HOMEBREW Digest #1021 Thu 26 November 1992

Digest #1020 Digest #1022

		Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator

  Re: Hops/Cannabis (G.A.Cooper)
  Telluride Beer (Guy D. McConnell)
  Strike Water Hint (pmiller)
  DMS and boiling ("Spencer W. Thomas")
  DMS, Whirlpools (Joe Rolfe)
  hunter airstat, klages vs. harrington, hops (James Dipalma)
  Three gallon kegs (connell)
  Greetings... (WALKERG)
  Beer Nests (Hal Laurent)
  Re: Mash transition (Jeff Benjamin)
  Kevin's and Bill's questions (parsons1)
  Hops and Cannabis (Mark J. Easter)
  Re: Hops/Cannabis (David Van Iderstine)
  chico pale ales/lion's head ale house in blue island (Tony Babinec)
  Re: Candy sugar continued (Aaron Birenboim)
  Aging, Head, etc (Jack Schmidling)
  orval yeast (Tony Babinec)
  Re: Oregon Pub Crawling (The Rider) (Michael Fetzer)
  Sierra Nevada and fruitiness (Rob Bradley)
  Humulus & Cannabis (Ed Westemeier)
  Bud ads/starter timing/Orval/pot size/going all-grain (korz)
  Re: Re: candi / Easymash infusion (korz)
  Re: clearing cider (Richard Childers)

Send articles for __publication__ to homebrew at hpfcmi.fc.hp.com (Articles are published in the order they are received.) Send UNSUBSCRIBE and all other requests, ie, address change, etc., to homebrew-request@ hpfcmi.fc.hp.com Archives are available via anonymous ftp from sierra.stanford.edu. (Those without ftp access may retrieve files via mail from listserv at sierra.stanford.edu. Send HELP as the body of a message to that address to receive listserver instructions.) **Please do not send me requests for back issues!** *********(They will be silenty discarded!)********* **For Cat's Meow information, send mail to lutzen at novell.physics.umr.edu**
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 25 Nov 1992 10:09:28 +0000 From: G.A.Cooper at qmw.ac.uk Subject: Re: Hops/Cannabis From: Brian Michael Cors >Supposedly he has heard that hops are the third/fourth cousin to the cannabis >plant. Is there any truth to this?? Yes. From J.S.Hough 'The Biotechnology of Malting and Brewing":- Hops belong to the Cannabinaceae but, despite the relationship with Cannabis, the commercial hop Humulus lupulus contains no hallucinogenic substances. Geoff Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 92 8:27:30 CST From: guy at mspe5.b11.ingr.com (Guy D. McConnell) Subject: Telluride Beer What's the scoop on this stuff? I picked up a six-pack of it one night in Bruno's on a lark, all the while assuming that it was brewed in Telluride Colorado. I was surprised to read on one of the bottles that it is brewed somewhere in the midwest (the place escapes me now). It did not list *any* ingredients, not even the standard "barley, hops, yeast, and select grains" that the big boys use. What is in this stuff? While it was not a big step above the mass produced adulteration of barley I did find it to have a bit more character. I seem to recall tasting a bit of sweetness similar to crystal malt and that the hopping rate was more than simply holding up a bag and "showing it" to the wort. Unfortunatley, I don't even recall if it was an ale or not (if it was indicated anywhere - there was precious little info on any of the packaging). Anyway, I meant to ask this when my memory of the brew was still fresh but I forgot. Just wondering if anyone is familiar with it. - -- Guy McConnell guy at mspe5.b11.ingr.com or ...uunet!ingr!b11!mspe5!guy "All I need is a pint a day" k Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 92 08:32:52 CST From: pmiller at mmm.com Subject: Strike Water Hint Greetings. Last weekend I brewed my first all grain batch and I have a hint for those who are about to try this themselves: Most books tell you to add 1 - 1.3 quarts of strike water per pound of grain. If you mash in a picnic cooler set up, make sure that you also add in the volume of water that your false bottom will hold. For instance, I've got a 10 gallon Gott cooler and my false bottom is a little over an inch above the bottom. I have nearly 1 gallon's worth of space under my false bottom. If I mash 10 pounds of grain I'd need between 3.5 and 4.25 gallons of water. 1 quart X 10 + 1 gallon = 3.5 gallons 1.3 quart X 10 + 1 gallon = 4.25 gallons I've never seen this written out explicitly in my books (maybe because both Charlie and Dave advocate the mash-on-the-stovetop method) and learned it this weekend -- the hard way... I hope this helps other new all grain brewers. Phil pmiller at mmm.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 92 10:01:39 EST From: "Spencer W. Thomas" <Spencer.W.Thomas at med.umich.edu> Subject: DMS and boiling Martin Wilde writes: > The brewer said they had never noticed a problem and he thought the > DMS thing > was a bit over hiped... Well, I was at a local micro-brewery last month (Detroit & Mackinac, the only active brewery in Detroit) and the brewer there is extremely careful to try to get DMS out/keep it from forming in his beer. He whirlpools the wort out of the boiler and sends it through a heat exchanger immediately. He's also got a "steam trap" in the exhaust steam pipe leading the steam from the boiler outside. The theory is that any condensation in the flue will drip back into the trap, rather than into the boiling wort, so the DMS going "up the chimney" will stay gone. =S Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 92 10:08:19 EST From: Joe Rolfe <jdr at wang.com> Subject: DMS, Whirlpools hi all, another data point for the whirlpool->dms: i do basically the same thing strike the kettle (heat off), add any finish hops, oar the kettle for about 5 min to get a good whirlpool going, add finings (in my case i rehydrate irish moss for a couple of hours and add it - contrary to popular belief - i do not add it 5,10,15 min left to the boil). in most cases the only negative result of doing this is a loss in aroma as the finish hops are usually in contact for about 90 minutes. the dms issue does appear to only come about when the temp of the wort gets to a certain temp - from what i have read and heard - temp gets below 190F. in my case the temp only gets to about 195F on average (again depending on the brew length). most every large scale brewery that i have ever visited performs this whirlpool , wait for the "junk" to settle then begin chilling. the other way to remove the "junk" quickly would be to filter the hot wort and some breweries do this also - filtered thru hops (hopback), centrifuged(??), or a plate/frame filter. well this is just another coupls of cents worth.... Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 92 10:48:04 EST From: dipalma at banshee.sw.stratus.com (James Dipalma) Subject: hunter airstat, klages vs. harrington, hops Hi All, In HBD 1019, Mike Kenny writes: <good post for the electronically inclined deleted> For those who may be leery of taking apart and modifying an electronic device, there is another method of getting a refridgerator equipped with a Hunter Air-Stat to operate at temperatures below 40F. Within every refridgerator, there are some areas that are colder than others, specifically the bottom-center is roughly 5 degrees colder than the upper-sides. What I do is tape the temperature sensor to the sidewall of the fridge, about 3/4 of the way to the top. Don't place the sensor too close to the freezer compartment, or this does'nt work. I set the airstat to 40F, the temperature at the bottom-center (where the beer is sitting) gets down to about 35F, as verified by readings taken by several different thermometers. I have two fridges set up this way, it works the same for both of them. Your mileage may vary, but the bottom of every fridge should be the coldest area. In HBD 1014, Glenn Anderson wrote and asked about the difference between Klages and Harrington malt. I want to brew an Anchor steam clone, and was planning to use domestic 2 row. I've been looking for responses to Glenn's post, as I have pretty much the same questions, and I'm a little disappointed at the lack of response. I know some of the readers of this forum have a fair amount of expertise regarding malts, would one of you folks be so kind as to enlighten us? Aaron Birenboim writes: > I just got a street lamp installed in front of my house. >I was wondering... could i grow hops up this pole? or do they >need something thinner like a string to twine up? This past spring, a friend of mine obtained some hop vines, planted some of them in his yard, and put the rest in some large pots behind his shed. A few weeks later, I went to his house to get the ones in the pots. He had sort of forgotten about them, so when we went around to the back of his shed, we found that they had grown up on *everything* in the immediate vicinity. Scrap lumber pile, sawhorses, the vines were everywhere, including around the trunk of a very large oak tree. The diameter of this tree was about twice that of your average lightpole, and the vines had entwined themselves around it and had grown about 12 feet up the tree. We had to hack at them for 15 minutes to liberate the pots. Aaron, I'd go ahead and plant them (well, wait 'til next spring), as they seem to be able to climb on anything. Cheers, Jim Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 1992 09:56:05 EST From: connell at vax.cord.edu Subject: Three gallon kegs Could anyone send me the address of a good source for three gallon stainless steel kegs. I was recently told that they are no longer made so that used ones are the only ones available. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed 25 Nov 92 10:55:42-EDT From: WALKERG at ASHLEY.COFC.EDU Subject: Greetings... Hi. I'm a rather new to the brewing discipline, having helped my brother on a couple of batches, but never made any that was entirely my own. I'd appreciate any advice about getting started, and particularly, the names of any brewpubs or homebrewing clubs in the Charleston, SC area. - --Thanks in advance, -Gary E. Walker Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 92 11:19:32 EST From: Hal Laurent <laurent at tamdno.ENET.dec.com> Subject: Beer Nests It occurred to me that some of you may also find this amusing... I just bottled my first batch of homebrew this past Sunday. It seems that two of my cats have decided to play mother hen to the beer! They take turns curling up on top of one of the boxes of beer bottles as if they're trying to incubate them! I wonder how soon they'll hatch... -Hal Laurent hal.laurent at tamdno.enet.dec.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 92 10:08:40 MST From: Jeff Benjamin <benji at hpfcbug.fc.hp.com> Subject: Re: Mash transition > And certainly my biggest question is related to the cost of > transitioning to the all mash brewing. I read a lot of articles about > special equipment and other items that I do not have. How many new > items do I need and where can I find mor e info. on these setups ?? I > am reading Papazian, but he seems to lack equipment details and > innovations that help the homebrewer. Moving to all-grain brewing is often perceived as being more difficult than it really is. Assuming you already have all the equipment for extract brewing, the only new equipment you'll need to go all-grain is: 1. A larger pot (probably). You'll be boiling 6 or so gallons at once, so I'd recommend at least a 7-gallon pot. You can spend ~$130 on a nice 10-gal stainless pot, but I've also seen 7-gal enameled pots for ~$30 (US). In a pinch, you can use two smaller pots, but ideally you want to be able to boil the entire amount of wort at once. 2. A lautering system. There are numerous possibilities for this: the Zapap system of nested buckets with holes (~$20 to make), the slotted-copper-tubing manifold (~$5), and a screened spigot in the mash tun (aka Easymash, probably ~$10). None of these are expensive or difficult to put together. My personal preference is the copper manifold; it's the cheapest, easier to use than th Zapap system (which I've used), doesn't require you to modify your kettle, and the only tool you need to make it is a hacksaw. After the lautering stage, the process is identical to extract brewing. There are a couple more items that may make your all-grain brewing a little easier: 1. A grain mill. If you can't get pre-crushed grain, or don't want to pay someone to crush it, it may be worth your while. Prices range from $40-$120 or so. Corona, Marcato, and the MaltMill are the most commonly used mills. 2. A wort chiller, if you don't already have one. You can make a simple immersion chiller for ~$30 in about 15 minutes, or spend $50 or so to make a more efficient counterflow chiller (this one might even take you a couple of hours to make, and require use of a propane torch. Great fun!). So, you can spend anywhere from $35 to $320 to go all-grain. > And the bottom line, if I ignore the fact that I am making a better > brew, does all mash beer cost less than partial extract ?? You will save some money (all other ingredients being equal, you can usually buy the grain for a given recipe cheaper than buying extract), but you will spend more time making each batch. But don't ignore the fact that you're making better brew! It's worth the extra time. - -- Jeff Benjamin benji at hpfcla.fc.hp.com Hewlett Packard Co. Fort Collins, Colorado "Midnight shakes the memory as a madman shakes a dead geranium." - T.S. Eliot Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 92 12:19:01 -0500 From: parsons1 at husc.harvard.edu Subject: Kevin's and Bill's questions Kevin, in #1020, asked if he should go on to all-grain brewing. Do it, Kevin. I won't say much about it, since you'll probably get a dozen responses from avid brewers eager to encourage and advise you. I'll just recommend a few things. After Papazian's book, go to Dave Miller's first book. Read the whole thing, but try to ignore him at his more pedantic moments (otherwise you will always have the idea that, with- out state-of-the-art microbrewery equipment, all your beer will turn out crappy). Get the latest issue of Zymurgy, which is all about equipment for all levels of brewing. You will find this useful. I would make one recommendation about buying things, though, and that is Get experience and basic technique down before concerning yourself with little details. I am referring to your concern about chlorine content perhaps causing off-flavors in your beer, and your interest in carbon filters to reduce it. First, call your city's water chemist and ask for an analysis. You may not have much THM (trihalomethane is a gaseous form of chlorine) in your water at all. Even if you do, a good boil will get rid of most of it. Off flavors are most often caused by a fermentation temp that is too high, or not racking the beer off the trub soon enough, or poor sanitation, &c. If your boil is good, and you do things right, you will see that the filter is not necessary. Go for greatness. All-grain is cheaper; tastes better; gives you more control; is messier; and is generally more fun. Bill asks about a no-frills, simple, household starter. Liquid yeast, as most people who have experience with liquid and dry yeasts will agree, is definitely the way to go. But by not introducing a big enough population into the fermenter, you will increase your lag- time, and thereby perhaps undo all the benefits of a finer yeast culture by letting other little beasties have a chance at your beer. For a starter, I just use two tablespoons of dried malt extract boiled in one cup of water. Put this in an extremely sanitary bottle with an airlock fitted to it. When it's cool enough, pitch in the yeast from the bag. It should take another day in this bottle to reach full kraeusen, at which point you should shake it around a little (to stir up the slurry at the bottom) and pitch it right into your just-brewed and cooled wort. This is all very easy, and reduces your lag-time to a few hours. Ideally, you want to make the starter out of the same wort you will pitch it into. This is often (for me at least) imprac- ticeable. It can be done if you have a good refidgerating system, or if you brew the same beer a lot (save a little of the wort in a capped bottle in your frig, and when you brew next, use that as the starter). Sorry this reply was so long. Good luck. Have a good holiday, all. Jed Parsons parsons1 at husc.harvard.edu Harpsichordist, Classicist, Homebrewer. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 92 09:14:16 PST From: Mark J. Easter <easterm at ccmail.orst.edu> Subject: Hops and Cannabis Michael cors writes: >A friend of mine has been asking and asking lots of people if this was true, >and he asked me to pose the question "to the experts"... >Supposedly he has heard that hops are the third/fourth cousin to the cannabis >plant. Is there any truth to this?? The concept of third or fourth cousin is not really appropriate in describing plant relationships. However, according to "Flora of the Pacific Northwest" (Hitchcock and Cronquist 1973), Hops (Humulus lupulus L.) and Hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) are both members of the Moraceae, the Mulberry family. I do not know anything about their evolutionary relationship beyond their familial association , but I would like to hear about it from somebody who does know. Mark Easter easter at fsl.orst.edu Forest Science Dept. Oregon State University Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 92 12:24:00 EST From: localhost!davevi at uunet.UU.NET (David Van Iderstine) Subject: Re: Hops/Cannabis >From all I've read, hops are supposed to be the closest genetic relative to cannabis. But, that old myth about grafting hops plants to cannabis roots is just that - a myth. The hops plants will NOT be pyschoactive, and you'll have spent considerable effort for nothing. Dave Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 92 16:18:19 CST From: tony at spss.com (Tony Babinec) Subject: chico pale ales/lion's head ale house in blue island So far as I know, Chico pale beers are as follows: Sierra Nevada Draught Ale SG 1.048 Perle and Cascade hops Sierra Nevada Pale Ale SG 1.052 Perle and Cascade hops Celebration Ale SG 1.064 Centennial, Perle, Cascade If you are in the Chicago area, you really ought to visit the Lion's Head Ale House on Olde Western in Blue Island, a near-south suburb. They've had Celebration Ale on draft for awhile (yum!). They also have Sierra Nevada Draught Ale, Old Foghorn, and 10 other beers including several from Kalamazoo and Goose Island. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 92 11:10:30 MST From: abirenbo at rigel.cel.scg.hac.com (Aaron Birenboim) Subject: Re: Candy sugar continued Phillip Seitz <0004531571 at mcimail.com> spoke about candi sugar. New Belgium Brewery, in Ft. Collins, CO uses turbinado sugar. I believe it comes in both white and brown. I will experiment with this, brown, "raw" cane-sugar cones, and some other "raw" hawian cane sugar. I'll post as i taste my brews. aaron Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 92 10:30 CST From: arf at ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) Subject: Aging, Head, etc To: Homebrew Digest Fm: Jack Schmidling >From: "Bob Jones" <bjones at novax.llnl.gov> >I feel that this assertion by JS is unfounded and is likely to only confuse others to whom, this does not apply. Precisely why I brought it up. Any homebrewer that read the article would have been confused. I posed the two obvious conclusions that the casual reader would come to but allowed ample room for others which followed in abundance. The objective was to stimulate a discussion not to generate flames. >So be patient, let your beer age properly and you will more greatly appreciate efforts, as the taste will reward. Standing by itself, this is just as confusing. It implies that one can go out and get a six pack of Bud and let it age properly..... >From: korz at iepubj.att.com >Jack writes: <>Although my bottled beer had adaquate carbonation, it never had much head and..... >I don't understand where the problem was. Generally speaking, if your beer has adequate carbonation and adequate amounts of proteins and dextrins, it should have an adequate head..... but I still don't understand where the change was made that would increase head retention. The problem here is that I never said anything about head RETENTION. I said head, period.... When I pour[ed] the beer from the bottle, no head formed. Now, when I pour the counter-pressure filled bottle, I have to pour down the side of the glass to control the head. It's the same beer but they behave very differently. When I tap a glass, I can build up a three inch whipped cream topping and there is at least 1/4 inch left in the bottom after nursing the beer down. I got hung up on this silly procedure at a demonstration at Baderbrau and it really makes an inviting glass of beer. BTW, I have never been able to do it with bottled Baderbrau, just from his private tap. I am not sure what happens when bottled directly out of the tap but perhaps I was just content with less carbonation than most people are used to. As an aside, if I shook the bottle a bit before pouring, it would form a head but that is a bit much. >From: tpm%wdl58 at wdl1.wdl.loral.com (Tim P McNerney) >Subject: What size stock pot? >I plan on starting up all-grain brewing sometime early next year ..... So my question to you is, what size will I need for all-grain brewing (5 gallon) and what size would be nice to have? The short answer is, the bigger the better. It's like so many other things, you didn't know you needed till you got it. If money is tight, my advice is to go for size rather than material. The 32 qt enameled canner is the best value but just barely big enough for 5 gallon batches. I started with one of these then graduated to a 10 gal SS and now also have a 16 gal ss. >Is there any point for getting something larger (I don't forsee brewing in larger quantities anytime in the near future)? What advantages would there be with a 7, 8 or even 10 gallon pot. The mess of a boil over for one. But more importantly, you can boil down larger quantities of wort to concentrate it and improve the yield or make larger batches. > I am not sure exactly how I plan on mashing (don't know if it will make a difference or not). I just so happen to have a suggestion but I will email it to you. >From: Brian Michael Cors <corsbria at student.msu.edu> >Supposedly he has heard that hops are the third/fourth cousin to the cannabis plant. Is there any truth to this?? The term "cousin" has little scientific meaning but hops and pot are in the same family (Cannabaceae). But before you try smoking hops, bear in mind that pear trees and rose bushes are not only in the same family (Roseaceae) but in the same genus. They are however, closely enough related so that one can be grafted on to the other. This had exciting prospects in the 60's but I am not sure what advantage could be gained from the graft. Don't know how many potheads really wanted 20 ft pot plants in their closets. >From: rush at xanadu.llnl.gov (Alan Edwards) >I do admit, though, that I was quite fed up with other (arf) problems (arf) with the HBD at the (arf) time, and it (excuse me, I seem to have something in my throat) came out in my post. I suspect that far more people object to this sort of ad hominem crap than objective criticism. > I realized that I was a being a jerk when Jack congratulated me on the post. Although your stock just took a tumble, the cudos were well deserved. The article was well thought out and to the point. To deny everything you said just because I agree with you is pretty petty. > I just want everyone to use a little care in sifting through the (arf) BS. (excuse me...someone get me a cough drop) Sure, we can excuse you but not perhaps, for the same reasons. >From: SynCAccT at slims.attmail.com > I've taken an interim step and made a home version of JS's easymash, which works fine for coarse crushes, but tends to stick with finer crushes. Not sure what "finer crushes" means but I am now using a 30 mesh SS screen which is considerably finer that the original window screen and may help those who don't use roller mills. I never had any problems with window screen but it just seemed a bit crude. > The flaw to this system is that you cannot do step infusions.... I'll say simply that I would like to do two step mashes, protein rest and conversion. It would be nice to be able to fiddle with conversion temps too without leaning out the mash by adding water. Do not understand this at all. The easymasher is installed in a brew kettle which sits on the stove. There is no limit to the number of steps you can do, simply by diddling with the heat. Total control of this end of the process is one of its major advantages. js Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 92 13:26:17 CST From: tony at spss.com (Tony Babinec) Subject: orval yeast Jackson's Pocket Guide claims that a single yeast is used in primary and secondary, while a blend of four or five bottom cultures is used for bottle conditioning. So, if one were to pitch the dregs from the bottle, which yeast would take off? If filtering is done before bottling, and if that first yeast contributes essential flavor notes, then there would be something missing from your built-up yeast. Once, I did attempt to culture the dregs from Orval, and what I got was a very slow fermenting yeast in my starter wort. I tasted it, and threw it out. It didn't taste bad, but I didn't want to pitch a slow yeast into my wort. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 1992 11:29:41 -0800 From: mfetzer at ucsd.edu (The Rider) (Michael Fetzer) Subject: Re: Oregon Pub Crawling >Date: Tue, 24 Nov 92 15:18:41 PST >From: Richard Childers <rchilder at us.oracle.com> >Subject: Oregon Pub Crawling >Lighthouse is a member of the Mcmenamin (sp?) family of brewpubs, what might >be called a 'chain' except that each pub has little in common with the others, >excepting only the format of the menu, and a few of the available brews. Each >brewery provides its own unique creations to its customers, as well as a few >of the established favorites. There are, to be fair, a few McMenamins that have more of a chain atmosphere in the fact that they share a name and general interior decore. Something like 10 or so. But as you say, most of the pubs owned by the McMenamin family have quite a unique character. McMenamins has also purchased (recently) a winery, the Edgefield Winery in Troutdale, and added a brewery and movie theater to it. And, McMenamins owns three other theaters in Portland now. For those of you who might be wondering why theaters and microbreweries coexist in a post... the deal is you pay $1 to get into the movie, and they are generally movies that have been out for a while, but not necessarily obscure or second rate movies. The seating is less densely packed than a standard theater, and there are tables between the rows of chairs. You buy a pint or three of your favorite micro brew, order one of the marvelous items off the menu, and sit and enyoy your movie. I must admit, beers are 30 or 40 c more than at their regular locations ;) Why do I sound like an ad for McMenamins? *Ack* I just love what they have done for Portland, I'm not in other ways associated with them... wish I was. >Some of the beers that come to mind, in connection with Lighthouse, are the >excellent Terminator Stout (tm), although I liked Hammerhead Ale much better, >and they also served a Crystal Ale that was deep reddish in color and very >sweet, as ales go. Allegedly, it was brewed entirely from crystal malt !! It >appears to be popular enough that it is available elsewhere, also. Ahem... soap box. There is this wonderful Deshutes Black Butte Porter, some of the creamiest I've had, that is normally available at McMenamins outlets. However, McMenamins is now producing their own porter, called Black Rabbit. Well, it just does not come *close* to the Deshutes!!! And I hear they're trying to replace the Deshutes at all their outlets with their own! Let the masses revolt! >At another Mcmenamin pub, in Eugene, I tasted what I think was called 'Blue >Heron Ale' ... which name was also in use at Steelhead, confusingly enough. Blue Heron is also the standard pale ale produced by the Brideport Brewing company in Portland (thy run a pub in the NW industrial part of town, out of their brewery, for those interested, and their XX Cask Conditioned Stout is *fine*). McMenamins does at several of their outlets sell beer not produced by them, and it's quite possible that both places you were in Eugene carry Bridgeports Blue Heron. Blue Heron is served at many small bars throughout Portland. It's quite good, so you have this concept that must be strange to many Americans. Namely, walk off the street into any pub, and god forbid, you get something other than Budmilob! I call this evolution ;*) >Perhaps Jeff Frane might see fit to contribute his opinion of Mcmenamin's ? >I would be interested in knowing how they are seen by resident experts ... Perhaps the Portland HBD community should get together for a weekend of *serious* research into just how many pubs there are and compile statistics of exactly what is served ;) ______________ Michael Fetzer Internet: mfetzer at ucsd.edu uucp: ...!ucsd!mfetzer Bitnet: FETZERM at SDSC HEPnet/SPAN: SDSC::FETZERM or 27.1::FETZERM Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 92 14:44:57 -0500 From: bradley at adx.adelphi.edu (Rob Bradley) Subject: Sierra Nevada and fruitiness In October I brewed two batches with WYeast 1056 (American); they were pale ale and porter. They were my first batches with this yeast. It is no coincidence that Sierra Nevada brews pale ale and porter with the same yeast; I was trying to clone these SN beers, or at least get close. When the pale was a 1.5 months old and the darker beer a month, I decided the moment of truth had come. I tasted my beers side by side with the SN beers in the company of a knowledgable beer taster. If I said there was no difference or that my beers were just as good, you could rightly suspect me of lying. I was pleased at how close I did come, though. My pale ale was overhopped by comparison and used only Cascade -- no Perle -- but was still in the right ball-park. The porter was much closer; in fact, the porter was tasted three ways with Anchor porter. With the Anchor as foil, my porter showed as _very_ similar to Sierra Nevada's. The only striking difference between my porter and SN was a fruity/malty spectrum of tastes in the SN that was absent in mine. It was also present in the SNPA and absent in my pale ale. Fruitiness has been an active topic on the HBD. My impression was that yeast was the main factor, and I had that covered by using 1056. I suppose temperature is another? I fermented in the 60s. Does anybody know at which temperatures SN brews pale and porter? Ultimately, fruitiness derives from the malt. I used Munton & Fison 2-row malt from the UK in my beers as well as UK crystal (in both) and US chocolate (in the porter). I believe I read that SN uses American pale malt and dextrine malt as the pale components of the grist. Can anyone confirm? Could this account for the difference in the yeast's production of esters? I guess the dextrine malt is the more likely candidate? And what about the difference between European and American malt? The late Dave Line made a big deal about it in his books. I gather that they are actually different sub-species (or even species?), with North Amercian malts related to the Manchurian strains and the stuff west of the Urals being entirely different. In direct comparisons, I've found UK 2-row to have more flavor than Canadian 2-row and more yield than US 6-row. That's as far as my research goes. Viv Jones, formerly brewmaster at Upper Canada in Toronto, has said that North American malts are too enzymatic and it is easier to get a high final gravity using European malt. Roughly speaking, this is why I pay extra for British malt in ales. So, is it possible that my malt won't produce the same fruity esters as the mix of US pale and dextrine malt (or whatever the mixture is) that Sierra Nevada uses? Another factor that occured to me is age. For all that my beers were mature, I'm sure the SN bottles were older. As we all now know, live beer _does_ change with age, improving throughout a period of time; the length of time depends on many variables. Perhaps in another month or two my beers will be just as fruity as the SN beers? Happy Thanksgiving all, Rob (bradley at adx.adelphi.edu) Return to table of contents
Date: 25 Nov 1992 16:35:28 -0500 (EST) From: homebrew at tso.uc.EDU (Ed Westemeier) Subject: Humulus & Cannabis In response to yesterday's question about the relation of hops to Cannabis: This subject always seems to provoke giggles and averted eyes, but it's really pretty straightforward stuff. I found it interesting enough to look it up in "Hops" by R. A. Neve (ISBN 0-442-31187-7) Quoting from Neve's definitive tome on the subject: "Humulus [hops] and Cannabis are the only two genera in the family Cannabinaceae and there are many similarities between hemp (Cannabis sativa) and the cultivated hop. The nettle family is also rather less closely related being in the same order, the Urticales. It is possible to produce viable grafts between hops and hemp and it is reported that pollination of hops by hemp, annual nettle (Urtica urens) or perennial nettle (Urtica dioica) stimulates cone development but only abortive embryos are produced." Later, he mentions: "It was reported by Warmke and Davidson (1944) that hop scions grafted onto Cannabis stocks produced cannabinoid resins and this led to interest in the technique as a means of producing such material while avoiding legal restrictions." He goes on to talk about how other studies showed that the rootstock in these grafts has essentially no effect on the type of resins produced by the plant grafted on the root (in either direction). Bottom line: Yes, they are related, and you can graft one to another. I surmise that the intent behind interest in the subject is to graft hop plants onto hemp roots and harvest cannabis resins from a legal plant. Unfortunately, it doesn't work. Good question, though! Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 92 15:51 CST From: korz at iepubj.att.com Subject: Bud ads/starter timing/Orval/pot size/going all-grain Jonathan writes: >With regard to Phil Miller's question about Wyeast packages that swell too >quickly, I have had the same experience, and I HAVE tossed them in the fridge >to slow them down, then removed them and let them come up to room temp again >while making the starter. I've also let the starter sit too long before >pitching. In each case, my fermentation started off quickly and the results >(some of them still pending) seemed o.k. However, I don't consider my palate >yet finely-tuned enough to recognize any problems in the finished beer that may >be traceable to clumsy handling of the yeast. (Maybe that's a blessing? -- >hey, it still beats the hell out of Bud.) Just an aside, there are two ways to interpret the AB slogan: "Nothing beats a Bud." The first one is, that "No other beer has the capability to surpass Budweiser in any respect." The second is, that "Drinking nothing is superior to drinking Budweiser." You choose. >I posted a similar question >awhile back and one respondent said that one ought to be careful about >letting the starter sit too long so that the yeast don't pass out of their >reproductive cycle into their fermentation phase, or something like that, >if I'm remembering correctly. I'm no biologist, I just cook beer. The key is not pitching the starter before it goes from reproduction to fermentation (although I would suspect that pitching just short of this transition may be the ideal), rather that it is most important to pitch before the yeast have consumed all of the starter food and gone dormant again. Common wisdom says to pitch at high kraeusen, which is smack dab in the middle of the fermentation phase. Primarily because it is the easiest to identify, I propose that, while it may be the second best theoretical choice, pitching at the *beginning* of the fermentation phase would be the best practical choice, slightly better than at high-kraeusen and *far* superior to waiting too long. Note that if we were to agree that this would be the best practical timing, it would imply that Wyeast should be pitched when the packet *begins* to swell. Comments? ******************** DanM writes: >I'm interested in the results of your (and others) Orval culturing. According to Jackson, Abbey d'Orval uses a single yeast strain for fermentation and four or five strains at bottling. I feel, quite confidently, that one of the bottling strains is the fermentation strain. I added 1020 starter wort to 6 bottles of Orval dregs (individually) and tasted the results. Three did not start, three did. Of the three that did, two smelled and tasted ok, but not Orval-like. One smelled and tasted just like Orval. Note that you should be able to control ester intensity in any yeast using temperature -- lower temps, less esters -- higher temps, more esters. ******************** Tim writes: >I figure minimum size needed to be 6 gallons. Is there any >point for getting something larger (I don't forsee brewing in >larger quantities anytime in the near future)? What advantages >would there be with a 7, 8 or even 10 gallon pot. I am not >sure exactly how I plan on mashing (don't know if it will make >a difference or not). For mashing, you only need perhaps room for 1.5 quarts per pound of grain that you intend to use. For the subsequent boil, you need quite a bit more room. Note that after the sparge, you may have 7 or even 8 gallons for a 5 gallon batch. You need additional room for the "head" that forms during the boil. Recently, I tried to boil 1/2 gallon of wort in a 1 gallon pot. Forget it! What a disaster! I managed to avoid boilover (just barely), but to do so, I needed to have the boil so mellow that I don't think I got much out of my hops at all. I was doing a test recipe with 2 Lallemand dry yeasts and did not want to brew two 5 gallon batches. I'm not sure that my results will be useful at all. To answer your question, ideally, you would like a 16-quart, copper-clad (for better heat conduction) SS pot for mashing and a 10 gallon (forget copper-cladding here -- you couldn't afford it if you could find it) SS pot for the boil. This would allow you to do (with a bit of difficulty) 10 lbs of grain. If you can only get one pot for both, you should probably go with a 10 gallon SS pot. *************** Kevin writes: >First of all, I brew in a 5-gallon tub with an airlock. Should I be using >one of those water bottles so the krausen can be blown off ?? Is that >important ?? First of all, please limit your line length to <80 characters. Not only can some people not read anything beyond 80, but it makes quoting you pretty tough. Back to your question: Blowoff. I say yes -- it makes a difference if you use blowoff. Does it make enough of a difference for you? Try it and see. I feel, that my beer made with blowoff is much less astringent than without. >Second, all my beer has a distinctive flavor. I am sure that everyones does, >but I am not sure my flavor is positive. I am wondering if chlorine in the >water is leaving its mark. Should I be filtering my chlorinated city water >thru charcoal filters ?? That's house flavor, but it can be minimized by good sanitation and, as you suggest, by removing the chlorine from your water. If your plastic fermenter has any scratches in it (and after a few batches, it certainly does) the scratches can harbor bacteria even with intense sanitation solutions. Boiling water is what Darryl Richman uses on his plastic fermenters and brews prize-winning beers. You don't need a carbon filter... you can remove chlorine by boiling -- that's what I do -- I boil all my water. >And certainly my biggest question is related to the cost of transitioning >to the all mash brewing. I read a lot of articles about special equipment >and other items that I do not have. How many new items do I need and where >can I find more info. on these setups ?? I am reading Papazian, but he >seems to lack equipment details and innovations that help the homebrewer. His latest book "The New Complete Joy of Homebrewing" (why "new" Charlie... why not just second edition?), I feel is much better. You said "I am reading" which may mean that you have not reached the advanced sections which, I thought described the equipment well. However, I was reading it with most of the necessary knowledge in hand -- perhaps it is not as clear as I thought? Miller has a slightly different setup described in his book as does Noonan. >And the bottom line, if I ignore the fact that I am making a better brew, does >all mash beer cost less than partial extract ?? A lot less if you don't count you time -- perhaps a little less if you do. For me, however, cost is not the bottom line. Al. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 92 16:04 CST From: korz at iepubj.att.com Subject: Re: Re: candi / Easymash infusion Alan writes about candi sugar while taking a stab at Jack. While I'm not about to say Jack's a nice guy, I must admit that he has been behaving himself lately and we should not bait him. Among his posts, in some he's a jerk in others he's informative. "Can't we all try to get along?" to quote Rodney King. *************** Glenn writes: >and made a home version of JS's easymash, which works >fine for coarse crushes, but tends to stick with finer crushes. The >flaw to this system is that you cannot do step infusions. Without >generating a conversation on decoction versus infusion, I'll say >simply that I would like to do two step mashes, protein rest and >conversion. It would be nice to be able to fiddle with conversion >temps too without leaning out the mash by adding water. Since I'm the resident expert on the flaws of Jack's system (;^), I'd have to say that this is not one of them. There's no reason that you could not choose a strike temperature to get you into the protein rest range, followed by heating to get you into the saccharafication temps, in fact, you could do as many steps as you want. Hmmm? Two cases of Al defending Jack in one post? Well, before you two or three people try electing me president of the JS fan club (I think Jack president for life ;^), I want to say that I enjoy it when the HBD is clean and hate it when people are mean to each other. A sense of humor helps, but let's not pick on anyone just the same, okay? Al. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 92 12:45:18 PST From: Richard Childers <rchilder at us.oracle.com> Subject: Re: clearing cider >Date: 24 Nov 1992 09:53:41 -0400 (EDT) >From: KLIGERMAN at herlvx.rtpnc.epa.gov >Subject: clearing cider "I have made some apple cider about a month ago and have not seen any clarification taking place. It is in the secondary and I've lowered the temperature to about 40 F., without noticeable clearing. Can anyone suggest methods for clearing the cider aside from filtering?" I've had success - I don't know exactly why, yet - by transferring the cider to a secondary fermenter ( after doing a few one-gallon batches, this is less of a problem as one becomes inundated with one-gallon jugs ) and adding a boiling-hot solution of honey diluted into water - which I was using to fill up the airspace left from the transfer, which left a lot of yeast and other precipitates behind. Within a few minutes of adding the hot honey-and-water combination, the clarity improved dramatically, almost as if the hot liquid had provoked a 'break'. Since the volume added was no more than one cup, there's no way this could have possibly killed all the yeast, the heat was absorbed instantly and contributed very little to the thermal mass that the full jug represented. Fermentation picked up thereafter, as the yeast responded to the honey, and I bottled at that time, since I wanted carbonated cider. The results were magnificent. - -- richard ===== - -- richard childers rchilder at us.oracle.com 1 415 506 2411 oracle data center -- unix systems & network administration Klein flask for rent. Inquire within. Return to table of contents
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1021, 11/26/92