HOMEBREW Digest #1070 Thu 04 February 1993

Digest #1069 Digest #1071

		Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator

  "Irish Red Ale"... (Diane Duane)
  WL media (extracted from the Difco Manual) (Paul Matulonis)
  Re: all-grain snobs (McHarry)
  Adelscott ("Rad Equipment")
  Culturing lager yeast (Greg Jesus Wolodkin)
  Re: BUGS! ("Spencer W. Thomas")
  Lager... ("Spencer W. Thomas")
  BUGS! ("Spencer W. Thomas")
  FAQ/RFC on Recirculation. (Chris McDermott)
  Hypercard Program (Andrius Tamulis)
  IBU table (Brian Bliss)
  fresh hops (Brian Bliss)
  Lager Questions (Ron Karwoski)
  How Long Is Too Long (Joel Pointon at staff)
  help the pathetic beginner (Kinzie Brian Mark)
  A survey of the readership (Chuck Coronella)
  Dry Malt Extract vs. Syrup Malt Extract (Richard Cox)
  Beadle, Open Fermenting, arf n snobs  (Jack Schmidling)

Send articles for __publication_only__ 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, BUT PLEASE NOTE that if you subscribed via the BITNET listserver (BEER-L at UA1VM.UA.EDU), then you MUST unsubscribe the same way! If your account is being deleted, please be courteous and unsubscribe first. 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 don't send me requests for back issues - you will be silently ignored. For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to lutzen at novell.physics.umr.edu IMPORTANT NEWS -- PLEASE READ ----------------------------- There will be nobody reading mail sent to homebrew-request during the period Feb 8 through approx. Feb 28. This means that any requests for changes or cancellations will not be handled until the end of the month. Subscription requests will continue to be handled automatically, and the digest will continue to be sent automatically, barring any computing device catastrophes. So if you send a message here and get no immediate reply, or if the digest stops suddenly, please do not panic. Just be patient. ps. and please try to behave yourselves while I'm gone ;-)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1993 9:39.0.53 From: dduane at kestrel.win.net (Diane Duane) Subject: "Irish Red Ale"... It may amuse (or horrify) some of you to know that at present, there are almost NO red ales sold in Ireland. Killian's, which I've seen while visiting in the US, is not sold here. Just about the only ale brewed in Ireland at the moment, to the best of my knowledge anyway, is Hilden Ale, brewed by Hilden up in the North. And it doesn't get down into the south - -- whether because of import problems, or no one here knows it exists, I'm not sure. The most popular beers here are, by and large, Irish brewed ones: Guinness has a stranglehold on the market (and likes it that way, so that foreign beers, especially the German ones, are coming into the country only very slowly. My husband danced and sang for about a week when he was able to get some weissbier in, just before Christmas.). American beers are oozing in...heaven help us. Miller Draft is sold in bottles: so are Pabst (some places) and Schlitz. There is better news, though: Budweiser is brewed here under license by Guinness, and "Uncle Arthur's" version is two and a half times stronger than the US article. Astonishingly, it actually tastes like something.... Otherwise, the most common brews found here would be (for stouts) Guinness, Murphy's, and Beamish: for lagers, Harp, and some German ones like Kronenbourg, Carlsberg, and Louwenbrau. PS: the weird beer called "Guinness Gold" is not sold here. They wouldn't dare. (grin) Regards from (presently) sunny Ireland! Diane Duane / Kestrel Ridge / Avoca, Co. Wicklow, Ireland Fidonet: 2:263/164 / Ci$: 73200,3112 Internet: dduane at kestrel.win.net "A little science...a little magic...a little chicken soup." Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 93 08:53:18 -0500 From: Paul Matulonis <paulm at sci.ccny.cuny.edu> Subject: WL media (extracted from the Difco Manual) There has been some curiousity recently regarding WL media for plating out yeast. I extracted the following from the Tenth Edition of the Difco Manual; all disclaimers apply; this was done without permission; proceed at your own risk. I checked the copy for accuracy but the final word should be verified via your local copy of the Difco Manual. Paul Matulonis CCNY/Biology paulm at sci.ccny.cuny.edu ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ WL NUTRIENT AND DIFFERENTIAL MEDIA INTENDED USE Bacto WL Nutrient Broth and Bacto WL Nutrient Medium are recommended for the cultivation of yeasts, molds and bacteria encountered in brewing and industrial fermentation processes. Bacto WL Differential Medium, also used in the microbiological control processes in the fermentation industry, permits the unrestricted growth of bacteria and inhibits development of yeasts and molds. HISTORY/PRINCIPLES Bacto WL Nutrient media are prepared according to the formulae described by Green and Gray. In their study of various fermentation processes, Green and Gray pointed out the inadequacy of the microscopic count in fermentation control procedures. An exhaustive study of the method of examination of worts, beers, and liquid yeast and similar fermentation products led to the development of two media; one containing no selective agent and the other, a differential medium containing the antibiotic Actidione (cycloheximide) as a selective agent. Bacto WL Nutrient media permit the development of yeast. In those instances in which the number of yeast cells is comparatively small, certain bacteria can be detected. Green and Gray reported that counts of viable bakers' yeast may be made on the WL nutrient medium at pH 5.5. If the reaction is adjusted to pH 6.5, the count of bakers' and distillers' yeast may be made. In making microbial counts using these media, the temperature and time of incubation will vary depending on the various materials under investigation. Temperatures of 25C are generally employed with brewing materials and 30C for bakers' yeast and alcohol fermentation mash analyses. Incubating periods run from 2 to 7 days, depending on the flora encountered. Incubation periods of 10 to 14 days may be used in some cases. Bacto WL Differential Medium has the same formula as Bacto WL Nutrient Medium, with the addition of 0.004 g of Actidione per liter. This inhibits the development of yeasts without interfering with the development of bacteria generally encountered in beers. A reliable count of bacteria can be obtained at pH 5.5. To obtain estimations of beer cocci and lactic rods, plates should be incubated under anaerobic conditions. For estimation of acetic acid rods and termobacteria (very small rods occurring in wort as described by Linder in about 1900 as _Termobacterium lutescens_, iridescens and erythrimum) incubate under aerobic conditions. To analyze bakers' yeast and alcohol fermentation mashes, the reaction is adjusted to pH 6.5. Plates containing dilutions of bakers' yeast are incubated aerobically, while those from alcoholic fermentation mashes are incubated anaerobically. FORMULAE BACTO WL NUTRIENT BROTH DEHYDRATED Ingredients per liter Bacto Yeast Extract .......... 4 g Calcium Chloride ......... 0.125 g Bacto Casitone ............... 5 g Magnesium Sulfate ........ 0.125 g Bacto Dextrose .............. 50 g Ferric Chloride .......... 0.0025 g Monopotassium Phosphate ... 0.55 g Manganese Sulfate ........ 0.0025 g Potassium Chloride ....... 0.425 g Bacto Brom Cresol Green .. 0.022 g Final pH 5.5 + 0.2 at 25C. One pound will make 7.5 liters of final medium. Rehydrate with 60 grams/liter. BACTO WL NUTRIENT MEDIUM DEHYDRATED Ingredients per liter Bacto Yeast Extract .......... 4 g Magnesium Sulfate 0.125 g Bacto Casitone ............... 5 g Ferric Chloride 0.0025 g Bacto Dextrose .............. 50 g Manganese Sulfate ........ 0.0025 g Monopotassium Phosphate ... 0.55 g Bacto Agar ................... 20 g Potassium Chloride ....... 0.425 g Bacto Brom Cresol Green 0.022 g Calcium Chloride ......... 0.125 g Final pH 5.5 + 0.2 at 25C. One pound will make 5.6 liters of final medium. Rehydrate with 80 grams/liter. BACTO WL DIFFERENTIAL MEDIUM DEHYDRATED Ingredients per liter Bacto Yeast Extract .......... 4 g Magnesium sulfate ............ 0.125 g Bacto Casitone ............... 5 g Ferric Chloride ............. 0.0025 g Bacto Dextrose .............. 50 g Manganese Sulfate ........... 0.0025 g Monopotassium Phosphate ... 0.55 g Bacto Agar ...................... 20 g Potassium Chloride ....... 0.425 g Bacto Brom Cresol Green ..... 0.022 g Calcium Chloride ......... 0.125 g Actidione (cycloheximide) .. 0.004 g One pound will make 5.6 liters of final medium. Rehydrate with 80 grams/liter. METHOD OF PREPARATION 1. To rehydrate suspend appropriate amount in 1 liter cold distilled water and heat to boiling to dissolve completely. 2. Sterilize in the autoclave for 15 minutes at 15 Lbs pressure (121C). 3. To obtain a final reaction of pH 6.5 add the amount specified on the product label of a 1% solution of sodium carbonate per liter distilled water used for rehydration; dissolve and sterilize as indicated above. STORAGE Bacto WL Nutrient and Differential media Below 30C Prepared media 2 - 8C QUALITY CONTROL Identity Specificatlons WL Nutrient WL nutrient WL Differential Broth Medium Medium Dehydrated powder: light beige light tan beige w/blue tint w/blue tint, w/blue tint, homogeneous, homogeneous, homogeneous, free-flowing free-flowing free-flowing Solution: 6% solution 8% solution 8% solution Reaction: pH 5.5 + 0.2 pH 5.5 + 0.2 pH 5.5 + 0.2 at 25C at 25C at 25C Prepared medium: blue, clear blue-green, very greenish-blue slightly opalescent slightly opalescent Typical Cultural Response In/on Bacto WL Media After 40 - 48 Hours at 30C (Bacteria at 35C) Organism Growth WL Nutrient WL Differential Media Medium Escherichia coli ATCC2 25922 fair to good good Lactobacillus fermentum ATCC~ 9338 fair to good good Proteus mirabilis ATCC~ 25933 fair to good good Saccharomyces cerevisiae ATCC~ 9763 good inhibited Saccharomyces uvarum ATCC~ 9080 good inhibited REFERENCES 1. Paper read at Am. Soc. of Brewing Chemists Meeting Detroit, May, 1950. 2. Wallerstein Lab. Comm. 13:357 1950. 3. Ibid., 14:169 1951. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 93 8:59:40 EST From: mcharry at freedom.otra.com (McHarry) Subject: Re: all-grain snobs Sorry if I offended extract brewers with my reference to my friend, the World's Worst Brewer, as, of course, an extract brewer. He is mainly trying to produce beer by the simplest possible means. We are all extract brewers. Some of use make our own extract. Whether that is worth the bother (it more than doubles brewing time) is a matter of what you are trying to brew and how much effort you want to put into it. Some of my better beers have been extract brews. It seems to me that one can make a lighter colored beer from all-grain, and a lighter bodied one as well, if the mash temperature is right. One can also play with adjuncts such as rice or rye with interesting results. Whether that is worth shooting a whole Saturday, I am not sure. The World's Worst Brewer is satisfied with what he produces and the time he puts in on it. As I said, the stuff is actually quite drinkable, in fact I may drown my sorrows in a liter plastic pop bottle of the stuff this evening--I need the protein! Return to table of contents
Date: 3 Feb 93 07:49:37 U From: "Rad Equipment" <rad_equipment at rad-mac1.ucsf.EDU> Subject: Adelscott Subject: Adelscott Time:7:40 AM Date:2/3/93 Don Scheidt says: >"Introduce" it? During the imported-beer boom of the early eighies, >when one could buy, among others, Rodenbach, Saisons de Silly, >and St-Louis beers in Seattle, bottles of Adelscott appeared on >the shelves of several specialty beer-and-wine-retailers here. Interesting. It was perhaps 2 years ago when I contacted the importer in Mass. Could be that they were reluctant to bend to our ever increasing label requirements and withdrew it, but no mention of this was made during my conversation with their representative. RW... Russ Wigglesworth (INTERNET: Rad_Equipment at radmac1.ucsf.edu - CI$: 72300,61) UCSF Dept. of Radiology, San Francisco, CA (415) 476-3668 / 474-8126 Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 93 08:00:50 PST From: greg at bandit.Berkeley.EDU (Greg Jesus Wolodkin) Subject: Culturing lager yeast Greetings! In getting ready to brew my first lager, last week I attempted to culture the yeast from a commercial brew. I've cultured SNPA (Wyeast 1056) several times without any problems, so I figured it'd be easy.. I re-read the "Yeast" chapter in Miller, and then headed down to Liquor Barn and picked up 3 pints of Paulaner Hefe-weizen. My technique was as follows: 1) 1.020 SG starter wort, just off the boil, cover and cool in a sink full of ice water to 80F. 2) Sanitize a one gallon glass jug and funnel (20 minutes with chlorine solution, then rinse). 3) Take a butane lighter to the exposed rim of the pot, then transfer 1/2 gallon of starter wort into the jug and fit with (sanitized) airlock. 4) Open a bottle of hefe-weizen, flame the mouth, decant beer into pitcher, sending the last 1/2" of dregs into starter. Repeat until beers are gone and pitcher is full ;-) 5) Place the starter jug at room temperature (70F) covered with a t-shirt to keep out the light. 6) Drink the hefe-weizen and don't worry! Well a typical culture (at least in my experience) would be bubbling merrily within 48 hours, with visible signs of activity within 24. This one has been *much* slower. At four days there was *nothing*. At five days a very small ring of bubbles on the surface. Now at six days, it has reached kraeusen stage. I can think of a few possible mistakes -- first the beer was chilled (it was unavailable warm at the store), and I guess that would slow things down. Second I discovered that Miller actually recommends Spaten, not Paulaner, as a stable, reculturable lager yeast. (Oops..) Whatever I have in my starter is a bottom-fermenter. It even smells good, so after it finishes I plan to taste the result and give it another feeding. If it seems OK at that point, I will most likely brew with it. I wanted to ask those of you who culture yeast on a regular basis: 1) Is six days such a long lag that I should expect a wild yeast, rather than the yeast I was attempting to culture? 2) What behaviour can I expect from the Paulaner hefe-weizen yeast, assuming that's what I've got? Anybody ever use it? 3) Should I eventually move the starter to fermentation temps (~50F) or should I leave it at 75F until pitching (since I will most likely pitch at 75F)? As always, thanks in advance for any suggestions/comments. Greg Wolodkin Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 93 11:20:52 EST From: "Spencer W. Thomas" <Spencer.W.Thomas at med.umich.edu> Subject: Re: BUGS! I would think that canning jar lids, screwed down tightly, would keep the bugs out. After all, they can hold a vacuum seal for years, even without the screw band holding the lid down. Of course, there is one major difference: the vacuum seal is formed at high enough temperatures to deform the "rubber" on the lid to exactly conform to the rim of the jar. I get bugs every summer, and consider it a good excuse to throw out the old stuff in the cupboard. If it's more than a year old, I'm not sure I want to eat it anyway. I've got too many uncontrolled insect sources entering the house to keep them all away. (Birdseed is the worst, even after freezing it at 0F for a few weeks before using it.) =S Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 93 11:39:53 EST From: "Spencer W. Thomas" <Spencer.W.Thomas at med.umich.edu> Subject: Lager... Disadvantage is that you almost are required to add new yeast to get reliable carbonation when you bottle. Also, you tie up a carboy for a long time. Advantages: you can put off bottling. A carboy takes less space than two cases of beer(?). Purportedly, you get better flavor characteristics. I've only done one (sort of) test on this -- a friend and I split 10 gallons of wort (Vienna lager), pitched the same yeast (2308, from the same starter), fermented at the same temperature (in our respective fridges) for the same length of time. He clarified with Polyclar, bottled, and lagered in the bottles. I lagered in carboy, didn't clarify, then bottled. Both were good (an understatement!), mine had a more malty flavor, but that may have been because he used polyclar and I didn't. =S Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 93 11:45:54 EST From: "Spencer W. Thomas" <Spencer.W.Thomas at med.umich.edu> Subject: BUGS! Rereading your post, it appears to me that the bugs (or, rather, their eggs) came in the grain (a not unlikely occurrence). The tightest container in the world won't prevent these suckers from growing. The CO2 idea sounds good, as I don't think they can grow without oxygen. I've had this problem with birdseed, and sometimes with flour(!) back in the days when I bought 25lbs at a time. Freezing them for a month in my chest freezer (or even storing them there) seems to kill most of the eggs. =S Return to table of contents
Date: 03 Feb 1993 11:07:19 -0500 From: Chris McDermott <mcdermott at draper.com> Subject: FAQ/RFC on Recirculation. FAQ/RFC on Recirculation. Since many topics come up in cyclical manner it would be nice if they could be answered in a FAQ format. And since some topics have more than one accepted answer the FAQs should try to show all sides of an issue. So to get the ball rolling here is an example: FAQ #0000-000: [Note that 0000 indicates the number of the FAQ and -000 indicates its version. The version mechanism allows mistakes and inaccuracies to be corrected and newer information to be included in newer versions of the FAQ.] **** FAQ #0001-01: Recirculation: What is it, and should I do it? Recirculation is a practice employed in the lautering of mashed grains where the turbid sweet wort is collected, as it is runoff, and recirculated through the grain bed until the runoff becomes clear. Most sources of homebrewing information will tell you that you should employ the practice of recirculation to avoid significant amounts of chaff in the boil. Chaff in the boil is considered by these sources to lead undesirable effects in the finished beer including astringancy and cloudiness. (Ref. Miller, Papazian) However, others beleive that some amount of chaff in the boil is desireable in that it helps to coagulate large protien molecules producing a better hot-break and thus a clearer finished product. Futhermore, some think that the hot side areation (HSA), or oxidation, of the sweet wort during recircluation outwieghs any benifit that may be gained by clearing the wort. (Ref. Fix) **** Please consider this FAQ as a kind of HbD Request For Comment (RFC). Please feel free to make any additions or corrections. _ Christopher K. McDermott Internet: mcdermott at draper.com C.S. Draper Laboratory, Inc. Voice: (617) 258-2362 555 Technology Square FAX: (617) 258-1131 Cambridge, MA 02149 (USA) Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 93 12:18:39 EST From: Andrius Tamulis <ATAMULIS at ucs.indiana.edu> Subject: Hypercard Program I may be the person to whom you refer - I wrote a Hypercard Homebrew Digester about 2-3 years ago, and offered it to anyone who wanted it. I even send out a few copies. Soon after, however, I discovered a serious bug/problem - Hypercard fields can be only 32767 lines long, and at one line per article (as I recall) this quickly filled my index field. I've tinkered with it once or twice in the interim, but have never really got it working to my satisfaction. I am willing to send a copy of it to anyone who cares to ask for it, send email to ATAMULIS at ucs.indiana.edu, with a request that if anyone makes it work well, they send me a copy. andrius tamulis Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 93 11:19:51 CST From: bliss at csrd.uiuc.edu (Brian Bliss) Subject: IBU table bszymcz%ulysses at relay.nswc.navy.mil (Bill Szymczak) writes: >In HBD1066 I submitted an HBU-IBU conversion table >but forgot to mention any volume relationships. >That table assumes a 5 gallon batch. >To adjust for a volume of X gallons simply multiply the >numbers in the table by 5/X. Well thanks, now that I just wasted 35 oz of hops in my latest barleywine :-) AA units = oz hops * %AA and HBU = AA units / gal. wort (right?) so that was really a AAU to IBU table, or do I have them backwards? I also noticed that the rows for 55 and 60 minute boiling times were identical. Was this a typo? Nonetheless, the table is among the things that I saved from the HBD for future reference and is greatly appreciated. bb Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 93 11:36:29 CST From: bliss at csrd.uiuc.edu (Brian Bliss) Subject: fresh hops The freshest hops I have found are hops plugs from GW Kent. They come vacuum packed in gold foil, in packs of 10 - 1/2 oz plugs. At around 8$ per pack ($1.60/oz) they are about twice as expensive as normal leaves or pellets, but they are so fresh that you will probably have to reduce your hopping rate by about 30% over "regular" leaf hops. They can survive a 60 minute boil without scrubbing out all their aromatics (which isn't always what you want). Available from Alternative Garden Supply, Streamwood, IL: 1 (800) 444-2837 The Malt Shop, Cascade, WI: 1 (800) 235-0026 bb Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 93 13:18:38 CST From: rak at mayo.EDU (Ron Karwoski) Subject: Lager Questions I am planning on starting a Bock soon and have a few Lager questions: At what temperature should the wort be when the yeast is pitched and how soon should the whole thing be brought down to lagering temperatures? Do you wait for active signs of fermentation before cooling? Should the starter be cooled? What is a good liquid yeast for a Dopplebock? Thanks. Ron Karwoski Internet: rak at bru.mayo.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 93 16:19:09 -0500 From: pointon at m2c.org (Joel Pointon at staff) Subject: How Long Is Too Long Greetings fellow brewers. Being a fairly new convert to HB, I have a question that I realize most of you WON'T be able to relate to. Although I enjoy my HB, I'm not a big drinker, so subsequently I have a stockpile building up of my brewing efforts. The beer cellar presently contains the following extract brewed product: Porter, (3 months), Pilsner (2 months) and English Bitter (1 month old). The cellar is approximately 55 degrees F at this time of year and will increase to about 65 by the beginning of summer. How long can one expect to keep each of these before the flavor falls off? I know, I know - "drink it or loose it", but seriously if I had to focus on which would decline first I would guess Pilsner, Porter and Bitter in that order. As long as I've tempted your wrath already - I'm heading to San Diego 2/13 - 21 for a sailing course and ***** brew pubs, etc.*****. (Please send replies on this portion via email.) Thanks. Return to table of contents
Date: 3 Feb 93 16:31:59 From: bmkinz at mail.wm.edu (Kinzie Brian Mark) Subject: help the pathetic beginner I am new to homebrewing (Papazian would put me at the intermediate level) and I would like some advice on brewing a Belgian Ale, using a couple bottles of Chimay I have for their yeast (someone told me this could be done, but didn't bother to tell me how). Please e-mail me directly, and use small words so I will understand what you are talking about. Thanks in advance, bmkinz at mail.wm.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 93 16:15 MTS From: Chuck Coronella <CORONELLRJDS at CHE.UTAH.EDU> Subject: A survey of the readership Are you an all grain brewer or an extract brewer? Lately, there have been quite a few highly technical discussions about mash techniques, kegging setups, and hopping rates, to name a few. This has been a real boon for most of us, whether advanced or beginners. Advanced brewers get an opportunity to discuss, with others at their level, the challenges that they're facing in their home breweries. Beginners can read these discussions and learn. Everyone wins. With one exception. Beginner brewers, or even intermediate brewers, are likely being intimidated by the high level of this discussion. How many posts in the last few weeks have started with "I'm only a lowly extract brewer..." or "Sorry for taking up bandwidth with such a simple question..."? And, I wonder how many questions have not even been asked because the author is afraid of being labelled "not a REAL brewer" by more advanced brewers. (Remember that discussion a while back about _real_ brewers?) I believe that Rob Bradley was referring to this in HBD #1069, when he wrote about all-grain snobs. I'll bet that the progress of many beginners is being slowed by this thought. I hate to think that people are being intimidated from asking questions, because the HBD has helped me so much in the three or so years that I've been reading it. (There used to be lots more "lower level" discussions.) I think it would be interesting to take a poll to see how many readers are extract brewers, or all-grain brewers. I suspect that the readership consists of more beginners than are represented by the questions posed in the HBD. And I think that, if beginners realized that they make up a substantial part of the HBD community, they would be more likely to pose "lower level" questions, and therefore, improve their comprehension and brewing. Therefore, I invite everyone reading this post to send me a brief note indicating your level of expertise. Please use the keywords: All Grain if you rarely use extract for your brewing, other than for yeast culturing, Intermediate if you do some mashing, partial mashing, some yeast culturing, etc., but you don't consider yourself very experienced, or Extract if you are relatively new to the brewing process, haven't tried mashing, or in general, consider yourself to be on the steepest part of the learning curve. I know that this classification is too simple, but it should prove to be informative, nonetheless. (It should also give some kind of a count of the number of readers, as well as swamping my mail utility.) In about a week, I'll post the results. Cheers, Chuck coronellrjds at che.utah.edu P.S. Sorry if this gets posted twice, we're experieingnce nicaltech ultiesdiffic iwth our ermail. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 93 17:09:59 PST From: Richard Cox <rcox at hsc.usc.edu> Subject: Dry Malt Extract vs. Syrup Malt Extract One of my homebrew suppliers strongly maintains that dry malt extract provides better flavor and less extract "tang" than the syrup variety. He has encouraged me to use all DME in my recipes whenever possible. I'm too new to homebrewing to have an objective opinion on this, although my last batch -- using all DME -- does taste *much* better than my first, which was made with syrup extract. There may have been other factors at work in that case, though. I have wondered whether or not the syrup cans impart any detectable metal taste to the extract. Does anyone have any advice? ) rcox at hsc.usc.edu ( ) ( ) sparkman at well.sf.ca.us ( Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 93 13:00 CST From: arf at ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) Subject: Beadle, Open Fermenting, arf n snobs >From: korz at iepubj.att.com Chris writes: >>Mr. Beadle ("Brew it Yourself*"), and at least two other British >>1960s-type books abhor boiling: >> "Do not bring the water to a boil.... This single bit of misinformation from those who should know better has caused many beginners to become unnecessarily discouraged in their attempts at brewing." >Don't confuse the MASH with the BOIL. In all-grain brewing, you MASH, LAUTER, BOIL, CHILL, FERMENT and PACKAGE. In extract brewing, you simply BOIL, CHILL, FERMENT, and PACKAGE. I also have this book in my library and HIS statement far better fits my definition of the "single bit of misinformation" that caused me no end of confusion. That page was dog eared in my book and the paragraph underlined. I assure you the he was referring to extract beer as there is not a single reference to whole grains in the entire book. Several times he describes the process of mixing extract with water between 151 and 155 F and maintaining it there for the duration. Another example of his misinformation is on page 53, also underscored and burnt into my early data base on brewing. "If you look into the fermenter, you will see a rich foamy head bubbling on top. This head is composed mainly of resins from the hops, which are forced up ty the carbon dioxide bubbles. Some books advocate skimming off the head but this should never be done because it contains all the oils and resins that will give the beer its body, aroma and characteristic beer taste." Certainly, there is a legitimate debate on the importance of skimming the foam but no one but Beagle argues the merits of leaving it there. I also note on reviewing the book again for this posting that there is no mention anywhere of hops. His recipes simply call for light or dark extract as though hops did not exist. The book also has no index so it is difficult to find anything but I think it is safe to say that it is one of the worst of the generaly lousy books on homebrewing available in the 60's and 70's. It is not hard to understand why homebrewing is now rapidly expanding as a hobby and why it stagnated before. I have no problem admitting that I never really made a good batch of beer till I spent several months digesting the Digest and much of the other information currently available. It's truly is a New World Order for home brewing. >From: Jim Busch <busch at daacdev1.stx.com> >Subject: re: reusing yeast & open fermenters >I am most likely in the minority of homebrewers in that I am currently utilizing open fermentation techniques. You're in good company. The only thing you need to do to complete your joy is to add a spigot on the bottom so you can take QC samples on a regular basis to determine how it is progressing before sending it to the secondary. I find that for some strange reason, the primary fermentation seems to take much longer this way and I always seem to come up about a half a gallon short:) I am sure you have also figured out how simple it is to sterilize with a bit of water boiling in the bottom. I also suspect that you, like the rest of the enlightened ones, simply yawn at all the discussions about "blow-off" tubes and related mess. >From: korz at iepubj.att.com >Subject: Spraying the grist >Both Jim and Donald mentioned the spraying of water on the grist as it enters the mash tun. I suspect that this has the addional benefit of reducing grain dust which is explosive. I suspect that it might have a negative effect if Fix's hypothesis on HSA is correct. What say George? >From: Tom Dimock <RGG at CORNELLC.cit.cornell.edu> >Subject: Mixing beers >Mixing beers has a long history in England, where the Black and Tan, Light and Dark, or 'arf 'n 'arf are all quite common in pubs. One of my fond memories involves drinking with friends from MIT at the Muddy Charles, a graduate student hangout on campus. At that time, they only had Bud on tap :-( , but they did have Guiness in bottles. Being cheap, but not quite cheap enough to drink Bud straight, I'd buy a bottle of Guiness, and use half a Guiness per pitcher of Bud to give the stuff some flavor. It worked pretty well - it made the Bud into something you could fool yourself into believing was beer.... This is amazing. I was going to point this out in response to the original question but I could not resist noting that ARF was drinking arf 'n arf long before he gained world wide acclaim as the World's Greatest Brewer. I did this when I was stationed in Bermuda in the 60's. Guinness and Bud was the poor man's real beer. >From: "Donald G. Scheidt" <dgs1300 at aw101.iasl.ca.boeing.com> >From: arf at ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) >Subject: Nitrosamines, Dough-in > > >From: gjfix at utamat (George J Fix) > > >For the record, the highest NDMA level reported was in Bamberg Rauchbier. > It contained 5-15 parts per billon, and not 5 ppm as reported in HBD. > > Just testing to see if you read my articles as carefully as > I read yours :) <Cute, but disingenuous. Given the orders of magnitude between ppm and ppb, this is important. Just cute. George and I discussed the orders of magnitude issue in email and it was a private joke in public. When researching the subject, I got that sort of ambiguity from the maltsters themselves. Not one of them could tell me for sure whether it was ppm or ppb so I asked George. >The best reason to use the Belgian malts is 'cause you like 'em - sorry if that seems a bit simple-minded, but I'm not planning on being part of this world forever... It is not only simple minded but puts everything else you say in the same perspective. Part of being cultured and civilized is controlling our likes to conform with not only our own well being but the needs and interests of others. I may very well like the taste of smoked Scheidt on a bagle with cream cheese, but I am not simple minded enough to assume that justifies eating it. js Return to table of contents
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1070, 02/04/93