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


Contents:
  Re: HIGH TEMPERATURE PUMP (Dion Hollenbeck)
  Pumpkin Ale-Success (kr_roberson)
  :Homebrew Digest Subscription (Charles Brault)
  Washington, D.C.-Area Brewpubs (TAyres)
  Wheat for Wit (A.J. deLange)
  Superior manifold design/rising and falling clumps (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
  Re: Found - The perfect pump! (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
  Sparge water pH adjustments (Lee Bollard)
  Re: Lauter Tun Out Of Cooler (Aidan "Krazy Krausen Kropping Kiwi" Heerdegen)
  selling what's free?!? (Dick Dunn)
  Wort Chillers and Hard Copy (Mike Zentner)
  Re: Worthless Posts (mdemers)
  Thermometer accuracy (Art Steinmetz)
  NJ Homebrew shops (Art Steinmetz)
  Barley Wine shelf life (Keith Frank)
  Mea Culpa (Steve Robinson)
  Propane Cooking Indoors? ("CANNON_TOM")
  Bru-Vigor contents questions. ("Gary E.Yoder")
  Copyrights; sulfites (Pierre Jelenc)
  Help a new brewer (Tom Griffin)
  Re: aging barleywine (Spencer.W.Thomas)
  Worthless posts, again! (Dennis Forester)
  RE: air-lock germs (Eric Hale)
  Chiller Tube Dia/Copyright ("Palmer.John")
  Weiss yeast (Wolfe)
  Re: air-lock germs (L M Sabo)
  AGED BARLEYWINES ("Norman Dickenson")
  Priming Stuff (Timothy Staiano)



******************************************************************
* NEW POLICY NOTE: Due to the incredible volume of bouncing mail,
* I am going to have to start removing addresses from the list
* that cause ongoing problems. In particular, if your mailbox
* is full or your account over quota, and this results in bounced
* mail, your address will be removed from the list after a few days.
* 
* If you use a 'vacation' program, please be sure that it only
* sends a automated reply to homebrew-request *once*. If I get
* more than one, then I'll delete your address from the list.
******************************************************************
 
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.
FAQs, archives and other files 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


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


Date: Mon, 31 Oct 94 16:37:30 PST
From: hollen at megatek.com (Dion Hollenbeck)
Subject: Re: HIGH TEMPERATURE PUMP

>>>>> "Philip" == sxupjd at fnma com <Philip> writes:

Philip> I need a HIGH TEMPERATURE PUMP for my tower system.  I
Philip> understand that they can be ordered out of Grainger's catalog
Philip> for about $75.  I called 800-555-1212 for their #, but they
Philip> didn't have it.

I am going to post this as well as reply by email since I have
answered the same question for 4 people in the last month.  W. W.
Grainger is *not* a centralized mail order operation with an 800 order
line.  They have no 800 line at all except for ordering replacement
parts for equipment you have already purchased from them.  They have
offices in all of the major U.S. cities.  Look in your local telephone
book for their number, and if not one locally go to the nearest larger
cities, until you find one.  There are hundreds of offices.

Here are some details on their sales policies:

1)	You are welcome to appear in person at their local office and 
	purchase anything you want from their catalog and they will
	be very helpful in assisting you to get what you need from
	a catolog almost 4" thick.

2)	If you have a business, getting a catalog and a credit line
	of $1000 is a snap - just fill out one form - in person.

3)	If you are an individual, you cannot get a catalog.

4)	They *do* accept credit cards as payment.

5)	They are very happy to sell to individuals.


dion

Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 31 Oct 1994 18:17 -0800 (PST)
From: kr_roberson at gate.pnl.gov
Subject: Pumpkin Ale-Success

I took 17 22 oz. bottles of my pumpkin ale to a halloween party Saturday night. 
I think it was a big success; it was all gone when it was time to leave and I 
got lots of favorable comments and no bad ones. Also, I didn't see anyone spit 
it out! Anyway, the point of this post is to tell you how I mashed the pumpkin; 
how you spice it is up to you.

Mashing process: I wanted to use 1/3 pumpkin as an adjunct. So I cut the 
pumpkins in half (ones about 6 inches in diameter), removed the seeds and 
roasted the pumpkin in the oven at 350 oF for thirty minutes. After they 
cooled, I peeled the skin off and cubed the meat. This went into the first 
decoction. I boiled this decoction until the pumpkin became stringy pulp. I put 
this back into the mash and hit a protein rest for 30 minutes. I did another 
decoction to get to the sacrification rest at 60 oC. I picked a low temp to get 
lots of sugar. This was probably too conservative since the body came out a 
little light for the spices I used. It rested for 1 1/2 hours before I tested 
it with iodine and got a negative test. Based on the negative test, I skipped 
the mashout since it was too late to stop enzyme activity. I didn't have any 
trouble sparging though. Mashtun smelled like pumpkin for a week! I looked at 
the spent grains afterward and the stringy pumpkin was trapped in the husks 
very well. Maybe if I had turned it into mush, it would have plugged up the 
grain bed? Don't know, but it might explain the variable results people are 
getting with regards to stuck mashes.

A data point in the wilderness,
Kyle



Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 31 Oct 94 21:54:00 -0400
From: charles.brault at channel1.com (Charles Brault)
Subject: :Homebrew Digest Subscription

I would like to suscribe to Homebrew Digest.  Is there anything special
I need to do?  Many thanks.

charles.brault at channel1.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 31 Oct 1994 21:26:35 -0500
From: TAyres at aol.com
Subject: Washington, D.C.-Area Brewpubs

I'm headed to "the Nation's Capitol," aka Washington, for Thanksgiving and
would appreciate tips, comments, etc., concerning brewpubs in the area.  My
time will be limited, so particularly tasty recommendations will be most
appreciated.

Thanks!

Tom Ayres
tayres at aol.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 31 Oct 94 21:45:01 est
From: A.J._deLange at csgi.com (A.J. deLange)
Subject: Wheat for Wit


Jeff M. Michalski, MD" <michalski_jm at rophys.wustl.edu> wrote:

>..In Phil Seitz's
>summary on brewing Belgian ales nothing is said about
>gelatinization.  

>Does anyone have any experience in the cooking/gelatinization 
>of raw wheat prior to a Wit biere mash?  
>Is this necessary or will a find [sic] grind suffice? 

I have made Wit from Phil's handout which, as stated, does not
discuss gelatinization of the wheat. Rajotte (in "Belgian Ale",
q.v.) describes the traditional method for brewing Wit which 
does not precook the  wheat nor use decoction but is still 
quite intense as there are multiple mashes and boilings.

Raw wheat is essential to this style and so I chose raw winter 
wheat berries (summer wheat has too much protein) which I ran
through a Glatt mill. The unmalted berries are very hard (the
mill's gears were ruined) which further suggested that an inten-
sive mash would be required to break down the very tough protein
matrix. 

I reasoned that unmalted wheat would present the same difficuilties
as malted wheat only more so and thus turned to my experiences
with Weissbier, eventually settling on the double decoction profile
as given by Warner in  "German Wheat Beer". The double decoction
mash seems to be adequate as fair (about 60%) extraction results.
No lautering/sparging difficulties are encountered but the spent
grains come out of the lauter tun in one big gelatinous glob.

The result is delightful. No other beer I have ever made has been 
so popular with family and friends. I think it compares favorably 
to the Celis, Dentergems, and Blanche de Bruges though I have stopped
using lactic acid and so mine is not so tart. It is unquestionably
better than Wit!

Nonetheless, Phil says I must drop my Teutonic ways and think more
like a Belgian!

I have seen several recipes for Wit all of which use raw wheat in
one form or another (flour for example) but none of which pre-cook
it.

A.J. deLange, A.J._deLange at csgi.com

Return to table of contents


Date: 31 Oct 94 17:53:00 GMT
From: korz at iepubj.att.com (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
Subject: Superior manifold design/rising and falling clumps

Jim writes:
>Now the hard part.  What is the "superior" manifold design?

I'm going to stick my neck out and suggest that virtually all manifold,
falsebottom, easymasher and grain bag systems are equivalent in terms
of getting a set mash (stuck runnoff) if you are:

1. not overcrushing your malt and unmalted grains,

2. using a protein rest if you have a lot of high-protein grains
in the mash, and

3. keeping the temperature from getting too low during runoff.

There *are* differences in terms of ease of assembly, cost, volume of 
underlet, amount of recirculation required and how equally the sugars
are extracted from the various parts of the mash bed (i.e. no pockets
of stagnant runnings).

On the subject of a vent tube, my intuition says that this is not necessary
and consider that no commercial system has any such vent.  Could some of
the brewers that have used *both* vented and non-vented manifolds comment
on their usefulness?  Just because commercially they are not used does not
mean they are not a good idea, but my gut feeling is that the manifold
is more likely to run dry with such a vent if the bed begins to compact whereas
without a vent, it is probably less likely for the manifold to run dry.  Does
this sound right to you?

*************
Michael writes:
>I am on my 3rd batch and just transferred to a carboy for a
>secondary ferment after 6 days in primary. When I siphoned from
>prim->second some clumps of ale yeast got sucked through. I having
>been watching with amazement these clumps of yeast rising and falling
>at the surface. Eventually the clumps seem to be falling to 
>the bottom.

That's probably not yeast, but rather cold break that's rising and falling
in the carboy.  CO2 clings to the clumps of cold break and it rises to the
top of the carboy -- once it reaches the top, the CO2 bubbles pop off and
the clump sinks.  During transfer, much of the dissolved CO2 came out of
solution and now it will take a few days for the CO2 to saturate the beer
and begin moving the airlock again.  Depending on the temperature, 6 days
may have been enough to complete most of the fermentation, so your beer
may be almost done and you may not see anymore airlock activity.  Wait a
few days for the airlock to restart.  If it does not, then wait a few more
for the yeast to settle and then go to bottling.  If the airlock does
restart, then wait for it to slow to about 1-2 bubbles per minute, wait
a couple more days for the yeast to settle and then bottle.

Al.

Return to table of contents


Date: 31 Oct 94 19:27:00 GMT
From: korz at iepubj.att.com (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
Subject: Re: Found - The perfect pump!

Bill reports having found the perfect pump for homebrewing.  The
writeup sounded great except for one key phrase that was missing:

                     "FOOD GRADE"

If indeed the pump innards are food grade, then this truly is a
wonderful find.  If not, then it still may be usable, but then
maybe not -- remember someone just recently posted how they got
a plastic-flavored beer from a PVC manifold in their lauter tun?
Also, flavor may not be the only worry from non-food-grade plastics.

Al.

Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 31 Oct 94 20:30:56 PST
From: Lee Bollard <bollard at spk.hp.com>
Subject: Sparge water pH adjustments

I'm wondering how/if to adjust my sparge water for proper pH.

My water:

        Total Alkalinity                168
        Total Hardness                  173
        Calcium                          45
        Magnesium                        14
        Sulfate                          14
        Chloride                         12.5
        Sodium                            9.6
        pH                                7.3

Need I adjust the sparge water?  Is gypsum the best substance to use for
this pH adjustment? (I usually make Pale Ales).  Thanks!

Regards,

Lee Bollard
bollard at spk.hp.com


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 1 Nov 94 16:22:30 EDT
From: Aidan "Krazy Krausen Kropping Kiwi" Heerdegen <aidan at rschp2.anu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Lauter Tun Out Of Cooler
Full-Name: Aidan "Krazy Krausen Kropping Kiwi" Heerdegen

<purchasing of easymasher deleted>

| So basicly, instant lauter ton for $20 and a cooler.
| 
| However I found they they also sell a "Sprayer" for $15.  

*snip*

| If somone has other inexpensive ideas of making one.  Please let me know.

Umm ... hate to *brag* .... but I will anyway!	:)

I bought 2 second hand coolers from the recycling place for $10 
(so one of them leaks a *little* ..  so what!  :) ).  I use the 
smaller one as a sparge water vessel (as I can get water hot 
enough out of my shower unit so I don't need to heat it 
separately).  The larger of the two (12 gal) I made into a 
mash/lauter tun ...  it cost $6 for the "elbow" and "T" joints 
and $5 for the three  0.5m lengths of straight copper tubing.  

My manifold looks like:


	 at  --- T ---  at 
	|     |     |
	|     |     |
	|     |     |		 at  = copper "elbow"
	|     |     |		T = copper "T" joint
	|     |     |
	|     |     |
	T --- T ---  at 
	|
	 at  (this elbow goes down through a 
	   hole in the bottom of the cooler)

The joints just sort of slip on ..  so I just tied some thin 
copper wire round the two major axes to keep it from coming 
apart.  It is easily dismantled for cleaning etc.  

I hacksawed diagonal cuts into the bottom of the pieces of tubing 
 - this was the major pain in the arse, but I don't have a vice of 
any description, so it probably wouldn't take too long if you 
have the right equipment.  

So that is A$21 (= US$16) for a mash/lauter tun (including the 
cooler!).

Jack S.  (about whom there are many strongly held opinions) 
reckons the sprayer is unecessary ..  and I am inclined to 
believe him.  Just keep the level of your sparge water above your 
grain bed and trickle the water in gently, should be fine (but 
one of those gizmo's sounds like FUN!  ...  but we are trying to 
be frugal here after all ..).  

I purchased my boiler for $30 ...  it is an old 12 gal wash 
copper, in a nice enameled body and has a cool little drain in 
the bottom ...  perfect in other words.  The wort chiller cost 
$36, and wasn't too hard to re-coil (It came already coiled 
flat).  

All up ... umm $87 Australian .. so that is about US$65 

I reckon that is expense is ok to set up for all-graining ...

This message was brought to you by the (CPAGB) Committee for the 
Proliferation of All-Grain Brewing (tm) (Copyleft).   

I did my first all-grain the weekend before last, a nice Heavy 
Strong Bitter, OG 1060 (about a 29 pts/lb/gal extraction from 5kg 
of Pale malt, 0.5kg of Crystal and about 0.1kg of roasted), did a 
single step infusion mash at about 65 degC (couldn't get it any 
higher) used about 100g (3 oz) of EKG pellets all up, and 
fermented with a yeast starter innoculated from some yeast I got 
from the local brewpub.  There was a shit load of yeast (no 
worries about pitching rates) and I aerated by letting the wort 
fall into the fermenter from the tap in my boiler (after 
cooling).  There seemed to plenty of foam on top (indicating good 
aeration), yet at racking the SG was 1.020, and 3 days later it 
is still at that.  I tasted when I racked and it seemed way too 
sweet ..  

I don't normally ..  but ..  I am WORRYING!  It being my first 
all grain and all ... encouraging noises welcomed .. 

Cheers

Aidan

- --
Aidan Heerdegen				
e-mail: aidan at rschp2.anu.edu.au


Return to table of contents


Date: 31 Oct 94 23:05:31 MST (Mon)
From: rcd at raven.eklektix.com (Dick Dunn)
Subject: selling what's free?!?

Sheesh!  Tempest in a brewpot, and a bit of conflict to flush out the budding
Jim(TM) Koch(TM) in all of us!  Come on, folks, THINK!  If you can brew a
decent beer, you can think your way through this one!

> Well, someone wants to sell a hardcopy of the HBD.  Do y'all know that you
> own the copyright on what you write?  And that you don't have to put such
> a notice on what you write?  Or even register it?  So, if you think you're
> getting ripped off, you are.

Ripped off for what?  Because you say <X> and freely tell it to the world,
and somebody prints a piece of paper that says you said <X>?  I think not.

Well, yes, at the outset you do own the copyright on what you write, and
since the US adopted the Berne Convention you don't need the notice, but if
you'll think about submitting to HBD for a moment, you'll realize that by
submitting to HBD you've already made your material available for distribu-
tion without charge to at least the 3000 or so direct subscribers to the
digest.  Beyond that, HBD is redistributed in USENET rec.crafts.brewing,
which potentially reaches at least an order of magnitude more people.  You
did all this intentionally.  Do you see any notices restricting (re)distri-
bution of the HBD?  If so, please let me know, 'cause they're not in my
copies.  As far as I can tell, sending to HBD constitutes publication with
no restrictions on further republication.

worse yet, from another:
> Bull. You're taking the work of others, printing it, retailing it without
> first getting releases from the authors, and claiming credit while having
> added absolutely no value whatsoever.

There was never any claim that the guy was going to "claim credit" for the
hardcopy distribution.  He was going to reprint the stuff so people could
buy a copy, sit down, and read it.  To the benighted few who don't realize
it: Editing/printing/publishing costs money.  The HBD costs money.  The
archives cost money.  DUH!

If releases were required to produce hardcopy of HBD, they would be
required to distribute the HBD itself.  Note that a copyright violation, if
it exists, is a violation regardless of whether money is charged for the
copy.  (Charging for copies in violation will normally change the penalties,
but not the fact, of a violation.)

> If I find you publishing or selling anything I have said without having
> first arranged it with me in writing, I will sue you into the ground.
> If you don't believe me I suggest you read the Berne Copyright Convention,

Before you threaten to sue, you had better consult a competent lawyer,
which you obviously have not done.  Consider that you need to maintain a
copyright (i.e., pursue violations once they become known to you) or you
lose it.  Consider that the proposed hardcopy publication is based on the
HBD, which is itself a publication!  In other words, you allow unlimited
redistribution via HBD; where do you think you get any control over further
distribution?  (For the slow of understanding, that means if <A> publishes
your work, and <B> copies it from <A> and publishes it again, if you want
to go after <B> you had better go after <A> as well, or your claim is a
house of cards.)

Now, let's think one more step on this.  Obviously you can get HBD from
free subscription, or from the archives.  If somebody wants to package it
up and print it on paper, let him!  He *can't* make much money on it,
because if he does, somebody else will do the same thing but undercut his
price.  This will continue until there is no useful margin left, and those
people who want a hardcopy HBD will either purchase the cheapest they can
find (which will be just copying costs) or the one which adds some value
(like editing, indexing, etc.) in which case the one with the added value
gets paid in proportion to the value added.  The only thing you gain by
attempting to restrict printed distribution of copies of HBD is a restric-
tion on where your little pearls of wisdom may fall.

I figger it this way:  If I've got something so wonderful that I want to
own it, I don't send it to HBD, 'cause that's giving it away, one way or
the other.  But I also figger I can afford to give advice and let people do
with it whatever they want, as long as they don't hurt me by doing so.  No-
body hurts me by saying "Dick said thus-and-so".

Yeah, I know, all the whiners can now add five lines of sniveling copyright
sub-re-distribution rules to their postings so that nobody will print a
hardcopy of their request for brewpubs in South Podunk...and the HBD will
lose more bandwidth to noise.  That's my bet.

Or we *could* just sit back and let anybody who wants to print the stuff
do whatever makes sense with HBD, and maybe reach a few more budding
brewers, and evince some of the camaraderie that still exists here and
there.
- ---
Dick Dunn    rcd at eklektix.com   -or-   raven!rcd    Boulder, Colorado USA
   ...Simpler is better.

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 1 Nov 1994 07:58:40 -0500
From: Mike Zentner <zentner at ecn.purdue.edu>
Subject: Wort Chillers and Hard Copy


Two things.
Mark asked:

>Thirdly, I was going to make a wort chiller.  It seems everyone
>is using 1/2 inch diameter tubing.  I can buy 25 feet of 1/2 inch
>for the same price as 60 ft. of 1/4 inch.  Adding up the surface
>area, it seems I could get about 17% more cooling power for my
>money.  Any reason not to go with the 1/4 inch?

Don't Do It!  You will experience nearly "creep flow".  In other
words, you'll wait, wait, wait, and there is a high probability
that if you get a husk or two in the works, it'll clog.  How do I
know this?  Because I did it already.  I think half inch is a little
big, but wouldn't be surprised if it works OK.  I used 3/8.  For
details:

As Always, my wort chiller plans are available on line for free
to nearly anyone who requests them.

Ulick Stafford stated that we should not expect royalties for our
drivel.  While he is right, I also do not expect someone to sell
my drivel for profit, and I think that was the original concern
here.

Mike Zentner

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 01 Nov 94 09:35:26 EST
From: mdemers at ccmailpc.ctron.com
Subject: Re: Worthless Posts


        Sorry to waste BW with this, but I must defend myself.
     
     In HBD 1565 Dennis Forester posted a *PRIVATE E-MAIL* that I sent to 
     him expressing that, IN MY OPINION, a rundown of EVERY homebrew shop 
     in the state of NJ is a waste of HBD BW.  Would everyone like me to 
     post my impressions of every HB shop in New Hampshire?  I doubt it 
     very seriously.  I have no problem with using the HBD to gain 
     information, that's what it's for! But, what Dennis could have done 
     was post a request for NJ homebrewers to contact him via e-mail with 
     their impressions of NJ homebrew shops.  Wouldn't this seem more 
     logical than to post a 100 line article that 99% of the HBD readership 
     wouldn't care about?  Dennis, shame on you for posting a private 
     e-mail without permission and for posting profanity in the HBD.
     
                                     Mike Demers

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 1 Nov 1994 09:01:55 -0500
From: Art Steinmetz <asteinm at pipeline.com>
Subject: Thermometer accuracy

Bill Marks comments about his BruTemp Digital Temperature Probe piqued my
interest because I have been very frustrated by my mash temp measurements
lately.  I admonish y'all to verify your thermometer.   
 
I had been using an instant read kitchen probe but became suspicious so I
tried to check it against a dairy alc. therm.  At 32f they agreed.  At 212F
the probe read 200f.  I used the space shuttle method and added a third
mercury candy therm. and allowed them to vote.  The probe was 5 to 10f low
throughout the whole mashing range. 158f mashes might actually be at 168f -
<gack!>.  The other two, while in agreement, sure take their time getting
to a stable reading.  They're useless for detecting temp. gradients in a
mash. 
 
It's definitely thermometer upgrade time. 
 
- -- 
Art Steinmetz NYC/NJ 
Internet: asteinm at pipeline.com 
Compuserve: 76044,3204 

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 1 Nov 1994 09:02:05 -0500
From: Art Steinmetz <asteinm at pipeline.com>
Subject: NJ Homebrew shops

My two cents on NJ brew shops.  The three I've been to are all fine. 
 
Gary Kuyat  at  bellcore sez: 
 
> Dave can be a little, well okay, 
> a lot loud- but he is EXTREMELY knowledgeable!  
 
I'll second Gary's comments about the Brewmeister in Cranford.  Good
selection.  Good prices.  The proprietor is passionate about brewing and
brooks no difference in his opinion.  I imagine newbies might be
intimidated by Dave but at least his advice is sound. 
 
The Home Brewery in Bogota (near the GW bridge) run by Alby Tarzia and Bill
McKinless is nothing fancy but selection and prices are also good. 
Advanced brewers will find less of interest than at the Brewmeister but
they have a great extract selection and solid recipe advice.  Great guys
who always have a sample or two to share.  They enjoy a link to Sam
Wammack's THB  in MO. 
 
Hop & Vine is a new entry in Morristown and is easily the swankest shop
I've been in.  Spacious, big inventory and slighltly higher prices than I'm
used to.  It's probably the wave of the future for our very successful
hobby.  The shopkeeper, Julianne Taggert, is putting her soul into the
venture.  She hosted a grand opening party where she served about 8 of her
own beers.  Her advice is also good; a couple beginners brought beers she
had tutored them on to tasting I attended.  Much better efforts than my
first batches. 
 
 - 
Art Steinmetz NYC/NJ 
Internet: asteinm at pipeline.com 
Compuserve: 76044,3204 

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 1 Nov 1994 08:34:41 -0600
From: keithfrank at dow.com (Keith Frank)
Subject: Barley Wine shelf life

***** From Bruce DeBolt *****

In the latest Southwest Brewing News there is an article on Barley Wine by 
Reagin McNeill from McNeill's Brewpub in Vermont.  He said in the blind 
tastings of Thomas Hardy Ale (some at least 4 years old) that he participated 
in the two year old bottle was consistently judged to be the best.  No 
telling how the bottles had been treated, etc.  Just a data point.

Bruce DeBolt
c/o keithfrank at dow.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 1 Nov 94 09:49:56 EST
From: Steve Robinson <Steve.Robinson at analog.com>
Subject: Mea Culpa


In HBD 1562, I posted the following piece of misinformation, referring to
Charlie Papazian's Homebrewer's Companion:
                   ----------------------

> In the section on water treatment, Charlie equates 5 grams of gypsum with 1
> TABLESPOON ...

It appears that I suffered brain fade between reading the book on the weekend
and sending the post on Tuesday.  The actual line I was referring to is in the
recipe section, not the chapter on water treatment.  On page 285 Charlie says,
"Add gypsum to very soft water at a rate of two tablespoons (15.6 g) per
5 gallons (19 l) of water."  It seems that I misremembered two tablespoons
as three tablespoons, hence my post.

I still believe the ratio of 2 tbsp. = 15.6 g to be incorrect.  One of the
problems with using volume measurements with gypsum is that its non-crystalline
nature leads to a wide variation in density.  Depending on how tightly packed
it is, a level teaspoon can range anywhere from about 3.75 g to about 5.05 g.

	LOW-END:  2 tbsp. = 6 tsp. * 3.75 g/tsp. = 22.5 g.
	HIGH-END: 2 tbsp. = 6 tsp. * 5.05 g/tsp. = 30.3 g.

The bottom line: 15 g is close to the maximum solubility of gypsum in water
anyway, so this is one case where it's probably appropriate to RDWHAHB.

Steve R.
steve.robinson at analog.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 01 Nov 94 09:24:11 EST
From: "CANNON_TOM" <CANNON_TOM at hq.navsea.navy.mil>
Subject: Propane Cooking Indoors?

          I'm sure this has been covered, but I'm in need of some near
          term guidance.  Private responses are welcome.

          As background, I brew with four other people.  This summer
          we purchased a King Kooker and have used it with our 7
          gallon enamaled brew pot on the deck of one of our houses.
          This weekend we cut open a 15.5 gallon keg, and will begin
          to use it with the Kooker on our next batch.  The Problem:
          With cold, wet weather in our near future, two of my fellow
          brewers have decided that we can use the King Kooker indoors
          with no problem.  I'm not so sure.  The next brew is at my
          house, and I'm not convinced we can use it safely inside.
          Does anyone have any experience or comments pro or con on
          using a 130000 BTU propane cooker inside a house?

          Tom Cannon
          DH Brewery
          Fairfax/Annandale VA


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 01 Nov 94 08:08:26 -0600
From: "Gary E.Yoder" <ej10geyu at shell.com>
Subject: Bru-Vigor contents questions.



I have added Bru-Vigor to a number of my fermentations. Being cheap, I bought a
"large" ( i.e. several batches ) economy size bag, which has subsequently
absorbed a lot of moisture ( I left it unsealed in the wet Houston air
). I know
Bru-Vigor contains nutrients, and I started wondering about the
contents of this
stuff, just what was in it, and why it is hygrscopic.

1) What -exactly- is in Bru-Vigor, meerly inorganic salts?

2) Are there simple or complex ( read heat / boil sensitive ) organic compounds
included? What would happen if it was added to the boil instead of with
the yeast?

3) Does it contain a sufficient nutrient supply to support growth on
its own; ie
could it become contaminated or infected?

4) What's in it that absorbs moisture?

Reply by private email if prefered. I'll summaraize if I get a response


    |  Gary Yoder:   email:   ej10geyu at shell.com    

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 1 Nov 94 9:57:12 EST
From: Pierre Jelenc <pcj1 at columbia.edu>
Subject: Copyrights; sulfites

In HBD 1567, "Ulick Stafford" <ulick at ulix.rad.nd.edu> has this to say 
about the "hardopy HBD" copyright question:

> [ ... ] I find it highly amusing that so many posters here are pompous 
> enough to expect royalties for the drivel they post.  Get a grip on 
> reality people - no one pays you now, and IMHO, there is bugger all
> difference between this electronic method of promulgation and someone
> making a hard copy.  This issue has come up before concerning the Cat's
> Miow, but the difference there is that someone has gone to a lot of
> trouble making it publishable.  And unedited downloads of hbd are of
> extremely limited utility, IMHO. 

As one who was among the first to protest (on r.c.b.), let me assure you
that it was not a question of royalties (and in my reading, all those who
raised that question did it at least partly in joke), but one of control.

If one makes it a habit to abandon copyright publicly, it becomes
increasingly difficult to assert later that copyright was not relinquished
on other texts. Apple, or Koch, can employ squadrons of lawyers to fight
in courts; I cannot, and therefore have to make it clear that I simply do
not ever relinquish my copyright unless I specifically state so in
writing.  No matter how much drivel it is, it's *my* drivel. 

That said, I would have given permission to include my posts to the HBD 
(royalty-free! yes!) if I had been asked beforehand and if a notice was 
put on the cover to indicate that the copyright of individual authors 
remained with these authors.

ObBeer: 
- -------

Is there a problem with the sulfite content of dried apricots? I plan on
making something like a strong ale with apricots in the secondary, but I
am afraid that the amounts of sulfites may be too high for even a
domesticated yeast to tolerate. Is this in fact the case? Is there a way
to get rid of sulfites gently (i.e. not by boiling)? 

Pierre

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 1 Nov 1994 10:01:21 -0500
From: tgriffin at sctcorp.com (Tom Griffin)
Subject: Help a new brewer

Hi everyone!  I need to tap some worldly brewing wisdom here.  I just
uncapped a bottle of my bitter ale and it slowly proceeded to foam out
half the bottle.  I tried chilling a bottle and that solved the
problem completely.  The problem is, I don't want to drink it that
cold.  Does anyone have any ideas on why I have little beer volcanoes?
The spewers (I did more than one) were at room temp. when I opened
them and I don't think they are infected.  

Many preliminary thanks!
Tom


- -- 
     /~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~/
    / Tom Griffin                       Internet: tgriffin at sctcorp.com  /
   /  Technical Specialist              Phone:    606-277-1500 x225    /
  /   SCT Public Sector, Lexington KY   Fax:      606-277-2300        /
  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 1 Nov 94 10:24:58 EST
From: Spencer.W.Thomas at med.umich.edu
Subject: Re: aging barleywine

Gary Bell wrote:

 > Thomas Hardy Ale has on its label that it gets better with great
 > age, and may be kept for at least 25 years.

I'd take that with a grain of salt.  They've only been brewing the
stuff for 26 years.  (Last year they had a big "silver anniversary"
thing.)  From what I've read, some years' production seem to be
keeping better than others.

=Spencer in Ann Arbor, MI

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 1 Nov 1994 10:29:03 -0500
From: Chris Cooper <ccooper at a2607cc.msr.hp.com>

Date: Tuesday Nov. 1, 1994  10:35 PM EDT
From: ccooper at a2607cc.msr.hp.com (Chris Cooper)
Subject:Home Brew Clubs

I'd like to start with a THANK YOU to Spencer Thomas for sending me an
invite to the Ann Arbor Brewers Guild meeting last month.  As a novice
home brewer (6+ months, 14 batches) it was a real eye opener and a heck
of a good time ( good people, interesting conversations, lots of home brew
to sample, need I say more !).  

I would suggest to all of you out there in HBD land that have never been to
a local club meeting start looking for one in your area and make an effort to
attend, its fun and educational.
 
On a related matter, during the meeting I was introduced to Mike O'brien and
Dave West of Pico Brew(tm) systems of Yipsilanti, Mi. and was invited to a
saturday brew session at Dave's house (it turned out he lived about
5 minutes away from my house).  This session was to do an all grain brew
on a new proto-type system based on stainless 55-gal. barrels and aimed
at the micro brewery/brew pub market.  As an extract brewer I jumped at
the chance to help in an all grain large volume (80+ gal.) batch.
As the equipment was still in the proto-type stage many ideas and
suggestions were exchanged and I think the final product will be a
very solid and functional design.  The session went by smoothly and we
made what I'm sure will prove to be and excellent stout.  
					       
Chris Cooper , Commerce Michigan    --> Where ever you go <--
ccooper at a2607.cc.msr.hp.com         --> There you are     <--
 


Return to table of contents


Date:        Tue, 01 Nov 94 10:33:13 EST
From: Dennis Forester <X6OT at MUSIC.STLAWU.EDU>
Subject: Worthless posts, again!

Dear HBDers,

  In response to a post I recently made the anonymous person whoses
address is MDEMERS at CCMAILPC.CTRON.COM sent this back to me about local
posts. Please post you feelings so that we may get this issue cleared up
for good.


     Well, if you think not leaving a name is bad manners, how can you
     possibly justify posting what you did in HBD 1565?  First of all,
     posting a private e-mail WITHOUT PERMISSION is EXTREMELY bad manners.
     I can't believe you wasted EVEN MORE bandwidth with that garbage.  I
     contacted you via e-mail to express an opinion. I never intended this
     to become a public flame war which YOU have begun. But now that it has
     begun I guess we'll see what the HBD readership has to say about it.
     If they say they would like to keep up on what's happening at every NJ
     HB shop then I will apologize to you and will promptly post my
     impressions of all HB shops within a 100 mile radius of my house.
     Oh yeah,  when you published my private e-mail with the word "shit" in
     it, that was really uncalled for in a PUBLIC FORUM. That's why I sent
     it OFFLINE!

 I responded to this person by telling him/her that I have recieved many
e-mails saying that 'Local' intrests are important to many paople and
that they should stay in the HBD. And with reference to posting Sh*t, I
was just reprinting his post and if he thinks that posting it in public
is bad, why would he post it privately to someone he does not know.

  I would like to get this resolved as quickly and as painlessly as
possible. Please help us because I feel this will be important to every
person in the HBD but I would like it to take as little time as it can.

TIA,

Dennis
X6OT at Music.Stlawu.Edu

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 1 Nov 1994 10:50:02 -0500
From: Chris Cooper <ccooper at a2607cc.msr.hp.com>

Date: Tuesday Nov. 1, 1994  10:45 PM EDT
From: ccooper at a2607cc.msr.hp.com (Chris Cooper)
Subject:RE:Cranberry Wheat/Wyeast Bavarian

In HBD #1567 Jim Emery asked about slow fermentation in a
Cranberry Wheat beer and Wyeast Bavarian.

I just bottled my Cranberry wheat (from the recent Zymurgy special issue)
it was 7 days in the primary (1.047-1.024) and 15 days in the secondary
(1.024-1.012) where it bubbled slow but steady right to the end.  I
used Wyeast Bavarian for this batch and I have used it for two other
batches , a wheat and a honey wheat, and all three had slow but steady
fermentation times, they came out great as far as final character was
concerned.  

Just my $.02 worth.

Chris Cooper , Commerce Michigan    --> Where ever you go <--
ccooper at a2607.cc.msr.hp.com         --> There you are     <--
 


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 1 Nov 94 10:50 EST
From: Eric Hale <S=Eric_Hale%S=Hale%G=Eric%I=ER%BECHTEL at mcimail.com>
Subject: RE: air-lock germs

RONALD DWELLE asks:
>     What happens to the liquid in the air-lock after bubbles quit going 
>     through it. Turn stale? grow bugs? If I have to leave the brew in a 
>     carboy for a long time, should I remove the airlock and bung the hole? 
>     Add chlorox to the airlock? Just let it be, relax, Have a home brew?

I don't know if this is a great idea, but what I do is add some cheap vodka
instead of water (or some other solution).  It's sterile and the worst thing
that can if it back-siphons is you increase your alcohol content.  If sodium
hypochlorite (a.k.a., bleach) should back-siphon...  Yikes!  Who knows what
it would do to your brew.  

I can't take credit for this idea.  It came from Steve Bailey who runs the
Home Brewing & Wine Making Emporium out of his house in Warrenville,
Illinois.  A real cool guy and he does mail order:  800-455-BREW or
708-393-BEER.  He got great prices and also offers a 10% bonus on first
orders. 

(And don't consider this an advertisement.  He's a good guy who cares more
about homebrewing and helping people than making a buck.  Spreading the word
about stuff like this is part of the reason why I read the HBD.) 

Eric Hale 


Return to table of contents


Date: 1 Nov 1994 08:26:11 U
From: "Palmer.John" <palmer at ssdgwy.mdc.com>
Subject: Chiller Tube Dia/Copyright

Hi Group,
Mark asked about using 1/4 ID copper tubing for a wort chiller. I used 40 feet
of 1/4 inch for my first chiller and although it works, I am going to suggest a
MINIMUM of 3/8 inch. Why? Backpressure. 1/4 inch is too restrictive to flow;
sure you have more surface area, but you have decreased the volume of flow to
the point where it works against you. A larger Dia will yield a higher flow
volume and result in better chilling.
**
As usual, more discussion leads to better understanding. If Clay is only trying
to break even on the costs of reproduction, that's not bad. We've been over
this part...
Ulick's irritating manner aside, I think he had a fair idea about HBD
submitters agreeing to surrender copyright, since most of what is discussed
here can be considered common knowledge. 

But let's look at the information shared by some of the "experts" around here.
Many have shared articles and new information that are published in Zymurgy and
Brewing Techniques.  Several members of this forum have committed personal
resources to generate new information, yet shared it in this forum because of
an understanding that this forum is public, not for profit. All archives are
free, etc. To republish this type of submittal is what has members of this
forum upset. We don't want this issue to scare away valuable posts

So here's the question, do we say that All the info on the HBD is free for
re-publication, or that none of it is? I think the solution is to attach tags
to posts we consider to be proprietary, however annoying that is. That's why I
revised my How To Brew Your First Beer document this year, because even though
the law is on my side, I wanted it understood up front what I regarded my
rights to the document to be. 
I said, 
"This document is intended to be distributed freely and may be copied for
personal use. 	Copyright (c) 1994 by John J. Palmer  All Rights Reserved."

I intend to do the same with the Mashing/Grain FAQ, although in that case I
will be acting as editor for submissions from a dozen people. The FAQs and
other documents archived at Sierra and other sites on the Net are intended to
be Free for Individual use, not as a free source of material for any
entrepreneur.

BTW, It occurs to me that hardcopy publishing of some topics such as Jim Koch
bashing could result in libel suits for some people...

Sorry, didn't mean take up so much space with this,
John Palmer MDA-SSD M&P palmer at ssdgwy.mdc.com  


Return to table of contents


Date: 1 Nov 94 10:27 CST
From: Wolfe at act-12-po.act.org
Subject: Weiss yeast

I want to make a Berliner weissbier.  I recently purchased a Kindl Weiss
(Wow!  That suff is sour!), and noticed that it was bottle conditioned.
Does anyone know if the yeast in the bottle is the original fermenting
yeast?  Or is the yeast filtered out and replaced with a lager yeast for
conditioning?

Ed Wolfe
wolfe at act-12-po.act.org

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 1 Nov 94 09:49:39 -0700
From: lmsabo at mbnoa1.uswc.uswest.com (L M Sabo)
Subject: Re: air-lock germs


Ronald Dwelle asks:

>     What happens to the liquid in the air-lock after bubbles quit going
>     through it. Turn stale? grow bugs? If I have to leave the brew in a
>     carboy for a long time, should I remove the airlock and bung the hole?
>     Add chlorox to the airlock? Just let it be, relax, Have a home brew?

As I recall some clever sole on the HBD posted a suggestion to use a shot
of vodka in the airlock. To your point, vodka won't turn stale or grow bugs.
If a bit should leak into the beer it won't infect it. Gosh I wonder if the
vodka would taste like a light scotch if you were to drink it after your
beer fermented out?  I'm kidding please don't respond to that comment!

_Michael Sabo

Return to table of contents


Date: 1 Nov 1994 10:18:16 U
From: "Norman Dickenson" <norman.dickenson at Sonoma.EDU>
Subject: AGED BARLEYWINES

                       Subject:                               Time:8:55 AM
  OFFICE MEMO          AGED BARLEYWINES                       Date:11/1/94
>What's the oldest barleywine anyone out there has kept?  I brewed one 
about 15 >months ago, and still have two bottles left that I'll be 
cracking open shortly >. . . I was just wondering if anyone has kept any 
over a year & a half, and if >so, did they continue to improve?

I have brewed barleywines that tasted like s--- for the first 1 1/4
years in the bottle and then, presto!, at a year and a half they
metamorphized into prize winning products (AHA 2nd place two years
running).  These were big (OG 1.105) gravity beers.  

Over the course of six or seven years, I collected many bottles of Thomas
Hardy's Ale spanning almost every year from 1984-1993.  I held a tasting
with friends about six months ago.  The 1984 was very oxidized and
sherry-like.  It was not pleasant!  Most of the other years from 1985-
1989 exhibited varying degrees of oxidation and were clearly not getting
better.  The best one was 1991 which was absolutely fabulous.  1992 and
1993 lacked the complexity of the the 1991.

It seemed to me and my fellow tasters that there were obvious differences in
the grist bills of the different years.  The color changes
between years was sometimes dramatic (and not owing to oxidation).

My experience indicates to me that if you use a Pasteur type champagne
yeast, it takes a very long time for a barley wine to deal with the many
unpleasant bi-products of the fermentation, and the yeast really isn't
any more attenuative than using (for example) a good dose of Wyeast's
1056 which will ferment very cleanly and produce a quality drinkable product
within a month or two (additional aging generally will improve it).  I will
never use a wine/champagne
yeast on a barley wine again. 

norman.dickenson at sonoma.edu



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 1 Nov 1994 11:27:15 -0500 (EST)
From: Timothy Staiano <tstaiano at ultrix.ramapo.edu>
Subject: Priming Stuff

Greetings and Salutations!

I'm going to bottle my Ho-Ho Holiday Ale within the next week and was 
wondering, how does one go about priming with molasses?  It turned out 
that the brew is a bit lighter body-wise than I had intended.  Can I use 
molasses not only to prime but to add body too?  Are there any other 
meathods to increase body without over-carbonation?  I know you're all 
busy out there in cyberspace, but prompt replys are greatly appreciated.  
I'd like to be able to serve this 'un on Thanksgiving Day.

Have a hoppy!
Tim (tstaiano at ultrix.ramapo.edu)

Return to table of contents

End of HOMEBREW Digest #1568, 11/02/94