HOMEBREW Digest #3296 Tue 11 April 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

  The Jethro Gump Report ("Rob Moline")
  Infusion Mashing Help ("Jeremy J. Arntz")
  RE: Soldering RIMS heater connections (Rod Prather)
  Steve's HSA model(s) ("Dr. Pivo")
  Fresh tips for England? ("Dr. Pivo")
  No Sparge Barleywine (Tony Barnsley)
  yeast attenuation ("Alan Meeker")
  dogma ("Alan Meeker")
  More attenuation ("Alan Meeker")
  yeast attenuation (Marc Sedam)
  alcohol tolerant yeast (Marc Sedam)
  Re: Secondary Fermentation ("Dr. Pivo")
  Re: Budweiser Engineered Barley (Joel Plutchak)
  Fullers pint glasses (Ian Smith)
  Soldering RIMS &  Chicken Scratch ("Pannicke, Glen A.")
  Secondary (RCAYOT)
  Merrimack Valley Brewers Club? ("Goodman, Todd")
  Correction for Prime Tabs carbonation (Paul Shick)
  Bavarian lager yeast in a "steam" beer? (Paul Shick)
  RE: Soldering RIMS heater connections (LaBorde, Ronald)
  Vinegar (Dick)
  Re: Hey Mabel... (Jeff Renner)
  Re: Kegging (Jeff Renner)
  Doug Moyer's caffine habbit ("Robert Bratcher")
  RE: Everything you know is wrong ("Murray, Eric")

* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! * 18th Annual Oregon Homebrew Festival - entry deadline May 15th * More info at: http://www.hotv.org/fest2000 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: Sun, 9 Apr 2000 23:55:00 -0500 From: "Rob Moline" <brewer at isunet.net> Subject: The Jethro Gump Report The Jethro Gump Report Yeast Forum...Dr. Clayton Cone Dr. Clayton Cone, recently retired from Lallemand, Inc., the American Yeast Company, and formerly of Fleischmann's Yeast Company....... and a major yeast god....has agreed to answer your questions regarding the subject of yeast for the HBD, from April 10th through the 21st. You may address your questions to the HBD, where they will be assembled and sent to Dr. Cone, and then returned through me to the Digest. This might take a wee bit longer to turnaround your questions, but I am doing this to prevent clogging up his mail box with thousands of requests...a circumstance that occurred last year with some of the Siebel staff...and which I hope to prevent this time. There is a possibility that other distinguished yeast folks will chime in from time to time, but again, there are no promises. I would suggest that questions best supported by this venture be of a technical nature, particularly not of the type that would be best answered by other manufacturers....i.e., it is probably a waste of time to ask why a Wyeast or WhiteLabs product does certain things...if you get my drift. The cut-off for questions will be the HBD on the 21st April. So, let's get the ball rolling!!! Lallemand Scholarship - AHA The date for the drawing of the Lallemand Scholarship for the AHA approaches! The drawing will be held at the AHA Nationals in Detroit on June 24th. Entry is open to all AHA members, who merely need to contact the AHA in Boulder to enter. New members are eligible also, and can join by calling 888-U-CAN-BREW. The Scholarship is worth $ 3500...which will cover the cost of a 2 week Short Course to Siebel, and includes a $ 1000 stipend to offset travel and accomodation costs. Cheers! Jethro ump Rob Moline Lallemand AHA BOA "The More I Know About Beer, The More I Realize I Need To Know More About Beer!" Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 03:08:24 -0400 From: "Jeremy J. Arntz" <arntz at surfree.com> Subject: Infusion Mashing Help OK I have brewed a few extract brews and have had some success formulating my own brews. I have recently become interested in all-grain brewing and I have decided that Infusion Mashing is the way for me to go right now. I have some questions about equipment, procedure, and grains. I have been mainly doing 2.5 to 3 gallon batches. Is this even practical for all-grain? It seems to me that it would be all right. Equipment: OK I will need a S.S. Brew kettle ( to replace the smaller aluminum kettle I have now ) 5 gallon stainless $32.50 5 gallon Picnic Cooler $20-$30 Now I have a question about using nylon mesh bags as opposed to a false bottom. I know someone has tried this. I think Charlie P. mentions something about it in his section on Infusion Mashing. Any thoughts? Nylon Mesh Bag $7.50 Total: $60.45-$70.45 Procedure: I guess I need some conformation on my understanding of the process. Ok here it goes: You bring approx. 1 quart of water per pound of grain to roughly 168 F Add the grains and hold the temp at roughly 150 for 30 to 60 min. until starches are converted. Starch conversion can be checked with iodine. Sparge with 1/2 gallon per pound of grain at roughly 170 F into the Mash Tun. Hold for 10 mins. Then you drain the Mash Tun into the brew kettle and boil as normal ( in extract brewing ). Right? Yes or No? Grains: Are there any charts that indicate which grains are modified and which aren't? Does the total amount of grain include specialty grains? Any help would be appreciated!! Thanks, Jeremy (arntz at surfree.com) "Draft beer , not people." (:-o)<><////////> Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 03:35:58 -0400 From: Rod Prather <rodpr at iquest.net> Subject: RE: Soldering RIMS heater connections First, it is commonly known that a solid physical connection of copper to copper or silver to silver is a better electrical connection and has better conductivity than soldered connections. High power wiring is almost always joined with high efficiency crimps or bolted lugs rather than solder. Internal connections of high current motors are never soldered but "staked" and the leads to those motors are always connected by lugs, high power crimps or even wire nuts where appropriate. There are numerous types of electrical connections that rely on the physical connection of two metals without solder due of the poor conductivity of solder. Given pieces of metal with equal circular area and length we can impose the given relative conductance: Copper 100 (standard) Silver 106 Tin 15 Lead 7 Aluminum (soft) 45 Tin and lead are relatively very poor conductors of electricity and there is a chance of heat being generated at the soldered junction especially if the wire is rated too close to the maximum current capacity. This is especially true if the soldered joint is poorly made or "cold". I really doubt that a well made connection (twisted or lineman's splice then soldered) with appropriate wire sizes would cause overheating in our ranges of current and use. Personally I would still prefer a good quality wire nut without solder, taped and tied with a wire tie. Not only is it a better electrical connection but it makes component replacement a much simpler process. - -- Rod Prather Indianapolis, Indiana Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 10:55:48 +0200 From: "Dr. Pivo" <dp at pivo.w.se> Subject: Steve's HSA model(s) Stephen Alexander writes: > I wrote both last year and just recently that the trans-2-nonenal formation > most associated w/ staling is (according to the lit) related to ENZYMIC > OXIDATION IN THE MASH. Your 'speriment which gives oxygen access to beer > long after the enzymes are gone, then you taste it at 8 weeks, is nearly > irrelevant to this issue - as I told you last year. Oooops. I guess I missed that (an embarrassed look). Could it be because of the VOLUMES of things you write? I tried to find where you said that, but couldn't (searching "hsa and alexander" DOES bring up a pile). I did find this however: When George asked: > > Can anybody think of some reasons that it would harm the wort to heat > > it to ~200F, then let it sit overnight before continuing the brewing > > process (T ~140F the next morning)? and Steve A replied: > I think the biggest risk is the chance that additional aeration and > oxidation will take place, a form of HSA. <snip> and... > My instinct would be to cool the wort to <90F and seal it. Then boil > the next day. This method has the potential for infections and other > problems too, but DMS and HSA aren't among them. Let's see... this time you were saying that enzymatically destroyed wort was at HSA risk. A different time, a different argument. Now let's see. If I interpret you correctly this time, Then extract brewers needn't worry about HSA at ALL! (Unless these trans-nonenal makers are capable of surviving the extract making process). Now what am I to think of all the times people were poking each other in the ribs and guffawing over Charlie Papazian publishing a picture of himself pouring an extract beer through a colander? Steve humbly asks: > What part of "Your experiment fails to test the hypothesis" are you having > difficulty with ? Actually none. It's just difficult to keep up with which hypothesis you are toting this week. But I know the answer to that. It's the one that helps you win whatever argument you are presently embroiled in ;). I really think YOU should design and do the experiment.... I'd be more interested in seeing where you found the limits were, than hearing about where you think they might be. It may save you some sleep as well. Dr. Pivo Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 11:06:58 +0200 From: "Dr. Pivo" <dp at pivo.w.se> Subject: Fresh tips for England? Planning to head to "Jolly Ol'" next week. I just realised that it has been 13 years since last, which does not jive very well with my advice of retaining a "taste memory" of beers from which one is influenced. I shall be in Shrewsbury (knowers of my habits and tastes will know to interpret that as: "He'll be sitting at the Three Tunnes in Bishop's Castle, asking pesky questions, and getting stewed.") I will, of course, land in London, and may make a short day or two jaunt to Oxford. Since my information is so painfully out of date, I'd appreciate receiving any "hot tips" about things to see (taste) along that planned route. Private email is fine. Dr. Pivo Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 10:12:06 +0100 From: Tony Barnsley <tony.barnsley at blackpool.gov.uk> Subject: No Sparge Barleywine Thanks for all the replies (private and public) regarding my question on the No Sparge technique. I'd missed the initial discussion whenever that was, and all the posts I read since then were somewhat ambiguous. ( :> , Chill, Just Chill ) So My plans are 10.5 Kilos grain, Mashed with 33 odd litres of water at 65C for 90 Mins should give me 27 litres in the kettle, Boil for 90 Mins, to end up with a tad over 20 litres. Pitch with a 10 Gallon starter ( :-'> Ok I'll just use the slurry!) of Nottingham. Frank thanks for asking about my hopping schedule, I'll check the calculations, but according to Tinseth the expected Utilisation figures even for the 11% Target hops are only something like 13.4% for the 90 Minute boil. My calculations using Glens Formula give me 80IBU's spot on, I know that the Rager / Daniels formulas do tend to give higher values (But 185! That's as you say HUGE! ) Thanks again, I'm looking forward to Brewing this Baby, And a Mild from the second Runnings, and probably a dry Irish stout as well, and all on the same day (sort of) Ambitious or what? I like mashing and sparging (Or not) the evening before, and boiling the runnings for 15 minutes, before leaving everything until 6am the following morning, Switch the boiler back on, Throw in the hops, and I can be wrapping the first one in the fermenter before the rest of the family is really awake. - -- Wassail! The Scurrilous Aleman Schwarzbad Lager Brauerei, Blackpool, Lancs, UK Reply To Aleman At brewmaster Dot demon Dot co Dot uk ICQ 46254361 Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 08:33:18 -0400 From: "Alan Meeker" <ameeker at welchlink.welch.jhu.edu> Subject: yeast attenuation Doug is still trying to sort out this attenuation biz: >I, too, appreciate Alan Meeker's comments. But, on this subject, his >comments were of the "I imagine it to be so" nature--not what I expect from >such an infamous "librarian". Certainly not the conclusive answer I would >like to see. "infamous librarian" huh? I'm not sure whether this is a compliment or an insult! But you are right, it was not conclusive because I have no data nor even references to back this up - just an educated guess. Perhaps someone w/ connections to Wyeast can find out the origins of the published attenuation values (Lynne??). The fact that they /do/ publish values for this characteristic makes one think that /someone/ studied this in the past to arrive at these numbers. I doubt they were pulled out of thin air though, like Doug, I'd sure like to see details on exactly how these ranges were arrived at. -Alan Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 08:36:29 -0400 From: "Alan Meeker" <ameeker at welchlink.welch.jhu.edu> Subject: dogma Amen Jim!! - ----------------------------------- I am NOT suggesting that you or anyone else stop reading beer books or reading anyone's posts in the HBD or anywhere else, just that you apply logic, critical thinking and your own empirical knowledge to other's ideas and pronouncements, and keep in mind that 'authorities' aren't necessarily right because they sound authoritative. - ------------------------------------ -Alan Meeker Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 09:19:43 -0400 From: "Alan Meeker" <ameeker at welchlink.welch.jhu.edu> Subject: More attenuation Steve Alexander wrote in part: >The answer is obvious by deduction. As Alan Meeker said, the difference is >that the *supposedly* fermentable sugars are not always or completely >fermented in time (6 days). Alan and I differ in our explanation about >which sugars *might* be left over. I have never heard it suggested >seriously that brewing yeast might lack invertase to consume sucrose (worth >only 0.77deg anyway)... Steve, I wasn't actually suggesting that low sucrose utilization in particular leads to low attenuation, just using it to illustrate the point that enzymatic differences between yeasts could potentially contribute to attenuative differences. Sucrose just seemed to be a nice example to illustrate the point because it does require hydrolysis by the enzyme invertase. It would be interesting to set up a bunch of test fermentations using different yeasts and a panel of single-sugar substrates. I wouldn't be surprised if there were significant differences. -Alan Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 10:07:42 -0400 From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam at unc.edu> Subject: yeast attenuation Warning: QDA (questionable data assumption) going on! I always assumed that the difference in attenuation was related to the floc qualities of the yeast, i.e. the less flocculant a yeast is, the higher attenuation rate. I also assumed that the ranges given were for yeast pitched into an undisturbed wort. Translation: Someone pitched the yeast in identical wort and observed what happened. No agitation, no dropping, nothing. Maybe they ended after six days (may explain some of it), maybe not. Personal observation has shown me the given attenuation levels are a good approximation. You can exceed those levels by having a mash profile dominated by the beta-amylase rest. You can flush the headspace with CO2 and gently agitate the fermenter (alternately you could bubble CO2 through the fermenter) and rouse the yeast. But let's face it--most of us have a preferred mash schedule for whatever beer we're making, chuck in the starter, and aside from long stares of awe at the power of fermentation, leave the bugger alone until it's time to rack off to another vessel. So those ranges are likely valid. If you use a stirplate to stir your starter, you know it consistently results in (a) better growth, (b) complete and utter fermentation of the starter wort, and (c) a rapid flocculation when the stirplate is turned off. I always guessed this was due to the mechanical agitation keeping the yeast in suspension until all the available sugars are consumed, avoiding any wacky separation of high and low gravity wort in the fermenter, etc. There's enough literature out there to suggest that all yeast will ferment out wort to the same degree given the proper conditions. It's just that most often I'm not willing to create those conditions. Cheers! Marc Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 10:27:51 -0400 From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam at unc.edu> Subject: alcohol tolerant yeast I want to thank Jim Liddl for passing along an article from the CRC Critical Reviews in Microbiology which discusses the ethanol tolerance of "standard" yeasts. I am cowed by the results and am now pretty well convinced that any brewing yeast can be nudged to ferment out wort of extraordinary OG. It is much the same thought as my intuition on attenuation levels, in that you must present the right conditions for the yeast to do it. I'll suggest the following, which is heavily influenced by the article and my other conversations with Jim: 1) Prepare an extraordinary starter and pitch at high levels of both activity and yeast mass. 1-2 quarts of active yeast solids is not underpitching. The only way I've found to do this is coordinate with a local brewery or pub and have them collect some yeast from the bottom of a unitank. My local brewpub actually gave me yeast from their propagation vessel. 2) Feed the yeast your wort in several additions. Someone recently posted a way to "unstick" wine fermentation by adding 1/2 stuck wine to 1/2 actively fermenting wine repeatedly over a period of days until the entire volume of the fermentation is again back in the same vessel. This is a suggested way to bump up the alcohol tolerance. Perhaps it has something to do with osmotic pressure...dunno. But it got a traditional ale yeast to ferment a product with >15%abv, and would serve double-duty as a test for your sanitization techniques. I imagine you could do it if you stored the unfermented wort in a 30F freezer during the interim. 3) Select a generally non-flocculent yeast for this ferment. Although you'll be rousing the yeast quite a bit with continued feeding of unfermented wort, a traditional non-flocking yeast might help eke out a few extra gravity points. 4) Give the yeast a highly fermentable mash. Jim, provided this mash schedule used to make "dry" beer: mash in at 37 C hold 20 minutes over the course of 20 minutes raise to 49 C and hold 30 minutes over the course of 10-15 minutes raise to 60 C hold 30 minutes raise to 63 C and hold 25 minutes raise to 65 C and hold for 30 minutes raise to 70C for 10 minutes 5) Use barley malt with high enzyme content to ensure that every last drop o' fermentables is converted in the mash. Jim suggests Breiss 2-row, but I would guess that in its absence a few pounds of 6-row would go a long way. Maybe it would improve "crispness"? ;-) I'm going to give this a whirl with my Samichlaus yeast. The Belgian-style lager used as a starter came out magically delicious, so I'll just need a little patience to do this one up right. I have high gravity lagers--they take so damn long to finish. Cheers! Marc Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 16:26:43 +0200 From: "Dr. Pivo" <dp at pivo.w.se> Subject: Re: Secondary Fermentation > > John Leggett <leggettjr at home.com> asks: > > >Ok all you hard core all grain brewers, give the new guy a break and > >tell me about secondary fermentation. I am brewing extract kit ales in > >a primary for about 7 days. How long do I rack these brews to a > >secondary? I'm just looking for some guidelines and general advice. Jeff Renner made a nice short summary of the secondary rationale (I don't think I need to quote it, just page back a few). I would add.... one of the ideas of the secondary is to reduce the amount of yeast... sooner or later they are going to give up, and if there are "large amounts" your beer may end up smelling like somebody doing a "quarter mile" on "slicks".... so as to time considerations, you could say "the longer the primary, the shorter the need for the secondary"..... it can stretch from days to weeks, and I've tasted stuff that has sat for "months" without any apparent problem. If your head is still roaring along when you rack to secondary, you might have to wait a bit... if you racked later, it won't have to sit long at all. The irony is, if you have a lot of yeast you "have" to wait a bit, but "can't" wait too long (or you'll get the "tires" anyway"). If little yeast comes along, you can do "whatever you like". I use the "finger method". If I can see my fingers distinctly through the neck of the carboy using a flashlight, it's OK to move on... if they are still "blurry", I can wait (I was going to switch over to a "particulate counter", so I could be sure I had the right cell count, until I found out they cost as much as the "Queen Mary"). The MAIN reason for the popularity of the secondary among home brewers, is that putting it in bottles too soon can turn into things that can lift your house off of its foundations. A good way around this, is to pull a bit into a cylinder with a hydrometer in it, and let it ferment in a warm spot in the room (surely you don't ferment your beer that warm?)... it finishes first and tells you where the other stuff is heading.... when it is one to two points higher, you can dump it straight to a container of your choice without priming. If you're not using kegs with safety valves, I'm quite sure there are ways to screw this up that I haven't managed to do yet (though I will take credit for all other possible mistakes already made, and will retain patent rights).... in that case put a mattress over your bottles and wear a helmet. Dr. Pivo Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 09:32:43 -0500 (CDT) From: Joel Plutchak <plutchak at ncsa.uiuc.edu> Subject: Re: Budweiser Engineered Barley In HBD #3295, Fred & Sue Nolke wrote: [Quoting "Wired" quoting Augie Busch(?):] >"Of the many varieties of barley that they grow, there are two >basic types. Two-row is for smoothness and sweetness. Six-row is >for crispness. Our brewmasters blend them to provide Budweiser >with just the right balance, just as they've done for 123 years..." >The question to you all is; has anyone ever come accross a >factual basis for the statement that "Two-row is for smoothness >and sweetness" ... >And how does "crispness" relate to six-row? At MCAB the A-B guy who gave a talk said the same thing (what was the word he used instead of "crispness"? Was it "snappy?"). Anyway, after the MCAB tour of the research pilot plant in St. Louis, I took the public tour. I made a point of comparing Bud to Michelob, since my notes indicated they both have about 30% rice but differ in the barley portion of the grist: 2/3 6-row and 1/3 2-row for Bud, with 80% 2-row and 20% 6-row for Michelob. Darned if the Bud didn't taste a bit crisper (drier, but grainier) and the Michelob was a bit rounder and mellower. Granted, this wasn't a blind testing and I was looking for those qualities, but I think they were there. Incidentally, I thought the biggest, and most distasteful to me, character for both beers was the (over-)carbonation. Made it hard to taste to beer. - -- Joel Plutchak <plutchak at uiuc.edu> Brewin' and Tastin' in East-central Illinois (aka Flatlandia) Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 08:42:16 -0600 From: Ian Smith <isrs at cmed.com> Subject: Fullers pint glasses Does anyone out there know where I can obtain a Fullers pint (20 oz) glass(es)? I brought 2 back from my last trip to London and unfortunately broke one the other day (insert sobbing noises here). Cheers! Ian Smith isrs at cmed.com <mailto:isrs at cmed.com> Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 10:51:18 -0400 From: "Pannicke, Glen A." <glen_pannicke at merck.com> Subject: Soldering RIMS & Chicken Scratch Regarding Soldering RIMS heater connections: Wire which is properly gagued to the current load with properly soldered connections will not overheat and melt. Solder is typically used for low power circuits where small drops at the junction cannot be tolerated. These drops are lower with a soldered connection than with a physical connector (ie. wire nut, terminal conncection, plug, etc.). In a high power circuit, the small drop experienced with a physical connector is insignificant. Screw-type terminal strips should be used for all high power connections which may require frequent access for replacements/repairs. These too are rated by current. Use wire nuts for connections which are more on the "permanent" side. The other advantage to physical connectors is the strength of the connection. Soldered connections are easy to pull apart and twisting the wires together before soldering only adds a bit more strength to them. Terminal screws and wire nuts provide a much stronger physical connection which is a much greater concern with high power circuits. You don't have to be an electrical engineer or genius for this one. High school E&E shop class should suffice. But I'm sure some wise-ass will want references, charts and diagrams to support my statements ;-) == Joe Kish suggested using cracked corn in CAPs: >Go to an Farm animal feed store and buy a bag of 'cracked >corn', also called Albers' Chicken Scratch. It's not as fine as >corn meal so it won't give a stuck mash. I certainly wouldn't mind trying this one. Dad raises chickens and from what I remember, the crack on the chicken scratch is just about perfect in size. The cracked corn, used for animals like pigs, might be a bit big though. It all depends upon the manufacturer. One question on this subject though... I know that different varieties of corn have been developed and marketed for use as animal feed vs. people food. I'm not sure that there is a huge difference in flavor contributions between feed corn and people corn when it comes to beer - BUT - what about feed corn which is of the high lysine variety. I believe feed corn varieties are high in protein and low in fat and oil, but I haven't seen a label in quite some time. Any of you lab rats (term of endearment - not a mockery) out there care to comment on the use of animal feed corn varieties and it's effects upon fermentation/finished product? I'll bet Joe's beer was rockin' anyway, right?!? Glen Pannicke Merck & Co. Computer Validation Quality Assurance email: glen_pannicke at merck.com Return to table of contents
Date: 08 Apr 2000 12:09:47 -0400 From: RCAYOT at solutia.com Subject: Secondary Recently, John Leggett <leggettjr at home.com> wondered about the secondary: "Ok all you hard core all grain brewers, give the new guy a break and tell me about secondary fermentation. I am brewing extract kit ales in a primary for about 7 days. How long do I rack these brews to a secondary?" John, under appropriate conditions, racking may not be necessary. Under other conditions, it may be very beneficial! How can this be? Well it depends. Since you are a novice brewer, there can and probably are many other things you could do to improve your brew that do not involve racking! For instance, a member of our club recently discussed with us how discouraged he was with his several attempts at brewing kit extract beers, several people encouraged him to abandon the dry yeast he was using...... It wasn't until probed into every detail of his brewing practice that we learned that he pitched his properly re-hydrated yeast into wort that was above 90F! I am sure that this is one of the major causes of the "unclean" type of flavors he was getting in his beers. Add to that that he recently had a severely contaminated batch, I think there are many steps he can and should take to improve his beers, by modifying his brewing procedure, and racking to a secondary is NOT one of them! Racking works to improve beer that has a lot of hops and trub carried over into the fermenter. In this case racking at precisely the right time when fermentation has begun to drop off but before it has completed, while active yeast are in suspension but the dead yeast, hop particles, trub etc. have settled, may help the beer. I would also recommend that the beer be left in the secondary only a relatively short time, there should be some active yeast in the beer when bottled so carbonation will occur rapidly. If you leave the beer in the secondary for say two weeks, then I would pitch a small amount (1/4- 1/2 packet of dried yeast) at bottling time. The addition of fresh yeast will help carbonate and stabilize the beer. I hope you continue to read the HBD, and other sources of information. There are several excellent beer and homebrewing sites on the web, read everything with skepticism, integrate all you read into an overall view of what is really important, try new things, and remember to keep notes so you can see what you did and how it worked for you! Roger Ayotte Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 11:01:56 -0400 From: "Goodman, Todd" <tgoodman at sonusnet.com> Subject: Merrimack Valley Brewers Club? I've been trying to get to their home page (http://www.millcitybrew.com/mvb) and mail to the contact from the Brewtown page (fred at mediamilldesign.com) and have been unable to contact either. Does anyone have up to date information? Sorry for the interruption. Thank you, Todd Goodman Brewing in Westford, MA Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 11:17:27 -0500 (EST) From: Paul Shick <SHICK at JCVAXA.jcu.edu> Subject: Correction for Prime Tabs carbonation Hello all, A few weeks back, I posted a note about bottling from a keg, rather than a bottling bucket, which I started in an effort to avoid some intermittant contamination problems. I suggested using Domenick Venezia's Prime Tabs, rather than batch priming, so that one fill any number of bottles and just leave the rest in the keg. Unfortunately, I screwed up in my quick calculation of the number of volumes of CO_2 generated by each Prime Tab: it's about .37 volumes, rather than the .7 I posted. Those of you who followed my procedure, please accept my apologies. I'm drinking undercarbonated German Pilsner, too. Paul Shick Basement brewing in Cleveland Hts OH Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 11:27:29 -0500 (EST) From: Paul Shick <SHICK at JCVAXA.jcu.edu> Subject: Bavarian lager yeast in a "steam" beer? Hello all, A quick lager yeast question. I'm planning on doing a run of German-style lagers, all using Wyeast 2206 Bavarian yeast. I'm toying with the idea of making a "steam" beer with the starter first, partly because I really like the style and partly to build up a nice yeast cake for the lower temperature batches to follow. Does anyone have experience using the Bavarian yeast at 60F? Searching the archives, I've found only one report from someone who had tried this (Jim DiPalma, 1994,) finding some unwanted phenolic character. I've read, I think in Fix's Analysis book, of increased ester production at 65F (probably good for this style, at least at reasonable levels,) but I don't recall an increase in any nasty phenols reported there or elsewhere. So, if there's anyone who's tried this yeast at 60F, please let me know your results. Thanks in advance for any help. Paul Shick Basement brewing in Cleveland Hts OH Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 10:33:01 -0500 From: rlabor at lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald) Subject: RE: Soldering RIMS heater connections From: Jonathan Peakall <jpeakall at mcn.org> Tom and Dee and Jonathan wrote about solder power connections for a RIMS: >>in a word don't. Heavy current carrying wires can heat up. If they >>heat up to much, the solder may melt and run or fracture and >>create a bad joint which will heat even more. If it runs and ends up >>on some portion of the metal frame and you touch it - crispy critter. >>So..... even if you think crimp or screw connectors are a pain, for >>heavy current wire, they are what you should be using. >>>Secondly, if one >>>has wires that are getting hot enough to even think about melting >>>solder, there is a fundamental problem to the system, perhaps under >>>gauge wire or poor connections. In any case, there is an underlying >>>issue that needs to be resolved The melting solder on high power connections was a problem when I had first soldered the wire end then crimped. What seems to happen is that the solder will get soft and then the crimp is not so well crimped after all. I also had a soldered tip of wire under a screw also get soft and loose. What I now do is to make a very tight good crimp on clean bare wire, then solder the connection. If using screw connections, sometimes I will 'tin' just a slight 1/8 inch or so and let it extend beyond the screw. Never had a problem since. Ron Ronald La Borde - Metairie, Louisiana - rlabor at lsumc.edu http://hbd.org/rlaborde Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 10:30:10 -0400 From: Dick <dickgl at lek.net> Subject: Vinegar The vinegar that my grandfather started 70 years ago is still going strong. I add any wine that does not suit my taste; white, red, left overs, what ever. I moved the mother into a 5 gallon bottle 30 years ago and just draw off some when I need it. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 13:03:22 -0400 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Re: Hey Mabel... Lou.Heavner at frco.com writes > > When I was just a tyke (the Ike & JFK days) my grandfather drank > Carlings Black Label. We will be celebrating my grandmother's 90th > B'day this summer and I'd like to make a batch in honor of the > occasion. I'm thinking a CAP, but if anybody has a clue as to what > yeast and hopping schedule I might use to get that old Black Label > taste, I'd appreciate the input as I never had one, myself. I plan to > use about 20% corn by weight and no rice. I'm thinking of using > Zatarain's Fish Fry (w/o lemon!) for the corn, any opinions on whether > it would require a separate cereal mash? Well, of course, it has to be a CAP. I think that 20% corn sounds a bit low, even for old recipes. I usually use 22% by weight (I have one mashing right now in the garage/brewery), which is perhaps 25% (WAG) by extract. Even old recipes go up to 30%. I think that several things are important here - 6-row malt, corn and Cluster hops. DMS might be a factor, too, but I don't know how to control for that, and I think you might best not try to produce/keep it. IOW, boil with the lid off. I don't know what Fish Fry might have in it, but plain old corn meal works for me. I use a fairly coarse kind, but even the very fine Quaker brand in the cardboard carton from the grocery worked fine the time I used it. Others have reported success with polenta. Grits should work, but stay away from the ones that have added iron. I would be sure to use yellow corn for flavor. All of these require a cereal mash, but that's part of the fun. I suspect the fish fry stuff would too, but make sure there are no additives! I'll defer to others' experience with popcorn, but it certainly sounds unnecessary. If you are concerned with a cereal mash, use flaked corn (maize). It works fine and I find that it has good corn flavor. Joe Kish <JJKISH at worldnet.att.net> advises: >Go to an Farm animal feed store and buy a bag of 'cracked >corn', also called Albers' Chicken Scratch. It's not as fine as >corn meal so it won't give a stuck mash. I have never had a problem with a stuck mash with corn meal. The problem with cracked corn is that it has the corn germ with all the corn oil. It can easily go rancid. The old brewing texts are quite explicit about this, but George DePiro and Jack Schmidling have both reported success with freshly ground whole corn. If I were to use cracked corn I think I'd grind it myself so it was fresh. Don't use anything that smells like old oil paint. I like to FWH with noble hops, but I'm sure Mable never did. And I'm sure Carling used/uses Cluster for bittering, but they may well use noble hops for late additions. I would. I'd aim for a gravity of 1.044-1.048, bitterness 25-30. Happy 90th to Grandma from me. 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: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 12:32:18 -0400 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Re: Kegging stevewo at us.ibm.com wrote about kegging straight from the primary and asked: >how much C02 >do I use to fill the air space? I'm thinking my procedure would be: > >Rack to keg from primary >Fill air space with C02 (again how much here? 25-30 psi like force >carbonation?) >Purge (to eliminate any trapped oxygen) >Fill air space again with C02 (same question as above here) >Let keg sit for 10 days to 2 weeks (I'm making a pale ale) >Tap and drink I generally just blow some CO2 in my empty keg until the gas coming out of the top smells "prickly" indicating that there's CO2 coming out. Then I rack, blow a little more on top of the beer, then out the lid on it and pressureize it until I hear the lid seal. Sometimes I don't hear it - I just figure 10 psi ought to do it. Then I vent it and refill it a time or two. The I leave it. But DON'T DO THIS unless you're sure the beer is pretty well worked out. If bottle bombs are a problem, think what a keg bomb would be. You don't want to rely on the safety valve. One remaining deg. Plato (0.004 SG) will give pretty good carbonation - less for British styles. Check the pressure in a week or so and adjust if it seems high or low. 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: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 13:07:12 -0400 From: "Robert Bratcher" <rbratcher at advanceautoparts.com> Subject: Doug Moyer's caffine habbit HBD collective, We have recently been treated to a streak of postings by Doug Moyer. Sadly, I can confirm that his recent activity does relate to his out of control caffeine habit. His mug shot has been posted at all of our coffee shops with instructions not to serve him, seems that the local populace is wondering about the rapidly rising coffee prices in our area. The Star City Brewers Guild is out in force trying to corner him and cut off his email access as well as force feed him his happy pills. One poster felt he was slammed by Doug, that wasn't slamming that was just Doug. I thought the poster had a pretty good come back to Doug's comments, to bad he had to post it with a poked out pouting lower lip. Lighten up, which is something allot of folks should consider on this forum. I have a feeling that if more of us actually knew each other in the flesh (no comments from the Baron or Fouch please) there would be allot less bickering and name calling. Oh uhh beer related stuff now....... Dry hopping in the serving keg. How much is enough? How long is to long for it to sit around with a bag of hops in it? What can one expect if a dry hopped batch sits for to long (if there is such a thing)? Let's try not to be so thinned skinned folks. Hope you can help. Bob Bratcher Roanoke, VA Star City Brewers Guild http://hbd.org/starcity Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 14:08:23 -0400 From: "Murray, Eric" <emurray at sud-chemieinc.com> Subject: RE: Everything you know is wrong Rick Magnan responds to post from Jim, Phil and myself and assumes just because we don't take everything for gospel that we claim that every book and everyone of the very knowledgeable brewers on here are completely wrong. I don't want to speak for anyone, but I am not saying that, and I don't think that was Jim or Phil's point either. What I gather from what Phil was pointing out (which I happen to totally agree with), is that it is the general opinion here that if you don't do everything with precise techniques which is handed down as gospel by some, you absolutely will not brew good beer. As Phil would say,, BS. One thing I have read that is absolutely gospel however is "Relax, Don't worry, have a homebrew". Many claim you have to have a degree in microbiology to use yeast properly,, spouting off chemical formulas and cell counts, arguing over whether you should pitch a 3rd generation 1 gal starter or not (and even debating on the contamination of smack packs?). I am not saying that there would not be a difference in the beer from using varying sizes of starters, but I always just pitch a one time starter of approx 600 ml. And I have exposed hot wort to splashing and boiled with out the lid countless times. Sanitation, there is one subject that I find a lot of people are making mountains out of mole hills. There are a lot of people who would suggest taking fire to openings of containers, boiling tools for 15 minutes, using only boiled water for their brew, keeping brewing procedures out of the kitchen. Maybe my apt is germ free, but I feel pretty comfortable just sticking with a quick iodophor soak and even hot water to sanitize, and call me crazy but I have started my siphons many times by sucking on the end of the hose. I have added cold tap water straight from the faucet to my partial boils countless times. IMO, brewing is not meant to be complicated. Clean your stuff, cook your wort, and throw some yeast in. I have made many mistakes (like my brew kettle boiling over just after I added the hops and scraping them off of the stove top to add back into the wort) and have had very good luck brewing. I have never brewed anything that was any worse than a commercial beer, and a lot of my brews have quickly disappeared from the following of brew hounds that have developed hovering around my doorstep, waiting for that next keg of ("better than any commercial beer you can buy") as some of them have claimed. Maybe HSA causes shelf life problems 6 months down the road, I wouldn't know because my brews are lucky to last 2 weeks after completion unless I hide it from my associates. I have not been around the HBD that long, and I do find very helpful and insightful information from many of you, including Dr. Pivo. I am grateful however that I have been brewing a few years prior to finding the HBD. If I would have found it when I started, frankly I would have been scared out of brewing. Many of us make it sound so much more complicated in a search for that perfect brew than it needs to be. There are many advanced topics worth debating and experimenting with and it is worthwhile to do so. Lets just not loose site that the theories and or discoveries are not necessary to making great beer. Lets not try to cram new ideas based on loosely controlled test down the throats of others who have brewed dozens of great beers by other methods and practices. Its not rocket science, and its something that has been done for 1000's of years, with a lot cruder methods than we use today. My experience? While it is not 10 or 20 years like some of you, but it is enough to know it is pretty hard to screw a brew up. Long live the craft of brewing! Eric Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 04/11/00, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96