---

	FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
		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


Contents:
  Noble hops, Noble Ideals and Noble Drunks. (Rod Prather)
  Whirlpooling the answer to Edwards pellet hop woes (Steve Lacey)
  re: Tannins,solubility & reactions ? ("Stephen Alexander")
  Re: Aussie Slang ("Dave Edwards")
  Invert Sugar ("Nigel Porter")
  Promash, Phils visit, repriming bottles ("Graham Sanders")
  Festbiere de Chambly ? ("Darrell G. Leavitt")
  More "hurl" terms..... ("Jeff Beinhaur")
  Coconut in beer ("Jim Verlinde")
  The land of plenty... (Chad Clancy)
  Re: Chilling out Chill Haze (Jeff Renner)
  Re: Another Sooky, Sooky La La (Jeff Renner)
  Etching glass, Vernor's (Dave Burley)
  Re: Bleach and glass and other momilies (Jim Adwell)
  Re: Another Sooky, Sooky La La ("Pannicke, Glen A.")
  Scads of stuff on which I feel the need to comment ("Brian Lundeen")
  Sake ("Evan James Dembskey")
  Re: Bleach etching glass ("Henry St.Pierre")
  Homebrewers vs. Drunks (Beaverplt)
  Re: Noble Drunks/selected other crap/take this job and... (Some Guy)


* 
* 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.

JANITOR on duty: Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)



----------------------------------------------------------------------


Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 01:08:44 -0300
From: Rod Prather <rodpr at iquest.net>
Subject: Noble hops, Noble Ideals and Noble Drunks.

Evidently no one took me seriously when I asked about what distinguishes 
noble hops from those less royal.  Anybody got any ideas about this or 
do I have the HBD Think Tank stumped here?  How about it?

My, my, my!!!! On the subject of Home brew and Drunks.  Pat I haven't 
heard you so vocal about a subject in all the time I've been on the HBD.  
I agree with you to some extent.   It is not wise to have the word drunk 
tied to the word "homebrew" and perhaps we should all refrain from 
phrases the refer to over-indulgent home brewing friend.  Still, I 
believe you have blown things out of proportion.  

Those people who think homebrew and Drunk go together also think of 
a beer as the work of the devil and those who drink is as the devils 
companions.  Certainly homebrewers take the higher station of advocate.
To these vocal far right conservative tea totalers it doesn't 
matter if it's homebrew, Budweiser, Fuller ESB or $200 a bottle of fine
Napoleon Cognac.  We're all going to hell and taking THEIR children 
with us if they don't stop us.  We are the evil legacy of John 
Barleycorn and Carrie Nation was right.  No amount of semantics and 
manipulation of the language will change their minds.  

To those more liberally minded about alcohol consumption, home brewing 
is seen as a hobby.  Just like any other hobby.  Something you do in 
your spare time.  I travel all over the country and I talk about 
home brewing all the time.  I just don't see the group of people who 
would see home brewers as any more over indulgent then other beer 
drinkers.  Frankly, I think the opposite is true.  That people see us 
as beer connoisseurs and not alcoholics.  
- -- 
Rod Prather, PooterDuude
Indianapolis, Indiana


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 16:22:31 +1000 
From: Steve Lacey <stevel at sf.nsw.gov.au>
Subject: Whirlpooling the answer to Edwards pellet hop woes

A couple of digests back, Edward from WA (thats Western Australia, not
Washington) lamented his stuck boiler drain system following using pellet
hops. He swore never to brew again unless he could get whole hops. I don't
think there were any responses. 

Now, now Edward, no need to be so rash. I agree that whole hops are a
wonderful thing to have in a brew for all kinds of reasons. But don't spit
the dummy altogether if you can't get any. Your attitude reminds me of the
patrons I was rubbing shoulders with in the Sail and Anchor, Fremantle two
months back when the Wollongong Wolves put the knife to Perth Glory. But I
digress. Try whirlpooling your wort to get most of the hop and protein break
into the centre of the boiler. Let it sit for 20 or 30 min before draining.
If your drain offtake is at the side just try running off slowly and the
material shouldn't get sucked through. Alternatively, syphon the wort out
after whirlpooling. You can avoid most of the crud this way. Hope this
helps. 
Steve Lacey
Sydney


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 03:03:53 -0400
From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net>
Subject: re: Tannins,solubility & reactions ?

Del writes ...

>Looking at the range of varying molecular weights
>of tannins, from monophenols (not really 'tannins') through
>the middle MW, to large, very bitter, tannins:
>What is the respective solubilities of tannins in sweet wort?

Not only are the monophenols not tannins, but wort contains relative little
of anything that is classed as a tannin. What little there is of
gallotannins and related compounds come primarily from hops and is primarily
left behind in the hot break.  The lit often refers to tannoids - phenolics
which can cross-link two protein molecules in wort/beer.  Many of these
derive from anthocyanidins and leucoanthocyanogens - two broad classes of
simple phenolics.  The simple mono-phenolics are never the haze/break cause,
but as the phenolic compounds take on oxidized states they are more likely
to polymerize, and the polymers more likely to cross-like proteins ...
tannoids ...  haze.

You are unlikely to find a precise answer re solubility. There are certainly
three dozen and probably 100 well documented phenolic compounds plus
polymers of these in wort.  The solubility is pH dependent.  The short
answer is that there is no practical limit to solubility of most phenolic
materials in wort till you get to polymeric forms of 6 or 8 units - after
which their become progressively less soluble.  Wine 'must' has much higher
SG, comparable or lower pH and many times (10X to 50X)  the level of total
phenolics as a point of comparison.

>And what effects on hot break and haze formation do the various
>MW tannins have?

Many of the wort phenolics make it from the mash tun in an oxidized and/or
polymerized state.  More are added as hops phenolics.  Some are oxidized
before the mash, yet many more are oxidized and polymerized in the mash.
The fraction of oxidized phenolics in  decoction wort is quite high.  After
the boil the levels of oxidized phenolics is far lower - most of the
oxidized phenolics have attached to proteins and are lost in the breaks.
This does not mean that phenolics are largely responsibly for break
formation.  I doubt that.  The hydrophobic nature of some proteins and their
electrical properties insure precipitation.  Also weak bonds with lipids and
multivalent metals is also a factor.  Much of the phenolic matter lost as
break is capable of binding to one protein site, but not capable of cross
linking two protein molecules.  In other words the break protein probably
causes more phenolic precipitation than visa-versa.

>What I've read seems to point to a decreasing solubility as MW
>rises (until you hit  172 F)

Decreasing solubility w/ ++MW is generally true, but there are other
factors.  Also 172F is no magic temperature. Hotter and more soluble go
hand-in-hand.  You may have seen phenolic precipitation in a cup of strong
tea as it cools (it's a sometimes thing).  Usually the precipitate forms
around the ring where the cup& tea surface meet, then eventually drops.  In
the tea trade this is known as 'cream'.  Reheating the tea will cause the
precipitate to redissolve.  Seems to happen around 90-110F - certainly not
172F.

If 172F (or ...) is a 'magic mashout temperature' it is because the
temperate causes the release of phenolics from other bonds in the grist.
Frankly I doubt it.  I believe 17xF is a useful mashout temperature because
it completes gelatinization with enough alpha-amylase remaining to digest
the starch safely.   I've read of recent studies that get good digestion of
final starch at 80C(176F) and decent digestion at 85C(185F).  I suspect that
a few tenths of pH will have a larger impact on phenolic extraction than a
few degreesF.    Consider decoction which certainly does not cause excessive
phenolic extraction despite a boil !

>that the smallest phenols may create
>haze but not flocculate hard enough to precipitate the haze .

The smallest phenols, once polymerized thru oxidation into tannoids may
create haze.  The precipitation of the protein-tannoid complex is related to
the type *and* amount of tannoids - not just the type.  I think it's fair to
say that if you were to add more of the very same haze forming tannoid
phenolics to a hazy beer, the haze would usually precipitate.  There isn't a
distinct type of phenolic that creates just haze but not protein-phenol
precipitate.

>Medium MW polyphenols flocculate well but as the size increases
>they lose  their flocculation strength.

Yes- sort of.  Small phenolics add a good flavor impact in moderate quantity
(fresh, brisk).  As the polymer size grows to 2-3 they become more bitter
and astringent.  Polymers of phenolics become progressively more astringent
and more strongly protein binding around polymer size 5-8, beyond that they
actually become less strongly protein binding, less soluble and also less
astringent and flavorful.  These medium MW phenolic polymers won't
precipitate on their own but may attach to a protein (or your tongue) and
hence precipitate.

>And the largest malt polyphenols
>don't precipitate proteins but only cause undue bitterness/astringency.

No.  The largest molecules are less bitter and less astringent.  In wine the
phenolics 'absorb' the oxidation state of other compounds thus keeping the
wine fresh, the oxidized phenolics polymerize and end up out of the way on
the bottom of the bottle.  Neat system.  The dropped phenolics are somewhat
bitter - but not excessively so.  In beer relatively few beers or phenolics
hang around long enough for this to happen.  They are more likely to
oxidize, polymerize and a find a protein to bind.  Once bound to proteins
the phenolics are much less flavor active and particularly much less
astringent.

In lagering you've lowered the temp so the weakest of phenol-protein bonds
becomes relatively stable.  The proteins w/ phenols attached precipitate
leaving a lower phenol beer.

Phenolics/tannoids do not bind to random amides of a protein - it is a
somewhat selective thing.  *some proteins*, such as those from wheat
*apparently* present relatively few good binding sites.  It is well know
that a phenolic addition will precipitate a certain fraction of soluble
wheat protein, but greater additions are relatively ineffective are
precipitating more.  Wheat proteins are just made for haze.  That's not true
for barley protein.  Of course you can break down the proteins (thru malting
or mashing) or remove more large proteins thru a longer boil, to
prevent/reduce the haze.

 -S








Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 18:06:03 +0930
From: "Dave Edwards" <eddiedb at senet.com.au>
Subject: Re: Aussie Slang

 It seems that I have been to colloquial in my use of the Australian version
of the English lamguage, and some blokes out there seem quite dazed and
confused when they wonder at what the content of my posts are. This is
really going to piss off all of the little boys who whinge about non-beer
posts, but I will translate for you.


| > Now, I have quite a few yank mates (Russ, Kev, Marc, Pat, Rob, Tony, you
| >  guys know who you are) but I'm sick of Americans having a sook about
how
| the
| >  Aussies on this list are always having a yarn. It seems that anybody
from
| >  accross the pond can do it as much as they please, but if all of a
sudden
| >  some Aussies get into a bit of chinwaggin' and it's all sooky sooky la
la.
| >
| >
| >  Just in passing, I'd like to let big Phil know that yes even I too
cheered
| >  loud and hard when the Wallabies got up. AUSSIE, AUSSIE, AUSSIE, OI,
OI,
| OI!
| >
| >  Cheers,
| >  Dave.
| >

Sook: Someone who crys, whinges and reacts poorly when things don't go their
way.
Yarn: Talking about whatever comes to mind, usually irrelevant nonesense.
Chinwaggin': Literally to wave one's chin by using means of verbal
comunication. Talking.
Sooky, sooky la la: 'Sook': (see above), 'Sooky': to act like a sook. 'La
La': The noise that a baby makes, being not too dissimilar to the behaviour
of the aforementioned sook. Therefore 'sooky sooky lala' means 'stop acting
like a baby, and shut up.'
The Wallabies got up: The Australian national rugby union team beat New
Zealand in a close game to retain the Bledisloe Cup.

Hope this helps.

Cheers,
Dave.



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 09:53:06 +0100
From: "Nigel Porter" <nigel at sparger.co.uk>
Subject: Invert Sugar

>I think I read (Category _?) that invert sugar can be made at home
>by boiling together water, table sugar, and an acid. Let's say the
>Recipator detemines that I need a pound of sugar for my Black
>Cat Mild clone.

Golden syrup (manufactured by Tate & Lyle when sold in UK) is 
invert sugar. If I ever use invert sugar, I'll use this. Most of the time I 
wouldn't bother and just add plain old sucrose if I do want to add 
sugar.

Nigel
Guildford, UK 


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 19:31:57 +1000
From: "Graham Sanders" <craftbrewer at cisnet.COM.AU>
Subject: Promash, Phils visit, repriming bottles

G'day All

With all these praises about Promash I found a couple of drawback (mind you
very minor when i checked it out some time ago).  Its one reason I haven't
removed the other popular program thats about "Brewers Workshop".  Two
features of this I liked (that Promash didn't have) was the ease of its
water profile analysis and style description.  On the water side, it has a
neat button called 'suggest'(I think).  Instead of playing arround with
salts, just hit the button and bingo it was there.  it also had a very good
range of water profiles for every style and location. very easy to use.

On the description of style, it had a verbal description as well as the
normal parameters.  this can be useful in twigging the odd receipe when you
are in the early stage of formulating receipies. If I could get Promash and
Brewers Workshop in one killer program, then I would be happy.

From: "Phil & Jill Yates" <yates at acenet.com.au>
Subject: pH Questions For The Scientifically Unimpaired

These days I keep the pH meter locked away in the brew house so I can't be
tempted to succumb to stray ideas nor unnatural applications.<<<<

Funny that Phil, when I got mine SWMBO also didn't see the practical side of
it one night in bed.  She was none the wiser til it didn't hum. Funny thing
thou, it didn't work properly after that so I had to get a new one.  Thank
god it was under warantee, and the manufacturer didn't ask.

Speaking of the slippery bugger (thats Phill and not the meter).  My spies
tell me you have been in the North.  Further you may have been actually in
Townsville.  Now try that again without my carton, and I make sure its brown
scum and not aviaition fuel that goes into the plane. You know the rules and
you can't hide.  Perhaps Dr Pivo was right.

From: "Dr. Pivo" <dp at pivo.w.se>
Subject: Graham and the galah with the unboiled wort.

I've seen another signature with "Dave" and "Brewin", and I'm beginning
to suspect that you're getting a bit TOO liberal on granting visas.... a
little order please, Graham.<<<<<

You're Not wrong there mate.  The way Phil slips in and out (this will stop)
and other so called people calling themselves Aussies (I think I hear a
squeek from a Mexican) or was that a fart from the ass end of the country),
Dr P, I'm going to have a few people for you dive tours out of Port Douglas.
They dont have to be Yanks you know.

I may have to look at entry permits for those so called Aussies on the
board.

Now just to show i occasional brew

From: "Bev D. Blackwood II" <blackwod at rice.edu>
Subject: Chilling out Chill Haze

Before I cave in and add a grain or two of
champagne yeast to get the bubbles going, do you think that
re-priming the bottles with a bit of fresh  white labs yeast in each
might work?<<<<<<

Bloody oath it will work.  I keg all my Belgians Beauties, BdG, Porters etc
and these babies are above 7.5 % v/v My tripple is 9.5%.  I transfer these
to grolsch bottles as i need them and because they have no carbonation, I
make up a fresh yeast culture and seed with this.

All you do is make a starter to size, when it starting to get to high
Krausen, cut it to the bottles, add your priming sugars and beer.  he yeast
is young and healthy enough to handle the biggest beers.  No worries mate.


Oh I havent forgotten about my report about the Ayinger yeast.  Its that I'm
going to aste my BdG this weekend, so I thought I would wrap the two
together.  If I'm going to be serious, I want it to be as rare as possible.

Shout

Graham Sanders




Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 06:41:48 -0400
From: "Darrell G. Leavitt" <leavitdg at plattsburgh.edu>
Subject: Festbiere de Chambly ?

Anyone have any info on the September "Festbiere de Chambly"?  
I know the location (Chambly, Quebec) as well as the dates 
(sept 1-4) but have not found much info on the brews to be 
offered....?
 ..Darrell
- --------------------------
Darrell G. Leavitt, PhD
SUNY/ Empire State College
- --------------------------


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 08:48:41 -0400
From: "Jeff Beinhaur" <beinhaur at email.msn.com>
Subject: More "hurl" terms.....

And don't forget two of my favorites, "screamin at the pebbles" and
"hollering at the hubcaps"......

Of course I've just heard these, I would never get in that situation since
I'm a "home crafter of malted beverages" not to be confused with
"homebrewer....aka, drunk".

Jeff Beinhaur, Camp Hill, PA
Home of the "Award Winning" Yellow Breeches Brewery





Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 09:19:44 -0400
From: "Jim Verlinde" <beans at voyager.net>
Subject: Coconut in beer

A recent post asked about using coconut in a recipe. I attended the Michigan
Brewers' Guild Festival in Livonia and there was a wonderful Coconut Porter
on tap. I asked the brewer to explain his method of adding the coconut. He
said he uses shredded coconut and bakes it for a short time. He
Places the coconut in a muslin bag and steeps it for about 30 minutes after
the boil. He used a little less than a pound per five gallons and cautioned
that the steep should start before the wort temp drops below 180 degrees F.
Sounds easy to me!

Jim Verlinde
Prime Time Brewers
Grand Rapids, MI




Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 07:05:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: Chad Clancy <chadclancy at yahoo.com>
Subject: The land of plenty...

With regard to the US ingredient database in ProMash,
Warren White writes:

"My only problem is when I see the U.S. ingredient
database I go a little green with envy!
Can you blokes really get all that stuff????"

Oh yea, all of this stuff is commonly available in
most US grocery stores.  Typically you'll find these
items in the aisle between the stainless steel
fittings and the magnetically driven brew pumps.

Oops, I'm getting the US and Heaven all mixed up here.
 Sorry!


=====
Chad M. Clancy                  o---o---o---o
Modjeski and Masters, Inc.     / \ / \ / \ / \
Mechanicsburg, PA        -----o---o---o---o---o-----
                              |               |
                               \~~~~~~~~~~~~~/


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 10:33:39 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Chilling out Chill Haze

"Bev D. Blackwood II" <blackwod at rice.edu> asks:
>I was told that I can remove (or at least minimize) some of my chill
>haze by cold-conditioning the beer in question for a while.  Given
>that the beer is already bottled and carbonated, is that accurate?

Yep.  You'll notice the beer in the neck getting clear first.  The chill
haze will eventually fall and join the yeast sediment.  It will probably
take the better part of a month.

Good luck with the barley wine.  I suspect that your best bet is to make a
yeast starter and shoot a little active yeast into each bottle with a
sterile syringe and recap.  I assume you are confident that there is enough
priming sugar in it.  It there isn't, you could add some Primetabs at the
same time.
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: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 10:29:55 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Another Sooky, Sooky La La

"Pannicke, Glen A." <glen_pannicke at merck.com> wrote
>for
>some reason Doc Pivo sounds like John Cleese in my mind (when he's being
>proper or official)

Nah - wrong accent.  Think Max Von Sydow.

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: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 10:41:29 -0400
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com>
Subject: Etching glass, Vernor's

Brewsters:

Pure Bleach is essentially a 5% solution of caustic soda ( lye, sodium
hydroxide) and as such will etch soda glass ( non-Pyrex(R) ) if you allow
it to stand for a long time.   A short soak is no problem. If you dilute
this to 1 TLB of bleach per gallon I would imagine the solution would be
useless for anything. You could probably almost drink this.   A dilution of
1 part bleach to 2 parts water and swirled around in a bottle, allowed to
stand wet for 10 or twenty minutes while you do this to the other bottles,
pouring this solution from bottle to bottle,  followed by three hot rinses
should be superior to a long soak as the alkalai in the bleach will release
any organic matter from the glass wall as well as be concentrated enough to
actually kill stuff in a reasonable time.
- -------------------------------------
I remember that one thing we used to do after football practice, stopping
by the local ice cream parlor especially in mid-August, was to mix a
Vernor's Ginger Ale into a pint of milk. The taste was excellent even if it
did curdle the milk a little. Don't ask.


Keep on Brewin'

Dave Burley


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 11:04:24 -0400
From: Jim Adwell <jimala at apical.com>
Subject: Re: Bleach and glass and other momilies

Adam Ralph asks:

"I am planning on soaking my empty and rinsed bottles in a 
bleach solution (1 tablespoon/gallon) for a few days to get rid of the muck
(technical term - please don't be put off if you're not familiar with it).
However, Miller states that bleach can etch glass and make it impossible to
clean.  What's the deal, momily or not?  Does this shorten the life of the
bottles?"

I regularly fill my glass fermenters with a bleach solution much stronger
than Adam mentions for a few days to clean them; no scrubbing of muck or
grunge or spooge or whatever you want to call it for me, and when I bottled
in glass, I used to leave the bottles in a plastic storage box filled with
bleach solution for weeks at a time.  No problems with etching or rinsing
the bleach out with cold water.  It's a momily, but be sure to rinse the
bottles thoroughly to get rid of the chlorine.  ( Plastic Bottle Man wants
me to remind you not to use bleach to clean and/or sanitize plastic PET
bottles; rinse them well with clean water and sanitize with iodophor
instead. )  

Dave Miller's books have lots of good info in them, but ya gotta wonder
about a guy as fanatical about sanitation as Dave who sucks on the end of
his siphon hose to start the flow.

Speaking of momilies, Phil has pointed out another, the old 'don't let the
run-off from your lauter tun go below 1.010 SG / above 6.0 ph or tannins
from the husks will invade your wort'.  This might be true, but I haven't
noticed that it makes a difference in the taste of the final product.  I
usually acidify my final sparge water to 5.8 or so, just in case, but I
have been known to forget to do that.  I decide long ago to RDWHAHB about
things like this, *unless* I notice something bad happening as a
consequence, which I haven't in this case, so far.  Perhaps the scientific
types here will have more to say about this subject.

Well, gotta go, the yobbo crop needs watering ( they are insatiable).

Cheers, Jim

Jim's Brewery Pages:
http://home.ptd.net/~jimala/brewery/


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 09:41:24 PDT
From: "Leland Heaton" <rlheaton at hotmail.com>

Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 10:41:39 -0400
From: "Pannicke, Glen A." <glen_pannicke at merck.com>
Subject: Re: Another Sooky, Sooky La La

Dave Edwards wrote of Another Sooky, Sooky La La:

>Joe Fleming had a bit of a brain fart, and thought that it would be a >good 
>idea to write this:
>|      Dear Janitor,
>|
>|         My Homebrew Digest subscription seems to have been | blah blah 
>blah.....

>On the flip side, you guys must be confused as hell to when we start jawin' 
>about our off-topic stuff.  But I guess Aussies don't mind using the 
>page-down key as much as Americans do.  I try to keep in mind that this is 
>more of an International Digest now than it ever was.  I enjoy the 
>diversity, but off topic discussions suck for those who want to read about 
>beer.  They suck even worse when you can't relate to them - no matter where 
>they came from.<

Ok...Here we go...Now you say "...but off topic discussions suck for those 
who want to read about beer."  What in Zeus's butthole prevents beer topics 
to get into hbd.  I read many many hbd posts about beer.  Only about 1 out 
of 4 digests doesn't have alot of beer posts.  But lets start doing some 
numbers.   Screw the numbers.  But if people wanted to post about beer, then 
f*king posts about beer.  Maybe people don't post about beer because they 
don't have anything to say about beer.  Maybe they have beers brewing.  I 
mean honestly.  Isn't one key to being a sucessful brew patience?  Maybe you 
have to wait 1 day to get in...Oh my.  The world is not going to end.  And 
why does everyone gain up on the aussies, but not (no offense pat) Pat 
Babcock when he starts a long thread about drunkeness (which I read 
everyone).  Do all the "americans" think the american off topics is more 
interesting than the aussie off topics.  I would gather so.

I bet the aussies do read all the posts that you say they don't.  When I 
have asked for help on hbd, I have had aussies help me.  If we didn't have 
off-topic posts, then the hbd would fail, because only a select number of 
people would read only off-topic.  What do think makes the hbd so popular?

As for you Mr. Fleming.  If you hate the non-beer related posts, (even 
though most aussie posts to mention beer, maybe not the making of it, but 
they mention it), then why don't YOU make a beer related post.

Now I am leaving on a business trip for 3 days, so it's not really fair for 
me to post and leave, but I will catch up, and if you or Mr. Fleming would 
like to take this outside :), I mean continue in private emails, I am more 
than welcome to argue with this not wasting hbd bandwidth, and allow for 
other people to post, without a huge war.  Like men, instead of this 
sneaking around, snide remark bullshit.

Dr. Pivo...Ralph is the term I use and expect, either that or bonding with 
the Porcelain god.

Leland Heaton - the one who reads EVER POST (almost but most).
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 11:52:08 -0500
From: "Brian Lundeen" <blundeen at rrc.mb.ca>
Subject: Scads of stuff on which I feel the need to comment

My goodness, the August long weekend (perhaps it's just a Canadian thing,
and yes, as far as I know that's the official name for it, guess they
couldn't find a saint or a monarch with a birthday close enough) has come
and gone and left me with a whole pile of interesting HBD topics to keep me
from doing any actual work.

First up, Jeff Renner talks about milds:

> Black Cat Mild
> OG 1034  ABV 3.2%
> Ingredients:  Halcyon pale malt (60%), chocolate malt (10%),
> invert sugar
> (17%), flaked maize (13%).  Fuggles whole hops.
>
> Tasting notes:
> Nose:  Roasted grain and nut aromas
> Palate:  Chocolate notes in mouth, sweet but dry finish
> Comments:  Dark mild with roast malt character.

Now being on the verge of brewing one up, I was going through Daniels again
and he commented that there are two camps for milds, the pro- and
anti-adjuncts. Whether this has reached the acrimony that surrounds the
oaked and unoaked schism in Chablis, I don't know, but something here
doesn't make sense to me.

Given that you are starting with a low malt bill to begin with, what is the
purpose of further reducing malt flavours by using, at least here, fairly
neutral sources of fermentables. I can see this practice in the higher
gravity styles, but isn't the essence of a mild based on malt flavours?
Obviously not, since this particular brew just won a major award, but I just
felt compelled to give my two cents. Any thoughts on this issue?

Next we got this bit of spam from one eblarsen (hmmm, could that be THE E.B.
Larsen) who wrote:

> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 23:06:08 -0400
> From: eblarsen at earthlink.net
> Subject: Accept Credit Cards You Are Approved!!
>           28820
>
(much drivel mercifully deleted)

Pat, for something like this to get through I figure you are way too focused
on finding contrary opinions on drunkenness. Do you just have the auto-scan
set for the word "drunk" and wake up when the alarm chime sounds? I mean,
does EVERY counterpoint need an immediate and often savage rebuttal? I'm not
sure whether the nettiquette of digest janitoring makes you more, less or
equally entitled to express your opinions, but it seems like you are
determined to have the last word on this topic, no matter how long that
drags things on for. You've made your stance crystal clear. Your service on
the HBD is greatly appreciated but at this point, your postings on this
subject are just causing needless wear and tear on my "page down" key. ;-)

And note that nowhere in this did I ever suggest that you stop posting on
this topic (wouldn't want the dreaded digest-police tag applied to me, in
addition to being pro-Aussie). Just expressing my feelings.

MrWes (there are those who call me... Bill, and if you missed the homage,
it's from MP and the Holy Grail) announces his intention of entering brewing
hell (at least my first attempt was) with:

>Subject: Help With Pilsner Urquell
>
> If I used simple
>infusion what mash temperature is acceptable for this style? -- I've read
>149F is used a lot.

Personal blundering (touched on in a previous digest) caused me to spend too
much of my sacc time at this temp and I am most unhappy with the results. I
got way too much attentuation even with the lower attenuating Wyeast
Bohemian Lager strain (in retrospect, the rousings in the primary were
probably a bad idea as well). I went from 1.055 to 1.009 after lagering. My
understanding of this style is that there should be more residual
unfermentables. If you are going to a simple infusion, I would consider
going up to 152F.

Pete Calinski comments on Eric's Philler gunk:

>Keep rubbing.  I just use the end of my finger so I don't scratch the
>surface.  The black "soot" will come off.
>
>I don't think it is "leaking" from the Philler.  For me, it forms where
>ever the Philler contacts the plastic.  Some kind of interaction.  I posted
>a question about it a few years ago but got no replies.

Perhaps there is different gunk depending on what you immersed your Philler
in (my tale of woe came from too long in Star San), but my blackening only
came off where the Philler was immersed in beer. Makes me wonder about at
least one bottle of beer, anyway. In any case, Dan Listermann is more than
happy to help on matters such as these. He hangs around rec.crafts.brewing a
lot, perhaps to see what nasty things people are saying about his products.
Sorry, I can't seem to find his email address.

Finally, (please hold your applause), my countryman Dr Pivo (OK, I'm only
half Swedish, was born in Canada and we spell our name wrong, it should be
Lundin) says in support of the brewless brewkits:

>2: Fermentation practices: I am a firm believer that the real "art" of
>brewing begins once the yeast have landed in their new home.
>
>Having a consistant wort source would be a fine way to hone those skills.

I'm not sure I would go that far. There is a lot of art preceding the entry
into the fermenter. However, I am a firm believer that until you master the
basic skills of cleaning, sanitizing and fermenting, you are wasting your
time at the mash tun or brew kettle. If your brews are not coming out to
your liking, there are just too many places where you could be doing
something wrong to easily pinpoint it. By starting with a quality wort, you
can at least eliminate these areas from consideration. If you can't get a
good, clean beer from a BrewHouse wort, then you know that something is
amiss either in your sanitation or fermentation practices.

Cheers,
Brian Lundi..., oops, een



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 18:57:40 +0200
From: "Evan James Dembskey" <evan at telemessage.co.za>
Subject: Sake

Hi,


Anyone brewed sake? If so, do you mind discussing it with me offlist?


Regards,

Evan


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 14:15:33 -0400
From: "Henry St.Pierre" <hankstar at mhonline.net>
Subject: Re: Bleach etching glass


> From: "Adam Ralph" <bluehillsbrewing at hotmail.com>
> Subject: Etching of glass with bleach
> 
> Greetings to the collective.  I have read some conflicting advice 
> about using bleach on glassware, and wanted to seek the comments of
> those with  this experience.

Adam,
 Are you sure Miller said that (I can't find my copy)? A long time ago
bleach was sold in returnable glass jugs. The gallon size was worth a
nickel and the 1/2 gallon size was worth two cents (deposit). I still
hear gallon glass jugs referred to as "bleach jugs" (nothing to do with
blondes). I sometimes keep a bleach solution in my carboys for months
and the glass has never been etched..
 Miller was probably referring to TSP. Soaking bottles too long in a
fairly strong solution of TSP will definitely etch them. This I can
vouch for.
Regards,
Hank


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 12:33:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: Beaverplt <beaverplt at yahoo.com>
Subject: Homebrewers vs. Drunks

This is my first post with this group after signing up
1 month ago. I've read the different posts on drunks
and homebrewers with a bit of a smile on my face until
today's diatribes by Some Guy and Steven Alexander. I
find it interesting how easy it is to be insulting to
other people when your facing a keyboard instead of
each other. Everyone seems to agree that being a
homebrewer and a drunk do not equate. Can we get off
this thread?

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.
http://invites.yahoo.com/


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 09:45:38 -0400 (EDT)
From: Some Guy <pbabcock at hbd.org>
Subject: Re: Noble Drunks/selected other crap/take this job and...

Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager...

On Tue, 8 Aug 2000, Rod Prather <rodpr at iquest.net> writes of Noble Drunks:

> My, my, my!!!! On the subject of Home brew and Drunks.  Pat I haven't 
> heard you so vocal about a subject in all the time I've been on the HBD.

Something I believe in strongly. 
  
> I agree with you to some extent.   It is not wise to have the word drunk 
> tied to the word "homebrew" and perhaps we should all refrain from 
> phrases the refer to over-indulgent home brewing friend.  Still, I 
> believe you have blown things out of proportion.  

True! Behavior learned by watching all the activists out there. 
Step 1: Blow the issue well out of proportion to get attention. 
Step 2: Define your position and hammer the issue over and over.

I don't think I've done a very good job at #1 - I don't think I've pushed
it too far out of the envelope - and I'm quickly tiring of #2. Guess I'm
not cut out for activism.

> Those people who think homebrew and Drunk go together also think of 
> a beer as the work of the devil and those who drink is as the devils 
> companions.  

Oh? I think, perhaps, that you've collapsed the issue too far within its
universe and have only selected a subset (not to mention falling into
stereotyping). I know only two families near me and in my experience whom
I would put into this narrowly defined category. One happens to be
Baptist, and the wife is the principal of their church's school. I don't
fault them their belief that alcohol is evil as they are free to believe
whatever they choose. They approach my activity with curiousity, but,
oddly, they don't associate home brewers with drunks. Probably because of
the example I set for them - I talk about the science of what I'm doing
and of the wonders in it as well. All while sipping a beer - which I have
the good sense never to offer to them. I guess I may have swayed their
opinion through example as their first response to learning I brewed was
"Gee! You must drink a lot." (To wit: I've written material on yeast and
fermentation for their science class - at her behest.)

The other used to raise hell in college, and it is his wife who has turned
him. I think he looks on with more yearning than anything else, but even
his very strict wife holds the opinion that maybe she was wrong and that
people who brew or make wine aren't evil drunks. Another who viewed the
craft (and me) with disdain until she learned that it just ain't so.

I know many more who hold/held the home brewer = drunk conviction without
the alcohol = evil mindset. Hell! There's many who flit around the edges
of the definition of drunk themselves!

> Certainly homebrewers take the higher station of advocate. To these

Apparently not as many as I originally thought. Ah, well...

> vocal far right conservative tea totalers it doesn't matter if it's
> homebrew, Budweiser, Fuller ESB or $200 a bottle of fine Napoleon
> Cognac.  We're all going to hell and taking THEIR children with us if
> they don't stop us.  We are the evil legacy of John Barleycorn and
> Carrie Nation was right.  No amount of semantics and manipulation of
> the language will change their minds.

Don't be too sure. I agree you'll never sway ALL who hold the offending
opinion, but you certainly won't throw a blanket over the fire by burying
your head in the sand with a "sticks and stones" attitude. With the right
circumstances, all it takes is that very manipulation of the language and
semantics to make things happen. Watch politics. It happens constantly
throughout history. Many of the world's most famous (and notorious)
leaders came to power through use of language and favorable circumstances.
Many laws have been pushed through by the same means.

> To those more liberally minded about alcohol consumption, home brewing 
> is seen as a hobby.  Just like any other hobby.  Something you do in 
> your spare time.  I travel all over the country and I talk about 
> home brewing all the time.  I just don't see the group of people who 
> would see home brewers as any more over indulgent then other beer 
> drinkers.  Frankly, I think the opposite is true.  That people see us 
> as beer connoisseurs and not alcoholics.  

Odd. I travel extensively as well, and I see the "you must be a drunk"
attitude equally as often as I see the "Wow! That's cool! Tell me more
about it!" attitude. (BTW, there's a difference in public perception
between alcoholic and drunk. It's subtle, but its different). Are you sure
they see you as a beer connoisseur and not a beer kinda sewer? ;-)

--

Brian Lundeen writes...

> Next we got this bit of spam from one eblarsen (hmmm, could that be
> THE E.B. Larsen) who wrote:
>
> > Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 23:06:08 -0400
> > From: eblarsen at earthlink.net
> > Subject: Accept Credit Cards You Are Approved!!
> >           28820
> >
> (much drivel mercifully deleted)
>
> Pat, for something like this to get through I figure you are way too
> focused on finding contrary opinions on drunkenness. Do you just have
> the auto-scan set for the word "drunk" and wake up when the alarm
> chime sounds? I mean, does EVERY counterpoint need an immediate and
> often savage rebuttal? I'm not sure whether the nettiquette of digest
> janitoring makes you more, less or equally entitled to express your
> opinions, but it seems like you are determined to have the last word
> on this topic, no matter how long that drags things on for. You've
> made your stance crystal clear. Your service on the HBD is greatly
> appreciated but at this point, your postings on this subject are just
> causing needless wear and tear on my "page down" key. ;-)

No. What allowed this to slip through are the twin phenomena of "sleep"
and an unfilled queue. Again, mea culpa. That we have to hear about it
again is the violation of "Digest Netiquette". Again, our moderation
system is set up such that if Karl or I don't explicitly stop a post, it
gets in the Digest. When the hour is late, and shit gets in, shit gets
published. Digest publishes at midnight Eastern. I do not stay up to see
that it happens. If you value the Aussie and "drunk" posts more than spam,
stop complaining about them.

And to the other part of your post, I apparently haven't made it so
crystal clear as I keep hearing about teetotalers, the religious far right
and social engineering. As long as those posting insist on painting the
issue at hand as some twisted prohibitionist plot rather than a simple
drive to dissociate the terms "drunk" and "home brewer", I felt it
necessary to continue to post. But no more! I prefer spam. Buy a new
keycap for your page down key, if you must. You'll need it for far more
than this.

By the way, when I post to the Digest (except when responding to
specifically Digest-oriented subjects), I'm not posting as a Janitor - not
that being a janitor should have any affect on one's right to participate
in the digest. I think it's a shame that you would suggest otherwise.  
The only advantage to this janitorial job is that I can often reply in the
same digest as that which I'm replying to. 

And Leland writes:

> have to wait 1 day to get in...Oh my.  The world is not going to end.
> And why does everyone gain up on the aussies, but not (no offense pat)
> Pat Babcock when he starts a long thread about drunkeness (which I
> read

IT'S NOT ABOUT DRUNKENNESS!!! Why can't I seem to get that through?

Crimony. I might as well quit. Those I would have expected to support are
contrary to the concept. Astounding! I guess I'm more of a fool than I'd
ever imagined.

And to the Beaver: The popular colloquialism of the emboldening effect of
the anonymity of the keyboard (say THAT three times really fast...) is not
universally true - I'd happily repeat the whole posting to Steve's face.
I'm sure he'd be equally pleased to repeat his to mine.

Being an HBDer for a month, you can hardly understand the history behind
Digest participants - and there's a longstanding history here. You
likely will learn it fast if your manner of weighing in on this issue is
any indication...

Well, thanks all for the ride - I do think it high time I get off. It has
been quite an education.

- -- 
 -
'bye.

Pat Babcock in SE Michigan         
pbabcock at hbd.org




Return to table of contents

---