HOMEBREW Digest #3359 Fri 23 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

  Re: priming after cold conditioning (Steve Lacey)
  NSW Homebrewing Championships (Steve Lacey)
  Forgive him Lord, he knows not what he asks (Steve Lacey)
  re: bt back issues/SlowHio law/HSA ("Stephen Alexander")
  Aylinger Y, Mauri 514, Aus slang ("Graham Sanders")
  Aussie Strine mate (Brad McMahon)
  Back End Of The Country ("Phil & Jill Yates")
  near beer and Prohibition (Jim Adwell)
  Bud's roots ("Nathaniel P. Lansing")
  Re: priming after cold conditioning (Jeff Renner)
  Raftman:  distiller's malt (Vachom)
  Feed / chit malt (Nathan Kanous)
  Shampoo Tube Wyeast ("Paddock Wood Brewing Supplies")
  Beer pH (AJ)
  Re: Big Beer/Small Beer Parti-gyle brewing ("Dan Diana")
  Bottling a 1+ year old lambic (Ted McIrvine)
  Carbonation and pH (mmaceyka)
  re: pH Heck ("Brian Lundeen")
  re: lag times ("Brian Lundeen")
  Sorbate in Beer ("Frank J. Russo")
  6% beer (John Adsit)

* Don't miss the 2000 AHA NHC in Livonia, MI * 6/22 through 6/24 http://hbd.org/miy2k * WebCam coverage at http://hbd.org/eventcam * 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: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 15:00:26 +1000 From: Steve Lacey <stevel at sf.nsw.gov.au> Subject: Re: priming after cold conditioning Dan Senne wrote: "Now it's time to bottle, but as I've never cold conditioned beer, I don't know if the yeast will have enough umph left to bottle carbonate with my usual 6 or so, ounce corn sugar addition. Is the addition of more yeast needed? how much? I don't have the equipment needed to force carbonate." This comes up periodically and is definitely a RDWHAHB situation. Mainly because there really IS enough yeasties floating around to effect carbonation (I'm speaking from experience - please don't ask me the concentration in cells X10^6/mL!). If you want to be doubly sure, you don't have to ADD extra yeast, just grab them from the bottom of the lagering tank. Use a bottling bucket and bulk prime. But when you rack to the bottling bucket, just momentarily put the business end of the siphon right to the bottom of the lagering tank and suck up a little bit of yeast. Defeat the purpose of lagering? I don't think so. Anyway, do you want your beer carbonated or not? Cheers, Steve Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 15:00:49 +1000 From: Steve Lacey <stevel at sf.nsw.gov.au> Subject: NSW Homebrewing Championships Whilst I'm on the job, I might as well make a quick short note for NSW (Oz) based brewers - the other 99.99% of you can page down now if you like. On behalf of the organisers of the NSW Amateur Homebrewing Championships, I just want to inform those who are wondering (both of you) that info packages and entry kits are about to be mailed out. We hoped to have it done weeks ago, but life (and Murphy) keeps getting in the way. Packages will be going to all homebrew stores in the State and at least one in ACT too. Also note that we are planning to run a bit of a homebrew promotion on judging day following judging (Sat 7th October). This will be in the centre of Sydney and will involve talks, tastings and vendor promotions. Comp presentations will follow that as part of a social function involving quality craft brewed beers on tap (ever tried Gil's Bock??). Any of you local legends out there interested in helping by conducting a guided tasting session or giving a short talk, I'd love to hear from you. That means you Phil, and you too Mr Lamotte! You can run but you can't hide. Any enquiries, please feel free to chase me up by private email. To the other 99.99%, thanks for the bandwith. Steve Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 15:45:34 +1000 From: Steve Lacey <stevel at sf.nsw.gov.au> Subject: Forgive him Lord, he knows not what he asks Bill wrote: I'd like help from the collective with 2 things - brewery info and Australian Lingo etc etc Bill, I fear that the likes of Yates and Sanders will be only too happy to rise to your request for Aussie (that's pronounced ozzee with a zee, not ossie with an ess) info. Just don't believe everything they tell you because it is a well-known Aussie trait to pull the leg of unsuspecting American tourists. For example, they like to wax lyrical about the dangers of drop bears when wandering in the outback. They convince the poor tourists that these feisty little creatures will pounce on you from out of a tree and start fornicating your ear hole. Now, this is absolute crap. We all know that drop bears actually come at you from out of burrows - it's a deliberate and ironical misnomer! I really only want to pick up on a couple of points 1) Coopers is an ale, Victoria Bitter is a lager - and a shocker at that! Tooheys (worse) XXXX (condoms in the US, we know that) as Graham has spoken so eloquently of, and Swan Lager are a couple of other mass produced soma products. 2) We don't really wish you would switch to the metric system. We are quite pleased that some in the world are willing to keep alive a clumsy outdated measurement system for the benefit of posterity. Think how much better off we would all be if somebody had kept Latin alive! Gosh no, don't change, it makes the world interesting and keeps us all metric/imperial bilingual and, hence, culturally enriched. 3) The only other words I would like to give American homebrewers is, in all seriousness, thanks for everything you guys give the homebrewing community. The HBD, AHA, BJCP, books, hops, yeasts, etc etc. We are just small fry over here and without the US "industry" we would all be still mucking about with bread yeast and God knows what. So, even if we are a bit cheeky at times, we do appreciate the US industry - imperial recipes and all. Now, having done my PollyAnna bit for the day I think I'll go and have a Bex and a good lie down. Cheers, Steve Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 04:13:12 -0400 From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net> Subject: re: bt back issues/SlowHio law/HSA Scott Morgan writes .. > However moral they feel, its a failed business, [...] Exactly, Dave Lamotte and others have justification for feeling a bit put-out, but a court has apparently relieved New Wine Press, Inc of it's obligation to us and tort law, not Mr.Mallery, will determine precedence for any disbursements. Haranging Mallery for not paying a debt he doesn't owe is counterproductive. I think Dave and others have confused a modern contract with a medieval code of honor. IMO the moral obligation to repay is entirely negated by the purchaser's obligation to understand tort fundamentals regarding performance risk and that the contract was with a corporate entity, not an individual. I and others ignored or incorrectly evaluted performance risk of resubscription. I was aware of the risk, resubscribed anyway, and blame only myself for the misjudgement. I'd do the same again. Others want to blame someone else for their failure to accurately assess risk - that's a different sort of moral flaw. I think it's totally off-base, but if anyone believes fraud was involved they should get together and have a local walk it thru small claims court. Corporate identity will not protect from fraud, just as complaining on HBD will not get blood from a stone. == Dave Burley writes of Ohio beer law ... >I think I remember on the labels it said "6% > but not more than 7.2%", didn't it? Excellent memory Dave. Actually Ohio is full of quaint Old-timey laws regarding alcohol. It's laws are stuck in a prior century and it's legislator's heads stuck somewhere else... In Ohio the maximum level of alcohol legal *today* in a beer is 6% ABW or about 7.2%ABV. This means no barleywines or trippels - despite the fact that you can stroll down the aisle and buy 13% wines day or night. Recently the State of Ohio began enforcing an odd "open container" law. The upshot is that Ohio HB clubs cannot legitimately bring untaxed HB to meetings at locations which hold liquor licenses, such as Micros. It's nice to know these busy-bodies have plenty of time to fix non-problems and interfere with legitimate freedoms. Great Lakes Beer News has more. I have to thank one of my local club members for detail. A letter from Paul Gatza made clear that AOB interest in the matter would fall short of calling or writing anyone to determine what was up. No one was expecting a legal challenge from AOB, but it's sad that this org can't act as a clearing house for info, or even assist in establishing communication with groups that could help. SlowHio - A great place to live - if you call this living. === Pannicke, Glen A. > But how many are BREWING chemists? These are the people who I > want to hear definative statements from. They are there Glen but you are not looking. Get off your duff and get to a good library. These brewing chemists and researchers publish regularly on damaging effects from oxidation in journals and books. I've reported on a few of these papers. Get a library card and read 'em yourself, since you discount my reports. That HSA (with other conditions) can result in off-flavors is not in serious question in the lit. What is questionable and interesting, is 'does this effect YOUR HB under YOUR conditions' and no paper will answer that. An HB level experiment might help gauge it tho'. >I would like someone with the proper education and experience IN THE >FIELD OF BREWING SCIENCE to explain or disprove HSA. You'll find several articles a year on the topic in JIB. Or you might look to a textbook like Kunze who declares ...(pp211) that "Oxidation during mashing [...] is shown by /darker wort and beer, / a less refined beer flavor,/ decrease in flavor stability." He then lists some obvious ways to reduce this. M&BS, written by some of the top brewing scientists in the English speaking world says much the same. When you consider that our HB tuns have perhaps a 5-10X greater surface to volume ratio, you can see why the potential problem is worse on the HB scale. > I want answers and I'm > sure someone already has them - or at least a good lead. Send me a snail-mail address Glen and I'll CC you on a couple recent papers. You will at least see that it isn't a snipe hunt. After participating in judging events over the past few months I am convinced that very basic improvements, such as control of carbonation, attenuation and infection are much greater issues than HSA for the HBer. That doesn't mean that I'll be ignoring HSA (or pitching rate or hops handling or ...) in my beers. ==== Spencer W Thomas writes re Blanche de Chambly yeast >If all the Unibroue beers are made with the same yeast, Unibroue claims on their website that they use a different yeast for each beer - seems unlikely. I too tried the Fin Du Monde yeast (after tasting Spencer's). It is very clean but gives a certain wine-like flavor (crisp adicity) in more neutral flavored beers. It is a very good fermenter for hi-grav and the attenuation and flocculation are average. I like it a lot. later Spencer continues ... HSA and Bud >My theory has two parts: >1. HSA affects "dark grains" the most. There are no dark grains in >Bud. There is a multi-step process hypothesized and to an extent confirmed in the lit. For trans-2-nonenal formation, linoleic, a fatty acid is oxidized in the mash or boil (and maybe the kiln). The FA oxidation is catalyzed by lipo-oxygenase enzyme or metal ions (Fe, Cu at ppb conc) and has a tendency to chain-react - creating increasingly oxidized FAs forming hydroperoxides of FA. The hydroperoxides survive the fermentation w/o being reduced. Later, in beer, heat and low pH act to increase the spontaneous rate for conversion of the oxidized FA products into trans-2-nonenal. Certain oxidation state carriers (like melanoidin & Maillard products from dark malts) can reportedly catalyse this last step - which agrees with Spencer's comment. G.Fix has an offhand reference in one of his books and I have found ASC Food series books containing papers to this effect. I think you'll find the same in EBC 17, Mahri et al, it's mentioned in part in JIB v98, 'Flavor Control', pp217 and his reference may be 'The Chemistry of Heterocyclic Compound in Flavours and Aromas', Vernin&Vernin, 1982. Actually there are quite a number of books devoted to lipid reactions in food and staling is a very big well studied issue. It's not all nailed down, but it's far from a hunch. -S Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 18:47:10 +1000 From: "Graham Sanders" <craftbrewer at cisnet.COM.AU> Subject: Aylinger Y, Mauri 514, Aus slang G'day all Well I have to hand it to Phil, honest and cagey like a cockatoo. Honest yes the yeast arrived. Cagey, well i better give you the drum. One wonders why the Hilton had dopped in the star rating, now on tin beer. Could it be the brewery just can't cut it. Well the yeast sample was going to be put thru the ringers. I was going to put the yeast culture to the full barage of tests when it arrived, just to see what he gets up to. So when at work SWMBO rings and says we have mail from the Hilton. I know its from the Hilton, First class postage, hand delivered, premium packaging with gold trim and a wax seal. Most impressive. "Now my chance to see what he gets up to" I think. Open it is the reply. Now SWMBO did so carefully (the packaging is worth a bit), and then I hear " Is there meant to be liquid sloshing about in here". Phils obviously been using Wyeast packs too much. Now its a nice try to contaminate the yeast before i get it so I can't determine whats in your rice lagers, but you failed mate, there's enough in the vial for me to do the proper tests still. Will keep the HBD posted on the results. Questions were asked of Mauri Dried yeast and 514 yeast. Well firstly Mauri makes 514 yeast. They also clain to make 497, a lager yeast. It was actually made in a vain attempt to stop Nth Qld separating from the Federation. Kit brewing companies were bombarded with complates from here on how their yeast wouldn't perform in hot weather (I can remember still remember some of the letters we received from coopers deneying it and one threating legal action). It actually centred at our local Homebrew shop. Try brewing without a fridge in the tropics. 32c at 8.00am, stays the same til nightfall, slowly drops to 24c by 6.00am, then straight bavck up to 32c when the sun gets up. Normal dry yeast wouldn't cut it. Well approaches were made to dry yeast manufacturers on this issue, (coopers wouldn't listen). I can remember when the first trial 514 came up specially for us to trial. We were told it was formulated for the tropics. Our opinion - Its probably the best hot weather yeast available on the market. It produces the least fruity flavours at higher temps than any other yeast, dry or liquid. It is now become the stock standard yeast for all kits in the tropics. It will ferment 15c to 40c, and for rehydration purposes, it should be done with water 37-40c. Although no yeast is ideal at these temps, this is the best there is. Aussie slang. Shit i could fill the HBD with it. Australia even has its own dictionary (The Macquarie) that chuck full. The dictionary was actually produced because there were too many words not covered by anyone else. Our slang is a mixture of rhyming from old england (plates of meat), Words made up by the uneducated convicts (Dinkum), local historical events (Buckleys) the shortening of words so we could spend more time drinking (breakie, footie) and just our dislike of the snobby upperclass (this results in us makin' a mockery of th' pomps lingo). And like the USA, there are regional differences. I wonder how many southerners know what a 'port' is. Or some places call tar, bitch-a-min, while others bit -u- men. And of course you have to get that nasal twang, or it just doesn't sound the same. Then, just to make it confusing we have more than one meaning to a word. Take the famous 'Mate'. a very veritile word. When drinking with your friend you call him mate, -You see a stranger, hi mate,- you in a fight, I'll 'ave you mate, SWMBO is my mate ------ infact in Aus everyone is a mate in one way or another. Confusing you would think. Yet sit in a crowded pub, and yell 'hey mate'. Only one person will respond. The only sad thing is that The good 'ol USA is slowly standardising the lingo arround the world. Its what you get with a global economy. Least in Nth Qld, we keep the spirit alive, and scull it as well. True right there Bill, you have in one with your terms. Commercial beers in Aus, Well being a big drinking nation here in the North things like XXXX (with all it sub style names like bitter ale, draught), Cairns Draft, NQ, Powers, Swan(swan lager and Emu bitter), Tooheys, Tooths, CUB stable, That SA Rubbish (West End , Southwark), Cascade, Boag. they are few just off the top of my head. Bugger, all this talk of commercial rubbish has made me sick, need a pony, no a pot of the good stuff. off to MY bar I go. (i want to raise a Ph question but that cant wait, my thirst cant) Shout mate Graham Sanders Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 21:22:00 +0930 From: Brad McMahon <brad at sa.apana.org.au> Subject: Aussie Strine mate Bil Wible wrote: >I'd like help from the collective with 2 things - brewery info and Australian >Lingo. Uh Oh. Now you've done it! > What are some other Australian > Lagers - I've heard of Cooper's, and Victoria's (which I think may be an > ale). I'm sure I will probably recognize the names when somebody > names more. When you say "Coopers" most are talking about Coopers Sparkling Ale. Coopers do 4 lagers: Draught, Light, DB (Diabetic) and Birrell (Non-Alcoholic) but these are nowhere as popular as their range of ales. http://www.coopers.com.au for more info. The other you mention is "Victoria Bitter" and is not an ale as you might expect but a lager. Erm, others you could mention are Hahn, Crown Lager, XXXX, Tooheys, West Southwark, Cascade, Emu, Swan, Resch's... >Second, I'd like some good *real* Australian Lingo. I'm not sure how >real Australians feel about the Outback Steakhouse. Never heard of it. Then we have Texas Bar'n'Grill type restaurants which are probably just as authentic. Yee-ha! > but they list some > supposed lingo on their menus, things like "Bonzer - Good" "Tucker - > Food" "Top Drop - Good Beer". Are these real? Yes, they are common. Top Drop is used with wine as well. Strewth, have a squiz at http://people.enternet.com.au/~goeldner/auslist.htm A short but bonza list of strine for you seppos to suss out! As with all slang, some are regional ones but it's a good start. In all seriousness (which we Aussies rarely are) we would be happy to translate your document for you! >Lastly, what words would Australians like to give to the American >heathens, er, Homebrewers, besides wishing they'd switch to the >metric system? ;) Oh that's easy: "By crikey, it's YOUR shout, mate!" Braddo the Crow Eater. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 22:17:22 +1000 From: "Phil & Jill Yates" <yates at acenet.com.au> Subject: Back End Of The Country I have to take umbrage over Graham Sander"s comments : >And to inform the rest of the HBDers, we in North >Queensland long ago >succeeded and separated from the rest of Australia. If it >wasn't for the >fact that we are glued on to the ass-end of the country, we >would have >relocated ages ago. Graham, we thought long and hard about it, but in the end decided there really was no better place to glue you on than at the "ass-end" as you put it. Where else would you expect to find a Queenslander? You will notice that Graham has taken Pat's advice and made no further mention of footy. But on a serious note, I am sorry that my shipment of Ayinger yeast has leaked in it's package. And after all the trouble I went to. The vials were supposed to be capable of holding liquid but apparently they have not. "The Artist" sent my sample in a little vial with an "O" ring in the lid (I have to hand it to the yanks for having something for every purpose) but I could find no such container locally. I'll have to give this matter a bit more thought. And just a short note for Brian. My drifting back to making kit beers will in no way dampen my enthusiasm for mashing. It's just something I want to muck about with on the side. Sort of fills in a bit of time between brews. I seem to remember there was someone in here that suggested we all would go down this track (well he certainly said he would) if it resulted in making fine beer. His name was Mr "S", alias Steve Alexander. But don't worry Brian, I'm not about to give up my mashing. The only thing I enjoy more, Is poking fun at Queenslanders. Cheers Phil (Oh I'm Always In Trouble)! Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 08:23:00 -0400 From: Jim Adwell <jimala at apical.com> Subject: near beer and Prohibition >I seem to recall that my father once told me he could buy "near beer" in >soda shops and ice cream parlors in the 1920s to 1930s, just like Coca-Cola >with no age restriction. I have the impression that these were not LA beers >but beer with about 2-3% alcohol. Any more reliable info on this? >The Volstead Act of October 27, 1919, clarified prohibition enforcement and >mandated 0.5% as the maximum legal alcohol content of any beverage - this >was near beer's upper limit. This remained the maximum until the end of >prohibition in 1933. (Source - _The History of beer and Brewing in Chicago, >1833-1978_ by Bob Skilnik). Some folks at the time were buying near beer and fermenting it at home to produce a more alcohol-laden drink; my grandfather did this in Tennessee in the 1920's. Also during prohibition the breweries were producing ( and selling ) large quantities of malt extract, which was sold as a food product. My grandmother told me that everyone knew that the major reason it was bought was to make beer at home. When I was growing up in Albuquerque in the fifties and sixties I remember something called 'near beer' being sold in the corner store, which all us kids were convinced could be fermented in the can ( or bottle, can't remember how it was packaged) to produce beer. We never actually tried it, though. Cheers, Jim Jim's Brewery Pages: http://home.ptd.net/~jimala/brewery/ Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 09:26:27 -0400 From: "Nathaniel P. Lansing" <delbrew at compuserve.com> Subject: Bud's roots Jeff brings up,>>They were explicit that that was one of the volatiles >they were decreasing, and sulfur compounds in general.<< That wasn't mentioned here in discussing the column. I *extrapolated again :-) Whoa, a contradiction, lagers are *supposed to have sulfur characters as compared to ales aren't they? >>Bud traces its origins not to Munich, but to Budweis << (knew this would raise an eyebrow or two) Well known, but what makes a pilsner, pale color or hop character? Urquell, the first pale beerand that because of the soft water, could be well hopped without going "over the top." I think of the beers' current character then look at the current BJCP style guidelines (reasonably accurate, thanks guys) ignoring the IBUs consider the hop/malt balance, is it reasonably close to a pils? It's just barely a helles. This is my reasoning for calling it a dumbed-down helles. >>As a matter of fact, virtually all mainstream US lagers of today >are in the pilsner style, albeit much watered down by now<< I just have a hard time agreeing that cuz they're pale they're pilsners, maybe "once upon a time" 80 years ago. Heck, Tetley's Ale is closer to a pils, all they'd have to do is change 1 thing; the yeast. Bud would need to change their grist and add some hops. Maybe even allow some DMS and diacetyl formation. Not just picking on Bud, they were mentioned cuz of the aeration column. Well maybe I am. They reinforced my homebrewing efforts when they put out that radio add poking fun at homebrew. "Never mind, those lumps that's just the yeast. It's s'posed to that color, hmm don't know what *that is." ++++++++++ >>all those of you who thought I meant I walked around without my clothes, hold up your hands).<< I hadn't till you brought that up, an image I didn't need to start my day :-/ >>the head twisted around about 180 degrees, so it was backwards. << Now that's a better image to start the day!! HAR Remembering when Michelob had serving temperature listed.. N.P. Lansing Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 09:34:26 -0400 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Re: priming after cold conditioning "Dan Senne" <dsenne at intertek.net>, remembering to add that he is in Collinsville IL, asks for a priming primer: >I brewed a rice ale recently using German pils and rice, hoping to make >something light that my father-in-law might like. The yeast was Wyeast >Kolsch and after the usual 2 week secondary fermentation at around 65F, I >put it in the refrigerator for 3 weeks at about 45F while I was on vacation. >Now it's time to bottle, but as I've never cold conditioned beer, I don't >know if the yeast will have enough umph left to bottle carbonate with my >usual 6 or so, ounce corn sugar addition. >Is the addition of more yeast needed? how much? I don't have the equipment >needed to force carbonate. I've lagered a bock for several months before bottling and carbonation went fine. It wouldn't hear to make sure your racking want stirs up just a little extra yeast off the bottom of the secondary as most of it will have settled out, but you don't need much, and it will be in fine shape. Just a little sleepy and hungry. Hope your father-in-law likes it. Does he know any ladies who play billiards? He might invite them over. Jeff - off to Livonia in an hour or two. -=-=-=-=- 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: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 09:28:24 -0500 From: Vachom <MVachow at newman.k12.la.us> Subject: Raftman: distiller's malt I ran across some of Unibroue's Raftman recently which further convinced me that these guys have been visited by some higher power of brewing. The blurb on the bottle claims the beer's made with whiskey malt. I've looked at George De Piro's comments on distiller's malt from last January, but I need a little more clarification. First, the smoke character of Raftman is very subtle, a taste I find very pleasing as, in general, rauch beers do not appeal to me. Is the peat-smoked malt one finds listed in homebrew supply shops what single malt distillers use as 100% of their malt bills? Or is this product something that maltsters have created for the craft/homebrewing community? Last, does anyone have the skinny on the Raftman malt bill? The website reveals little, actually less than the bottle blurb. I'd like to culture up the Unibroue yeast and take a shot at this excellent beer. Mike New Orleans, LA Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 09:30:11 -0500 From: Nathan Kanous <nlkanous at pharmacy.wisc.edu> Subject: Feed / chit malt Hi, Glyn Crossno asked me about a project I'd proposed a couple of years ago. Using a hot air popcorn popper to roast some barley. I've got plenty of malt at home that I can roast, but no unmalted barley. If I go to a feed store / grain elevator, is there anything I should look out for when purchasing unmalted barley? Thanks a million. I may not be able to do this for a few months, but I'll do it. nathan in madison, wi Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 08:50:00 -0600 From: "Paddock Wood Brewing Supplies" <orders at paddockwood.com> Subject: Shampoo Tube Wyeast Del (delbrew at compuserve.com) asks if anyone has tried the 'shampoo tube' pitchable yeasts from Wyeast. We just received two samples and I pitched a 1056 tube into 5 gals of Koelsch style wort (I had it kicking around). My lag time was about what I'd expect from an XL smackpak. They contain the same number of active cells as a fully activated XL smack-pack at 40-60 billion. About 36 hours to noticeable fermentation. I can't be more specific, because it wasn't bubbling after 12 hours (I pitched into very cold wort), and I didn't check on it for another 24, and then it was going great. I haven't tried the beer yet. I like the way the tubes work: they don't need sterilizing as the spout is sealed and pre-sterilized. They are UV resistant, and it was very easy to use. We are considering switching to them for our ReadyBrew kits. They are ideal for us, since our ReadyBrew kits are stored at 2C, and the yeast is too, we can pitch the Tube into the cold wort. With the XL packs, we had to wait until the wort came to pitchable temp. But, they have a shorter shelf-life and are bulkier to store, so some retailers may not like carrying them as much. We will carry a selection with our next order mid July. We expect to bring in 1968, 1084,1335, 1318, 1272, & 1275. We can bring in any of the varieties by special request. I will report more data on performance and use as I try these more. I hope this was somewhat useful. Stephen Ross -- "Vitae sine cerevisiae sugant." ______________________________________________ Paddock Wood Brewing Supplies, Saskatoon, SK orders at paddockwood.com www.paddockwood.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 11:48:00 -0400 From: AJ <ajdel at mindspring.com> Subject: Beer pH Dan Listermann asked about the effects of carbonic acid on beer pH at 20 psi. In #3344 I showed how to compute the pH of deionized water as a function of the partial pressure of CO2 with which it is in equilibrium: Deionized water in equilibrium with atmospheric CO2 at the lower bound of concentration ( 0.03%) has a pH of 5.69 and at the upper limit (0.05%) 5.58. These values are easily calculated by sticking =0.0338*B1*(10^A2)*(10^-6.38) + (10^-14)*(10^+A2) - 10^-A2 into an Excel cell, setting B1 to the partial pressure of CO2 (0.0003 - 0.0005) and then using the solver to zero the cell by varying the pH which is in cell A2. You can set up a spreadsheet and play with numbers to your heart's content. Bear in mind, though, that beer is NOT deionized water. It contains various organic and inorganic acids as a consequence of malt composition, fermentation and brewing water content. These will have an effect on beer pH which in most cases will overwhelm the carbonic acid as some of them have pK's substantially less than carbonic acid's first pH of 6.38. A calculation at 20 psig = 20/14.7 atmospheres shows that the pH of distilled water would be 3.86. You will find the pH's of most beers to be higher than this - in the low 4's with some ales and of course Weissbier, lambic, guerze etc. lower. Proof that CO2 is not a major determinant of beer pH is easily demonstrated by measuring pH as the beer looses gas to the air over time. This is a little tricky as gas bubbles form on the pH electrode and must be swished off for stable readings. I think the bottom line is that while there is a fair amount of CO2 dissolved in beer (~46 mmol/L at 20 psi) the fact that the pK of carbonic acid is so high means that little of the H+ in the beer actually comes from CO2 (about 0.4% of it is dissociated at pH 4). Put in other words: beer is buffered to a pH usually in the low 4's. Even the relatively large amounts of dissolved CO2 are not enough to overcome beer's buffering capacity. Furthemore, beer dispensed at 20 psi is going to foam and quickly loose a lot of the gas it contains. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 09:06:12 -0700 From: "Dan Diana" <dands at ftconnect.com> Subject: Re: Big Beer/Small Beer Parti-gyle brewing Mike requested some information on Parti-gyle brewing (see below). Randy Mosher's The Brewer's Companion outlines how to get target gravities for both a regular and small beer(s). Randy's method calls out for collection of the first runnings and boiling those as a separate beer. The process is then repeated for each subsequent running. For homebrewer's ease in dealing with 5 gallon multiples, he proposes using either two runnings (10 gallons of beer total) or three runnings (15 gallons of beer total). In both cases, you will wind up with at least two beers. However, he quotes a rule of thumb that says that half the extract is contained in the first third of the runnings. Hence, you can achieve a higher gravity using the 1/3-2/3 split. To achieve the desired gravities for the subsequent beers, Randy tabulated the required gravity for the total batch. I have excerpted some of the data below. You can use a program like Excel to model this and establish what you total batch gravity needs to be for your desired beers. Original Gravity Estimation (Data from Mosher pp217-218) total 1/3-2/3 split 1/2-1/2 split batch 1/3 2/3 1/2 #1 1/2 #2 1050 10750 10375 10666 10333 1060 10900 10450 10800 10400 1070 11050 10525 10933 10467 1080 11200 10600 11067 10533 1090 11350 10675 11120 10600 1095 11425 10713 11267 10633 Good luck and hope this helps. Dan Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 08:05:52 -0400 From: "FC1(SW) James Pensinger" <pensinger at deyo.navy.mil> Subject: Big Beer/Small Beer I want to try an Imperial Russian Stout as first runnings and a small beer as a second runnings. Is there a way to figure out what the gravity will be for the small beer? I can formulate a recipie for 5 gallons of the big beer but I know that there will be sugars left in the mash and figure I should use them :). Can i do it this way or should I make the grain bill larger and stop at a certain gravity? Mike Pensinger beermaker at mad.scientist.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 13:12:02 -0700 From: Ted McIrvine <McIrvine at ix.netcom.com> Subject: Bottling a 1+ year old lambic I age lambics for a long time too, often upwards of two years. In recent years, I simply batch prime a lambic (plain or flavored) the same way that I do any other beer: I boil 3/4 cup of corn sugar in some water, chill it, add it to the carboy and bottle. Yes, it takes a while to carbonate this way, although I've never had a problem. Some brewers use a fresh yeast strain at bottling. I don't do this because I want to avoid flavor problems and attenuation problems that might occur by introdcing a new yeast strain at bottling. And yes, I publically proclaim that Jethro Gump is right and I was wrong about dry yeast. (I recall tasting a fine beer made with Nottingham yeast, and one cannot taste the difference between liquid and dry yeast.) Cheers Ted in NYC - -- Ted McIrvine McIrvine at IX.Netcom.Com (College of Staten Island/CUNY) > > Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 07:49:43 EDT > From: Lynhbrew at aol.com > Subject: Re: Bottling a 1+ year old lambic > > OK, so I finally made a palatable lambic (kriek) beer and now it's time to > bottle it. It is one year old, crystal clear, and has precious little yeast > in solution. Can someone who does lambics give me some advice on the best > priming and bottling techniques. And how long should it take to carbonate. > Thanks, Lyn Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 13:13:09 -0400 From: mmaceyka <mmaceyka at jhmi.edu> Subject: Carbonation and pH Howdy, Dan Listermann asks of people who know more chemistry than is good for them what the effect of carbonation would be on beer pH. I am not sure I still qualify, but here goes... Excellent question. If you add CO2 to beer, then some of it reacts with water to form H2CO3, or carbonic acid. The effect this has on pH depends on a value known to chemistry geeks, though generally forgotten by biology geeks, as "pKa." The pKa values are specific for each proton of a given acid, so carbonic acid has two pKa's, and they tell you at what pH the acid gives up 50% of its protons (actually, it's 25% for carbonic, because it has two pKa's, but at beer pH we need only be concerned with the first, and to fully explain pKa's I would need <SHUDDER> math). The first pKa of carbonic acid is... AARRGHH, where is my CRC! Who stole my CRC?! I'll bet it was the insidious, Airbus-flying Luddite, Darth Phil, doing the bidding of the most-evil Emperor Pivo... Anyway, I think carbonic acid's first pKa is 5.something, and finished beer is around 4.something, at some temperature (Sorry Dr. Burley)... The point is, as the pH of beer is at least one unit less than the first pKa of carbonic acid, adding CO2 to beer by force carbonating should have no direct effect on pH. Adding CO2 indirectly by priming might have a slight effect due to acidification of the medium, er, I mean beer, by yeast as they ferment the sugar, but my -guess- is that this effect would be minor. Because there is no pH change, there would be no additional pH-dependent effect on yeast health or infection protection due to carbonation. How the excess CO2 might effect the chemical activities of the relevant acids and bases in finished beer is still an open question, though I suspect the effects would be minor, though perhaps detectable with a pH meter accurate out to thousandths of a unit. Of course, I don't know this, and I could have missed some other important factor, so feel free to ignore everything I have just said. After all, I have no data, I'm just working on the first principles I thought relevant. Dare I suggest an experiment? Mike "Better living through chemistry" Maceyka The Peoples Republic of Takoma Park, MD And let me remind Ray Kruse that The Peoples Republic is indeed a nuclear free zone, so you will have to leave your tactical nukes at at the border when you visit... Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 12:24:35 -0500 From: "Brian Lundeen" <blundeen at rrc.mb.ca> Subject: re: pH Heck Dave Burley gives me the stern tut-tut with: > I think all > authors who do not designate the TEMPERATURE of measurement > of the mash pH > DO deserve their own place in hell. And it would be crowded. > Brian, that > includes you as you didn't tell us what temperature you were > when you began > adding lactic acid to adjust your mash pH. Your 5.7 ( I > assume measured at > room temperature) mash was perfect for a Pilsner style as > this range is > what the malt comes to in a low salts soft water and where > Pilsner Urquell > is mashed. You should never have changed it. > And why weren't you in my kitchen on Sunday to tell me this? To start with, Dave, your special place in hell will just have to wait for me, as I'm already booked into several, including the one for "People over the age of 13 whose favorite band was Styx". Personally, I don't think this is a particularly fair damnation, I mean, I was only in my 20's. Still, ya do the crime, ya gotta do the time, I suppose. And I'm probably not helping myself by cranking up the volume every time Christina Aguilera's Genie in a Bottle comes on the radio. Obviously this pH thing is a lot more complicated than Homebrewing for Dummies makes it out to be. And while I don't have the book in front of me, I'm pretty sure it was Noonan that really stressed the importance of getting that pH down, albeit without all the fine print that you brought up. So, just to give you a few more details. I heat my mash water then mix in the grains, usually getting close to my target. I let the mash rest for about 5 minutes after mixing before drawing off a sample for pH testing. I will sploosh it back and forth for a while between a couple of glasses to cool it off a bit, so it's still warmer than RT but below mash temp. I've never measured the actual temp (yes, I know, another millenia in your special place) but my pH meter is temperature compensating (at least that's what the Chem instructor that I borrowed it from tells me) so I've never worried about it. So those are the conditions under which I got the 5.7 reading and began my lactic acid additions. And no, I'm not calibrating my meter with buffer solutions before each use. I used to do that religiously and just found it didn't make an appreciable difference in the final results, so damn me for another millenia if you must, but I'm content to be a sloppy chemist, and can live with the fact that I won't be attempting to replicate congress mash results anytime in the foreseeable future. Anyway, your advice has made me feel a little less paranoid about pH levels. Now, if the damn Russian tanks would just stop making such a racket in the tunnels below my house, I might get a decent night's sleep. ;-) Brian Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 12:37:11 -0500 From: "Brian Lundeen" <blundeen at rrc.mb.ca> Subject: re: lag times Ooops, forgot to respond to Del's query: > I saw someone mention the 'shampoo tube' pitchable yeasts > from Wyeast. Who out there has tried them? What have been > your results? I have a lager-2124 and figured I'd step it up cuz > that is my standard practice; but what kind of lag times have you > seen if you've used them as a "direct pitch" yeast? My statistically insignificant data point was about 12 hours for "signs of life", which to me means a few bubbles and patches of yeast on the surface, and a full frothy krausen when I checked again about the 20 hour mark. However, that was with pitching into about 68F wort, which was then tossed in the fridge to cool down to 50F at whatever rate my fridge can manage. Oh, and before Dave books me into another warm room, the wort volume was 23 litres. Brian Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 16:40:04 -0400 From: "Frank J. Russo" <FJRusso at coastalnet.com> Subject: Sorbate in Beer For reasons I do not want to spend time on I added a 1/2 tsp of Potassium Sorbate to my fermented beer. It was in the secondary for 2 weeks at the time. Now the question is I want to bottle it and need to know if I repitch new yeast with corn sugar will it grow or will the Sorbate kill it also? Frank Havelock, NC Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 14:51:42 -0600 From: John Adsit <jadsit at jeffco.k12.co.us> Subject: 6% beer When I first moved to Colorado, more than a quarter century ago, I toured the Coors brewery. Here's how they explained the difference between 3.2% beer and 6% beer. (Warning: precise accuracy subject to age and failing memory.) According to Colorado law, beer sold in supermarkets and to anyone between the ages of 18-21 was 3.2 beer, meaning it could not be above 3.2% alcohol. In actual practice, it was around 3.0-3.1%. "Regular" beer could not, by law, be above 6%. For that reason, many people referred to it as 6% beer. In actual practice, regular Coors (they only made one beer then) was about 3.8%. There was thus not nearly as much difference between the 3.2% beer and the 6% beer as people believed. The problem was that because people frequently called normal beer by its legal limit (6%), they thought that was what they were getting: 6%. (An analogy would be driving on a road with a 65 mph speed limit and assuming that you must therefore be driving 65 mph.) I am guessing that it would have been an extremely rare beer in those days to have been at 6% alcohol, even though that is what it was frequently called. - -- John Adsit Boulder, Colorado jadsit at jeffco.k12.co.us Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 06/23/00, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96