HOMEBREW Digest #3343 Mon 05 June 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

  Plane Beer (Aaron Perry)
  Grains in infusion ("Aaron Sepanski")
  calcium sulfate in hard water ("Aaron Sepanski")
  non or low alcohol recipes (JERRY POOLER)
  Bier de Garde, and others ("Graham Sanders")
  Post Cut Short And Aerial Drinking ("Phil & Jill Yates")
  Re: cap labels and bottle caps (Jeff Renner)
  festivals (JPullum127)
  freezing grains and the nays have it. ("Dr. Pivo")
  dry or wet crush. ("Dr. Pivo")
  grain distinction. ("Dr. Pivo")
  Crystal malt fermentability - Part 1 (Jeff Renner)
  Crystal malt fermentability - Part 2 (Jeff Renner)
  therm. input ! (hal)
  RE: Thermocouple braid problem ( at )
  False Bottom Flexing (Epic8383)
  Specialty Grains ("Rob Moline")
  freezing malt ("Stephen Alexander")
  re:Homebrew Tri-Nations? (=?iso-8859-1?q?scott=20morgan?=)
  mash pH retry ("Nathaniel P. Lansing")
  re: Foster's (Bill Wible)

* Don't miss the 2000 AHA NHC in Livonia, MI * 6/22 through 6/24 http://hbd.org/miy2k * 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: Sat, 03 Jun 2000 00:45:11 -0400 From: Aaron Perry <vspbcb at earthlink.net> Subject: Plane Beer Fred L. Johnson writes... <snip> I have always bemoaned the fact that the beers available on airlines are not of the quality that I care to drink unless I am REALLY thirsty. <snip> the problem here is that the airline serves everything in cans or in very small bottles, and I know of only a few high-quality craft-brewed beers that come in cans. Lucky us!! I saw today,for the first time , Sam Adams Boston Lager in those stubby little bottles. They were at the local "packy" and I pondered a use for them. Well there it is!! Plane Beer! slowly gaining ground A.P. Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 0:1:24 -0700 From: "Aaron Sepanski" <madaarjul at earthlink.net> Subject: Grains in infusion Malts should go in all at once, it's more hassle than it's worth. Dark grain aren't exposed to enzymatic attack because of carmelization, etc... Crystal need the mash to be partially converted. You'll get dextrins from your mash anyway. It's not like they don't exist without the rest. The rests were designed (years ago) to finish what the maltster couldn't do. Today, malts are extremely well modified and stepping is almost futile. Not to say that stepping doesn't do anything, but it is a cost/gain issue. To me, it's not worth it. As far as the issue at hand, you need to put those grains in with the mash. Especially anything that isn't black. You'll get sugar and conversion, and the maltster today makes malts that are for single step infusion. Sorry if I'm rambling, I've had quite a bit to drink. Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 0:10:7 -0700 From: "Aaron Sepanski" <madaarjul at earthlink.net> Subject: calcium sulfate in hard water In hard water with high alkalinity, gypsum will have little effect. You already have a saturated solution. The water is already containing much total hardness that prevents the reaction from producing an effect. Your only solution may be an acid. You could switch your brewing water, but don't need to. However, you could make a better choice in acid other than lactic. Phosphoric is the stand by. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 22:41:50 -0700 From: JERRY POOLER <pooler at pacbell.net> Subject: non or low alcohol recipes Does anyone know of a good low or non-alcohol beer recipe? Is there a way of removing the alcohol from a batch after fermentation by reboiling or freezing? Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 20:01:45 +1000 From: "Graham Sanders" <craftbrewer at cisnet.COM.AU> Subject: Bier de Garde, and others G'day all I sit here, in the tropics, hugging my 'blankie' tighter than Scot could with his Band of Bawdy School Girls. (Be honest Scot, you wouldn't share if it came down to the crunch.) We are having an unprecented cold spell up here. Who said the greenhouse effect is about. Its the coldest winter temps on record up here. We are having minimums down to freezing and maximums up to 21c. So what to a lot of you, but when you dont own any jumpers, you start looking for things to get you warm. Shit even SWMBO is looking ok for a hug at the moment. I'm not that desperate yet, so I'm using my old blankets I used to use to insulate my boilers. And I'm knocking down my 9.5v/v trippels in a vain attempt to keep warm (SWMBO will be please, I might even become affectionate). Now before I get to my Biere de Garde some quick points. Scott, NSW beating the QLD Reds - in your dreams, and this from a man who said we'll clean up those cockroaches in the State of Origins (oh the pain). Oh Australia's a cert in the tri-nation. And Phil, I dont need the soap, more a XXXX expert, and also, dont spare Lyndon feelings, (whiff indeed) - give him the whole vial up where the sun dont shine. Those A-Rules players are just too scared to play a real mans game. Darrell. In regards to Whitlabs 500 yeast. A couple of us up here did some brewing with this yeast. One guy accidently brewed it too warm (dont know the exact temp) but the end result was it was more like a wheat beer than a belgian beauty. Infact some guys thought it was a wheat. it needs the low temps. I brew it at 15c. I understand the majority of the flavour is produced early on, so you may be stuck with it. Biere de Garde. Now some of you may remember earlier in the year, I was researching (loosely speaking, haven't got the PHD yet) this beer. Well its time to put up or shut up. Yeast was the first problem. A Wit yeast seemed to be the best bet, and after the comments by Mike in the last post, the Blanche de Chambly is the go. I will forgo the usual claptrap about ingredients etc, and concentrate on what I will do differently to capture this sytle's taste. 1. I will deliberately do some hot side airation. It seems that this practice is common (by accidient or design) in a lot of BdG breweries. 2. The first couple of litres I will boil separately and at a very high heat to get some caramelisation. I reduce it down to a pancake syrup consistancy and add back to the main batch. 3. I will add a small amount of oak shavings to some of the batch when I keg it for storage. This oak I will wet earlier and allowed to let a bit of mold grow on it. Should be an interesting experiment. Shout Graham Sanders Townsvillianite!!!!!!!!! Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 23:05:43 +1000 From: "Phil & Jill Yates" <yates at acenet.com.au> Subject: Post Cut Short And Aerial Drinking My last post must have exceeded 40 lines because some of it was unceremoniously cut off, but this time from the middle. Is this something new Pat? I was trying to say that I would not be mucking about with adding Calcium Sulphate again to my mash as I was not too pleased with the effect it had on my rice lager. That being a softer bitterness perception accompanied with a vague mineral after taste. I'm using lactic acid now but I see in a post by Doc Pivo, he doesn't take too kindly to this either. I must ask him why. Now about these mushrooms growing in the grounds of Burradoo Estate. "Gold Tops" do you suspect Doc? Perhaps this explains my abstract grasp on reality. I shall cease consumption forthwith! On quite a different matter. Steve Alexander adds his comments on aircraft travel : >I find the ludicrously dry air and the lower pressure >to have an adverse effect on my ability taste and smell >anyway - but that's another matter. Sorry Steve, the "ludicrously dry air" is a result of keeping the cabin warm and at around 8000 ft when the aircraft is flying at nearly 40000 ft. I doubt you would prefer to travel with an oxygen mask on at temps around minus 50C. You wouldn't get a chance to smell and taste much at all. As for the selection of beers available, this comes down to an Airline's perception of what it thinks it's customers want. I'm sorry to say we home brewers don't rank highly. Unless enough people complained, it's likely to remain a pretty thin selection. But spare a thought for those two poor buggers driving the thing up front. Regardless of selection, they can't so much as have a sip. It's a pretty dry argument up there! Cheers Phil Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 09:05:39 -0400 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Re: cap labels and bottle caps >JGORMAN at steelcase.com asks >I remeber someone posting a few years back with a supplier of 8.5" x 11" >sheets of .75" circular labels. I couldn't find it in th archives. Does >anyone still have the supplier's name, phone#, internet address.......? I >want to use them for labeling my caps and my printer won't print on the >smaller Avery stickers. I don't remember anyone posting this - I would be interested too. However, what I do works for the small number of labels I want. I print on 8.5x11, then tape the small sheet of Avery labels on this sheet, positioned exactly over the printing, and run it through the printer again. 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: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 10:20:26 EDT From: JPullum127 at aol.com Subject: festivals hi all: the brewpub i help out with has decided not to enter the denver gabf this year but maybe do a trip to something else.we have heard nice things about the chicago real ale festival also portland . does anyone know when these are roughly or have other suggestions for a major beer geek trip?yes london and the british beer festival would be heavenly but a bit impracticale for our budg et. thanks Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2000 17:29:46 +0200 From: "Dr. Pivo" <dp at pivo.w.se> Subject: freezing grains and the nays have it. Someone recently asked about freezing grains, and if it was feasable. I would think there were enough people who are living in cold climates that there should be a resounding "I've never noticed a problem". I was quite sure as well that at least ONE person would be able to envision all manner of theoretical objections, and warn against it. I was also quite sure that this person had never investigated this in any organized manner, and had in fact "never frozen a single kernel". Since I haven't irritated anybody seriously for a while, I might share my experience on this. I once got a supply of malt from a brewery that was infested with little red mites (Well I don't actually KNOW they were mites, but I called them that, and they were chewing on my grains and I was displeased). I thought: "Right! The whole lot of you into the freezer!". I thought that would show them just who ran this brewhouse, but every time I thawed the stuff out, they'd start kicking their little feet again. I got two shipments in a row with similar infestations, which meant I kept my malt parked in the freezer for over a year. Outside of needing higher strike temperatures, I never noticed a difference at all. I've also had the brewhouse where the grain is stored dip below freezing many a time without any discernable problem. Now the question is... why would the "not a problem" reponses grow silent after this one negative admonition. This is what I call "negative dominance". Nobody wants to give "bad advice" so everyone with actual experience shuts up, and the one big warning is left hanging in the air. This is by no means limited to the HBD... it just seems to be a place that collects these harbingers of ill fate. You can really find this attitude everywhere, and some folks seem to thrive on it. It's sort of like: "I gotta' go. I'm gon'na rototill my garden." "OH no man! Don't do that. You'll kill all the earthworms, and your soil needs those guys." Now this all may be true, but I know if I turn that soil by hand, I'll get about two rows planted. and I know the stuff grows, earthworm deficient or not. What is most interesting, is that this sort of advice is invarioubly offered by someone who doesn't have a single stick growing in their garden! They just "didn't have time" this year. And if you really question their experience, it turns out it's all word of mouth, or gleaned from literature like "The National Enquirer". They have spent all their time learning all the things you can't do and warning others about them, that they never managed to get any seeds in the ground. I am going to pass on a little "cure" for these situations. You may be involved in a project that just has to get done, and have one of these theoretical prognosticators of impending doom involved. They may have some theoretical worry about something planned (I'm quite sure they collectively invented Y2K). Ask them calmly to explain their theory. repeat it. "you mean that...." and when they say "absolutely" and then you point out some contradictions and they begin spinning in some circular logic, or thrusting tangential ideas, then there really isn't any point in continuing. Now you simply suggest an experiment that would show if the theory holds: "So if we took... it would lead to...." When the reply is: "Yes, without a question." Then you reply: "I bet you a hundred dollars (or whatever the local currency) it won't." And then you'll see the darting eyes, and the lips bobbing like a gold fish in an oxegen deprived bowl. They'll usually want to change a few parameters in the proposed experiment.... let them. Then add: "would you bet fifty then?" "ten?". Are you willing to bet ONE dollar on the result you recently were absolutely certain you would get?" Now, fellow brewers, PLEASE use this technique sparingly and only on particularly obnoxious individuals. Arguing ruffles not a little bit of pride in many folks, and some seem to believe "last" or "most jabbing" comment wins, and will absolutely not relinquish this object of pride. This is NOTHING compared to the injured ego of "losing a bet". Particularly when it comes time to fork over the dough. The true value of this comes the next time they suggest some pomposity, and you say "You really think so?".... they actually stop and think if they DO really think so before directly embarking on the path of argumentation. Anyhow, if you put some grain in the freezer over night, and then brew it next to some nonfrozen stuff, treating it exactly the same, I bet you a hundred bucks you wouldn't be able to pick them apart in a blind tasting. Any takers? I rather thought not. Dr. Pivo Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2000 17:46:10 +0200 From: "Dr. Pivo" <dp at pivo.w.se> Subject: dry or wet crush. There is very little "dry crushing" done in large industrial productions any more, mostly because a "wet crush" saves time. Wet crushes are for the most part impractical for the home brewer, but I've just bumped into something sort of cute. I long ago gave away weighing grains. They all sit at about a density of .5 crushed and the only difference is water content which I'm not terribly interested in. I brew then, by volumes. I feed the grain through the crush in the proportions I want until I have about 55 litres crushed and then I stop. This means I can have taken more grain to the crush that actually gets crushed. Such was the case a few weeks ago, and as I drove the load to the brewhouse, I pulled the barrell of uncrushed out and headed into the brewery with the crushed stuff. That night it rained like all buggery, and when I saw the barrel still standing outside, I raised my eyebrows in self disgust, poured off the water and put the barrell in the cellar. I pulled that out today, and the grains were noticably "plumper" than usual, and more pliable under my fingers. I just ran that stuff through the crush, and with a little fiddling with the feed rate, it came out looking like "rolled oats" (you know, the porridge making stuff). One thing that used to bother me when such things did, is no matter how long one mashed, if you pulled a sample and then crushed a bit of hull with your thumbnail, you could always find a PAS positive iodine test somewhere in it.... just wasn't getting everything out. This stuff LOOKS more accessable to wetting. Now I wonder where I've placed that iodine bottle? I think I can feel a spearmint coming on. Dr. Pivo Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2000 18:07:32 +0200 From: "Dr. Pivo" <dp at pivo.w.se> Subject: grain distinction. appealing to the pragmatically interested: Does anyone know how one can tell the difference between "chocolate malt" and "mouse turds"? For my failing eyesight they look desceptively similar. If I just "brew with it" and it turns out to be the latter, what characteristics should I expect in terms of "mouth feel"? "head retention"? "colour"? Dr. Pivo Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 12:54:22 -0400 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Crystal malt fermentability - Part 1 This question has come up again, so I will repost Mort O'Sullivan's two excellent posts from two years ago. Mort is a graduate of the International Centre for Brewing and Distilling at Heriot-Watt University in Edinburgh, Scotland. Jeff -=-=-=-=- Date: Thu, 2 Jul 1998 22:12:04 +0100 From: "Mort O'Sullivan" <tarwater at brew-master.com> Subject: RE: crystal malt: call for discussion Jeff Renner calls for a discussion on crystal malt, primarily questioning whether it is really true that the sugars from crystal malt are less fermentable than those from standard malts. >It seems to me that there is nothing inherent about this procedure that >should produce more unfermentables than a standard mash. If a temperature >regime is used in stewing that would result in higher unfermentables in a >conventional mash, the result should be the same. > >Now it may be that the stewing is indeed done at such temperatures >routinely, resulting in high unfermentables. I think that maltsters have >researched the results of temperature regimes, both regarding sugar >profiles and protein profiles, and control these precisely. And, of >course, the caramelization of most crystal malts' sugars adds an important >flavor component not easily (or at all?) achieved otherwise. Perhaps it is >these caramelized sugars that are less fermentable than they would be >uncaramelized? I don't think so, but I'm trying to think of all of the >angles. These are very good questions. The starting point for creating crystal malt is usually well modified green malt at >43% moisture and the initial air on temperature is usually 65-70*C. Holding at this saccharification temperature is often compared to mashing within the kernel, but some important differences should be kept in mind. First, at about 43% moisture, the liquor:grist ratio is much lower than in a normal mash; and second, the "grist" is never milled but simply consists of starch-and-protein-containing endosperm cells whose walls have been degraded during germination by endoproteases and beta glucanases. These conditions limit the amylase enzymes' access to substrate compared to normal mashing conditions. There are still plenty of reducing sugars released to react with the primary amines in Maillard reactions to form the reductones, furans, pyrroles, pyrazines and countless intermediates that provide the characteristic flavors and colors to crystal and caramel malts. Once caramelized, these sugars are no longer sugars, and so are not fermentable by yeast. However, only a small percentage of the sugars actually undergo Maillard reactions and so presumably there are plenty of other sugars, dextrins, and partially degraded starch molecules remaining that would eventually contribute to fermentability, especially after they are mashed in the presence of the "healthy" enzymes from the normal malt that makes up the majority of your grist. But this is not the case. Why? Starch molecules in barley are approximately 25% amylose, and 75% amylopectin. Due to the limited enzyme mobility described above, the amylopectin is preferentially broken down because the complexity of the molecules "entraps" enzymes in microchannels on the surface of the amylopectin molecules. The much longer, straight-chain amylose molecules are solubilized, but survive the process relatively unscathed. During the later, high temperature stages of kilning and subsequent cooling, these solubilized amylose molecules tend to recrystallize in a process called retrogradation. For reasons not entirely understood, these recrystallized amylose molecules are very resistant to enzymic hydrolysis and so will not yield fermentable sugars. It has also been noted by many researchers that regardless of the type of malt being produced, there is an inverse relationship between the time spent at high temperature in kilning and the fermentability of a malt. As crystal and caramel malts can spend quite a long time at temperatures as high as 150*C, it makes sense that their fermentability may be severely reduced. Hope this helps. Mort O'Sullivan Edinburgh, Scotland -=-=-=-=- 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: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 12:55:16 -0400 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Crystal malt fermentability - Part 2 Here is a clarification Mort posted to a followup question by Steve Alexander. Jeff -=-=-=-=-=-=- Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 22:30:30 +0100 From: "Mort O'Sullivan" <tarwater at brew-master.com> Subject: Crystal Malt Questions I was afraid someone might ask for clarification regarding my earlier post. Thanks, Steve. Starch retrogradation is a pretty complex physical phenomenon and could be better explained by a rheologist than a brewer. But I'll try to tell you what I know and show you where I found the information. >In capsule form it says: >malt is 25% amylose and 75% amylopectin (this checks out) >stewing of crystal malt favors amylopectin-lysis [- hmm why ? all enzymes >are just as short of water. - Isn't BA smaller to start with ?]] Even in a normal mash, amylopectin is broken down faster than amylose, which is explained by the fact that the complex structure of amylopectin molecules tends to entrap amylase enzymes. In conditions such as stewing crystal malt, free movement of enzymes would be even more restricted and the time of stewing at 65*C is generally shorter than the time for a full mash, so a lot of amylose would be left undigested. >only a small % of the sugars undergo Maillard reactions and become >unfermentable by this mechanism during kilning, the relatively >unchanged amylose molecule recrystallize [or perhaps crystallize is >better - since it's the first fime - No Mort?] No, I think 'recrystallize' is better since the starch granules are already in a crystal structure before gelatinization. The conditions for the retrogradation of starch require that the starch molecules be gelatinized and then that they be cooled to below the gelatinization temperature before they are fully hydrolysed. The slower the cooling and the longer time spent at the low temperatures, the more retrogradation occurs. Retrogradation is also promoted by relatively long chain lengths (>100) and association with lipid molecules, so amylose molcules retrograde faster than amylopectin molcules. Retrogradation of starch is one of the primary mechanisms of bread staling and most research has been focused on that area rather than brewing. One interesting thing I read about wheat starch is that while in its natural state it gelatinizes at ~55*C, after retrogradation its gelatinization temperature is 105*C. Whether this is the case with barley starch I am not sure, but it could explain why it is resistent to enzymes. >and by an inexplicable mechanism become unfermentable - that is - >insucceptable to amylase enzymes. >regardless of malt type - high temp kilnoing => lower fermentability. The amount of time spent at the high temperature is as important, if not more important. For those interested in reading more about this stuff, I got most of the information from these sources: (1) Gretenhart, K.E. "Specialty Malts." _MBAA Technical Qtly_ 1997 v.34 n.2 pp.102-106. (2) Jackson, S.W. and J.R. Hudson. " Flavour from Crystal Malt." _J. Inst. Brew._ Jan/Feb 1978 v. 84 pp. 34-40. (3) Manners, D.J. "Starch Degradation During Malting and Mashing." _Brewers Digest_ Dec 1974, pp. 56-62. (4) Palmer, G.H., ed. "Cereal Science and Technology." Aberdeen: Aberdeen UP, 1989. (5) McGregor A.W. "Current State of Research into Barley Carbohydrates and Enzymes." in _Proceedings of the Third Aviemore Conference on Malting, Brewing & Distilling_ ed. I. Campbell. London: IoB, 1990; pp 10-33. (6) Blenkinsop, P.G. "A Look at Malt Products." in _Proceedings of the Third Aviemore Conference on Malting, Brewing & Distilling_. pp. 179-194. (7) Bourne, D.T., et al. "Some Factors Influencing the Fermentability of Malt." in _Proceedings of the Third Aviemore Conference on Malting, Brewing & Distilling_. pp. 309-312. -=-=-=-=- 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: Sat, 03 Jun 2000 12:59:56 -0500 From: hal <hwarrick at springnet1.com> Subject: therm. input ! Greetings all, Boy I throw in a quick bit of info on a small digital therm. i find and all we talk about is water getting into the braiding. I'm sorry for all the problems with this,I just assumed anyone using a therm. on there mash inserts it into the side of the mash vessel instead of dropping it into the liquid. That way none of the braiding is in the liquid. Hal Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2000 18:02:50 GMT From: mikey at swampgas.com ( at ) Subject: RE: Thermocouple braid problem I have two of these -- using heat shrink tubing will NOT work (this includes the heat shrink tubing provided by St. Pats). It may work initially, but eventually water will seep in. I'd advise simply taking care with the probe. I have had some luck adding food grade silicone caulk to the edges, in addition to heat-shrink tubing but I suspect that even this will eventually fail. Do be careful -- if water DOES seep in, the probe will indicate a high temperature -- but not necessarily so high that you will notice something amiss. Cheers -- m ************************************** Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball. Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2000 02:53:38 EDT From: Epic8383 at aol.com Subject: False Bottom Flexing When I finally set up my 3 keg system, I also wasn't impressed with the mash/lauter false bottom, so I went to my nearest big time home store and took some 1/4" x 2" stainless round head machine screws and two nuts for each. I installed 3 of them upside down, with a nut on either side of the false bottom. After adjusting the length and location of the screws, I had a very firmly supported false bottom... My recent Kolsch filtration running directly from fermenter to keg via my carboy cap was a complete success, I saved myself a transfer of unfiltered beer into a keg prior to filtering. The Kolsch is clear, golden, and delicious! Gus Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2000 02:05:36 -0500 From: "Rob Moline" <brewer at isunet.net> Subject: Specialty Grains >From: "Steve" <stjones1 at chartertn.net> >Subject: Mashing specialty grains ><SNIP> but this guy is adamant about it. He says that specialty >grains, especially crystal and dextrin malt, should not be mashed with >the base malt because the enzymes will 'destroy' the dextrins, leaving >nothing but fermentable sugars. He claims that this will lead to >overattenuation and thin body. He says if you want to use crystal, then >steep it in the boil kettle. Though I have always added specialties directly with the rest of the mash...certainly I always made sure to include them in the middle of a milling run...just to ensure that there was no..say..roasted..in the 'dead space' of the mill transit to tun...left over for the next batch....I always start a crush with 2 row...and finish with 2 row..... I have heard many a positive comment from brewers that do add specialties just before the sparge...and have greatly enjoyed the flavor from those beers employing such a scheme... But the above statements reported by Steve can only be made with little respect for actual practice... Yes, the enzymes CAN reduce dextrins...but WILL they? Not likely... "Thus, B-amylase depends upon A-amylase to by-pass the the branches and expose additional 1-4 linkages for hydrolysis. A-amylase is known as the 'liquefying enzyme,' <SNIP>. A-amylase has the ability to bypass the 1-6 branch points and attack internal 1-4 linkages to expose additional substrate for B-amylase....... .....A-amylase is also known as the 'dextrinogenic enzyme' since it will eventually, ALTHOUGH VERY SLOWLY, convert dextrins to maltose and glucose........ .....The optimum temperature for A-amylase activity is 65-67C (149-153F.) B-amylase is the more powerful maltose producer, but it's action slows and ceases as 1-4 linkages become unavailable for hydrolysis. It's opimum temperature is 52-62 C (126-144 F.) Together with A-amylase, B-amylase is capable of converting 60-80 % of the available starch to fermentable sugars. The remaining 'limit' dextrins are inaccessible to B-amylase activity. Limit dextrinase is a de-branching enzyme which attacks 1-6 linkages and can break down limit dextrins. However, since it's optimum temperature is 40C (104F.), it has little effect at mashing temperatures. Thus a large percentage of the dextrins, which are unfermentable, pass into the finished beer, contributing to palate-fullness, or body, into the finished beer." <SNIP> "The rate of rise and the selected conversion or saccharification temperature determines the relative proportions of maltose and dextrins which the amylases are permitted to form." The Practical Brewer..3rd Ed, 1999, pg 114. So much for the books...I would say this to Steve, ask your adamant friend to make a pair of mashes, in any temp range...steps...or at a single infusion temp... One with nothing but 2 row or 6 row...and the other with 50% carapils.... Over any time period he wishes.... And taste the collected runnings........ He may change his mind.... Rob Moline "The More I Know About Beer, The More I Realize I Need To Know More About Beer!" Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2000 03:35:35 -0400 From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net> Subject: freezing malt Oh yeah. Purified barley beta-amylase is destroyed by freezing. Some other plant BAs degrade slowly with freezing. That may be why Mary Ann Gruber of Breiss suggested avoiding it. I doubt, based on reports, that the impact is severe but a may still show up in the 'con' column for this method. -S Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2000 20:01:39 +1000 (EST) From: =?iso-8859-1?q?scott=20morgan?= <surferscotty at yahoo.com.au> Subject: re:Homebrew Tri-Nations? Lydon, just let me correct you... "Rugby? What's that? Oh, yes, it's a funny game played by thugs in Queensland and New South Wales."....and the ACT, new zealand, the UK, ireland, scotland, wales, Europe, the north and south America's, China, Japan, korea, sth africa, zimbawe, pacific isles... "Australian Rules is the code down here." for how long? "Coopers is the only decent commercial beer in Australia. " The only point we can unite on....except for those nasty add sugar kits. Praise be to Dark Ale. scotty _____________________________________________________________________________ http://movies.yahoo.com.au - Yahoo! Australia & NZ Movies - Find out what's on at the local cinema with Yahoo! Movies Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2000 08:56:14 -0400 From: "Nathaniel P. Lansing" <delbrew at compuserve.com> Subject: mash pH retry There were a few requests for a retry of my mash experiment. So, new calibration buffers mixed and calibration of the meter checked, calibration with the new buffer solutions was off only 0.03; an amount typical with this meter after 1 week of storage. The water pH was checked before the mash started. Water pH was 4.89, after boiling to eliminate atmospheric volatile acidity the water pH was 5.45; adding 0.25 grams calcium sulphate to 400 ml of the test water caused no change of pH-remaining 5.45. 100 grams pilsner malt was added to 400 ml of the prepared water, stirred 1 minute and allowed to rest 3 minutes; the pH reached 5.69. The mash was repeated with water with no added calcium sulphate, the grist stirred 1 minute, the calcium sulphate added after doughing in and the mash allowed to rest 3 minutes; the pH was 5.71. Adjusting the readings for temperature offset gives _normal_ mash pH of 5.5. Adding gypsum before or after doughing in seems to make no significant difference in the resulting mash pH. The 0.02 variation between the 2 mashes is meaningless since the accuracy of the meter is =/- 0.01. The results of these 2 trials replicate the original findings of my experiment. Water containing 150 ppm of calcium ions results in an adjusted mash pH within normally accepted standards. One good measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions. N.P.Lansing Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2000 11:23:03 -0400 From: Bill Wible <bwible at pond.com> Subject: re: Foster's Phil, Absolutely no need to apologize for anything. I actually enjoy reading all the comments from you guys. The whole Burabadoo Hilton thing has been very amusing. I truly did want comments on a Foster's Recipe. I live in Philadelphia, PA. One of my friends who I used to work with is from another part of the State - Pittsburgh, PA. I worked with the guy for about 8 years. Now he is leaving this part of the state to go back to his home and take a job closer to family. He has been here for awhile and so he will not leave right away. He wants to close out all his business properly, say goodbye to everyone, etc. So I asked him "What kind of beer do you want me to make for your going away party?" He said, "I like Foster's." That's the story. The post was not a troll to get you Australian guys out of the woodowork, though it might have seemed that way. And sure, I can understand that it would be like someone asking for a Schlitz, Schaefer, or Iron City Beer recipe here. These are all older beers that some of the old men still drink. Most people would say they're not nearly as good as they used to be. And alot of people would say "Why bother?" Still, we do occasionally see those kinds of requests, "for someone's father". Like I said, I stopped judging people, and now I just make what people ask for. Builds my skills as a brewer. I look at each request as an opportunity. By the way, here's what I finally came up with for Foster's: 5 gallons OG 1.048 IBU ~23 SRM ~6 5 lbs 2 row lager malt 2L 1.25 lbs 6 row lager malt 2L 1 lb Carapils 2L .5 lb Crystal Malt 20L 1.5 lbs Table Sugar 1L 1 starter Wyeast 2272 North American Lager Yeast .5 oz Pride of Ringwood 6.8% 60 min .5 oz Pride of RIngwood 6.8% 30 min Infusion mash, 155 degrees, my system gets around 68% efficiency. I originally had 6.25 lbs 2 row, but because I buy malt in 5 lb bags, and I already have an open bag of 6 row, that's what I decided to use. No other particular reason. Well, it does help efficiency just a tiny bit, but not enough to get excited over. Thanks for writing, no hard feelings or anything toward anyone here. Look forward to your posts. Have a good one, Bill Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 06/05/00, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96