---

	FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
		Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator


Contents:
  State Regulations (Rob)
  What does your club do? (Nik Subotic)
  2nd generation yeast & heresies (dbreiden)
  yeast slurry (Russ Gelinas)
  re enzyme temperatures (Chip Hitchcock)
  Contacting Norm Hardy and Rick Larson (flowers)
  Re : heresies (Darryl Richman)
  Fruit beers (John Freeman)
  zip city pub ("KATMAN.WNETS385")
  Re: HBD #712 Crown Caps on twist off bottles (larryba)
  Re:  Homebrew Digest #712 (August 29, 1991) (Bill Spikes)
  Sassafras (Andrew Lawson)
  Re: heresies (Ken Giles)
  Attention Chris Shenton (MIKE LIGAS)
  mail delivery error (Network Mailer)
  Furry Things (MIKE LIGAS)
   (Clarence Dold)
  Screw-on caps (Carl West)
  Nature's Way (C.R. Saikley)
  Conn's heresies (hersh)
  Attention Ross (MIKE LIGAS)
  Un-natural? (korz)
  Yeast Caking, Aluminum, and "Oh no not AGAIN!" (FATHER BARLEYWINE)
  Chlorine/pH meter, Mashing pot (Darren Evans-Young)
  Beer Tasting (Rob McDonald)
  Infection (Jack Schmidling)
  Remove me from this list (George Zengin)
  Re: DMS  (Darryl Okahata)


Send submissions to homebrew at hpfcmi.fc.hp.com
Send requests to homebrew-request@ hpfcmi.fc.hp.com
[Please do not send me requests for back issues!]
Archives are available from netlib at mthvax.cs.miami.edu


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

Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 03:06:29 CDT
From: bliss at csrd.uiuc.edu (Brian Bliss)


>  I brewed 3 batches over the entire summer. None in August.
>  They were drinkable but not up to my usual cooler weather
>  standard. All were pale ales (mjas o menos) done with London
>  Wyeast. Is (are) there better yeast for the hot times of the
>  year?

I have AC and kept it at 75F, and kept a water bath around my
fermenter; my friend had none and the temps varied but his basement
probably averaged 85F.  I kept accusing him of using too much sugar
in his brews, but finally realized that temperature was the actual
culprit.  He used various kinds of dry, unattenuative ale yeasts,
but all the brews had a distinctive, hard to explain, pseudo-cidery
flavor.  Some of mine certainly had esters (banana), but nothing
near what his did.  His spring brews had no such flavor.

draw your own conclusions.

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

> I've been wanting to try an oatmeal stout, but as I haven't been
> able to start brewing yet, could anyone tell me a good one to try?  

Sam Smith's!

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

> Several months ago I talked with the Kemper head brewer) 
> and he said that the sassafras extract comes from only a few 
> licenced processors since the raw stuff is apparently quite 
> carcinogenic. 

I've got 3 ounces of sassafras root from the grocery store,
and it's sure not imitation!  should I throw it out?

bb


Return to table of contents


Date:         Thu, 29 Aug 91 06:39:52 CST
From: Rob <C08926RC at WUVMD.Wustl.Edu>
Subject:      State Regulations


>Missouri              3.2% by weight. Exception: 5% or "malt liquor"

Now I'm confused.  Is that saying that 5% beer must be labeled as malt
liquor?  As far as I know, 5% beer (not malt liquor) is available
everywhere, but on Sundays only 3.2% beer can be sold - and I don't
know how true this is, since I've seen some 7-11s advertising 5% beer
on Sunday...


Rob
C08926RC at WUVMD

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 09:10:29 EDT
From: subotic at erim.org (Nik Subotic)
Subject: What does your club do?


Hi Bill,

In the last Homebrewer's Digest you asked about some club activities.
Two interesting ones come to mind that our club (Ann Arbor Brewers
Guild) has sponsored.  One was called "bad brew."  In this one, a
series of additives was introduced into beer that approximated some
brewing artifacts (large amount of esters, fusils, ethel alchohol,
etc.) such that people can correspond tastes to these artifacts.  This
is an ongoing program and it has been very informative.  Another
activity that has been interesting is for the whole club to brew a
specific recipe.  We have done this with a number of recipes (an
extract, partial mash, and full mash) such that everyone can get
involved.  We end up tasting the end product(s) and try to ascertain
the differences in taste of the (presumably the same) beers.  We then
try to understand the differences in brewing techniques and see how
they forment these differences.  This has caused alot of good brewing
technical interchange since one variable (the recipe) has now been
fixed.

Hope this helps,

Nik

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 08:50:30 -0500
From: dbreiden at mentor.cc.purdue.edu
Subject: 2nd generation yeast & heresies

1.  I made one of my finest beers using yeast I cultured from a friend's
homebrew (thanks again, Ralph).  Of course, he started with good yeast,
but I am still amazed at how well the yeast stays in the bottom of the
bottle even with a somewhat careless pouring.
    The only thing about such an operation is that there are more chances
for the stuff to get infected while you are culturing.  But for me, culturing
off finished brew (drink the beer, reculture the dregs), is far more
efficient than trying to save slurry.  No disrepect to Father Barleywine,
but I can't imagine what effect the trub and spent gunk has on the next
batch. It just doesn't sound natural.

2.   Our local heretic posed the question of why the often benevolent (and
equally often malevolent) Mother Nature would design a natural system that
only occurs at unnatural temperatures.  I suspect that our extracting sugars
from the barley is UNnatural.  That is, our Mother Earth intended for
little baby plants to get the goodies inside the barley -- not a bunch
of beer swilling humans.  Thankfully, She is looking the other way while
we work our own version of alchemy.

- --Danny

Return to table of contents


Date:    Thu, 29 Aug 1991 10:04:22 EDT
From: R_GELINAS at UNHH.UNH.EDU (Russ Gelinas)
Subject: yeast slurry

  I guess I was a little unclear in my wording about saving the slurry from 
the primary.  I realize that you can always culture a starter from the 
conditioned bottles.  I also realize that you can stir up the slurry and save 
that.  I've done both of those.  There are a couple of parameters in this case
that make me want to handle it differently.
  The yeast has not flocculated very well, and I believe there is quite a bit
of trub.  So stirring up the slurry may give me a low yeast-to-trub ratio.
Also, the most recently active yeast is still in suspension, not in the 
slurry.  It seems to me the way to get the cleanest and most active yeast is 
to save a couple of pints when I rack to a new carboy before bottling.

  Now the real question is why doesn't this yeast, Wyeast Chico Ale, settle
out very well?  Certainly Sierra Nevada Ales have a solid pack on the bottom
of the bottle.  *Someone* published a test report on Wyeast yeast, and Chico
ale was said to be a low-medium floculator, which seems to be the case.  How
does Sierra Nevada do it?

Russ Gelinas

Oh yeah, I'm going to IOWA for a vacation. Are there any restaraunt supply
shops there?  };-)


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 10:12:42 EDT
From: cjh at vallance.HQ.Ileaf.COM (Chip Hitchcock)
Subject: re enzyme temperatures

> speculate on the reasons why mother nature invented an enzyme system which
> functions most efficiently at decidedly un-natural temperatures.

Stephen Jay Gould has written extensively on various aspects of this
fallacy, and given it at least one elaborate name; you should definitely
read as much of his work as you can find if you are trying to figure out
"why nature invented" anything.
   His basic observation is that nothing in nature is deliberate, or
maximally efficient. Among the reasons for this are:
 - evolution is accidental. Natural selection culls some traits and
strengthens others, but not very strongly unless there's a massive
[dis]advantage---ordinary variations generally aren't strong enough to be
subject to selection. Populations drift and mutate, and often we can't even
make a good guess at why selection pushed in a certain direction (we don't
\know/ that giraffes evolved long necks to eat high leaves; there could
have been some other force, or even accident, that let them fill this
niche).
 - nature has to cover a wide variety of conditions. A machine shop can be
precise because everything is controlled; biology has to survive extremes
of temperature, food, and water. An organism that can survive extremes is
more likely to be around after a few decades than one that is very good at
filling a narrow niche.

   Another factor is simple thermodynamics: most chemical reactions go
faster when heated. The better the enzymes can survive serious heat, the
more likely the grain is to reproduce (see above); that they will actually
work faster at this temperature is incidental. In fact, high-temp activity
could be unhelpful, breaking down the starch faster than the resulting
sugar can be assembled into cellulose---have you every seen your mash
sprout?

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1991 10:13:00 -0600
From: flowers at csrd.uiuc.edu
Subject: Contacting Norm Hardy and Rick Larson

Please excuse the interuption.

I am soory Rick, but I cannot seem to reach you by direct email.  I will
try again with the help of the local email guru.

Norm, mail to you did not come back to me.  Did you receive a copy of your
Germany series?  Did I screw it up and now you won't talk to me?  If you
did not receive anything, I will contact said guru about your address also.

Maybe someone can put the series in the archive?

 -cf
 (flowers at csrd.uiuc.edu)


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 08:33:20 -0700
From: darryl at ism.isc.com (Darryl Richman)
Subject: Re : heresies

Conn V. Copas enhances his heretical position by adding a new heresy to
ones he's already espoused.  However, I don't find anything heretical,
nor even more than mildly controversial about what he says.  I believe
the key to profficient and successful brewing is an understanding of
the processes involved and what parts the brewer wants to manipulate
and why.  The actual how of it isn't particularly important, and can
employ whatever the brewer has available or can buy or fabricate.

Conn's newest heresy seems to revolve around the question of why would
an enzyme system evolve that is most efficient at unnatural
temperatures.  The answer, to my mind, is that the definition of "most
efficient" is different for us as brewers than for the barley plants
that make those enzymes.  Their concern (if plants have concern) for
efficiency is with the enclosing system that provides energy for growth
from starch without benefit of sunlight, which is a plant's primary
energy pathway.

In this sense, "most efficient" is probably defined as that which
provides the breakdown of starch at a pace that closely matches the
rate of sugar consumption.  The plant throttles this rate by generating
the right level of enzyme concentration for about 60F to match this
pace.  That's why there's an ability for brewers to convert unmalted
adjuncts at the higher temperature--the balance at 60F is a very high
level for 150F.  On the other hand, a plant can't make use of all that
sugar in a matter of an hour, and it would be subject to rotting and
vigorous consumption by animals.

		--Darryl Richman

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 10:55:28 CDT
From: jlf at poplar.cray.com (John Freeman)
Subject: Fruit beers

> Papazian 
> recommends adding the fruit when the wort has ceased boiling to achieve some 
> level of pastuerization but avoid the pectin problem. OK, I can handle that. 
> But, how much fruit do I add? I'll most likely wind up using juice, I haven't 
> looked to see what's available yet, and lemons are no problem. I would like 
> some recommendations so I don't overdo it the first time around. I have
> one remaining bottle of my "light American" brew that I plan to use as the
> base for this next brew, and I thought of adding a little fruit juice until
> I got something reasonable, but I'd still like to know what the boundaries
> are. Any help out there?
> 
>  -phil duclos

If you're going to buy fruit to flavor your beer, I'd recommend you buy
fruit juice.  What I did recently was to add one quart of blueberry
juice to one gallon of pale ale - the rest of the ale was bottled as
usual.  I did this in the secondary fermenter, not the primary like you
would have to do to sterilize fruit.  Specifically, I added the juice
when I racked off the rest of the ale for bottling.  It then fermented
a couple more weeks.

The only deficiency is that the blueberry flavor does not come out
without a little sweetness.  So, when I serve Bluebeerd, I add a
teaspoon of sugar to each glass in the form of syrup.

As far as proportions, with blueberry I think it's hard to overdo the
fruit.  At 25% juice, it is barely noticeable as a blueberry flavor - I
taste something, but can't identify it as blueberry till I add the
sugar.

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 16:06 GMT
From: "KATMAN.WNETS385" <6790753%356_WEST_58TH_5TH_FL%NEW_YORK_NY%WNET_6790753 at mcimail.com>
Subject: zip city pub



     Date: 29-Aug-91      Time: 12:05 PM       Msg: EXT01780

Hi,
I called Zip City Brewpub, and also got the answering machine. I had heard that
they weren't going to open until late August, but you know how starting
businesses goes :) If they aren't open by October or November, then I'd worry.
RDWHAH until they do open.

Lee Katman == Thirteen/WNET == New York, NY

=Do not= use REPLY or ANSWERBACK, I can not receive mail in that fashion.
Please send all mail to
INTERNET katman.wnets385%wnet_6790753 at mcimail.com
OR
MCIMAIL EMS: wnet 6790753  MBX: katman.wnets385



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu Aug 29 08:47:54 1991
From: microsoft!larryba at cs.washington.edu
Subject: Re: HBD #712 Crown Caps on twist off bottles

|>From: eisen at kopf.HQ.Ileaf.COM (Carl West)
|
|I understand that it takes a certain kind of luck to get crown 
|caps to work on twist-off bottles and ordinary mortals shouldn't 
|even bother trying. 

In my past life as an extract brewer, I always used recycled twist off
bottles and capped them with regular crown caps.  After the 4-5th bottling
the edges of the threads started chipping and they became a bear to twist
off (gee, i had to use a church key).  So I would tossed them and get another
batch.  Big deal.

Nowdays I use soda kegs for regular consumption and shorty seltzer bottles (
styrofoam wrapped, platic screw caps) for transporting beer to social
functions.  The bottles seem infinitely reusable and the styrofoam sides keep
the beer at temp longer.  Plus a pint bottle is soo compact!  I have not
conditioned beer in one of these, but I can't see any reason why it wouldn't
work just fine.  Be careful boiling polyethylene caps: they might warp.  Cold
sanitization (bleach) might be better.

Yes, the lights are off in my fridge as well when the door is shut.

Cheers.



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 10:28:22 pdt
From: Bill Spikes <spikes at sc.hp.com>
Subject: Re:  Homebrew Digest #712 (August 29, 1991)


Please delete me from the Homebrew Digest.

Thank You,

Bill

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 12:48:08 EDT
From: Andrew Lawson <lawson at ra.nrl.navy.mil>
Subject: Sassafras

> Can anyone document the carcinogenic aspect of sasafrass and 
> what if anything is done to mitigate it?

The carcinogenic ingredient in sassafras is safrol.  It is
confirmed to be carcinogenic, though I forget what type
of cancer it is implicated in. It can be removed from the
extraction, but I don't know how.
 
> I have a hard time believing that anything that 
> require so little for such a powerful taste can be natural 
> or non-toxic.
 
Try tabasco :-)

+-------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Drew Lawson             |  If you're not part of the solution, |
| lawson at ra.nrl.navy.mil  |  you're part of the precipitate      |
+-------------------------+--------------------------------------+

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 11:19:47 PDT
From: keng at ic.MENTORG.COM (Ken Giles)
Subject: Re: heresies

In HBD #712, Conn Copas <C.V.Copas at loughborough.ac.uk> says:

> Apologies if I gave anyone the impression that I posted my heretical
> thoughts for the sake of being frivolously controversial.

I think most people would agree that it's healthy to question the necessity of
dogmatic procedures. Hopefully the dogma will be replaced with scientific 
principle. However, there will always remain some subjectivity as to the effect
of the application of those principles.

> d) By implication, I was encouraging more experimentation in homebrewing.
> As someone said recently, they preferred to brew 'empirically'. In other
> words, if the technique can't stand up to the scrutiny of a double-blind
> tasting comparison, it is questionable.

Agreed. However, you can't blindly rely on the double-blinds of others. I know
plenty of beer enthusiasts who just can't distinguish certain flavors. I 
consider phenols in a pale ale to be a fault. Others will never notice it.

> Oh, and I have dreamt up another heresy, which is that mashing temperatures
> are not as critical as we are often led to believe (once again, it helps to
> know what you are doing if you intend to mash cool). It's interesting to
> speculate on the reasons why mother nature invented an enzyme system which
> functions most efficiently at decidedly un-natural temperatures. About the
> only natural situation I can think of is when a heap of grain is composting
> on the ground. Any thoughts ?    

When brewers and brewing textbooks say 'enzyme efficiency', aren't they really 
saying 'enzyme efficiency during mashing'? The temperature of the mash is
partially intended to destroy (gelatinize) the kernal and dissolve its 
carbohydrates. This is not the same goal as the life-processes for which the 
enzymes were intended, where less mechanical action is involved. So, I don't 
find it odd that the mash efficiency temperature of enzymes would be different 
from the life-process efficiency temperature of those same enzymes.

And I suspect that if you go ahead and sparge the contents of your compost
heap, you will get a fermentable fluid. :-)

kg.


Return to table of contents


Date: 	Thu, 29 Aug 1991 14:22:00 -0400
From: MIKE LIGAS <LIGAS at SSCvax.CIS.McMaster.CA>
Subject: Attention Chris Shenton

******************************************************************************
First an apology to all HD readers for using up some bandwidth for a personal
letter but I'm unable to reach Chris via E-mail so this is my only option. The
good news is that the discussion to follow is mostly about beer.
******************************************************************************

>From: Chris Shenton <chris at asylum.gsfc.nasa.gov>
       (personal communication)
>Thanks for all the info... The blue spot is surrounded by a white furry
>perimeter, and it's at the edges of the plate; the plate has condensation
>in it so I've inverted it to keep the water off the agar; is this wise? My
>guess is that the condensation absorbed something from outside, then
>dribbled onto the edges of the agar. I sterilized the agar-filled plates by
>steaming for 30 minutes; this seems to have worked as the center of the
>agar is infection-free. Next time I could try pressure cooking.

>My stock email address is chris at asylum.gsfc.nasa.gov. You should be able to
>replace asylum with endgame with identical results. Other machines which
>forward to me include condor, falcon, xorn, dragon, and gryphon. Failing
>all those, you can send to my home unix box, but I don't read there as
>often: uunet!media!thanatos!chris. If you go that last route, could you
>also send me a copy of your bounceback message?

Well Chris, I tried to respond to this via the asylum and again my message was
spooled back. The following is the bounceback message containing my reply.


- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:   IN%"MAILER at SCFVM.BITNET"  "Network Mailer" 29-AUG-1991 12:05:30.62
To:     LIGAS at SSCvax.CIS.McMaster.CA
CC:
Subj:   mail delivery error

Return-path: <MAILER at SCFVM.BITNET>
Received: from SCFVM.BITNET (MAILER at SCFVM) by SSCvax.CIS.McMaster.CA with
 PMDF#10660; Thu, 29 Aug 1991 12:05 EDT
Received: from SCFVM.BITNET by SCFVM.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 4243;
 Thu, 29 Aug 91 12:05:28 EDT
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 12:05:28 EDT
From: Network Mailer <MAILER at SCFVM.BITNET>
Subject: mail delivery error
To: LIGAS at SSCvax.CIS.McMaster.CA
Message-id: <81189DEDE0C4538F at SSCvax.CIS.McMaster.CA>
X-Envelope-to: LIGAS

Batch SMTP transaction log follows:

220 SCFVM.BITNET Columbia MAILER R2.07 BSMTP service ready.
050 HELO SSCvax.CIS.McMaster.CA
501-SSCvax.CIS.McMaster.CA is bogus for a file with RSCS origin MCMASTER LIGAS
501
050 TICK 0001
250 0001 ... that's the ticket.
050 MAIL FROM:<LIGAS at SSCvax.CIS.McMaster.CA>
500 Command ignored due to a previous error.
050 RCPT TO:<chris at asylum.gsfc.nasa.gov>
500 Command ignored due to a previous error.
050 DATA
354 Start mail input.  End with <crlf>.<crlf>
451 Request aborted: command out of sequence
050 QUIT
221 SCFVM.BITNET Columbia MAILER BSMTP service done.

Original message follows:

Received: from SSCvax.CIS.McMaster.CA (LIGAS) by SCFVM.BITNET (Mailer R2.07)
 with BSMTP id 4242; Thu, 29 Aug 91 12:05:28 EDT
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1991 12:04 EDT
From: MIKE LIGAS <LIGAS at SSCvax.CIS.McMaster.CA>
Subject: Furry Things
To: chris at asylum.gsfc.nasa.gov
Message-id: <80F1240880C45E98 at SSCvax.CIS.McMaster.CA>
X-Envelope-to: chris at asylum.gsfc.nasa.gov
X-VMS-To: IN%"chris at asylum.gsfc.nasa.gov"


Chris:

I'd avoid anything furry. Sounds like the white stuff is also mold.

Another suggestion is to get more of the yeast slurry from the Weizenbier and
add 2-5 mls of it to 50 mls of sterile wort. See if the yeast can get going in
this environment and then streak out a few plates of this culture.

The one problem I foresee is that most authentic Weizens are naturally
conditioned with a lager yeast which is added at the time of priming. You may
be wasting your energy if that is the case with the beer from which you are
getting the yeast.

Send me your snail-mail address and I'll mail you pure S. delbrueckii when the
weather cools down at bit (to ensure viability when the vials arrive).

Take care,
Mike

PS: Incubate your plates upside-down from the beginning.
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 10:37:56 PDT
From: Clarence Dold <dold at tsdold.Convergent.COM>
Subject: 

From: eisen at kopf.HQ.Ileaf.COM (Carl West)
Subject: Screw-on caps

> How about using the real screw-on/screw-off caps and their bottles? 

In Australia, most beer is in screw-top bottles.  They have very few of
our 'long necks'.  Homebrewers use a thinner cap, labelled 'twist off' on
the package, which is pressed on with a standard bench press capper.  

I have tried some of these on American screw top bottles.  It requires a 
lot of pressure to put them on, but they do work.  

- -- 
- ---
Clarence A Dold - dold at tsmiti.Convergent.COM
               ...pyramid!ctnews!tsmiti!dold


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 11:28:14 PDT
From: grumpy!cr at uunet.UU.NET (C.R. Saikley)
Subject: Nature's Way

Conn Copas writes :

>It's bemusing to
>read posts in which people describe how they have conscientiously chilled
>the wort, then pitched the yeast straight in on top !

OK, I'll bite. 
What's unusual about chilling wort and putting yeast on top??

>It's interesting to
>speculate on the reasons why mother nature invented an enzyme system which
>functions most efficiently at decidedly un-natural temperatures. 

Mother Nature would not have optimized the enzyme system for grain to make
beer. She would optimize the system such that grain could best make more
grain. As far as the unsuspecting little barley kernels are concerned, that
enzyme system is what will allow it to nourish itself during the early days
of spring while it begins to sprout. The little bit of starch in the grain
must sustain the fledgling plant until it is able to photosynthesize. Thus 
it must be doled out slowly - not converted all at once as we brewer's strive 
for. It follows that the strains best adapted to survive the germination 
phase would prevail. (Until, of course, man steps in and mucks around with 
everything.) As brewers, we are very fortunate that our goals require only
a small, easily achieved deviation from nature's course.

In fact, we should be grateful that some deviation is necessary. For if the 
conditions required for making beer were too "natural", then all the grains 
would be turning themselves into beer in the fields, and then where would we 
be??? :-)

Cheers,
CR

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 14:38:03 EDT
From: hersh at expo.lcs.mit.edu
Subject: Conn's heresies


Regarding Conn's heresies part d)

>In other words, if the technique can't stand up to the scrutiny of a 
double-blind tasting comparison, it is questionable.

Conn it depends a lot on whose doing the tasting. If your palatte is untrained,
or insensitive or both, then obviously off flavors deriving from brewing
technique don't matter. Then again perhaps neither does recipe formulation (in
the extreme, see my signature) so why not brew Miller clones??

We do Dr. Beer trinaing sessions (me & Steve Stroud) and find that some people
just aren't sensitive to certain substances. Others just don't know what to
look for or how to sort out and identify what it is they're tasting.
My personal experience is that after trainign my palette some I began to detect
off flavors in beers I was making that I hadn't recognized for what they were
previously. Adjustment of my brewing technique eliminated these.

Also in d) you say
>It's bemusing to
>read posts in which people describe how they have conscientiously chilled
>the wort, then pitched the yeast straight in on top !

What do you mean by this?? I'm not sure what youre describing and/or
criticizing here.

 - JaH

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
assume that you are moderate in everything.
you now have an eXcess of moderation, a contradiction.

eXcessiveness is clearly the way to go...


Return to table of contents


Date: 29 Aug 91 12:09:11 EDT (Thu)
From: GC Woods <gcw at garage.att.com>

For the NJ area folks, a new supply store is scheduled to open around
August 15th.

			The Home Brewery of New Jersey
			118 Fort Lee Road
			Teaneck, NJ 07666
			1-800-426-BREW

They also have locations in CA, MO and NV. 

A quote from the catalog, "We do not sell beer or wine ingredients to 
minors. Its not illegal, it's just not right; so if you are under 21, 
please don't order". The founder (Sam Wammack) is an ex-cop, so watch 
out if you visit the Ozark, MO store.

Just out of curiosity, do many of the under 21 HBD readers ever have
any problems ordering supplies?

Return to table of contents


Date: 	Thu, 29 Aug 1991 14:54:00 -0400
From: MIKE LIGAS <LIGAS at SSCvax.CIS.McMaster.CA>
Subject: Attention Ross


Sorry again HD readers but I've lost an address to which I need to reply to and
this is the only route I can use to retrieve it.

Ross...I got your letter about lager yeast. Are you out there??!! Send me your
E-mail address ASAP.

Mike

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 16:47 CDT
From: ihlpl!korz at att.att.com
Subject: Un-natural?

Conn writes:
>Oh, and I have dreamt up another heresy, which is that mashing temperatures
>are not as critical as we are often led to believe (once again, it helps to
>know what you are doing if you intend to mash cool). It's interesting to
>speculate on the reasons why mother nature invented an enzyme system which
>functions most efficiently at decidedly un-natural temperatures. About the
>only natural situation I can think of is when a heap of grain is composting
>on the ground. Any thoughts ?    

Nature never meant for the enzymes to change the starch to sugar as quickly
as we do.  It meant for the starch to be converted to sugar only at the rate
at which the growing barley plant can use it.  Nice try, but I'm just too
relaxed to get short-circuited at this point in time.

Al.

P.S. I'd like to propose that the Homebrew Digest recognize the Baltic
states as independent republics.

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1991 17:47:23 EDT
From: FATHER BARLEYWINE <rransom at bchm1.aclcb.purdue.edu>
Subject: Yeast Caking, Aluminum, and "Oh no not AGAIN!"

This one is for all of you who groan every time you see a Father B. posting...

	It has been a while since I proclaimed again my heretical belief in 
the brew without sanity philosophy.  There has been a lot of discussion of 
using yeast from the bottom of the fermenter, and to keep my dirty fingers
in the discussion I'd like to raise a few points:

	1)  Try racking off your beer for bottling just as you finish the
		preparations for your next brew, and within 20 minutes of
		uncovering the yeast cake, pour in your next (cooled) batch
		of wort.  Close your eyes if necessary so you won't see the
		brown ring of scuzze on the walls of your fermenter.  Pray to
		your favorite deity or just stare at a spot on your wall.
		Stick on the fermentation lock and don't even look at that 
		carbouy until tomorrow.  I guarantee that a good yeast batch
		will produce a couple (I've tried 11) sequential batches of
		beer, and that the dried dead yeasties on the walls of your
		carbouy will not be (detectably) detrimental.  Some final
		suggestions:  ferment as cold as possible, and use a good
		yeast.

	2)  Be really careful when storing trub in your refrigerator unless
		you really enjoy cleaning dried malt substance/yeast off 
		your refrigerator/vegetables/catsup bottles.  Just a warning

	3)  Try keeping a culture (adding yeast cake to fresh wort) instead,
		using about 1/2 - 1 cup yeast of good texture to about 3/4
		gallon wort.  This will last a while, and you don't need
		to worry too much about catching the yeast in log phase (i.e.
		2 - 3 days old).

	4)  Please don't sanitize everything (anything!).  Keep your equipment
		clean, free of deposits, and above all dry in storage.  I know
		you don't want to hear it from me again, but you really don't
		need to bleach/boil/Campden/irradiate items used in typical
		brewing.  Culturing yeast is an entirely different ball game.

	The "Oh no not AGAIN" was in reference to the Great Aluminum Debate.
There have been many many MANY postings about whether aluminum will discolor
wort/beer, cause Alzheimer's Disease, and everything else that our diverse
collection of posters could blue-sky.  Aluminum will dissolve into aqueous 
solutions, particularly acidic ones (like beer), but my personal philosophy
is that aluminum exposed to beer (wort) before fermentation will dissolve in
it and then be efficiently sucked up (chelated) by the hordes of yeasties
which pass the total wort volume through themselves many times over during the
course of a brew.  Admittedly, you are drinking some of these yeasties too in
your final beer, but most sit languidly on the bottom.  Relax, use aluminum,
and worry about the carcinogenic compounds you run into at high concentrations
at work every day.
	Ah, another diatribe smoking out of the keyboard!  Please, flame me!
I thrive on abuse.

					Father Barleywine


Return to table of contents


Date:         Thu, 29 Aug 91 18:47:39 CDT
From: Darren Evans-Young <DARREN at UA1VM.UA.EDU>
Subject:      Chlorine/pH meter, Mashing pot

Chlorine/pH meter:

I came across a catalog that contained a combination chlorine/pH meter
for use with swimming pools.  It's about $50.  Has anyone tried one of
these?  Are they accurate enough?  Seems like it would be real handy.


Mashing pot:

Has anyone tried mashing pot?  ...just kidding...
Seriously, what size pot is needed to mash, say, 10 lbs of grain?
I already have a 10 gal SS pot to boil in.  Is a 5 gal SS pot large enough
for mashing a maximum of 10 lbs of grain?

Darren E. Evans-Young
The University of Alabama

*---------------------------------------------------------------------------*
| Darren Evans-Young, Sys Prg                  BITNET: DARREN at UA1VM.BITNET  |
| The University of Alabama                  Internet: DARREN at UA1VM.UA.EDU  |
| Seebeck Computer Center                       Phone: (205)348-3988 / 5380 |
| Tuscaloosa, Alabama  35487-0346                      (205)348-3993 FAX    |
*---------------------------------------------------------------------------*

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 23:29 EDT
From: rob at maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Rob McDonald)
Subject: Beer Tasting

I have decided to invite a few homebrewing acquaintances over for
a "Beer Tasting Session".  To the best of my knowledge this is a
first for all of us.  I intend to ask each participant to bring
two bottles, preferably homebrew, but possibly a favorite
commercial product for comparison.  How do _you_ conduct tastings?
What might you suggest that would contribute to the event?  One
person has suggested that I provide score sheets so that we can rate
the brews, then compare, and have a record for the future.  Does
anybody have a sample of such a rating sheet? (Preferably electronic,
though you could fax it to me, we are in the midst of a mail strike
right now).

What about munchies, anything special you recommend? (nothing too
mouth numbing for obvious reasons :-).

All suggestions welcome, if you are within reasonable distance of
Burlington, Ontario, Canada, and wish to attend (no date set, 
probably mid to late September) send me an email message.
 .....rob

EMAIL:   rob at maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca     <<< Standard Disclaimers Apply >>>
ARCHAIC: Digisonix, 2326 Redfern Rd., Burlington, Ontario, Canada, L7R 1X3.

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 10:54 CDT
From: arf at ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: Infection

 
 
 To: Homebrew Digest
 Fm: Jack Schmidling
 
 RE: MIKE LIGAS <LIGAS at SSCvax.CIS.McMaster.CA>
 Subject: Re: Yeast infection? (agar plate culture)
 
 >All wort & wort/agar must be pressure sterilized either in 
 an autoclave or a home pressure cooker (minimum 15 psi for 
 20 mins). The petri dishes must be obtained sterile 
 (irradiated plastic or baked glass).
 
 Aside from the environmentally unfriendly use of throw-away 
 petri dishes, I would like to point out that I have been 
 sterilizing glass petri dishes in a microwave oven with good 
 results.
 
 A few drops of water in the bottom create steam and, I 
 suppose, limit the temperature but I supect the critters get 
 "nuked" directly.
 
 Has anybody done any research on this technique?  My work is 
 strictly amateur and I have not the equipment nor 
 inclination to test it thoroughly.
 
 jack
 
ZZ
>


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 30 Aug 91 08:16:41 +0300
From: George Zengin <s1638090 at techst02.technion.ac.il>
Subject: Remove me from this list


It's been the n-th letter that i've sent you to just say :

"Please, remove me from this mailing list."

I've sent this to homebrew-request@ ... but an auto-answering program always
tells me that i'm accepted to this list, etc.

Sorry, guys on the list, but i have to do this this way.

Thanx in advance.

George
s1638090 at techst02.technion.ac.il


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 22:46:53 PDT
From: Darryl Okahata <darrylo at hpnmxx.sr.hp.com>
Subject: Re: DMS 

>       I believed that while chilling the wort became infected with dimelhye
> sulfide (DMS) before pitching.

[ Just to clarify things, DMS is a chemical, and not a living organism.
  However, a bacterial infection of the wort could cause "large" amounts
  of DMS to be produced.  ]

> Does it have an effect on the taste or
> smell on the final product?

     I've been told that, in high concentrations, DMS can give beer a
hint of "cooked vegetables" or "shellfish".  Perhaps someone who knows
more can give a better description.

     If you're interested in finding about what causes various
off-flavors, you may want to get a copy of the 1987 special issue of
Zymurgy, which is entirely dedicated to "troubleshooting" problems with
beer flavor.  The special issues of Zymurgy seem to get periodically
reprinted, and should be available at your local beer supply store (if
not, mail-order places have it).  However, note that they're not cheap,
being about $8.00 for a 64-page magazine (in the case of the 1987
issue), but I think that they're worth it if you plan to do any serious
beer-brewing.

     -- Darryl Okahata
        Internet: darrylo at sr.hp.com

DISCLAIMER: this message is the author's personal opinion and does not
constitute the support, opinion or policy of Hewlett-Packard or of the
little green men that have been following him all day.


Return to table of contents



End of HOMEBREW Digest #713, 08/30/91
*************************************
-------

---