HOMEBREW Digest #4095 Sat 16 November 2002

[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]

		Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org


          Northern  Brewer, Ltd. Home Brew Supplies
        http://www.northernbrewer.com  1-800-681-2739

    Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********

  lager yeast esters / S-23 bready fruity (long post) (Petr Otahal)
  RE: SS conicals ("Wayne Holder")
  Bleach ("Kevin Boyer")
  Boiling Aertion Stone? (Fred L Johnson)
  Bulk vs. Bottle Lagering/Conditioning (Bob Hall)
  re: ss conical (Stacy)" <sgroene at lucent.com>
  Hypochlorite ("Eric R. Theiner")
  Re: Cleaning Aeration stone (Demonick)
  dry-hopping (homebre973)
  beer at deer camp! ("Micah Millspaw")
  Kegs O Beer in Louisville ("Eric R. Theiner")
  Re: SS Conical Project Update ("Mike Sharp")
  Barley Wine priming question (Sebastien Riopel)
  Re: priming? ("greg man")
  RE: first all grain and keg (Kevin Crouch)
  Thanx ! ("Axle Maker")
  Aerobic Yeast Propagation (Fred L Johnson)
  RE: first all grain and keg (Donald and Melissa Hellen)
  RE: hypochlorite (Donald and Melissa Hellen)
  Re: Classic American Pilsner Recipe/Report/Ranting ("Tidmarsh Major")

* * Show your HBD pride! Wear an HBD Badge! * http://hbd.org/cgi-bin/shopping * * 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 cannot reach you. We will not correct your address for the automation - that's your job. HAVING TROUBLE posting, subscribing or unsusubscribing? See the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org. 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 or read the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org. JANITOR on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 16:22:45 +1100 From: Petr Otahal <potahal at utas.edu.au> Subject: lager yeast esters / S-23 bready fruity (long post) Hi All, Im catching up on the last few digests, after spending last week working in the bush and this week catching up on the work I missed while away. In digest #4089 Randy Ricchi wrote some comments about esters in lagers and I would like to share some observations. Randy wrote: >I used to think that one sign of a good lager was that there were no >esters. To me, estery meant ale-like, and lager beer meant no esters. >Lately, I've been re-thinking that. Obviously, we wouldn't want a lager >with the ester character of an English ale, but I believe some subtle >ester character is needed for a beer to taste "beery". I have to agree with you here Randy. A few months ago (maybe six or seven) I did a bit of side by side tasting of some of our locally produced megalagers. You might wonder why I would do such a "horrible" thing, and Im sure I'll cop some flak from the Aussies on the list, but lets just call it an educational exercise. Some of you may know that the megabreweries here in Australia usually produce around three "types" of lagers (I wont call them styles because they are all a bit too similar), and I did a comparison of only a few of these. Many make a lager that includes some crystal malt and is typically called a "Draught", and quite a number make lighter coloured and v. slightly more hoppy brews under the label "Premium" (I think these also have a higher proportion of malt). There are also a number of lagers under the label "Bitter", but unfortunately they are far cry from their ancestral roots in England and aren't particularly bitter either. There are also quite a few light beers, which in Australia refers to the alcohol concentration (light beers are around 2.8% abv), but these aren't really worth drinking since they are like making love in a canoe = FCTW! The beers that I tasted were three of the Draught and three Premium varieties: Cascade Draught Boags Draught Carlton Draught Cascade Premium Boags Premium Crown Lager (premium type) What is of note is that all of the Draught beers have a very slight mixed fruit or apple aroma, the fruitiest of which is Boags Draught, whereas all the Premium types have very little esters and are extremely clean with the slightest touch of malt and hops. This lack of fruitiness makes the Premiums very boring beers after a few mouthfuls your are lucky to taste much of anything, I think this is the whole point of these beers, there is nothing anyone could find objectionable (except for the lack of flavour and the higher cost). In recalling my Uni days I remember having a strong preference to Boags Draught even though I was very uneducated in terms of how a beer should taste I preferred the fruitiness which is quite obvious in this brew (it is definitely not as fruity as any English ale but you can't miss it). Of the three Premiums, Boags also has the most esters although you have to do a lot of searching to find them (allowing the beer to warm to around 12C helps). In my opinion a slight hint of esters can be a good thing in a lager but I definitely think it has to be subdued and just there as a background flavour to provide a little bit of interest (add complexity). I don't drink these beers on a regular basis but it was an interesting exercise to try and appraise them, unfortunately I don't have the "nasal vocabulary" to describe the particular esters, but Im learning. Do you think that Noonan means "estery" lager yeasts when he suggests Aromatic lager yeasts (as opposed to Neutral lager yeasts) for some of the recipes in New Brewing Lager Beer?? .......................................................... Onto a slightly different but related topic: A couple of months back I made a lager with Saflager S-23, I normally use liquid yeasts and this was the first time I had used this dry yeast, the reason I pitched the Danstar yeast was that the WLP800 yeast I pitched didn't seem to take hold. The beer has quite a lot of esters which seem way out of place, there is nothing else wrong with the beer just a bready fruity aroma, I've noticed a similar aroma with the S-04 ale yeast (which isn't really out of place in an ale). Has anyone else had a similar aroma experience with S-23? I might have to try drinking it very cold on a hot day so I don't notice. I pitched three packets (11g each) into 23L and fermented around 10-12C. I rehydrated two of the packets, but the first one that went in wasn't rehydrated, it was only after I pitched the first packet that I realised I probably should rehydrate (as I said I don't typically use dry yeasts). What makes this a little more interesting is that I then pitched another wort onto the yeast cake and fermented around the same temp 10-11C. This second beer is really quite clean and has none of the bready fruity aroma of the first (it does have a very slight hint of esters which is quite pleasing). Anyone have a possible explanation?? Cheers Petr Otahal Hobart, Tasmania, Australia Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 21:34:23 -0800 From: "Wayne Holder" <zymie at charter.net> Subject: RE: SS conicals Scott Jose says: "I too, am looking for a way to build a 12.2 conical in an economical way." Scott, "economical" is a relative term. If you want a conical that is 100% stainless, then you need to be prepared for the cost. If you're willing to use cheaper materials (brass, wood, copper, etc.), then you can probably move closer to what I would gather your definition of "economical" is. You also said: "Consider that you will have to come up with a seal for the lid, another $50 for the Zymico bottom dump and $100 for their racking port, and I don't know how much for their stand kit, it looks like it really starts to add up." Actually, the stand kit comes with a seal for the cone. It also comes with leg extensions to allow transfer into a corny. The last time I looked the leg extensions ($99) were an option on the Fermenator. If the $85 suggested retail for the Konical Stanz-it(TM) is a bit too steep for your budget, then maybe something made of wood or plaster would be more "economical". You could save a bit of money, maybe, by not buying the TMS standard lid and making your own out of acrylic or something of that sort. Maybe if that crazy megalomaniac lady in Texas ever actually develops a conical of her own, then they will finally be "economical". I've tallied up what you could build one using Zymico(TM) kits to be around $375, depending on what you pay for shipment of the cone. Your time and labor are not included in that estimate, but research and assembly time, labor, and shipping are usually never included in stories about "how I did it cheaper". Wayne Holder AKA Zymie Long Beach CA http://www.zymico.com Proud sponsor of the HBD Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 05:55:58 -0600 From: "Kevin Boyer" <kboyer at houston.rr.com> Subject: Bleach AJ says: "The bleach used at water treatement plants is much more concentrated than the bleach you buy at the store. The latter is about 5 "trade percent" and the latter, I think, at least 50." The maximum bleach concentration is 15%. Most common industrial strength is 10-12%. Any higher than that and the mixture becomes very unstable for storage and transport. Also: "Older and smaller plants may use sodium or potassium hypochlorite (NaOCl). ...The safety aspect is why smaller plants tend to use hypochlorite. An interesting bit of irony concerns the largest escape of chlorine gas in the history of the US water treatement industry. It occurred at a hypochlorite plant when a truck driver accidentally dumped his load of sulfuric acid into a hypochlorite tank." This is changing with the recent threats. Many municipalities and MUD districts are converting over to bleach from liquid chlorine (gas) for safety reasons. It's much more difficult to gas a huge population area when you have to physically mix two chemicals (bleach and an acid) as opposed to just opening one tank. I think the lead in chlorine gas releases may have changed a couple of months ago when a rail tank car of cl gas escaped up in MO when a loading hose broke. You should see the video. Kevin Boyer Houston, TX Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 07:42:37 -0500 From: Fred L Johnson <FLJohnson at portbridge.com> Subject: Boiling Aertion Stone? Someone recommended boiling an aeration stone to clean it. Boiling a dirty aeration stone is the quickest way I can think of ruining one. Boiling will denature the proteins inside the pores. If you want to boil an aeration stone to sanitize it, be VERY sure it is clean first. - -- Fred L. Johnson Apex, North Carolina, USA Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 08:55:00 -0500 From: Bob Hall <rallenhall at toast.net> Subject: Bulk vs. Bottle Lagering/Conditioning Recent posts have discussed bulk lagering vs. bottle conditioning in regards to potential yeast activity and carbonation. I just opened the latest issue of BYO and in the section "Tips from the Pros" by Thomas Miller featuring Alec Moss of Half Moon Bay Brewing it states: "Lagering is best achieved in bulk. You aren't going to get the same results cold-storing your beer after it has been moved to the bottle .... don't make the mistake of thinking that aging bottle-conditioned beer is the same as lagering. It isn't." I'd be interested to know if anyone has done a side-by-side comparisons or has had other experiences that would support these statements. Bob Hall Napoleon, OH Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 10:08:57 -0500 From: "Groene, Stacy B (Stacy)" <sgroene at lucent.com> Subject: re: ss conical Scott, When I purchased my 21.5 gallon hopper from TMS last year, I got pretty much the same info as far as modification costs. >From your TMS quote: "To fab and weld bottom dump valve: Our hoppers are 1 pieces construction with a solid bottom. To cutout bottom/drill = $30 ($5 ea + $25 setup) Weld customer supplied fitting = $80 ($30 ea + $50 setup)" TMS confirmed my assumption that their set-up charges are geared more towards higher volume operations than single jobs, so I opted to only purchase the basic hopper. (very happy with TMS service as far as the hopper goes). I then located a small local weld shop that specialized in SS welding, and was able to save much of the TMS quoted set-up charges. No knock against TMS, they just aren't looking to do a lot of onesy-twosy operations. Another advantage of the local weld shop was I could get a good look at the hopper before deciding for sure how to modify it, and could bounce ideas off the welder. I held off on adding a racking port (too lazy to clean more hardware), and so either use a ss racking cane or a contraption I made to insert a tube through my dump valve to rack out the bottom, but above the sediment. I still wonder if a racking port my be in my future, but have not really suffered without it. I made a LEXAN lid out of a sheet I got at the hardware store. Wanted to be able to look in on the ferment & it's more durable than acrylic. I don't miss cleaning carboys, & there is 15 gallons of APA in the conical now. Happy Fermenting, Stacy Groene Columbus, OH Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 09:36:01 -0500 From: "Eric R. Theiner" <rickdude02 at earthlink.net> Subject: Hypochlorite From James Keller: >Rick Theiner says ... >>I am 99.9% certain that chloramines and sodium hypochlorite are the only >>chlorine compounds added to municipal water supplies. > >I am in one of the growing number of communities that use >chlorine dioxide (OClO) as a sanitizer for the municipal water supply. That 0.1% will get you every time! Rick Theiner LOGIC, Inc. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 07:48:53 -0800 From: Demonick <demonick at zgi.com> Subject: Re: Cleaning Aeration stone From: "Dennis Collins" <dcollins at drain-all.com> >Chlorine will corrode stainless steel(and most everything else). I'm not >sure what the effect will be on a porous item like the stone, but it >probably isn't desired. If I recall correctly, the issue with bleach and stainless is mostly at the air/liquid interface, and in letting drops of bleach evaporate on a stainless surface. This raises the local solute concentration and can cause pitting. I doubt that a 30 minute soak in weak bleach will hurt a stainless aeration stone. Just make sure to get all the air out of the stone. However, I certainly do not want to give incorrect advice, so someone who knows about stainless and bleach please chime in. John Palmer? The reason I like bleach is that is dissolves organic matter. Boiling or soaking in iodophor a stone that has trub and yeast stuck in it may sanitize it, but it is not going to remove the gunk stuck in the stone. Domenick Venezia Venezia & Company, LLC Maker of PrimeTab (206) 782-1152 phone (206) 782-6766 fax Seattle, WA demonick at zgi dot com http://www.primetab.com Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 11:59:33 -0500 From: homebre973 at mindspring.com Subject: dry-hopping I know this topic came up recently, but I wanted to get a concensus after the discussion. I just racked an all grain Sierra Nevada Clone that tastes great now (when I racked it). I want to dry hop it to get only aroma and no flavor or extra bitterness to speak of. I have some cascade plugs, and I would like the groups advice. Andy from Hillsborough Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 11:23:32 -0600 From: "Micah Millspaw" <MMillspa at silganmfg.com> Subject: beer at deer camp! >William Menzl writes about introducing others to his great CAP: >"The real test comes this weekend at deer camp when I put it up against the >swill the other guys drink. I sure hope they don't like anything but water >flavor as I want to keep it all to myself!" I have long since come to the conclusion that taking quality beer to deer camp is a waste of effort and good beer. I bring along some cheap canned stuff and everyone is happy. I content myself with preparing food that is flavourful but so spicey that hurts my companions the next day. Had excellent results with kim chi and white chili. Now thats fun !! Micah Millspaw - brewer at large Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 12:47:50 -0500 From: "Eric R. Theiner" <rickdude02 at earthlink.net> Subject: Kegs O Beer in Louisville I'll be in Louisville for a very brief time on Thursday and was hoping it was possible to get my hands on a keg or two from Bluegrass Brewing Co. (Alt and Hell for Certain are the two I'm shooting for). But I don't know if they do kegs, or if their semi-subsidiary, Pipkin, does either. Does anyone know about whether or not this is the case? And if not, who's got good brew in that area that does kegs? I'm planning on bringing something special home for Thanksgiving. Thanks! Rick Theiner LOGIC, Inc. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 10:02:59 -0800 From: "Mike Sharp" <rdcpro at hotmail.com> Subject: Re: SS Conical Project Update Christian Rausch writes about his SS Conical Project Update Christian, are you sure that a 1/2 inch bottom dump valve is going to be big enough? I would have though a larger size would work better to get the yeast out. Regards, Mike Sharp Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 13:19:12 -0500 From: Sebastien Riopel <s.riopel at eci-co.com> Subject: Barley Wine priming question I recently brewed a barley wine. It is presently in secondary. I wanted to get some suggestions as to how I should go about bottle conditionning this beer. Here are some specifics: 5 gallon batch Thick mash, ~158F (so lots of dextrines!) + mashout 168F OG 1.112 (all grain single mash - no added sugar. There was not too long ago a thread going about how much grain could be fit in a 50L keg mashtun - well I fit 40lbs for this recipy - ABSOLUTELY THE LIMIT at 0.75qts/lb) FG 1.035 (at racking to secondary) Femented with Wyeast British ale down to 1.040, then racked on top of Scottish Ale slurry from another batch. Total primary ferment time 2 weeks at 66F. It was quite clear when I racked it (not cloudy with yeast and no foam on top of the beer). I intend on letting it sit for about 1month at around 65F after which I'm not certain what I should do. I definitely want to bottle condition it and let it sit for at least one year. When I go to bottle it, should I just prime the aged beer with dextrose, mix and bottle straight, or should I hit it with a fresh pack of yeast and wort? Would a Wyeast smack pack (regular size) be too much yeast if made into a 1qt starter? Also, would there be a type of yeast I should choose, ie alcohol tolerant a must like London or Scottish or Irish? What about a lager yeast? It has lots of dextrines and I want to condition it for about 1 month at around 65-68F then cellar it at 55F for up to a year in a temp controled cellar (gotta love the father in law and his wine making!). I'm afraid that a lager yeast will ferment out the dextrines and create bottle bombs. All suggestions are welcome on the digest or by personnal email. Cheers! Sebastien Montreal Quebec Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 14:55:54 -0500 From: "greg man" <dropthebeer at hotmail.com> Subject: Re: priming? Let me try this question again? I was not asking for opinoins last time this question was raised, not that I object to constructive criticism or anything but here goes....... How fermentable is belgin dark candy sugar? I can usually prime my beers with 2 quarts of 1.040 starters. That seems to work good! Now am I wrong in assuming that 1 lb of sugar will give a 1.040 gravity in one gallon? Then if that's true I could use 1/2 to 3/4 candy sugar in say 1/2 to 3/4 of a gallon of water. If its 70-75% fermentable than that would give me the desired result, plus I will be adding a quart of fully fermented beer(for a little more active yeast) Can anyone let me know if these assumptions are correct......thanx gregman Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 14:46:20 -0800 (PST) From: Kevin Crouch <kcrouching at yahoo.com> Subject: RE: first all grain and keg Byron's <btowles at yahoo.com> asks what his first all-grain style should be. Aahhh, Byron san, you wish to become one with your beer, but the object of your pursuit eludes you. A wise man once said, "keep it simple". Build your experience as would a skilled craftsman in any trade. You must appreciate the essence of malted barley as would a cabinet maker the raw grain of his wood, or the vintner the fruit of his vine. Slowly then, the layers of flavor complexity infused by the myriad varieties of malts, hops, adjuncts and yeasts will reveal their influence. Your first all-grain batch should be about Pale Malt and one variety of hop. You pick. A gravity of 1.050 with an American Ale yeast will do the trick. You must have faith that this can create an interesting beer, and will better reveal the source of problems. I wish someone had given me this advice 11 years ago as I have had to figure this out on my own. Kevin Crouch Vancouver, WA USA Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 18:04:39 -0500 From: "Axle Maker" <axlemaker at mindspring.com> Subject: Thanx ! Earlier this week I posted a question about a batch that did not completely finish and then it didn't carbonate. The over all opinion was the yeast had died due to the alcohol content. ( thanx to all that responded.) Now I was wondering what to do the next time I suspect this is happening. Could I re-hydrate some dry yeast and pitch that ? Or would it better to get another pitchable tube and use it instead ? If using a tube is the preferred method do I, or should I, make a starter ? Thanx ! Bob Gordon Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 18:34:22 -0500 From: Fred L Johnson <FLJohnson at portbridge.com> Subject: Aerobic Yeast Propagation There has been some recent traffic on the HBD regarding ideal yeast propagation conditions. I've been playing around with aerobic yeast propagation for over two years and believe the following excerpt from a now defunct YeastLink website may shed some light on this method used by some commercial breweries. (Whatever happened to YeastLink?} I'm not sure how well the table below will be reproduced, and I apologize for the all caps font reproduced directly from the web site, but I believe that the evidence supporting continuous aeration and feeding of a yeast culture is very strong. Feeding must occur at a rate that maintains the glucose concentration below the level that would stimulate fermentation. Both continuous aeration and infusion of medium are necessary to accomplish maximum growth. The difficult part, in my opinion, is achieving the optimal wort infusion rate. Ideally, this rate should be varied during the culture, to match the growth rate. Nevertheless, I figure if one infuses at a rate that ENSURES that the concentration of glucose in the culture never exceeds 0.4% w/v, then one should be able to maximize the number of cells produced per gram glucose. - ----------- Excerpt from YeastLink.com follows: THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF ECONOMIC AND EFFICIENT YEAST PROPAGATION IS THE PRODUCTION OF CELL MASS WITHOUT THE PRODUCTION OF ALCOHOL. THE FIRST PREREQUISISTE IS AERATION, THE SECOND IS THE GRADUAL ADDITION OF WORT. IT IS VITAL TO FEED ONLY AS MUCH WORT AS IS REQUIRED BY THE YEAST CELL. AN EXCESS OF MORE THAN 0.4 % GLUCOSE AT ANY TIME WILL TRIGGER THE YEAST TO PRODUCE ALCOHOL. IN THEORY, UNDER IDEAL CONDITIONS, LESS THAN ONE GRAM OF YEAST WILL PRODUCE MORE THAN SEVERAL TONS IN FOUR OR FIVE STEPS AND A TOTAL FERMENTATION TIME OF 72-96 HOURS. The use of an incremental-feed system takes advantage of the fact that residual substrate concentration may be maintained at a very low level. A low residual level of substrate may be advantageous in (1) Removing repressing effects of rapidly utilized carbon sources (glucose) and maintaining conditions in the culture within the aeration capacity of the propagator. (2) Avoiding the toxic effects of a medium component (ethanol). The yeast is grown in an initially weak medium to which additional medium is added at a rate less than that at which the organism can use it. During the exponential phase the yeast is growing at its maximum specific growth rate, umax, for the prevailing conditions. Ideally, the substrate limited culture has a feed rate equivalent to a dilution rate slightly less than u max. Glucose levels in a all-malt wort are in the approximate range of 1% - 1.5 %. Brewer's yeast has a metabolic effect where the yeast will respond to glucose levels above 0.4% with or without the presence of oxygen by metabolizing the sugar through fermentation rather than respiration. If the yeast propagation is aerated and the culture is fed incrementally with sterile wort at a rate that the yeast metabolizes the glucose to keep the level of this sugar in the propagation below 0.4%, the yeast will stay in a respiratory or growth state. A similar process is utilized in the production of baker's yeast although molasses is utilized instead of brewer's wort. Under these circumstances, far more energy is available to the yeast cell than under fermentative conditions and far more yeast is produced while less alcohol is produced. The yeast produced from this method are in highest growth phase (log phase) and can be pitched at a dilution rate of 1:100 or higher. The volume of the propagation medium is 1% or less of the batch total. The propagation medium may be bland and slightly acidic, but can be blended along with the yeast slurry into the batch with no noticeable off-flavors. Generally speaking, anything that promotes yeast growth relative to fermentation will tend to reduce the amount of flavor compounds produced by directing the carbon of the fermented sugar into yeast mass. Yields of yeast and ethanol Mass (kg) Medium Conditions Yeast Ethanol Wort Unaerated 2.7 17.5 Wort Aerated 8.6 10.5 Wort Aerated-Incremental Feed 23 0.7 Molasses Aerated-Incremental Feed 50 0 *from Malting and Brewing Science - -- Fred L. Johnson Apex, North Carolina, USA Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 18:57:45 -0500 From: Donald and Melissa Hellen <donhellen at horizonview.net> Subject: RE: first all grain and keg Byron Towles writes: "So, in summation, what should an All-Grain newbie make for his first batch?" That depends, my friend, on what kind of beer you prefer. I like both light and dark ales. Kolsch is my current favorite on the lighter side (also low alcohol), and Russian imperial stout on the dark side (also high alcohol). The grain bill is a lot bigger on the imperial stout, so you may need to make sure that you have enough capacity to handle all of that grain (over 20 lbs.). I did my first batch of imperial stout by doing two sparges (split the batch into two) and boiling in three vessels on the stove top, adding more collected wort as the boil progressed. I used a picnic cooler and a "Phil's" mash/lauter tun setup. The picnic cooler took care of the grain that wouldn't fit into the mash tun. I'm not certain, but I think it was my first all-grain beer. It came out very well. The downside of the imperial stout is that is best when aged for months. It does taste good when it is fully carbonated even though it has not aged but a couple of weeks, so you don't NEED to age it. It just mellows out and gets better over time, though it is still good, in my opinion, when it is still a young beer. The Kolsch is also supposed to be lagered for a bit, but again, it tastes good as soon as it is fully carbonated. (Some recommend bulk lagering instead of in the bottle. For now, don't get too technical, just enjoy the hobby.) For a "fast" beer, you could go with a mild ale or pale ale, or, for darker tastes, a Guinness clone. Stouts are somewhat forgiving (read the current BYO on oatmeal stouts), and are not difficult to make. You can add 1/4 lb. of acidulated malt to your grain bill to get that Guinness "twang" to your beer. Listermann carries it if you can't find it locally. Don Hellen Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 19:02:13 -0500 From: Donald and Melissa Hellen <donhellen at horizonview.net> Subject: RE: hypochlorite A J writes: "Bottom line (as Jeff said): it doesn't matter whether the HOCl/OCl- came from dissolved chlorine gas or dissolved hypochlorite, boiling will remove it. So will Campden tablets (or photographer's hypo) which will also remove chloramine (which can also be remove by boiling but it must be an extensive, i.e. a couple of hours) boil." What about the drops that aquarium owners use to remove chlorine? Can these be used safely? I realize that they are not FDA approved, but the fish live in the water after treatment. Don Hellen Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 19:05:27 -0600 From: "Tidmarsh Major" <tidmarsh at bellsouth.net> Subject: Re: Classic American Pilsner Recipe/Report/Ranting Jeff Renner wrote in today's digest, "Now intermittently open the pressure relief valve of the receiving keg (or depress the gas in fitting if there isn't a relief valve) and let the beer flow at a moderate rate, controlling by opening and closing the relief valve. As soon as you hear the keg blow (or when you see sludge flow in the line), disconnect the hose." As a variation on this method, place the full keg on a counter, table, or somewhere else higher than the receiving keg. Add just enough gas to get the flow started, and then connect a line between the two gas in fittings. The beer will siphon under pressure without the need to intermittently relieve pressure and without the need to add additional gas. Tidmarsh Major Tuscaloosa, Ala. (anxiously awaiting next week's tapping of the keg from my first batch after moving, a Classic American Cream Ale) Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 11/16/02, by HBD2HTML v1.2 by KFL
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96