HOMEBREW Digest #4149 Mon 20 January 2003

[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 *********

  RE: competition conundrums, BJCP exam, and yeast advice (Brian Lundeen)
  Re: Muriactic acid (Tony Verhulst)
  Berliner Weiss ("Houseman, David L")
  RE: Muriatic Acid ("Mike Sharp")
  RE: More wine stuff... ("Mike Sharp")
  Re: Basement Brewing with propane burner ("Mike Sharp")
  Re: "other" stuff (Wil)
  first all grain stout (Teresa Knezek)
  Fw: Brewhouse efficiency ("Mike Maag")
  220 Volt Electric Boiling Kettle (Andy Buhl)
  yeast and legal action (ensmingr)
  Attenuation Control (Fred L Johnson)
  Re: BJCP Levels ("David Houseman")
  Re: Diacetyl Rest (Pete Limosani)
  Is WLP810 a Slow Fermenter (Stuart Lay)
  Re: BJCP Judge Test (hand-written vs. computer vs. the clock) ("Tidmarsh Major")
  Re: Writing on the BJCP exam... ("Tidmarsh Major")
  Brewhouse efficiency ("Michael O'Donnell")
  Re: brickbats, plowshares, etc. (Teresa Knezek)
  weihenstephaner lager (Calvin Perilloux)
  BJCP Levels (hand written test) (Calvin Perilloux)
  How to turn your home into a boombox, local shops, and a recipe question (guy gregory)
  RE: Is WLP810 SF Lager a slow fermenter? ("Lou King")
  No more brewers resource? (jim williams)
  Variable results using milk as a label adhesive (Kevin White)
  re: dusty malt ("Steve Alexander")
  MCAB 6 QE's ("Louis Bonham")
  Re: dusty malt (Fred L Johnson)
  re: too much extraction efficiency ("Steve Alexander")
  Pumpernickel (Jeff Renner)

* * Show your HBD pride! Wear an HBD Badge! * http://hbd.org/cgi-bin/shopping * * The HBD Logo Store is now open! * http://www.cafeshops.com/hbdstore * * 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, 17 Jan 2003 10:19:23 -0600 From: Brian Lundeen <BLundeen at rrc.mb.ca> Subject: RE: competition conundrums, BJCP exam, and yeast advice Mark Tumarkin writes: > Brewing for an upcoming competition can take a little > advanced planning, even two months is too short for many > styles. Mike Dixon (who we now know is lurking out there) has solved this problem by having EVERY style of beer on tap ALL the time. ;-) Bev Blackwood II writes: > I have heard they are considering shortening the essay portion of the > exam and adding some multiple choice questions, so maybe there's hope > for you yet. > Allow me to be serious (it will be brief) and suggest that this seems like a bad idea. As a student, I loved multiple choice. To me, it was on a par with open book. The answer is basically given to you. Yes, there are tricks to make picking out the correct answer a little more difficult, but if you have a passing familiarity with the information, all you have to do is look for the answer that jogs your memory. An analogy would be a stage actor who relies on the prompter for each of the lines. At the judging table, a judge is in no position to have their library of references at their disposal. There is nothing there to provide helpful prompts. The judge must know the necessary information, and be able to recall it from memory without other aids. By turning to multiple choice questions, I am concerned that we will be certifying judges who have not demonstrated an ability to do this. Steve B writes: > > I was recently having a conversation with a co-worker about > the health > benefits of drinking fermentables with the yeast still in the > container. > Her doctor had recommended this course of action during a > bout with anemia. > The doctor specifically suggested stout or ale. And the last line suggests to me that the doctor does not have the necessary knowledge to recommend any particular yeast over another for its health benefits. Amazing how one slip-up can ruin someone's credibility. Right, Dan? ;-) C'mon Dan, I'm sorry that it seemed like the entire howli^H^H^H^H^H Canadian contingent was ganging up on you, but bitter sarcasm is not the correct response. Relax with a homebrew, laugh about it, then go fire your buyer and laugh some more. ;-) Cheers Brian Lundeen Brewing at [819 miles, 313.8 deg] aka Winnipeg Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 12:50:29 -0500 From: Tony Verhulst <tony.verhulst at hp.com> Subject: Re: Muriactic acid > I am wondering about the suitability of muriactic acid as a cleaner for > home brewery use. I have an opportunity to get some that a friend no > longer wants/needs. Is it okay to use on stainless, copper, brass? Muriactic acid is another name for hydrochloric acid. Having spent 10 years profesionally in a chem lab, my advice is to not bother. It's pretty nasty stuff and dangerous if not used properly. So, why use it if you don't need to - and you don't. Cleaners like "Bar Keepers Friend" and "Powdered Brewery Wash" (PBW) will clean anything that you'll come across. That said, a dilute solution (25% or so) does a pretty good job of cleaning stainless steel but you still will want to minimize contact time - and use latex gloves, wear clothes that you won't mind getting holes in. I wouldn't even think of using it on copper or brass. You may need a weak acid solution to "passivate" stainless steel but you can use plain vinegar (acetic acid) for that. BTW, Muriactic acid is dirt cheap at any hardware store. Tony V. http://home.attbi.com/~verhulst/RIMS/rims.htm PS. I heard that ATT broadband has been sold to Comsat so I'll be forced to change email and web site adresses. This rots (not the word I was thinking of :-) maybe it's time to get my own domain name. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 13:26:02 -0500 From: "Houseman, David L" <David.Houseman at unisys.com> Subject: Berliner Weiss The discussion thus far about making Berliner Weiss focused on adding lactobacillus to the wort in the form of a pure culture. I've made a couple of these and followed the process of adding some malt to the warm wort. Basically, after making the wort, let it cool to 70-80oF. Toss in a lb of crushed malt; I used some plain 2-row I had lying around for awhile. Covered the top of the wort with some plastic wrap to keep air out and let this sit for several days. The longer it sits, the worse it smells. The worse it smells the more sour it will be. Try 2-3 days. Then I siphoned this off the grain and any trub to a kettle again, brought it up to 170oF for 15min to pasteurize the wort so that it would not continue to sour (or skip this and let it keep going), cooled to pitching temperature and used a neutral ale yeast (Kolsch would be great). Bottled when done with maybe 1.25-1.5 cups corn sugar / 5 gallons -- this is a very effervescent beer. This worked very well and won a couple ribbons. Dave Houseman Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 10:35:48 -0800 From: "Mike Sharp" <rdcpro at hotmail.com> Subject: RE: Muriatic Acid Richard Foote asked about Muriatic Acid Richard, I prefer using caustic to clean stainless...corrosion rates increase as pH goes down, and HCL is one of the most corrosive. HCl isn't a good thing for Stainless Steel. Nitric acid is used to passivate, but I'd stay away from the muriatic acid (HCL) for cleaning. Dan the Reamed One said: "WOW! It looks like I will just have to get used to the freshly reamed one." Just remember, it wasn't us that did the reaming! It was your buddies at C&B...and by proxy, DCL. ;^) Regards, Mike Sharp Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 10:55:51 -0800 From: "Mike Sharp" <rdcpro at hotmail.com> Subject: RE: More wine stuff... Brian Lundeen wrote: Mike Sharp writes: > This surprises me. I've always assumed the wine kits were > concentrated using ultrafiltration. I will defer to your first hand knowledge of the process since I have none. This was related to me by what I considered to be a knowledgeable source some time back. I suspect heat is a factor in colour extraction for reds, and I would also assume that heat is involved in producing a product that is shelf stable. Mike Replies: Oh no, I didn't mean to imply I had first hand knowledge about the making of wine kits, I was involved in a system that concentrated grape juice as a food product. I guess it's the stuff that gets added to all those drinks that say "contains REAL juice!" I'm definitely curious about how the wine kits are produced, though. I could see using ultrafiltration for a white grape, but the reds...? Unless they're more like a Nouveau style. I suppose pasteurization would be inevitable, though--or irradiation. Are the wine kits even concentrated in the first place?? Regards, Mike Sharp Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 11:00:10 -0800 From: "Mike Sharp" <rdcpro at hotmail.com> Subject: Re: Basement Brewing with propane burner Re: Basement Brewing with propane burner In regards to all the comments regarding: Basement Brewing with propane burner I'm wondering why basement brewers that use flame for heat don't enclose the flame in a firebox, and use a flue for exaust gas...like your furnace or hot water heater does? A flue fan can help with the poor geometry of the fire box. Regards, Mike Sharp Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 19:19:30 GMT From: Wil at thebeermanstore.com Subject: Re: "other" stuff >As for the "other" news I stirred up last week. Many of y'all have >written to say you're shocked no more traffic is on the HBD about it. >I'm not. If that is what it takes to be the "largest homebrew store" in the USA and to be the first shop EVER to do just about everything in home brewing, then you can have it. I'll pass. Wil Kolb The Beer Man Plaza at East Cooper 607 B Johnnie Dodds Blvd Mt. Pleasant SC 29464 843-971-0805 Fax 843-971-3084 www.thebeermanstore.com Wil at thebeermanstore.com God bless America! Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 14:25:52 -0900 From: Teresa Knezek <teresa at mivox.com> Subject: first all grain stout Popped open the first bottles of my first all grain brew last night... my boyfriend liked it, and it actually had some noticeable alcohol content, so I did something right... Sadly, it doesn't taste at all the way I wanted it to. I don't like the aroma, and the flavor isn't nearly as complex my first stout (which had wonderful overtones of chocolate, and an almost smoky flavor). It's not a bad beer, it's just not the beer I wanted to make. So, I've been hunting around, and I've found tons of info about converting grain recipes to partial extract versions, and there are whole books of reverse-engineered clone recipes for commercial beers... but there doesn't seem to be a single resource for converting extract recipes to grain. The flavor on my first every batch of stout was heavenly. It was based on 6.6 pounds of John Bull unhopped dark malt extract syrup... and I would kill to find an accurate grain conversion for that extract. I tried to keep the rest of the recipe as similar as possible, but was at the mercy of the local shop's owner as to what a grain equivalent for the extract would be, and his guess obviously wasn't on the money... Can anyone help out here? Has someone, somewhere, ever bothered to reverse-engineer the grain bill for John Bull Dark LME? - -- :: Teresa :: http://rant.mivox.com/ In The Beginning there was nothing, which exploded. Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 07:47:14 -0500 From: "Mike Maag" <maagm at rica.net> Subject: Fw: Brewhouse efficiency > >Various calculations put my > > efficiency between 75.6% and 78%. > > I'm not sure if a longer sparge, or a batch sparge will help, so I > > am going to experiment. Steve A: > Well do experiment - you'll learn a lot that way. > > I've nothing against your mission to increase your efficiency from the > 75-78% range but that's really a good figure IMO. Me: Interesting. I was wondering what you meant by "not too high", so efficiency can be too much of a good thing. S- > A continuous sparge is probably more efficient than a batch sparge, but a > continuous sparge does not extract evenly (more extraction at the top, less > at the bottom). In practice the sparge type makes only a minor difference. Me: Seems like 2 batch sparges using the required water to get enough in the kettle would get maximum fermentables without leaching nasties, from the standpoint of not over- sparging areas of channeling in the grain bed, or not oversparging the top of the grain bed while leaving sugars in the bottom. By two batch sparges, I mean adding sparge water to the mash at mashout using sparge water to the top off the lauter tun (if the tun is large, use half the sparge water). During mashout, you mix the sparge water throughout the mash. Let set for 15 min. Sparge, (after recirculating till clear runoff), then add the rest of the sparge water. Mix thoroughly, to insure fresh water is getting to all areas of the lauter tun, let set for 15 min. then sparge again (after recirculating) Any sparge water which would not fit in the tun on the 2 nd sparge should be added like a "fly" sparge. Seem to me, the uniform distribution of water, twice, should give maximum extract without extracting nasties. I will brew the same ale, as an experiment, but I will batch sparge as described. Maybe I can get better yield without appreciable nasties. Mike Maag, in the Shenandoah Valley, VA. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 21:11:19 -0500 From: Andy Buhl <buhlandr at pilot.msu.edu> Subject: 220 Volt Electric Boiling Kettle I have seen several questions relating to the appropriate elements for use in regulating electric boiling kettles. The consensus seems to be that maintaining a boil only requires something in the area of a 3000 watt element, while anything up to about 7000 watts greatly reduces the time required to achieve a full boil. Unfortunately, I am not nearly as clear on the best way to reduce the power going to a 6000-7000 watt element. I have seen several posts mentioning series 555 (???) timing circuits use and even links to plans for building them. Unfortunately, building electronic circuits from scratch is where I draw the line on skills I'm willing to pick up for the sake of brewing. Bottom line: does anyone have suggestions on where I can scavenge, order, or buy off the shelf an appropriate controller for this purpose? Thanks! Andy Buhl Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 01:02:47 -0500 From: ensmingr at twcny.rr.com Subject: yeast and legal action In HBD 4148 ( http://www.hbd.org/hbd/archive/4148.html#4148-1 ), Mark Vernon mentioned that Chris White (White Labs) threatened legal action if anyone cultured and re-sold one of his White Labs yeasts. I have long been wondering just who *owns* all these different yeast strains anyway. Surely, Chris White got his yeast from somewhere. In fact, the White Labs web site identifies WLP002 as "a classic ESB strain from one of England's largest independent breweries", WLP023 as "from the famous brewing town of Burton upon Trent", WLP500 as "from one of the six Trappist breweries remaining in the world", etc, etc. Can't one of these breweries threaten legal action against Chris White? Just who *owns* these different yeast strains? What exactly does it mean to *own* a yeast strain? Why can't someone just re-culture a White Labs or Wyeast yeast and sell it? I can sell a sprig from the hop plant or seeds from the tomato plants that I grow in my own backyard (at least I think I can). Why not yeast from White Labs or Wyeast? Maybe an HBD lawyer like Lou Bonham (Hi Lou! Are you still out there?) can answer. Cheerio! Peter A. Ensminger Syracuse, NY http://hbd.org/ensmingr Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 09:01:21 -0500 From: Fred L Johnson <FLJohnson at portbridge.com> Subject: Attenuation Control In Martin's recent post to the HBD regarding attenuation control he stated: > For instance, you could mash to produce a highly fermentable wort and convert > it with a low attenuation yeast. Conversely, you could produce a less >fermentable wort and convert it with a higher attenuation yeast. In my experience this is simply not true. If we confine our discussion to the customary, commercially-available brewing yeasts (i.e. excluding wild yeasts and other exotic varieties), "low attenuating" yeast is very likely to convert a "highly fermentable" wort, and a "high attenuating" yeast will not be able to convert a "low fermentable" wort. The attenuation by a yeast is HIGHLY dependent upon the wort itself, moreso than the particular strain of commercial yeast selected. If all other factors are controlled, the sugar profile of the wort is much more important than the yeast selection in determining attenuation. In my opinion, it is rather misleading to publish attenuation values for a yeast in the manner that is currently being done by commercial providers and has contributed more to the "stuck fermentation" posts than any other single factor. I dare say that a majority of the "stuck fermentations" reported here were due to nothing more than a wort that simply was not fermentable to the degree stated on the package of the yeast. Only under controlled, standardized conditions could a yeast be accurately described by its attenuation potential. Such wort standardization simply isn't practiced by the yeast companies. If a standard wort were (could be) produced, one should more informatively report a mean plus/minus a standard error of the attenuation, not a minimum and maximum, i.e., a range. Even then, this would only allow one to compare between yeasts--it would NOT tell you what the attenuation would be of YOUR wort. In comparing yeasts, I pay no attention to the descriptions of attenuation published by the manufacturers, especially if the published attenuation ranges overlap at all. - -- Fred L. Johnson Apex, North Carolina, USA Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 09:44:57 -0500 From: "David Houseman" <housemanfam at earthlink.net> Subject: Re: BJCP Levels Philip says "Sorry, that doesn't hold water. Most, if not all, of the forms I've gotten back from competition had no more than a couple dozen words on them. Writing a few dozen words on a form is much different than writing 10 multi-page essay answers." Oops Phil, you're leaking like a sieve; any judge form received back with only a few dozen words is not a good example of what should be done. My hand hurts as much after a flight of judging as it did when I took the exam. Personally I don't think cheating is the issue in allowing computers as it is fairness. Unless every examinee taking the exam has the same opportunities, it's not being fair to those that don't have, can't afford, or can't use effectively a laptop. Not just in the exam you take but in all the exams across the country. Frankly if someone isn't willing to put out the effort to write for this exam, perhaps they should consider whether this is really the right activity for them. David Houseman Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 11:09:24 -0500 From: Pete Limosani <plimosani at rcn.com> Subject: Re: Diacetyl Rest In #4148, George asked: 1. Sometime back someone mentioned a Diacetyl Rest while he was making his beer. Would someone please explain what this is or when you do it or how. George, I've only been brewing lagers for a couple years, so others with more experience may pipe in, but I'll contribute my 2 cents... When primary fermentation is winding down, you can raise the temperature (low to mid 60s is good) and let the beer sit at this temperature from one to several days. This will cause the yeast to metabolize the diacetyl that is created during fermentation. I typically ferment at about 52*. To prepare for the rest, I raise the temperature in my fridge a few degrees a day for a couple days. Then I take the fermenter out of the fridge. My fridge is in my basement where the temperature stays at about 65* for the winter. During the summer the basement is too hot, so I leave it in the fridge at about 60-62*. I don't think a precise temperature is as important as a temperature rise. In other words, if you ferment at 45*, a rest in the high fifties may suffice. I typically rack to the secondary fermenter right before I begin the rest. This gets rid of the nasties in the trub and keeps any latent yeast from autolyzing during the warmer temps of the rest. Some sources say that you should begin the rest when the beer is about 2/3 attenuated. For a 1.050-->1.014 beer, this would be at 1.026. I have not had good luck with this approach. I find that I get under-attenuated beer. This might be partly because I reduce the temperature too fast and may be partly because of particular yeast strains I use. When I put the beer back into the fridge, I try to have the fridge at about 58* and reduce it by about 3* per day until I get it to lagering temps of ~34*. This doesn't seem unreasonable to me, but maybe it is too severe for some yeasts. I use Wyeast 2278 a lot and this yeast seems to like to fall out quickly with even a slight temp drop. At least that has been my experience after using it about 6 or 7 times. Then again, I have not noticed much diacetyl in this strain, so I stopped performing rests with it. Four to six weeks of cold lagering with this strain seems to remove the little apparent diacetyl that it produces. (And a slight amount of diacetyl may even be desirable if you are trying to clone something like Pilsner Urquell.) Anyway, when I do perform a diacetyl rest, I wait until the beer is at 1.020 or lower. Usually, during the two or three days of the rest, the temp rise gets the yeast going again and it typically attenuates most of the rest of the way, so then I move right to lagering without worrying about under-attenuation because of the temperature drop. Some strains of yeast may not need a rest, while others will still have noticeable diacetyl even after a good rest (Weihenstephan #308). I only used 308 once and had to lager it a long time. I remember reading a about a technique once (it may have been on this board) where you start your fermentation at 48* and raise the temperature one degree per day for 14 days. Then, you rack to a secondary and reduce the temperate two degrees per day until you reach lagering temp. This incorporates a built-in diacetyl rest and has very slight temp changes. I haven't tried it yet, but think I will. Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 08:44:07 -0800 From: Stuart Lay <zzlay at yahoo.com> Subject: Is WLP810 a Slow Fermenter I've brewed five California Commons using WLP810 and all of them reached final gravity in ten days or less. If this seems quicker than what you're experiencing, the difference may be that I don't have a fridge or way to control temperature. The warmest my steams have fermented have been 70, but three stayed within White Labs recommended 60-65. One thing I have noticed with this yeast is a medicine-y smell in the finished beer. Two of my five attempts (including one between 60-65 degrees) have resulted in off flavors. The first was so bad I had to dump it and I switched from Iodophor. The second (a November batch) is drinkable but not real good (Star San this time). Probably not the yeast, but I've had a lot easier time brewing good beer with WLP-001. I think my next steam will wait until I've got a brew fridge. stuart Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 11:06:08 -0600 From: "Tidmarsh Major" <tidmarsh at bellsouth.net> Subject: Re: BJCP Judge Test (hand-written vs. computer vs. the clock) On 17 Jan 2003 at 0:13, John Doherty wrote: > With this test, as with most, either you know the answer or you don't. > Giving some extra time (I'd actually like to see more time than 3 hours) > will only help people - BS is BS, and a grader isn't going to give you > bonus points because you wrote 3 pages of it per question - you'll > probably lose points for aggravating them! But someone who truly has > real information to put down on paper could benefit from a little extra > time. I won't presume to speak for the BJCP test designers, but in general, essay exams test more than just how much the writer knows. One purpose for having time limits is to require the writer to analyze and evaluate his or her knowledge and to include only the most relevant and important information in the answer (hopefully in a reasonably organized form). The BJCP exam may limit writing time for reasons other than merely limiting the amount of time necessary to grade the exam. Tidmarsh Major Tuscaloosa, Ala. Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 11:06:08 -0600 From: "Tidmarsh Major" <tidmarsh at bellsouth.net> Subject: Re: Writing on the BJCP exam... On 17 Jan 2003 at 0:13, BDB2 wrote: > It > also places extreme burdens on the proctors to verify there isn't > cheating going on. God help the poor proctor who has to learn to > traverse a UNIX file structure to see if there are hidden files, or > rummage through the Windows temp files. Not only that, the proctor has > to neglect the other folks taking the exam to look over someone's > shoulder regularly. Test-taking software is available that would alleviate many of those concerns. There are at least 2 programs that run a basic word processor from a floppy disc and disallow access to the hard drive (as well as recording attempts to access the hard drive). If anyone is interested in pursuing this idea, drop me a note off-list and I'll look up the information about the software, which is beginning to be used on law school exams. If the purpose of the BJCP exam is to find out what the test-takers know, why shouldn't the test-takers be allowed whatever tool best allows them to present their knowledge? Tidmarsh Major Tuscaloosa, Ala. Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 10:39:54 -0800 From: "Michael O'Donnell" <mooseo at stanford.edu> Subject: Brewhouse efficiency >Thanks to all who responded. Various calculations put my >efficiency between 75.6% and 78%. All of the posts were, indeed, interesting and informative. For the other all-grain newbies on the list, I want to recommend the article by John Palmer in the most recent Zymurgy. It has a great background on a lot of the numbers that go into the calculations. cheers, mike monterey, ca Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 13:12:45 -0900 From: Teresa Knezek <teresa at mivox.com> Subject: Re: brickbats, plowshares, etc. On or thereabout 1/18/03, Steve Alexander spoke thusly: >I've copied her in the hope that she'll reply to HBD and explain just why >she refused Marc's order. All in all, while I generally refuse to do business with anyone who repeatedly proves themselves to be a jerk to my friends and acquaintances for no good reason, I can happily excuse myself from even trying to figure out whether this is the case here... It seems, when I read their shipping policies, that St. Pats has absolutely no interest in doing business with small purchasers in Alaska. I am not allowed to buy ingredients at all, must buy at least $100 worth of equipment (not including shipping) in each order, and can only have my merchandise shipped via DHL. It seems my business is just not worth their time or trouble. The only good thing I have to say about that policy is that at least they're up front about it, so I know not to even bother starting to fill up a shopping cart. - -- ::Teresa : Two Rivers, Alaska:: [2849, 325] Apparent Rennerian "It has been my experience that folks who have no vices have very few virtues." -- Abraham Lincoln Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 15:47:23 -0800 (PST) From: Calvin Perilloux <calvinperilloux at yahoo.com> Subject: weihenstephaner lager 'gregman' writes about Weihenstephan's lager beer: >> My main question about the grist formulation is does this beer >> have wheat in it? Considering the body of this beer I think >> it does either that or raw barley? Or maybe raw wheat? Doubtful. If any brewery in Germany were to stick with Reinheitsgebot, even for exporting to ignorant foreigners ;-), it would be Weihenstephan. That means no unmalted barley, and no wheat in their lager. But it certainly doesn't rule out carapils, aromatic, or other "malty" malts. I reckon, on a blind guess, that's what they're doing. Calvin Perilloux Middletown, Maryland, USA Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 16:07:31 -0800 (PST) From: Calvin Perilloux <calvinperilloux at yahoo.com> Subject: BJCP Levels (hand written test) Phil Leonard writes, regarding the BJCP exam:: >> I agree completely with Alan about having to handwrite the answers. >> I can type many times faster than I can write (assuming you with >> to be >> able to read the writing). Since this is a timed test >> the speed of writing (typing) is very much an issue. Ah yes, I remember how my hand nearly fell off when I took that exam. As a computer programmer, I'd have LOVED to use a keyboard! The handwritten test provides a "level playing field". A painful one, I might add, though. But perhaps most importantly, the handwritten (hence time-limited) test requires that one know precisely and clearly which points are most important in regards to the question. Not enough time for all the questions? Join my club! I couldn't get it all down, either. But what I did early on during the test was to write a reasonable amount on each item and then add further information on some of them later, before the clock ran out. As for cheating, it would happen. Boy, would it be eeeasy to have a full set of pre-written text responses to loads of possible questions, and how long does it take to pull up a window and cut & paste? And right off the top of my head I know a couple of guys who would do it in an instant. Sigh. Very sad, but they exist. (There are not people I have contact with now, for those of you who know me. Anyway, if you're reading this list, you're not one of them.) Calvin Perilloux Middletown, Maryland, USA Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 17:14:56 -0800 (PST) From: guy gregory <ggre461 at yahoo.com> Subject: How to turn your home into a boombox, local shops, and a recipe question Folks, propane is heavier than air. If you persist in putting it in your sealed basement, get an explosimeter, put it on the floor, and when that atmosphere reaches 25 percent of the lower explosive limit, get your kids out of the house. Then go back and stir the mash if you want. Local homebrew shops. Ah, the controversy. If your shop is lousy, he'll go broke without you. If your shop is great, he'll never get rich from you, even if they double charge for yeast or some such nonsense...I mean, 10 years ago you'd give five times what we're paying now for great yeast in convenient packages. Now we're whining. Jim's Home Brew in Spokane is the greatest, fair price, great service, quality product, and nobody there seems to be dressing much better than me. What's the latest thinking on CAP recipes and Rye beer recipes? Personally, I'm liking Saaz hops exclusively in my CAP, and I find rye beer is made for Amarillo hops. Anybody have opinions? ===== Guy Gregory Lightning Creek Home Brewery Spokane WA (1660.4, 294.3) Rennerian Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 20:49:35 -0500 From: "Lou King" <lking at pobox.com> Subject: RE: Is WLP810 SF Lager a slow fermenter? Mike - Last time I did a batch of steam beer with WLP810 (9/21/02), it had a lag time of 5 hours, and fermented out after only a week. I left it in the fermenter another week and the SG didn't change. My records show a temperature which is unlikely, so I probably forgot to record the temp in promash, but it was probably around 65 degrees. I had pitched a 24 oz starter (about 700 ml). Lou Ijamsville, MD > -----Original Message----- > Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 20:18:00 -0700 > From: "Michael J. Westcott" <westy at commspeed.net> > Subject: Is WLP810 SF Lager a slow fermenter? > > Did a search of the archives and could not find anything > related to this question so I thought I would post it. I have > a 1.054 OG brew fermenting rather actively for 14 days as of > tomorrow. Temperatures have been between 60-62F for duration > of primary. Wonder if anyone has had same experience with > this yeast. Pitched 1 liter starter just past high krausen > and had first signs of fermentation at about 8 hours after > pitch. First time I have used this yeast. Thanks, Mike. > > Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 23:01:18 -0500 From: jim williams <jimswms at cox.net> Subject: No more brewers resource? Damn. I needed to order some yeast, and it looks like they are out of business. Too bad, it was great dealing with them! I am in need of a new yeast supplier, preferably one offering yeast on slants as brewtek did. Does anyone have any ideas? Cheers, jim Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 23:15:13 -0500 From: Kevin White <kwhite at bcpl.net> Subject: Variable results using milk as a label adhesive I use milk to affix paper labels to bottles. I have noticed that sometimes the dried labels simply drop off the bottle and sometimes they adhere so well they have to be soaked off. I've had some that survived an entire weekend in an ice-water bath in a cooler. Does anyone know what causes this different behavior? Kevin White Columbia, MD Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 08:36:38 -0500 From: "Steve Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net> Subject: re: dusty malt Fred Johnson's happened on some very dusty or flour-y malt from Munton's which his shopowner thinks is 'normal'. It's not. A sack of malt with a high percentage of flour sounds like a packaging error or a grain weevil infestation to me. I doubt you can crush a malt to 8% flour without destroying the sack. Something seems wrong in any case. Fred - Assuming you bought a 25kg sack of malt as packed by Munton's and not something repackaged at an HB shop I think you'll find that they will stand behind their product. Munton's is a class act - always has been. If the HB shop won't take this off-product back contact Munton's directly. http://www.muntons.com/index.html There's a full sheet of email contacts at http://www.muntons.com/common/htm/contact.htm Maybe they can explain what you are seeing. I'm confident you'll get a good response from them. Either way - drop HBD a note when you get this resolved. -S Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 14:13:36 -0600 From: "Louis Bonham" <lkbonham at houston.rr.com> Subject: MCAB 6 QE's Greetings all: First, an apology . . . I've been completely under water for a number of weeks with various business and family matters, and so I've been more than a bit derelict in responding to e-mails, not to mention tending to MCAB stuff. As far as MCAB QE's for 2003 (and the years beyond) . . . . "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." Accordingly, unless the organizers of the individual competitions decline, he following will be the MCAB Qualifying Events ("QE's")for MCAB 6: Boston Homebrew Competition Kansas City Bier Meisters Competition Regale and Dredhop World Cup of Beer Bluebonnet Brew Off Drunk Monk Challenge Sunshire Challenge Spirit of Free Beer BUZZ-Off Aurora Brewing Challenge Dixie Cup Happy Holidays Homebrew Competition Heart of the Valley Competition Further, while the MCAB reserves the right to make additions or subtractions to this list in the future, the first twelve of these competitions will be "presumptive" MCAB QE's in all future years (meaning, unless the MCAB decides to terminate a competition as a QE, it will remain a QE in all future years). The Heart of the Valley Competition and Novembeerfest will similarly be considered "presumptive" QE's but we will stick with our prior practice of alternating them . . . meaing the Heart of the Valley competition is a QE in odd numbered years (2003, 2005, 2007, etc.) and Novembeerfest is a QE in even numbered years (2002, 2004, 2006, etc.). Meanwhile, if you've not done so, check out the MCAB website (http://hbd.org/mcab) for details on MCAB 5, coming up in a couple of weeks in the Northern Virginia area. Looks like another killer beer geek weekend in the making! (Now if I can just get a certain case to settle so I can be there too . . . ) As always, lemme know if you have any questions, etc. Louis K. Bonham Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 18:37:56 -0500 From: Fred L Johnson <FLJohnson at portbridge.com> Subject: Re: dusty malt Steve Alexander has suggested that I take up the issue of the very dusty malt with the homebrew shop owner from which it came or with Muntons directly. I must clarify that although I mentioned that the homebrew shop owner regularly sifts the bulk malt when he packages these in smaller quantities for his customers, he has quickly stated that what I have experienced is not the normal and was more than willing to accept back the 25 kg bag (minus what I had used). I was willing to use it after I had sifted the bag through his ingenious homemade, motor driven sifter. I wish to emphasize that this shop owner is genuinely interested in providing to his customers the finest quality products he can, and he goes WAY beyond the expected to please his customers. His shop is exemplary. I should also clarify that the dust in this malt is tan in color, not white like flour, although it certainly may contain a significant amount of convertible starch. I should have taken the advice of the shop owner and experimented with the dust by mashing a small beaker of this stuff just to determine how convertible it was. (I was simply too lazy to play with it and left it behind in the shop.) I think I will take this issue up with Muntons as Steve has suggested. Incidentally, this was the original, unopened, Muntons bag of malt and not a repackaged product I was using. I'll report back after I get Muntons reply. - -- Fred L. Johnson Apex, North Carolina, USA Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 20:02:27 -0500 From: "Steve Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net> Subject: re: too much extraction efficiency Mike Maag asked, > Interesting. I was wondering what you meant by "not > too high", so efficiency can be too much of a good thing. Yes ! If you just extracted more high quality wort from the grist then higher efficiency would be wonderful. The problem is that late runnings are inferior to 1st wort and early runnings in flavor quality. M&BS says ..."Last runnings [..] are of higher pH, lower extract, rich in polyphenols and silica than earlier worts. They are also richer in certain lipid materials, notably linoleic acid. All these characteristics may be detrimental therefore some breweries, concerned more with quality of the final beer than the cost of it's production, will discard final runnings." Linoleic is a fatty acid that is the precursor of state cardboard aldehydes - btw. In Wolfgang Kunze's 'Technology of Brewing and Malting' (the Weihenstephan undergrad textbook) he states..."Towards the end of sparging increasing amounts of undesirable material (polyphenols and bitter substances from husks, silicic acid, etc.) pass into solution [table of extracts given]. If one wishes to produce high quality beer, the spent grains must not be extracted too much i.e. not sparged too long." I think that any runnings, certainly after a 1st batch sparge are *slightly* detrimental to overall beer flavor. The no-sparge proponents would argue that any lautering at all increase inferior flavors and they may be right! Clearly somewhere before the runnings drops to SG1.000 there is a point where you are increasing the flavor damage moreso than you are increasing the efficiency and extract. The art of brewing is calling that point. A few rules of thumb --- According to the texts, total water (mash+lauter) should be under 8L/kg of grist. That's 3.75qt/lb in US HB terms. I think that the upper bound for HB use should be around 3.25 or 3.5qt/lb. Less water implies lower extraction efficiency. Late runnings should be cut-off when the SG drops to 1.012 - 1.015 range. At that point you are flirting with a lot of phenolic flavors. The way to do this is *NOT* to chill the samples but to use a hydrometer at the runoff temp and correct for it. My recollection is that 165F runoff reads about 12 points low - so a reading of SG1.000 to 1.003 at 165F is time to cut the sparge. Adjusting sparge water pH to 6.0 or lower (but above 5.0) should help reduce the extraction of flavor-negative substances from grist. Keep the sparge water temp below 80C(176F) [according to Kunze]. - -- Choosing low efficiency (but better flavor) is one area where HBers can afford to outpace the commercial brewers. Malt is cheap compared to time or good beer. [lipids leech late in the lauter, the vessel with the pestle is the brew that is true - where is Danny Kay when you need him ?] -S Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 22:20:49 -0500 From: Jeff Renner <jeffrenner at comcast.net> Subject: Pumpernickel Brewers I have had several requests for a recipe for authentic Westphalian pumpernickel. Here is one that is rather large, but it can be reduced. It's actually pretty easy to make. The basic ingredient is coarsely broken rye kernels, called rye chop or coarse pumpernickel meal in the bakery trade. You might be able to get a friendly bakery to order some for you. I get it in 50 lb bags for around $10.00. Or you could buy rye kernels from a feed store or food coop and grind it yourself. The loaves are sour fermented for three days, then baked at 225F for 8-14 hours in covered pullman loaf pans, which are long, rectangular pans with sliding covers. You can bake it in regular bread pans with foil covers. This bread is dark, dense, moist, chewy and very aromatic. Organic acids and alcohols formed by the fermentation form aromatic esters and the baking produces dark, flavorful Maillard reaction products. For five large loaves: *Day One 2 oz. active dry yeast (optional, you can rely on "wild" yeasts on the rye) 10 lbs rye chop 26 cups water Hydrate yeast in one cup of water at 105 F (or use half as much instant dry yeast and mix with rye meal before adding water. Mix well into a loose porridge, let ferment at 75-80F if possible in covered bucket *Day Two Add 6.5 lbs rye chop, mix well, return to bucket to ferment *Day Three 6.25 lbs rye chop 8 oz. salt Mix well (sort of knead) until it achieves some degree of cohesiveness (this requires a professional mixer, but smaller amounts can be done by hand). This will be a wet, stiff consistency rather like potter's clay, not like typical bread dough. Let rest for two hours, mix again, divide, shape into long "rolls,", roll in rye chop to cover on all surfaces. Put into pans (grease if they are not non-stick), press down into pans to flatten tops. The loaves should fill pans 2/3's. Cover, Let rise about two hours until risen 50% to fill the pans. If using foil covers, weight the tops to keep tops flat. When risen, bake in oven at 225F with pan of water to provide moisture in oven. I bake 14 hours. When baked, remove from pans, let cool. Slice very thin when cool. Tastes great with thin sliced Westphalian ham, other lunchmeats, cheese, smoked fish, or just butter. Goes great with any good German style beer. Anyone who tries this please report back to the HBD readership on your results. Jeff - -- Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, JeffRenner at comcast.net "One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943 Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 01/20/03, by HBD2HTML v1.2 by KFL
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96