any new product in exchange for my old lid (sounds like some government conspiracy....we'll sell you a new one, but WE want the old one!). I just don't feel the need to shuck out $50 for a new canner and pay shipping to send them the lid to my old one. Any thoughts? I use it to can starter solutions...water for yeast washing...sterilizing fittings...there, my post is "beery". nathan in madison, wi Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 14:10:31 -0700 (MST) From: "Robert A. Uhl" <ruhl at austinc.edu> Subject: Re: Practical Brewer PDFs I ran the pdfs through pdftotext, a programme I have on my box which does as its name implies. Unfortunately, the pdfs (except for contents.pdf) are--as you all know by now--simply scans of the appropriate pages. This is one of the reasons why the pdfs are so utterly huge. If someone could get me the text I could start working on converting to LaTeX and from there to PostSrcipt & PDF. If you've never heard of it, LaTeX is a set of macros for TeX. TeX is just about the world's coolest document layout system. It was invented by Donald Knuth (yes, _that_ Donald Knuth) when his Art of Computer Programming, Vol. something-or-otehr was messed up at the printer's. It is hyper-capable and produces some really very beautiful output. I do have some questions about the legality of doing any of this, though. The text is copyright 1977, which means that without the MBAA's permission we cannot really do much except with our own copies (I believe that in the US, at least, it is legal to to what one wishes with one's own copy). Perh. they could be contacted? At the very least, an effort like this could be used to correct the size of the files (PDFs composed of text would be very much smaller than these are). Bob Uhl Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 15:38:26 -0500 From: "George de Piro" <gdepiro at mindspring.com> Subject: Importance of wort clarity Hi all, Jack Schmidling writes in Thursday's digest that obtaining clear wort from the lauter tun is unimportant because the beer will have plenty of time to clear later. This is a statement that many brewers would take exception to. Firstly, there is more at stake than beer clarity when discussing wort clarity. Cloudy lauter runoffs are higher in lipids (M&BS, Vol. 1 p.330), and this will most definitely affect the outcome of the fermentation (one outcome is an increase in ester production (M&BS v.2,p. 608). It is up to the drinker if this is desirable. There are also the more amorphous claims that high levels of wort lipids yield beers with poor flavor stability. One such claim is that worts with higher lipid concentrations are more prone to developing the cardboard-like flavors of trans-2-nonenal. In private communications with Garret Oliver (Brooklyn Brewery) and George Fix I learned that some people theorize that the apparent lack of stability in certain Munich beers is due to the use of the Meura 2001 mash filter, which apparently produces worts rich in lipids. It would be greatly appreciated if somebody with access to a good library (Steve Alexander) could investigate this further... Kunze claims that cloudy lauter wort will result in poor hot break separation during the boil, which means an increase in the amount of high molecular weight proteins and tannins that will make it into the beer. This can most definitely affect beer clarity. Which leads to the second thing I disagree with Jack about: the beer will always have time to clear later. That is sort of like saying that a poor music studio recording can be "fixed in the mix." If you produce an exceptionally cloudy beer it will take exceptional efforts to clear it. These can include filtration (something which most homebrewers cannot do, and commercial breweries prefer to do efficiently, meaning the beer should be relatively clear to begin with), fining agents (which may or may not work), cold temperature and time. "Time" sounds easy enough, but there are two problems with it: 1. People are impatient. The party is next week and the beer has the clarity of the Hudson river after a storm. 2. If you wait long enough, the beer will be clear, but will also be old-tasting, too! As a commercial brewer, I am cognizant of the desire to eliminate unnecessary work and worries from the brew day, but one must know enough about brewing to know when you need to worry and when you can say, "C'est la vie." You can make decent beer from turbid wort, but the odds of doing so or lower than they are if you achieve good wort clarity. George de Piro C.H. Evans Brewing Company at the Albany Pump Station (518)447-9000 http://evansale.com (under construction) Malted Barley Appreciation Society Homebrew Club http://hbd.org/mbas Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 10:51:54 -0600 From: "Jack Schmidling" <arf at mc.net> Subject: Stuck sparge with EM...Hmm... From: Midwest Brewer <mgeorge at bridge.com> >Huh? I routinely recirculate a gallon for my 5 gallon batches. The first 3 quarts I run full bore, and the last a bit slower. The first 3 almost always are murky, the last one only begins to clear somewhat toward the end..... I would be willing to bet you are not using an EASYMASHER (TM). I am not responsible for the problems people have using obsolete brewing schemes. If you are using an EM, your need to do all this is a result of not following the instructions that came with it. > Temp drop? I'd like to see data points on this. I am a fraid you will have to invest in a thermometer. >Hmm...I almost always gently rake / stir the grain bed in one form or another during the sparge, and I've never really had one get stuck... You seem to forget that the original poster was having a problem with an EM and I was trying to help him. >Stuck sparges are usually from compaction and air space between the grain bed and the filter... What filter? The grain bed is the filter. The only thing that causes stuck sparges with an EM is if the strainer gets clogged and stirring is the only thing that causes a clogged strainer. > Not from stirring IMO - I thought that was a way to get things flowing again..... I certainly will not argue with what works for you but again, it is not relevant to the problem. >Geez...all this time I've been recirculating for nothing I guess...but you are the brewer of the WGB, so it must be gospel. Well, the good new is, that now you know and can save years on to the rest of your life. >You want to know the single most important thing I've learned to help the flow from the lauter tun? Mashout. Since I've done that I've improved my beers significantly. I couldn't agree more but you are simply identifying mash temp as the real factor. Again, your whole posting may have boosted your ego but it won't help the person we are trying to help who is doing infusion mash in a cooler. 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: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 16:24:17 -0500 From: "K. Reinhard" <kevinr at clarksteel.com> Subject: BT Back Issue Clarification I personally have had some frustration regarding back issues of BT. I have been the biggest critic too, and not to rehash an old topic "to death" but.. I contacted Stephen Mallery via email regarding this matter. Stephen was kind enough to take the time to respond to me. I asked him for permission to post his response, sepcifically for thos of you who are in my shoes and have not received their back issues. Stephen has given me permission to post his response. I hope you'll take a minute to understand his position . [Begin Paste] I apologize for my slowness to respond regarding the status of BT back issues. Progress on that front stalled when a series of events compounded to absolutely bury me with work. I have a full-time+ job, I am single-parenting three kids, I lost my last staff member at the beginning of December, then Christmas -- that amazing time sink, and whatever time and energy I have had for BT has been consumed by the more immediate need to vacate a fairly complicated office setup (landlord pressure) and resolve certain other financial/legal issues. Meanwhile, physically displaced and left with different computer equipment than was previously set up for the task, I am having to re-start BT systems from my home for the purpose of back issue fulfilllment and order processing. I haven't done a good job, at least in getting it done ina timely manner, and I do apologize. Please understand, however, that it has nothing to do with anything immoral, illegal, or spineless. I'm just plain buried. Obviously I need to do better at communicating status to BT customers. I have always been and remain committed to the highest values, both for my craft of publishing and for my personal conduct. I had hoped to get an e-mail out to the online community this week. Here it is Friday, and I'm still so swamped I can't see it. But I will get it done. Thank you for the prod. Cheers, -stephen [End Paste] Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 16:24:44 EST From: WayneM38 at aol.com Subject: Regarding the difficult Practical Brewer Download: Regarding the difficult Practical Brewer Download: I have borrowed a hard copy of the Practical Brewer. The first edition was published in 1977. It is in it's 11th printing (1997). While it does have some timeless brewing information, I would not download the whole shebang. Most info is about commercial operations, bottling lines, etc.. It has a black and white photo of an early 70's computer process control console that has a fraction of the computing power of my son's PlayStation game. A new edition of the Practical Brewer was published in 1999 and has been updated to reflect new technology/brewing science. Have not seen it. I am sure that edition will not make it to public pdf format. I found the: American Handy Book / Wahl & Henius http://hubris.engin.umich.edu:8080/Wahl/ to be a much more interesting online brewing text to view. I feel much more in tune with the brewers of that time (except for my RIMS) than the 24/7 commercial brewing info found in the 1977 edition of the Practical Brewer. The format is difficult to read, but it is comforting to know that 100 years ago, brewers were concerned with the same basic issues most homebrewers deal with today. Look over a few sections and check out the adjuncts used during those times. Wayne Botanist Brewer Big Fun Brewing RIMS Site http://member.aol.com/bfbrewing/BigFunBrewing.htm Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 15:00:12 -0800 From: "scott" <Cuckold at cornerpub.com> Subject: Yellow Hefe's I posted this question a month or so ago, no response. Oh, well, will try again. Although probably not too traditional, my wife and I both enjoy the American version of Hefeweissen. Light yellow color, mild, and very refreshing, esp. when our summers can get regularly over 100 deg. F. I all-grain, and recirculate. Have experimented with 50-70% wheat grain bills. Taste is fairly good. However, one batch was more like a traditional weissen. All batches were CLEAR! Even after only a month from brew to bottle. Amazing, considering this is something I could never do using extract. Anyone have good results brewing a Yellow hazy hefe? Which yeast do you prefer? Do you recirculate the mash? Spring is coming, would appreciate any help. Scott, Richland, Wa. http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Salon/3768/Brewery.html Return to table of contents
Date: 28 Jan 00 22:54:36 MST (Fri) From: rcd at raven.talisman.com (Dick Dunn) Subject: when is enough enough already? this from the most recent HBD I've got: > Alan Meeker chooses to continue his > misquoting and singling me out for comment > for reasons only he can know. Is there any hope that the HBD will ever ascend above the level of play- ground taunts? Really...I mean to ask whether we can ever hope that the folks who have valid material to contribute will actually contribute it, as such. Disagreements are many; they are to be expected. They are part of what makes this forum interesting: we have many unanswered questions, plus more-than-a-few questions to which the current answers happen to be wrong. We've got a lot to do, a lot to learn. But every time the arguments descend to _ad_hominem_, all merit of the discussion is lost. There are *NO* winners. Answering an insult or a personal attack with a personal reprisal marks you as an infantile loser. Real science is hard. Science at the edge is contentious. Get used to it. Get over it. Either learn to shrug off the personal slights--real or imagined--or shut up until you grow up. If you are right, time and testing will prove you so. If not, no amount of defensiveness will help. - --- Dick Dunn rcd at talisman.com Hygiene, Colorado USA ...Simpler is better. Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2000 00:00:46 -0600 From: Matthew Arnold <revmra at iname.com> Subject: Re: Microwave bombs >This may seem a streatch for being on topic but I frequently boil water in a >microwave to sterilize glass ware and would like someone smarter than me to >comment on this. It seems like just another urban legend and microwaves were >not around when momilies were invented. I can not think of any reason >whatsoever >for the phenomena but bombs are bombs. I received this from a friend who got it >form someone else and god only knows where it really came from........ The Urban Legends site is a good place for checking stuff like this. Here's a link for this very item: http://www.urbanlegends.com/ulz/microwave.html According to that, it is a very real possibility. How likely is anyone's guess. I've never had this happen personally, but I usually don't warm coffee or water up to boiling or greater in the microwave anyway. Matt - ----- Webmaster, Green Bay Rackers Homebrewers' Club http://www.rackers.org info at rackers.org Return to table of contents
Date: 28 Jan 00 23:06:32 MST (Fri) From: rcd at raven.talisman.com (Dick Dunn) Subject: re: Microwave Bombs "Jack Schmidling" <arf at mc.net> wrote: [discussion about boiling water in microwave] > > I feel that the following is information that any one who uses a microwave > > oven to heat water should be made aware of. About five days ago my > > 26-year old son decided to have a cup of instant coffee. He took a cup of > > water and put it in the microwave to heat it up (something that he had > > done numerous times before). I am not sure how long he set the timer for > > but he told me he wanted to bring the water to a boil. When the timer > > shut the oven off, he removed the cup from the oven. As he looked into > > the cup he noted that the water was not boiling but instantly the water in > > the cup "blew up" into his face... > > ...While at the hospital, the doctor who was attending to him stated that > > this a fairly common occurrence and water (alone) should never be heated > > in a microwave oven. If water is heated in this manner, something should > > be placed in the cup to diffuse the energy such as a wooden stir stick,... The problem is this: It is surprisingly easy to heat water in a container which has too few nucleation sites to cause enough bubbles. Water can be heated to excessive temperatures without visibly "boiling" in the usual sense. It takes something to make bubbles form. Put water in a container which has a very smooth interior (like glass that hasn't been through the dishwasher too many times) and microwave it. The water gets hot, perhaps very hot, but unless there's a point where the bubbles can form, it may be way above boiling (212F/100C or your locally-adjusted value:-) without any bubbles. Introduce any sort of foreign substance or anything to disturb the water and find a nucleation point, and all of a sudden it can boil, possibly explosively. It is not, as the quoted material suggests, diffusing the energy. Rather, it is that the object inserted is rough, hence provides places for bubbles to form. - --- Dick Dunn rcd at talisman.com Hygiene, Colorado USA ...Simpler is better. Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2000 02:01:19 -0500 From: phil sides jr <psides at carl.net> Subject: Re: Caustic "Steven J. Owens" <puff at netcom.com> asks: > So what the heck *is* "caustic" anyway? Caustic, quite literally means - has the ability to burn, corrode, or destroy organic tissue. In chemical terms, it means there is an OH (hydroxide ion) looking to get busy... When it does, it affects a reducing reaction. Phil Sides, Jr. Concord, NH - -- Macht nicht o'zapft ist, Prost! Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2000 09:50:23 +0000 From: "A. J. deLange" <ajdel at mindspring.com> Subject: Troy's Water/Microwaving Water A comment on Alan's comment on Troy's water: Troy's water is pretty soft: 21 ppm as CaCO3 calcium and 16 ppm as CaCO3 Mg. The alkalinity is, as he mentioned, is an estimate basesd on the amount of bicarb required to bring the net charge to neutrality assuming that the ions he knows about are the only ones present except for bicarbonate which is assumend to be the only unknown anion. Thus the alkalinity may be off a bit but probably not by much. Assuming that the alkalinity value is about right the residual alkalinity is positive at about + 30 and thus the salts in the water would actually tend to raise the pH above 5.75 or so though not by much IF the calcium/phosphate reaction is what is settng the pH. Clearly this is not the case here: it is, I believe, the malt organic acids and offer Troy's, Carm's and my own experiences with medium water and pale ale/crystal grists in support of this notion. Thus reducing the hardness/alkalinity of the water would only make the situation worse (lower pH). In simple terms the reason for this is that the calcium in Troy's water is insufficent to overcome the alkalinity in Troy's water. In addition, it would not be easy to soften Troy's water much further chemically. Heating with extra calcium likely won't be very successful. The best that can be done chemically is probably the lime "split treatment" which is only likely to reduce alaklinity to perhaps 20 ppm. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * The phenomenon Jack S describes when water is heated in a microwave oven is not a momily and is easily observed (but best not from above the container). When water boils what happens is that the temperature is raised to the point where the vapor pressure of water is as high or slightly (by the amount of hydrostatic head) higher than atmospheric pressure. If a nucleation site is present a steam bubble can then form. Nucleation sites can be particles in the liquid, projections from the bottom of the vessel or what we most commonly see, the release of some gas (i.e. air) held in surface imperfections in the walls of the vessel. In normal boiling the bottom of the vessel is heated and this usually, but not always, causes release of this gas. When this doesn't happen we get what chemists (and brewers) refer to as "bumping". At its worst, the liquid gets substantially hotter than the boiling point (it is said to be super heated) and then some event, such a a very slight mechanical disturbance, triggers nucleation and the entire liqud mass explodes into vapor at once. To prevent this chemists use "boiling stones" which are rough carborundum or plastic particles designed to entrap and hold air. In the microwave, paricularly if the water is free of particulate matter and the vessel clean, this phenomenon is more common than it is with flame heating because the heat is not applied through one surface only but more or less uniformly (skin depth considerations aside) throughout . Thus the entire mass can become uniformly super heated more readily than it can with the flame where clearly there is a temperature gradient from bottom to surface. To observe the phenomenon Jack describes put some clean water in a very clean, clear vessel and put it in the microwave. Heat it for a minute and see if it boils. If it doesn't, disturb it (be careful) by jolting it a little or tapping with a spoon or dropping something in and see if ebullition is triggered. If not start again (new water) but give it 2 minutes this time. The object is to find an irradiation time that super heats but not so much that a mouse sneeze in the next room starts it boiling. Once again, be careful. Please use common sense. Remember that the object is to produce water/steam hotter than 212F. I first noticed this when microwaving water to make tea. The water as removed from the particular oven at work would not be boiling (after 2 minutes I think) but would start to boil violently as soon as the tea bag was lowered into it. This phenomenon was explained at length in an article in Scientific American - Amateur Scientist I think and probably 5- 10 years ago. Maybe a net search could turn it up but I'm afraid I can't do much better than that. Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2000 05:51:44 EST From: VQuante at aol.com Subject: Re: re: Efficiency vs.Yield In einer eMail vom 28.01.00 06:07:50 (MEZ) Mitteleuropaeische Zeit schreibt "Jack Schmidling" <arf at mc.net>: > The proof of the pudding is in the eating and > in this case gravity per pound per gallon says it all. Hm, but now I have the problem to compare that to the metric system which is used in the rest of the world: degrees Plato per kilogram per liter... How can we call your propositions a standard??? Volker Volker R. Quante Brunnenbraeu Homebrewery Brewing and working in Warsaw / Poland, but definitely a German Homebrewer Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 01/31/00, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96