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


Contents:
  We are all going to Die (Joseph Nathan Hall)
  Brews paper, WYeast date co ("Daniel F McConnell")
  Munich malt made me a believer (Scott Bickham)
  Motorizing the Corona (Jeff J. Miller)
  Grape-Nuts (TM) and German Purity Law ("Hi, you don't know me, but I play one on T.V.")
  re:Barleywine yeast & high alpha hops (Jim Busch)
  PH Adjustments (Cisco)
  mareseatoatsanddoeseatoatsand... ("John E. Lenz")
  wyeast package swell/lag times (Tony Babinec)
  Micah's Barley Wine Recipe ("Bob Jones")
  What I did on my Christmas vacation (Rob Bradley)
  Re: solder (holding wort chiller together) ("Roger Deschner  ")
  Old Wyeast 1008 with short lag (Rob Bradley)
  Which dregs to culture? (Rob Bradley)
  Barleywine Yeast Method (Jeff Frane)
  chiller construction (was solder) (Carl West)
  Barleywine problems (korz)
  Protein levels (korz)
  Contribution of boiling hops (Brian Smithey)
  barleywine (Brian Bliss)
  Hop Specifications (korz)
  GUINNESS in Caribbean (korz)
  All-grain barleywine (Joseph Nathan Hall)
  Year end report (STROUD)
  diminishing desperation (Peter Maxwell)
  brewspaper (Brian Bliss)
  Brewspaper, Super Corona (Jack Schmidling)
  All-grain Red Ale recipes? (Jim Bayer)


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: Thu, 21 Jan 93 23:23:45 EDT
From: joseph at joebloe.maple-shade.nj.us (Joseph Nathan Hall)
Subject: We are all going to Die


J. S. says,
)  I would like to use this opportunity to re-address the nitrosamine issue
   <sigh>
)  as these two malts are produced in exactly the way that produces the maximum 
)  precursors for this potent carcinogen.
   <sigh>

Don't you know that it's all part of a Bavarian conspiracy to kill
YOU, Jack?  And we're all in on it, too.

HH1/2K

================O Fortuna, velut Luna, statu variabilis================
uunet!joebloe!joseph   (609) 273-8200 day   joseph%joebloe at uunet.uu.net
2102 Ryan's Run East        Rt 38 & 41             Maple Shade NJ 08052
Copyright 1992 by Joseph N. Hall.   Permission granted to copy and
redistribute freely over USENET and by email.  Commercial use prohibited.

Return to table of contents


Date: 22 Jan 1993 06:01:58 -0500
From: "Daniel F McConnell" <Daniel.F.McConnell at med.umich.edu>
Subject: Brews paper, WYeast date co

                       Subject:                               Time:5:56 AM
  OFFICE MEMO          Brews paper, WYeast date codes         Date:1/22/93
>From Jeff J. Miller:
>Mr. Charlie P. if your listening:  If these people did get there mailing
list from the Zymurgy subscription list I would like to indicate that I
don't appreciate Zymurgy selling/giving my name to them.

I second that.  It seems obvious that the list came from the AHA.  Anyway the
Pico Brewery article by Mike O'Brien and Dave West *IS* genuine.  No
disclaimer, they are friends of mine.  Mike can't spell well either, but I
should think he knows how to spell his name by now!  Humor is one thing
(spellin is anothur), but misinformation (sugar vs malt article) is quite
damaging those new to the hobby.

>From James Dipalma:
>IMHO, there is no correlation between the date code and the time
required for the package to swell, as I've also had 1 month old packages
take 6 days to swell.  As Rob mentioned, this is inconvenient, as timing
if fairly important.  

In the past I've experienced the same thing and suspect that variable lag times
have more to do with retail mishandling than product date codes.




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 8:51:58 EST
From: bickham at msc2.msc.cornell.edu (Scott Bickham)
Subject: Munich malt made me a believer

Darryl Richman writes:

>Lets clear up a misconception here. Real Munich malt, whether
>domestic or imported, has enzymes. It has sufficient enzymes to
>convert itself, and perhaps just a bit more. If you want to make a
>real dark Munich lager, then use Munich malt. I've made several bocks
>with high percentages of Munich (60-80%) and it works just fine.

I recently made a dunkelweizen with 5 pounds of malted wheat,
3.5 pounds of Munich malt, and some crystal and black malts thrown
in for body and color.  My O.G. was 1.052, for a yield just
under 30.  So the Munich malt not only converted itself, but also the
5 lbs. of malted wheat.  Just a data point.

Scott

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 8:20:34 CST
From: jmiller at anubis.network.com (Jeff J. Miller)
Subject: Motorizing the Corona

In Homebrew Digest #1060, Michael_Merriman at camb.intersolv.com writes
about motorizing a corona by...

>           I simply removed the handle, inserted a bolt into the
>           threads, cut off the head with a hacksaw, and attach a
>           power-drill to the bolt.  I typically crush about 10-15 # at
>           a pop, and with the drill, this takes about 10 min.  I'm
>           sure I could get that down to two minutes if I had a 10#
>           hopper, but I haven't gotten around to that yet....maybe
>           that old bottling bucket would be just the right size.

I did this same thing but hooked it up to a large motor complete with
gears to reduce the spin to 140rpm.  This worked ok but I found my
corona to be so sloppy in its production that the thing bounces all
over.  I also ended up snapping a screw and a milled setup trying to
use the setup.  I've pretty much given up on trying to do follow this
path and am now building a roller mill.

- -- 
Jeff Miller                 Network Systems Corporation
Advanced Development        7625 Boone Avenue North
jmiller at network.com         Minneapolis MN 55428   (612)424-1724

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 09:43:44 -0500 (EST)
From: "Hi, you don't know me, but I play one on T.V." <cygnus at unh.edu>
Subject: Grape-Nuts (TM) and German Purity Law

Okay, so one day I sittin' down at breakfast eating my Grape-Nuts(tm)
cereal, and I noticed the ingredients:

Malted barley, wheat, salt, yeast.

I was wondering what if I were to include yonder cereal in a mash and
make a beer?  It seems logical since the aforementioned ingredients
are in most beers that a beer could be made from it.... 

Secondly, I was wondering if there are copies of the German Purity Law
out there anywhere on the net or if anyone has it... just out of curiosity...

Danke in advance,
 -chris
- -- 

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 9:53:15 EST
From: Jim Busch <busch at daacdev1.stx.com>
Subject: re:Barleywine yeast & high alpha hops

In the last digest, Neil Mager asks about brewing barleywines with
Thomas Hardys yeast.  I have done this, using a culture from a 
bottle of 1991 hardys.  The strain was isolated on a plate, so
I would assume that I was fermenting with the bottling strain,
which could certainly be different from what the initial ferment 
strain is in the Eldrige Pope Brewery.  Anyway, I grew a one
liter starter, brewed a 26 degree P BW, and pitched the culture.
It took off quite well, producing a large amount of blowoff. 
After a week or so of primary fermentation, the gravity was down
to around 11 P (~1.044) and the ferment appeared to be dead.  At this
point I racked quietly and pitched a ton of american ale yeast
slurry (~150 grams of Old Dominion Ale yeast, off a uni).  This 
yeast happily began chewing up the remaining fermentables and the
resulting finish was about  6 P (~1.024).  THe beer was a great
BW, bit I would caution anyone who intends to use this method to
be prepared for a high FG or be prepared to repitch.

Neil also inquires about adding extract to produce a BW.  I feel
this is a fine method, depending on your equipment.  When I was
brewing in my older setup, getting a good volume of high gravity
beer was not possible.  I would max out my system to yield about
5 gallons of 20-22 P wort, and add 3 lbs of DME.  Worked fine.
Now that I have a larger mash tun, I just reduce my yield by
30%, increase my grain bill by 50% and make a small beer in my
older kettle.  Last BW made with this method yielded a BW of 
23P and a small beer of 8P.  The small beer was astringent from 
the spraging, but enough Kent Goldings took care of most of that
flavor.

Darryl Richman notes his experience with high alpha west coast 
hops.  I agree 100%, beers made exclusively with a low to medium
alpha hop tend to much more pleasing on the palate.  Beers
made with Chinook tend to much harsher, in my experience.  I do
like the notes that Centennial hops can contribute, but I still
try to keep the quantities added to the initial boil low.  THis
hop does lend itself nicely to dryhopping, though.

Anyone out there tried Liberty hops??  I have used the Mt Hood 
hops with fine results and intend to try Liberty soon.

Jim Busch


Return to table of contents


Date: 22 Jan 1993 08:07:33 -0700 (MST)
From: Cisco <FRANCISCO at lan.ccit.arizona.edu>
Subject: PH Adjustments

Last weekend I was brewing an all grain stout and following Miller's
suggestion of a ph of 5 to 5.6 for the mash - no problem with the
hard water I have. But I couldn't lower my sparge water to 6.5 from
8.1 using gypsum. After dumping in a teaspoon at a time and taking
reading with a digital ph meter, I could only get the ph down to
7.6 after I used up the entire one ounce package of gypsum. The ph
seemed to drop down to 7.6 after the addition of 1/2 ounce of gypsum
but any further addition didn't seem to lower it any further.
Does anyone have any suggestions about what I can use to lower my
sparge water ph to 6.5?????

I should mention that I've been an all grain brewer for ten years.
The stout that I'm brewing has the addition of one of those small
bottles of coffee extract used for making Kahlua(spelling?) that I
added at the end of my boil with my final addition of finishing
hops. I'll let you all know well it turns out in a couple weeks.

John Francisco

Return to table of contents


Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 93 10:15:43 EST
From: "John E. Lenz" <JELJ at CORNELLA.cit.cornell.edu>
Subject:      mareseatoatsanddoeseatoatsand...


Greetings all,

In HBD #1061, Tony Babinec suggests using rolled oats rather than steel cut,
for the sake of convenience.  Good advice, IMHO, until, after discussing the
different types of Quaker oats, he got to the statement

"Another easier alternative is flaked oats, sold through homebrew supply
shops."

Seems to me that the price will likely be the only difference between flaked
oats sold in a homebrew supply shop and rolled oats from a grocery store.  The
best prices on many types of non-malt grains (whole, rolled, and otherwise)
can usually be found at food cooperatives (real coops, not the yuppie natural
food stores).  For example, my local coop carries organic flaked barley for
$.69/lb, or I can go to the local homebrew shop and pick up a prepackaged
pound of flaked barley for $1.59.  Sure, this is only one observation.  But
the next time you are in the market for adjuncts you might consider a stop at
your local food coop.  If they don't stock what you are looking for, they can
probably order it.

Tony ends with

"Does anyone have a source for malted oats?"

I didn't see any last time I stopped by the coop, but I'm sure I've seen an ad
for them lately, though I can't remember where.  I thought it was The Malt
Shop (1-800-235-0026), but the most out-of-the-ordinary thing they carry (at
least according to my somewhat outdated catalog) is malted rye.

Ooogy wawa,
John

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 9:59:50 CST
From: tony at spss.com (Tony Babinec)
Subject: wyeast package swell/lag times

Here's another data point on Wyeasts...

In my experience, if I pop a very fresh Wyeast packet, it will swell in
a day, but otherwise it can take several days.  The 1 month lapsed equals
1 day "rule" is only a rule of thumb.  If the freshness date is months
ago, then the yeast in the packet are somewhat stressed, and upon 
breaking the seal, the yeast will use the sugar to replenish their
glycogen reserves and other such things to get them ready for the job
awaiting them in the wort.

I find it easiest to start the process several days to one week ahead of
anticipated brewing.  American Science Center, for example, has 250, 500,
and 1000 ml flasks that can be fitted with a stopper and fermentation lock.
If your packet swells, pitch it into a flask and toss in some sterile wort
and build up the yeast.

To those who pop the packet and find that it swells before they're ready
to brew, you should pitch it into some starter wort and build up the 
yeast mass.  If you don't have flasks, use a 12 oz beer bottle!

If you let the package swell up and pitch directly into your 5+ gallons
of wort, you're underpitching.  This is especially true for lagers.
I don't have the numbers in front of me, but this has been talked about
at past AHA conferences, for one.  Biochemistry works more slowly at
50 degrees F than at 65 degrees F, and therefore one must pitch with
proportionately more lager yeast.  The compromise method of setting
the wort in a somewhat cool spot until signs of fermentation begin is
a way to shorten the length of the lag period.  If you pitch lager yeast 
into your cool wort, even after one pitch into a starter, the lag can
last 4 days or more.  If you build up the yeast first, you'll have a
much shorter lag time.   

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 08:18:54 PST
From: "Bob Jones" <bjones at novax.llnl.gov>
Subject: Micah's Barley Wine Recipe

Micah's Barley Wine recipe can be found in one of the recent Zymurgy issues.
I beleive it was about 1 year ago. It took a second or third at AHA comp.
He named it "Trespassers Will Be Violated".

The best Barley wine I have EVER tasted was when I judged at the recent 
Calif. State Homebrew Competition. The BW made by Jack Dawson took best of 
class and had also won best of class previously at the Calif State Fair and 
won the AHA Barley wine is fine. One of the things that amazes me is the 
how that many judges could agree! One of the judges at the All State Comp 
who I judged with was Steve Harrison, a long time friend and sale manager 
for Sierra Nevada. He made the comment about a couple of the BW's that "I 
hope these guys don't go into business!" Tom Altenbach's BW was just edged 
out, and took a second place. The first place BW was just a little more 
complex than Tom's. MaybeTom could post his recipe for interested parties. 
My question is "could Jack Dawson do it again"? Didn't Jack's recipe get 
posted here in the HBD last month?

Bob Jones

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 11:21:30 -0500
From: bradley at adx.adelphi.edu (Rob Bradley)
Subject: What I did on my Christmas vacation

I spent 3 weeks in Chicago over the holidays.  In the days since I
left it's gotten to be a better home for homebrewers.

The most fun I had with my clothes on was at the CBS first Thursday
meeting at Goose Island.  This is an informal meeting held by the
Chicago Beer Society every month.  Chicago area homebrewers who don't
attend should have their heads examined.  Homebrewers bring their beer
and share it around, and non-brewers are welcome too.  I met a lot of
great people and drank a lot of great beer.  I brought some of my own,
which held up well despite travelling from NY via Montreal and Ottawa.
Everywhere there was good talk, good beer and goodwill to all.

Interestingly, the world's greatest brewer (tm?) didn't attend,
although he threatened to do so publicly, right here in the HBD.

Another fun outing was the Chicago Brewing Company.  They hold
brewery tours every Saturday at 2:00.  They proudly claim to be
the only brewery bottling beer in Chicago.  This is technically
true; however, there is an excellent lager called Baderbrau bottled
in the 'burbs, and good draft beer is brewed within the city limits,
notably at Goose Island.

The CBC brews three fine beers.  Their Legacy Lager won a gold at
the GABF and their Heartland Weiss took a bronze.  My favorite is
a good bitter ale with lots of body called Legacy Red Ale.
Before I tasted it, I thought "Irish Red Ale" was a scam perpetrated
by Coors et al.  I've never seen any of these beers on Long Island.
>big surprise<   I don't know how far afield they're distributed.

Co-owner Steve Dinehart gives good tour and he's quite knowledgable
on the subject of Chicago brewing history.  The set-up is a 100 bbl
system bought from the Manhattan Brewing Company when they closed
shop a few years back (soon to re-open, I understand).  The kettles
are new: a two-kettle system with 50 bbl capacity.  Kettle #1
doubles as mash tun and boiler while #2 is the lauter tun.  Nice
looking hunks o' copper.

Some interesting notes:  the wheat beer is 2/3 malted wheat and
1/3 6-row.  All beers are bittered with Chinook.  Finishing:
Mt. Hood for the lager, Willamette for the Ale (or was that
Fuggle?), none for the wheat.  The wheat beer has great clovey
phenols, the ale exhibited a little of the same.  It was more
pronounced in some of the December beer I had at the brewery than
in some older bottles (Sept?) purchased in a store.  They were 
planning to go back to a fresh slant in January.

There are plans in the works for both a porter and a cream ale.
I got some bottles from an experimental batch of cream ale and was
most impressed.  Look for it when it comes out: smooth and quite
bitter with a color similar to the red ale.

When I lived in Chicago (89-91) there were no good brewstores.
This, too, has changed for the better, but perhaps I'll leave
that for another time.  Suffice it to say that I shared the
drive back to the right coast with grains and hops.

Cheers,

Rob (bradley at adx.adelphi.edu)

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 11:33:28 CST
From: "Roger Deschner " <U52983 at UICVM.UIC.EDU>
Subject: Re: solder (holding wort chiller together)

Somehow this is a problem it had not occured to me to have. My immersion
chiller holds together fairly well on its own. It is made of standard
3/8" tubing. And having it as loose coils makes it easier to clean, too,
since stray hop petals that get caught in it come right out while
cleaning it by simply separating the coils slightly. But anyway, if you
really must hold your coil together, this idea might work for you:

Just take bare solid copper electrical wire, size #14 or #12 (cheap,
readily available, and pure copper) and weave it amongst the coils, at
two places 180 degrees apart. If you are clever and even the slightest
bit artistic, you can leave enough wire leftover at the top to fashion
handles and put two of those thick fibre tubes that department stores
provide for carrying string-wrapped packages home with. Then you can lift
the thing out of your wort easily.

For removing the solder, go to Radio Shack, and you can get a thing
called a Desoldering Wick, which comes with instructions. Heat the copper
tubing with your torch, and the wick should soak up nearly all of the
solder once you get it hot enough.

- --- Roger Deschner


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 13:11:53 -0500
From: bradley at adx.adelphi.edu (Rob Bradley)
Subject: Old Wyeast 1008 with short lag

Thanks to all of you who replied to my posting concerning the
Wyeast 1008 which exhibited no noticable lag in getting started
despite being 4 months old.  A significant piece of data which
I had omitted was the fact that I bought the yeast the day it
arrived in the brewshop -- it was 3 days old -- and brought it
straight home.  I  kept it at a constant temperature in a bag
at the back of my fridge.  So it had been well cared for.  It
was pointed out that Wyeast probably plays it safe, assuming that
the older the package is, the more often it has been mishandled.

Yeast that starts faster than expected is a whole lot better than
yeast whcih starts slower than expected.  Obviously!  It gives
you the opportunity to make a starter.  If you'd been planning
on making one anyway (I had) you can work it up in 2 or 3 steps,
perhaps beginning as small as a cup, perhaps ending up as large
as half a gallon, instead of the wimpy pint- or quart-sized
starters most of us seem to use for 5 gallons.

Cheers,

Rob (bradley at adx.adelphi.edu)

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 13:18:56 -0500
From: bradley at adx.adelphi.edu (Rob Bradley)
Subject: Which dregs to culture?

I'm thinking of using recultured Chico yeast for my next brew.

Plan 1: Buy some SN Pale Ale.  Open 3 bottles and pour the dregs
        into a starter, treating them as I would a Wyeast culture.

Plan 2: Same, but with three bottles of my own pale ale, brewed
        from a fresh pack of Wyeast 1056.

I suppose SN's cleanliness/quality control is superior to RB's,
but at least I know that my beer has been well cared for since
bottling.  My beer is almost 4 months old, but here on Long Island
I can't be sure that SNPA will be any fresher.

Any suggestions?  Musings?

Cheers,

Rob
(bradley at adx.adelphi)

Return to table of contents


Date: 22 Jan 93 13:34:21 EST
From: Jeff Frane <70670.2067 at compuserve.com>
Subject: Barleywine Yeast Method

On the subject of proper yeasts for barleywines, I'd like to offer
my own suggestion, having brewed a couple successfully.  I make a
BIG yeast starter, i.e., a whole batch of ale and get that up and
running, then use the yeast from that to ferment the barleywine.
The first time I did this was because the champagne yeast _pooped
out_ after two days!  Fortunately, I brewed some ale shortly after
and pitched fermenting beer into the barleywine.  It took off and
fermented out completely.

More recently, I deliberately made of a batch of pale ale,
intending to follow the same procedure.  As it turned out,
however, I delayed brewing for a week, racked the ale off the
yeast pack (WYeast 1056), and ran the cooled barleywine wort on
top of the pack.  Kablooie!  Those yeasts were hungry and fell
on the barleywine like reporters on a free lunch.

The notion of using champagne yeast is pretty bizarre, when you
thithink of it.  Can you imagine any self-respecting British
brewery using some Frog yeast?  Part of the problem may have
arisen from the homebrewer's notion that everything should be
quick and easy.  The British barleywines I've tasted have all
required _years_ to reach a drinkable stage--but they _will_
get there.

- --Jeff Frane


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 13:07:53 EST
From: eisen at kopf.HQ.Ileaf.COM (Carl West)
Subject: chiller construction (was solder)

I don't know how you're going to get rid of the solder you've got on
there now, but, when you do:

Strip enough 16 or 14ga solid copper wire to do the job.
Cut the wire into three or four pieces.
Bend the pieces in half.
`Weave' the wire into your coils.


		 $
	 0	(0)
		 X
	 0	(0)
		 X	    0 = copper tubing
	 0	(0)
	 	 X	()X\/ = copper wire
	 0	\0)
       \   /	 X
	\0/	(0)
	 X	 X
	(0)	(0)

	 a	 b

a - wrap the wire around the bottom coil, cross over, cross again over
    the next coil, etcetera ad finem.
b - when done twist the ends together well and turn the ends under so
    they won't snag on your sleeve.


Carl
WISL,BM

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 13:20 CST
From: korz at iepubj.att.com
Subject: Barleywine problems

Neil writes:
  What about a yeast culture from Thomas Hardy? Will that work or
  has the high alcohol content mutated the yeast.

I'm not a ubiologist, but I know that Chico Brewing crops (harvests)
yeast from all their beers except the Bigfoot Barleywine, the Celebration
Ale and (I think) the Pale Bock (which is a lager yeast anyway).  I
believe the reason for not reusing yeast from the strong-alcohol beers
was, just as Neil suggested, mutations.

  On a similiar note, Miller mentions that it is difficult making
  an all-grain Barleywine and his recipes call for adding extract.
  He never fully explains what the problem is. Is the problem the
  quantity of grain needed to get the og high enough without
  adding extract? Or is there some other problem?

The problems are that if you only use first runnings, you have to use
bushels of grain to get enough (1080+) runnings for a 5-gallon batch,
or, if you do sparge, then you have to boil 20 gallons down to 5 somehow!

Al.

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 13:07 CST
From: korz at iepubj.att.com
Subject: Protein levels

George writes:
>5. Many highly respected maltsters in the US claim it is impossible to make
>color and roasted malts from two row barley. The low protein levels of the
>D-C malts indicate that they indeed come from 2-row barley, and very high
>quality to boot. Sonja, noted as Europe's best 6-row barley, never has
>protein levels below 13%. Hector, a mid-western feed barley (which I sometimes
>fear finds other applications as well!), never falls below 14%.

Just what we need for making an authentic Moobock.

Another data point:

I was at a microbrewing seminar back in 1989, at which Briess Malting Co.
did a talk.  Included was a brochure which listed the analysis of all their
malts.  Strangely enough, both the Briess 2-row and their 6-row had reported
protein levels of 14%!

Al.

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 13:10:51 MST
From: Brian.Smithey at Central.Sun.COM (Brian Smithey)
Subject: Contribution of boiling hops

> "C. Lyons / Raytheon-ADC / Andover, MA" <LYONS at adc3.adc.ray.com> writes:

> When adding boiling hops, does the selection of the type of
> hop (Kent Goldings, Northern Brewer, Cascade, etc.) make any
> difference on the final taste profile?  I am wondering if I only
> need to be concerned about getting the number of IBUs correct, or if it
> is significant to get the correct number of IBUs from a particular hop when
> attempting to duplicate recipes/styles.  I understand that hops
> added for flavor and aroma do give the beer destinct characteristics,
> but I am curious if anyone believes that the boiling hops do?

> Darryl Richman <darrylri at microsoft.com> responds:

> [ ... ]
> Anyway, it is my personal opinion that more than just bitterness is 
> extracted from hops, even during a long boil.  I feel that the low 
> alpha hops tend to provide a cleaner, crisper flavor with a more 
> pleasant, less cloying aftertaste in the finished beer than many of the 
> high alpha varieties.


I seem to remember reading somewhere lately that the ratio of
alpha- to beta-acids also plays a part in the hop bitter profile
of the finished beer, not just the total iso-alpha acid "count",
and that high alpha hops usually don't have correspondingly high
beta acid levels.  I wish I could remember where I read/heard this,
perhaps this will jog the memory of somebody who can provide more
detail (maybe it was Warner's "German Wheat" book, I was reading
that recently).  Maybe the crisp/clean vs. cloying flavors that
Darryl describes are a result of low vs. high alpha to beta ratios?

Brian
- --
Brian Smithey / Sun Microsystems / Colorado Springs, CO
smithey at rmtc.Central.Sun.COM

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 14:12:38 CST
From: bliss at csrd.uiuc.edu (Brian Bliss)
Subject: barleywine


> On a similiar note, Miller mentions that it is difficult making
> an all-grain Barleywine and his recipes call for adding extract.
> He never fully explains what the problem is. Is the problem the
> quantity of grain needed to get the og high enough without
> adding extract? Or is there some other problem?

My problem usually is that I can't sparge enough grain for a 5 gal
batch in a Zapap lauter.  Let me go out on a tangent here.  Has
anyone noticed a correlation between the length of the mash and
the speed of the runoff?  3 weeks ago I did a sour-mash stout
(15 hour mash), and the runoff was quite slow.  A week later
I made a partial-mash barleywine (10 lbs of grain) with a 45
minute mash (usual is 2 hours for me), and it had the fastest
runoff ever.  Perhaps the husks decompose some in a long mash,
making for a bad filter bed.

Back to barleywines...

Miller claims that it requires an extended boil go comcentrate
all the wort, but I do not find this to be the case.  A 2 hr
boil (standard for me) easily condenses 10 gallons down to 5
with my setup.  I usually wind up adding boiling water to the
wort to keep it from concentrating too much.

Since I switched to hops plugs (the freshest), I find that the
5 oz + necessary in a barleywine absorbs over a gallon of the
precious wort.  In the last batch I squeezed 2 gallons out of
the hops left in the boiler, stuck the wort in the fridge overnight
and let it separate from the trub, then siphoned off the good stuff,
re-boiled it, and added it to the fermenter.

I would recommend adding some sugar to a barleywine, though, even
if you want a super-rich taste like Hardy's.  Barleywine can
be notorious for stuck fermentations, but batches where I have
added brown sugar (turbinado sugar is yummier) seem to just keep
glugging away.

I always use dry Whitbread Ale yeast with barleywines.
I wrap the fermenter in a towel and let the vigorous fermentation
take the temperatures into the 80-90F range for 1 day, and then
try to get it back down to 60-70F.  I find this makes for just
the right amount of esters with said yeast.

None of this is carved in stone, of course.  Barleywines are
kosher for experimentation - they always turn out great!

 - Brian "I never drank a barleywine I didn't like" Bliss

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 14:44 CST
From: korz at iepubj.att.com
Subject: Hop Specifications

Darryl writes:
>"C. Lyons / Raytheon-ADC / Andover, MA" <LYONS at adc3.adc.ray.com> writes:
>> When adding boiling hops, does the selection of the type of
>> hop (Kent Goldings, Northern Brewer, Cascade, etc.) make any
>> difference on the final taste profile?  I am wondering if I only
>> need to be concerned about getting the number of IBUs correct, or if it
>> is significant to get the correct number of IBUs from a particular hop when
>> attempting to duplicate recipes/styles.  I understand that hops
>> added for flavor and aroma do give the beer destinct characteristics,
>> but I am curious if anyone believes that the boiling hops do?
>
>This is a topic that doesn't get much attention.  I believe that the
>reason is that once we engineering types (well, most of us do seem to
>fit that description, don't we?) have a way to hang a number on
>something, we feel it must be solved and move on to the next problem.
>If only there were a way to describe hop aroma with a number...

Born and bred a techno-weenie myself (BSEE/MSEE), I have the same kind
of tendancy, although I'm missing some of the information needed to
interpret the attached hop data.  Perhaps someone can post the meaning
of all these hop fractions?  Perhaps someone can massage the data
enough to assign an AROMA FACTOR to each variety?  Alas, I've drifted
from my heritage, let my membership to the ACM and IEEE lapse, taken
to believe that brewing is more of an art and less science than we would
like it to be and traded my slide-rule for a penlight.  The bottom line,
I feel is still that the human senses are our most useful tools as brewers
and a beer that tastes good on paper doesn't necessarily have to taste
good in your glass.  That said:



>From HOP VARIETY SPECIFICATIONS, printed by HOPUNION, U.S.A., INC.

variety		Alpha	Beta	Co-Hum-	Total	Myrcene	Humu-	Caryo-	Farne-
		Acids	Acids	ulone	oil	(% of	lene	phy-	sene
		(%w/w)	(%w/w)	(% of	(%v/w)	whole	(% of	liene	(% of
				AA)		oil)	whole	(% of	whole
							oil)	whole	oil)
								oil)
==============================================================================
CASCADE		4.5-	4.5-	33-	0.8-	45-	10-	3-	4-
		7.0	7.0	40	1.5	60	16	6	8
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CENTENNIAL	9.5-	3.5-	29-	1.5-	45-	10-	5-	<1
		11.5	4.5	30	2.3	55	18	8
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHINOOK		12.0-	3.0-	29-	1.5-	35-	20-	9-	<1
		14.0	4.0	34	2.5	40	25	11
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CLUSTER		5.5-	4.5-	36-	0.4-	45-	15-	6-	<1
		8.5	5.5	42	0.8	55	18	7
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FUGGLE		4.0-	1.5-	25-	0.7-	40-	20-	6-	4-
		5.5	2.0	32	1.2	50	26	10	5
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GALENA		12.0-	7.0-	38-	0.9-	55-	10-	3-	<1
		14.0	9.0	42	1.2	60	15	5
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HALLERTAUER	3.5-	3.5-	18-	0.6-	35-	30-	10-	<1
		5.5	5.5	24	1.0	44	38	12
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LIBERTY		3.0-	3.0-	24-	0.6-	35-	35-	9-	<1
		8.0	4.0	30	1.2	40	40	12
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MOUNT HOOD	5.0-	5.0-	22-	1.0-	55-	12-	7-	<1
		6.0	7.5	23	1.3	65	25	10
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NUGGET		12.0-	4.0-	24-	1.7-	51-	12-	7-	<1
		14.0	6.0	30	2.3	59	22	10
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PERLE		7.0-	4.0-	27-	0.7-	45-	28-	10-	<1
		9.5	5.0	32	0.9	55	33	12
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TETTNANGER	4.0-	3.0-	20-	0.4-	36-	18-	6-	5-
		5.0	4.0	25	0.8	45	23	7	8
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WILLAMETTE	4.5-	3.0-	30-	1.0-	45-	20-	7-	5-
		7.0	4.0	35	1.5	55	30	8	6
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------



One other piece of very interesting data (there is more, but it's geared more
towards growers and salespeople) that would not fit above, is storagabilty:

variety		storagabilty
		(% of AA remaining
		after 6 months storage
		at 20 degrees C)

CASCADE		48-52
CENTENNIAL	60-65
CHINOOK		65-70
CLUSTER		80-85
FUGGLE		60-65
GALENA		75-80
HALLERTAUER	52-58
LIBERTY		35-55
MOUNT HOOD	50-60
NUGGET		70-80
PERLE		80-85
TETTNANGER	55-60
WILLAMETTE	60-65


Note that Liberty, the latest commercially available Hallertauer "replacement"
seems to have hit much closer (numerically) to Hallertauer than the other most
recent attempt, Mount Hood.  Alas, it's storagability has suffered.

Ahhh, friday at last...
Al.

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 15:02 CST
From: korz at iepubj.att.com
Subject: GUINNESS in Caribbean

I checked the labels and caps yesterday night:

	GUINNESS FOREIGN EXTRA STOUT

Al.

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 12:26:08 EDT
From: joseph at joebloe.maple-shade.nj.us (Joseph Nathan Hall)
Subject: All-grain barleywine

neilm at juliet.ll.mit.edu ( Neil Mager ) says:
  On a similiar note, Miller mentions that it is difficult making
  an all-grain Barleywine and his recipes call for adding extract.
  He never fully explains what the problem is. Is the problem the
  quantity of grain needed to get the og high enough without
  adding extract? Or is there some other problem?

So far as I can tell, he's either 1) in too much of a hurry, or
2) reluctant to make beer in a way that doesn't give 33+ pts/lb of 
extract.

If you sparge to near completion, you will have a 3-6 hour boil if
you want to get your wort to 1.100 or higher.  The long boil means
that your wort will have an orange-ruby color, which may or may not
be what you want.  It IS a lovely color, though!

If you begin with a fairly stiff mash and use grain to the tune of
4-10 lbs per gallon of wort desired (!), then sparge very slowly,
you can collect wort at 1.085+, which will need only an hour or so
of boiling--essential for making that most difficult and tedious of
(non-lambic) beers, the very pale barleywine.

While it may seem ghastly to some (including me) to get only 15 or
less points of extract per pound of grain, a few 8-10 hour barley
wine brewing sessions involving very long boils can bring about a
softening in this attitude.  Anyway, when you think about it, if making
5 gallons of barleywine requires a $35-$50 bag of grain and you have
the facilities to do it all at once ... what's the big deal?  Costwise
it's still competitive with extract.

Second runnings can make very good beer.  I do not recommend boiling
them for over a hour, though, since the result (in my experience)
seems to be a bit astringent, even when my sparging water is acidified
and reasonable in temperature.  Don't worry--make a "light" beer.
The slightly unbalanced grainy character is a positive contribution
to flavor in that case, especially if you dry-hop out the wazoo.

A good reference for making very strong beers is the wonderfully succinct
and matter-of-fact "An Introduction to Old British Beers and How to
Make Them," by Dr. John Harrison and the Durden Park Beer Club.  You
can order this from Great Fermentations of Santa Rosa.  For example:

(per Imperial gallon):

28 Usher's 68/~ Mild Ale (1885)
OG 80

A high gravity mild ale virtually unique to Scotland.

2 lb Pale Malt                       1 1/3 lb Carapils
0.9 oz Goldings Hops

Mature for 4 months.

================O Fortuna, velut Luna, statu variabilis================
uunet!joebloe!joseph   (609) 273-8200 day   joseph%joebloe at uunet.uu.net
2102 Ryan's Run East        Rt 38 & 41             Maple Shade NJ 08052
Copyright 1992 by Joseph N. Hall.   Permission granted to copy and
redistribute freely over USENET and by email.  Commercial use prohibited.

Return to table of contents


Date: 22 Jan 1993 17:02:23 -0500 (EST)
From: STROUD%GAIA at leia.polaroid.com
Subject: Year end report

END OF YEAR REPORT

Beverage Industry has just released  beer volume sales for the US for 1992.

The top 10 selling beers in the US were:  
(name, millions of BARRELS, % market share, % change)

Budweiser		45.9	24.1	-3.2
Miller Light		18.0	 9.5	-7.7
Bud Light		13.5	 7.1	11.6
Coors Light		12.8	 6.7	 4.1
Busch			10.2	 5.4	 4.1
Miller Genuine Draft	 8.9	 4.7	18.7
Milwaukee's Best	 8.3	 4.4	-1.2
Old Milwaukee	 	 5.8	 3.0	-4.9
Miller High Life	 5.0	 2.6	-13.8
Natural Light	 	 4.8	 2.0	 9.1

Overall, sales of beer in the US grew just 0.3% in 1992, this following a 2%
decline in 1991.  The increase in sales is mostly attributed to a very slight
increase in domestic sales and a 4% increase in imports.

The #1 beer, Budweiser, saw its sales slip 0.5 million barrels to "only" 24.1
million barrels, its lowest production since 1985.  Overall, however,
Anheuser-Busch continued its march towards 50% of the market because sales of
several of its other brands were up significantly.  A-B's overall production
increased from 86.1 to 87 million barrels and its overall market share went 
from 45.5% to 45.7%.

The other major players all saw their sales decrease in 1992.  Miller went from
42.8  to 41.9, Coors from 19.5 to 19.3, Stroh from 14.7 to 13.5, and Heileman
from 10.3 to 9.5 million barrels. Pabst's sales increased from 6.7 to 7.1
million barrels, largely on increased sales of Olde English 800 (yum!).

Underscoring the importance of growing small regional brands like Rolling Rock
and Sam Adams, brewers in the "other" category doubled their overall sales to 5
million barrels and a 4.5 % market share.

Imports sales were up sharply.  Heineken continued by far the biggest seller,
and Corona's sales were up for the first time since 1987.

The top 10 imports in 1992 were:
(name, estimated millions of GALLONS, % of import market)

Heineken	60.5	23.8
Corona Extra	29.5	11.6
Becks		23.2	 9.1
Molson Golden	19.0	 7.5 
Labatt's Blue	13.4	 5.3
Amstel Light	11.0	 4.3
Tecate	 	 8.6	 3.4
Foster		 7.9	 3.1
Moosehead	 7.0	 2.8
Bass		 5.5	 2.2
Guinness	 5.5	 2.2


Cheers,
Steve


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 16:20:29 -0800 (PST)
From: Peter Maxwell <peterm at aoraki.dtc.hp.com>
Subject: diminishing desperation

I received a lot of suggestions about my wierd tasting beer and many thanks
to all who responded.  Although the problem hasn't been completely isolated
I'm happy to announce that my latest batch is excellent.  Since I used
exactly the same procedures and equipment this tends to rule these out as a
problem.  What I did change is the malt, yeast and hops.  The remaining 
common items between the two batches with this flavor are:

Nottingham Ale yeast 
Munton & Fison malt (although one used light and the other amber)

I'm wondering if anyone else has had strange flavors from using either of
the above.  

	Peter

Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 13:22:56 CST
From: bliss at csrd.uiuc.edu (Brian Bliss)
Subject: brewspaper

Producing a newspaper is an enourmous task, with the overriding concern
being: get it out on time.  Producing the first edition is even harder,
with the overriding concern beging: just get it done.  As they said
in their "letters" section: This is the first edition - "we don't have
any letters - we're adlibbing."  You guys should wait till you see
the next couple of editions before you convict them of editorial
negligence.

As for Zymurgy giving them a list of subscribers (if this is indeed
what happened), I think you have a legitimate bitch here, but in the
chance that receive something useful from their distributing my
address I am grateful.  As long as I don't start recieving a bunch
of "BREWCARD" credit card* (which may be used at any of my favotive
mail-order shops) offers with a 21% interest rate, I will be happy.

Give 'em a break!

bb

Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 12:30 CST
From: arf at ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: Brewspaper, Super Corona

 
 >From: pyle at intellistor.com (Norm Pyle)
 
 >Ulick and Jack commented on the Brews Paper.  I think this thing is a piece
 of junk.  I'm not sure why I received their first issue, but I guess it has
 something to do with my subscription to Zymurgy.  Anyway, there are soooooo
 many typos in the thing....
 
 How bout the way they consistantly spelled "lauder tun"?
 
 >Roller mill rollers:  anyone have any good sources?  I have a wonderful
 little homemade roller mill, but the rollers are a weak point.
 
 Please be so kind to share what you find with the rest of us.  I gave up 
 looking long ago and use custom made rollers.
 
 >From: Ulick Stafford <ulick at bernini.helios.nd.edu>
 
 >js praises The Brews Paper.
 
 I believe I only referred to the humor.
 
 >  I personally think it is not that great (well OK for nothing - but 
 personlly I think the $15 annual subscription could be better spent on 
 Imported hops or something).  
 
 It was sent out to everyone on the Zymurgy mailing list at no cost to anyone. 
 I think we can all gain from having another national publication promoting 
 our hobby/business.  Remember all the griping about Zymurgy rejecting 
 articles?  Well, here is another place to send them. 
 
 In addition to airing our criticism here, we should also take the time to 
 write the editor and let him know what we want in an alternative journal.  
 Personally, I have no problem with humor but I do not think it should be the 
 dominant feature and I have expressed my views to the editor.
 
 >It should be noted that js is not an unbiased observer as the publication 
 carries advertisments for his products.
 
 I think my views are pretty straightforward.  If nobody likes it, nobody sees 
 my ads no matter what I say about it.
 
 >  Incidentally, does anyone know who is responsible for the ads in Zymurgy 
 selling Coronas with the statement that it is better than the js rollermill 
 (someone in St. Louis)?
 
 Sure.  He is the one and only person to return a MALTMILL for a refund.
 
 However, as he is a regular contributor to this forum and r.c.b, I will give 
 him the opportunity to identify himself and enter into the discussion so he 
 can make his case publicly.
 
 >From: R_GELINAS at UNHH.UNH.EDU (Russ Gelinas)
 >Subject: nitrosamines
 
 >Jack, I've asked this before, and since you brought it up, I'll ask
 again:  What is the level of nitrosamines in fire-kilned malts,
 
 I have answered this before.  It is requried to be less than 5 PPM.
 
 >especially as compared to what one might get in a grilled entry at
 the local pub?  It doesn't make sense to me to avoid ordering a stout
 when your hamburger on a toasted roll has orders of magnitude more n.amines
 in it anyway.
 
 As I do not eat hamburgers on toasted rolls, you will have to do your own 
 homework.  You are also confusing the toxins in toast with those in malted 
 barley and they ain't necessarily the same.  The nitrosamines in malt are a 
 result of precursors formed during the germination of the grain combined with 
 the combustion by-products of the flame.  It happens long before they come 
 even close to being toasted.
 
 js
 

Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 23:57:53 -0600 (CST)
From: brewmstr at ddsw1.mcs.com (Jim Bayer)
Subject: All-grain Red Ale recipes?



Hello All..

I'm a "beginner" at all grain and am trying to get past the Pale Ale into
something a little more interesting, so I'm looking for a good  Red Ale
recipe A La Killian's.  

Any help will be appreciated.

Jim

******
* I gotta' get me a snappy ending!
******


Return to table of contents



End of HOMEBREW Digest #1062, 01/25/93