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


Contents:
  N2-CO2 mixed-gas systems/finings and haze (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
  Last Call:  BUZZ-OFF AHA Competition ("Houseman, David L [TR]")
  Barkeeper's Friend (Jim Larsen)
  bulk yeast starters (Nigel Townsend)
  BarKeeper's Friend/Fining agents (Philip Gravel)
  Re:A Purple Heart For Homebrewing? (StanM13541)
  water software ("terence tegner")
  Dark DME for yeast starters. (Stephen Hudson)
  Unmalted Wheat & wort chiller responses (Jay Reeves)
  re: bad news bungs (Wesley Dunnington)
  boiling extracts (Btalk)
  Comments (Russell Mast)
  Around & about (Joseph.Fleming)
  Pete's Wicked Ale / and Summer Brew  ??? (EricHale)
  Kegging Question (LBRISTOL)
  Styles (Norman Pyle)
  Re: cost, brewing to style (Jeff Benjamin)
  Pete's Wicked Ale - Forgot to mention the YEAST type (EricHale)
  Standards (Beersgood)
  cleanliness (ESMPD)" <gcunning at Census.GOV>
  Styles:  Another View (Martin Lodahl)
  re yeast strains (Tim_Fields_at_Relay__Tech__Vienna)
  nonToxic, crystal malts (HOMEBRE973)



******************************************************************
* 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.
******************************************************************
 
#################################################################
#
# YET ANOTHER NEW FEDERAL REGULATION: if you are UNSUBSCRIBING from the
# digest, please make sure you send your request to the same service
# provider that you sent your subscription request!!! I am now receiving
# many unsubscribe requests that do not match any address on my mailing
# list, and effective immediately I will be silently deleting such
# requests.
#
#################################################################
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.
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
ARCHIVES:
  An archive of previous issues of this digest, as well as other beer
  related information can be accessed via anonymous ftp at
  ftp.stanford.edu.  Use ftp to log in as anonymous and give your full
  e-mail address as the password, look under the directory
  /pub/clubs/homebrew/beer directory.  AFS users can find it under
  /afs/ir.stanford.edu/ftp/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer.  If you do not have
  ftp capability you may access the files via e-mail using the ftpmail
  service at gatekeeper.dec.com.  For information about this service,
  send an e-mail message to ftpmail at gatekeeper.dec.com with the word
  "help" (without the quotes) in the body of the message.


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


Date: 25 May 95 16:26:00 -0500
From: korz at iepubj.att.com (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
Subject: N2-CO2 mixed-gas systems/finings and haze

Tom writes quoting me:
>>If your normal (100% CO2) pressure is 12 psi for your line
>>length/diameter, and you are using 75% N2 / 25% CO2 mix, then
>>you want to use 48 psi.  To your beer, this will look like
>>12 psi of CO2 and the beer will stay carbonated.
>
>Hmmm.  Well, yes, to your beer, the partial pressure of CO2 would look
>like 12 psi, but to your walls, it would look like...  "INCOMING!!!"
>
>Wouldn't 48 psi of _any_ gas shoot the beer from here to way over
>there?  Or am I missing something?

Well, I just picked the numbers out of the sky, really.  Recall that I
suggested that the correct pressure should be gotten from a pub owner
or the keg supplier.  The correct pressure might be 25 or 30 or 35 psi,
I don't know -- I was just trying to explain the theory behind how the
mixed-gas dispensing worked.  Also recall that this would be dispensed
from a restricted faucet.  If you don't have a true Guinness faucet, I
suggested that you could probably get by with only opening your normal
faucet a little bit, which would provide the constriction that would
imitate the perforated disk in the Guinness faucet.  Finally, I believe
<guessing mode on> that the shooting out of overpressurized beer is
not so much from the high pressure, but more likely from the overcarbonated
beer turning to pure foam at the faucet and taking up a lot more space
than the liquid that makes up the foam. <guessing mode off>

***
Keith writes:
>I have noticed a few discussions lately on different fining agents 
>and their effectiveness.  I have also noticed that people referring 
>to Irish Moss and Gelatin as usefull in eliminating (chill) haze.  
>Correct me if I'm wrong (like you wouldn't anyway ;-)) but it has 
>been my understanding that IM is for helping the hot/cold break to 
>coagulate and settle out (does this have any effect on haze?); 
>gelatin is used mostly in kegs to help the yeast settle out; and haze 
>(chill haze especially) is reduced with polyclar.  Don't they each 
>have different uses?

Indeed they do have different uses.  First, what is chill haze?  It is
a complex of larger proteins and tannins that becomes insoluble at
colder temperatures.  There are three ways to reduce chill haze: 1.
reduce the proteins, 2. reduce the tannins and 3. make the chill haze
settle out.  Cold and hot break are mostly protein so using Irish Moss
to help settle it out reduces the protein and thus the chill haze.
Polyclar (PVPP) removes tannins from the beer as it settles out so it
removes tannins.  Lagering is one way to make the chill haze settle out.
Cold filtering is another.  [Gee, if we cold filter, perhaps we could
get away without the need to lager so long and we wouln't need so many of
these 1,000,000 gallon tanks... hey... I think we're onto somthing here!]

I do know that gelatin helps settle out yeast, but I believe it can
also reduce chill haze.  I'd have to look that one up.

If you have starch haze then neither Irish Moss nor Polyclar nor gelatin,
betonite, Sparkaloid, Isinglass... etc. will eliminate your haze.  If
none of these seem to help you get good clarity, starch haze may be your
problem.  Starch haze can be caused by:

1.  adding grain that needs to be mashed (pale, pils, oats, wheat, etc.)
into an extract batch without mashing it,  

2. sparging too hot (which would release unconverted starch), or

3. crushing your grain into flour and then not doughing in properly (which
would produce a lot of balled starch, later washed into the kettle during
the sparge).

Al.

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 25 May 95 21:24:00 EDT
From: "Houseman, David L [TR]" <DLH1 at trpo3.Tr.Unisys.com>
Subject: Last Call:  BUZZ-OFF AHA Competition



 American Homebrewers Association
 Sanctioned Competition
(And BJCP Judged)

Beer Unlimited Zany Zymurgists Present

 The Second Annual
 BUZZ-OFF

Sunday, June 25, 1995, 10:00 AM
Valley Forge Brewing Co. Resturant and Pub
Gateway Shopping Center, Rt 202, Devon, PA


Location/Sponsors
This year s competition will be sponsored by Beer Unlimited, BUZZ and the 
Valley Forge Brewing Co.
Resturant and Pub.  The event will be open to the public.  The awards 
ceremony will follow the competition.

Eligibility
The 1995 Buzz-Off  Homebrew Competition is open to all non-commercial home 
produced beers.
Enter as often as you wish.  Enter as many categories as you wish.

Categories
The 1995 BUZZ-Off will judge beer, mead, and cider styles recognized by the 
American Homebrewers
Association.  AHA categories and subcategories will be used (see enclosed 
category list).
All entries must indicate category, subcategory, and style description. 
 Sake will be enjoyed, but not judged.  All entries will be judged according 
to the style entered.  Categories receiving fewer than five (5) entries may 
be combined with a related category for the presentation of awards.

Awards and Prizes
Certificates of achievement, first, second and third place ribbons will be 
awarded in each category or combined category as well as for the BEST of 
SHOW.  BUZZ will secure commercial sponsorship for category winners.   A 
total of up to $1000 in gift certificates will we awarded.  All questions 
and disputes will be settled by the competition organizer.  All decisions 
will be final.

Entries
An entry consists of two (2) bottles, accompanied by a completed 
entry/recipe form  -- one for each entry.  A bottle ID form must be attached 
to each bottle with  rubber bands -- No glue or tape.
Beers must be in clean 10-16 ounce glass bottles, free of labels, raised 
glass, silk screen, or other identifying markings.  Any markings on the cap 
must be completely blacked out.  No swing-top bottles.
All entries become the property of  BUZZ.  No bottles will be returned.

Entry Fees & Deadlines
Entry fees are $5.00 per entry.   Make check payable to  Beer Unlimited. 
 Entries must arrive between June 7 and June 21, 1995. Entries will not be 
accepted before June 7 or after June 21, 1995.  Send entries to:

               BUZZ- Off
               c/o Beer Unlimited
               Rts 30 & 401
               Malvern,  PA  19355

Local entries may be dropped off between June 7 and June 17, 1995  at any of 
the Philadelphia Area homebrewing stores.
     
Packing  and  Shipping
Pack in a sturdy box.  Pad each bottle and the inside of the box.  Line box 
with heavy trash bag and twist-tie securely.  Pack entry forms, recipe 
forms, and fees outside the bag.  Mark the box Fragile.  UPS is recommended 
for shipping.

Beer Label Contest
Beer labels will be judged for artistic merit and appropriateness to the 
style for the label entry.  Entry fee is $2.00.  Each label must be 
accompanied by an entry form.  In order to show off your labels in their 
natural environment, submit entries attached to an empty, capped beer 
bottle.   First, second and third place ribbons will be awarded.

Delaware Valley Homebrewer of  The Year
The BUZZ-Off is the final jewel in the local homebrewing  crown: The 1995 
Delaware Valley Homebrewer of the Year will be chosen based on points 
awarded from the Hops-Bops, Dock Street,  Moon Madness and BUZZ-Off 
 Competitions.

Judges
We will secure the most experienced, qualified judges possible.  We are 
soliciting qualified judges and stewards from all participating homebrew 
clubs.  Judges and stewards will be awarded experience points toward the 
Beer Judge Certification Program, which is jointly sponsored by the AHA and 
HWBTA.  Prospective judges and stewards are requested to fill out the 
attached form.  You will be contacted individually to confirm participation 
and given directions to the contest.  Since this year we are holding this 
event at a new Brew Pub in our area, there is even more reason to come and 
spend the day out of the hot sun.   The competition will begin at 10:00am. 
 Stewards should be present by 9:00am; judges by 9:30am for their 
assignments.

Bed and Brew
Judges and stewards from out of the area are welcome to participate in the 
Bed and Brew program.  BUZZ club members are opening their homes for those 
traveling from some distance who would like to have a place to stay for 
Saturday June 24th and Sunday June 25th.  Please indicate your desire to 
have a place to stay on the Judge/Steward Registration Form and you will be 
contacted several weeks prior to the contest.

You may enter using the standard recipe, bottle label and judge 
participation forms or
For further information contact:

Jim McHale at Beer Unlimited   (610) 889-0905
or
 Dave Houseman                   H: (610) 458-0743          
 Competition Organizer      W:(610) 648-4071      
 dlh1 at trpo3.tredydev.unisys.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 25 May 1995 20:52:05 -0500 (CDT)
From: Jim Larsen <jal at gonix.gonix.com>
Subject: Barkeeper's Friend


I second Bones' (Timothy P. Laatsch <LAATSCH at kbs.msu.edu>) endorsement of 
Barkeeper's Friend. It cleans wonderfully and does not hurt the stainless.

Usual disclaimers apply.

Jim


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 26 May 1995 13:07:45 +1000
From: nigelt at delm.tas.gov.au (Nigel Townsend)
Subject:  bulk yeast starters

I am  looking for ways to reduce the time for producing beer and reducing
the opportunities for infection.  I therefore wonder if anyone has done the
following, designed for a 5 gallon batch, and was it successful?

About four or five days before brewing, add the following directly into a
clean 5 gallon primary fermenter. Take a couple of cups of DME, sugar or
the like, throw in two sachets (each described as suitable for 5 gallons)
of dried yeast and about I gallon of warm (previously boiled) water and
shake vigorously. Add the lid and air lock. On the brewing day, add the
wort and additional water directly to the primary fermenter with the yeast
starter already in it.

If this works, you would have about I gallon of starter ready to go,
without a number of intermediate steps to enlarge several step ups of a
yeast starter.  Whilst not a technically perfect system, would the above,
or minor variations be a significant improvement on say simply rehydrating
a single sachet of yeast.

This thought has come about from listening to the threads discussing large
yeast additions used in commercial brewing. I have not yet found a suitable
local supply of liquid yeasts, so I use dried.  Perhaps a similar approach
would work with them too.

I would be particularly interested in comments from any one using a similar
simple system, or those with a knowledge of yeast habits.  Many thanks.

Nigel Townsend
Tasmania, Australia



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 25 May 95 21:59 CDT
From: pgravel at mcs.com (Philip Gravel)
Subject: BarKeeper's Friend/Fining agents

===> Timothy P. Laatsch comments about BarKeeper's Friend:

>Thought I would pass along a little cleaning tip and maybe draw some opinions 
>about it in the process.  I have been using Barkeeper's Friend to clean any 
>and all metal objects in my brewing operation.  BKF is a mild abrasive powder 
>with oxalic acid.  It's recommended for cleaning stainless and copper and the 
>stuff works GREAT!  It takes off lime deposits, beerstone, and copper 
>oxidation, and handles just about any other tough metal cleaning job without 
>being too harsh (IMHO).  I heartily recommend it and thank my mother-in-law 
>for clueing me in.  As always, no affiliation, blah, blah, blah.  I bought it 
>at the local supermarket.  Buy it---and enjoy!

Oxalic acid is a good reducing agent and mildly acidic.  It is useful in
removing rust and cleaning lime deposits.  But, be sure to rinse well as
oxalic acid it is rather toxic.

===> Keith Royster asks about fining agents:

>I have noticed a few discussions lately on different fining agents 
>and their effectiveness.  I have also noticed that people referring 
>to Irish Moss and Gelatin as usefull in eliminating (chill) haze.  
>Correct me if I'm wrong (like you wouldn't anyway ;-)) but it has 
>been my understanding that IM is for helping the hot/cold break to 
>coagulate and settle out (does this have any effect on haze?); 
>gelatin is used mostly in kegs to help the yeast settle out; and haze 
>(chill haze especially) is reduced with polyclar.  Don't they each 
>have different uses?

Chill haze is generally caused by proteins precipitating from solution
when the temperature is dropped.  Irish moss helps to remove hot and
cold break material.  But the break material is coagulated proteins.
The more you can remove as break material the less the chance that chill
haze will form.  Gelatin removes yeast and helps the beer to have a
sparkling clarity.  Polyclar, I believe, by its somewhat ionic nature
binds with proteins and preciptitates them from solution thus helping to
prevent chill haze.

- -- 
Phil
_____________________________________________________________
Philip Gravel   Lisle, Illinois               pgravel at mcs.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 25 May 1995 23:21:26 -0400
From: StanM13541 at aol.com
Subject: Re:A Purple Heart For Homebrewing?

>From HBD 1740
hbush at pppl.gov (harry)
Subject: Re:  A Purple Heart for Homebrewing?

>        I broke my thermometer while mashing and got Mercury poisoning. I
>blew off my right arm (lucky I'm lefty) with an exploding Mini-keg. I'm
>half brain dead from propane burner-induced CO poisoning. The remaining
>half of my brain has gone schizo from lead poisoning because I decant my
>brew from crystal vessels. I've been refused life insurance because
>homebrewing is listed as a "dangerous" hobby. I'm applying for veteran's
>benefits.
>
The only solution is to brew in aluminum pots so you won't remember
your troubles !!!

>       Enough of that, my real question is: Is my beer ruined?........
> 
>Harry
>..............................................
>
>"If it bleeds, we can kill it!"- Arnold S.
> ..............................................
"If it's dead, we can ferment it!" - Anon. Homebrewer

Stan



Return to table of contents


Date:          Fri, 26 May 1995 08:38:54 +0200
From: "terence tegner" <tegbrew at iaccess.za>
Subject:       water software

 1) I have been following the thread on water treatment software in the 
old HBD files without finding an answer.
Is there any software that can do this for me on a PC with windows.
 2) Are their any known correspondence courses in brewing theory 
available? Siebel institute perhaps?
TIA
Terence Tegner

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 26 May 1995 17:06:01 +1100
From: Stephen Hudson <s.hudson at bom.gov.au>
Subject: Dark DME for yeast starters.

I'm about to pop a Wyeast 1084 (Irish Ale) to brew a few Stouts, is it
OK to use Dark dried malt extract to make yeast starters? I have some 
on hand which won't be going into the brew itself (moved up to all-grain),
but want to put it to some use.

Cheers,
Stephen.

- --

Stephen Hudson
Finance & Supply Section                    Phone:        +61 3 9669-4563
Bureau of Meteorology                            Fax:        +61 3 9669-4254
Melbourne Victoria AUSTRALIA       E-mail: s.hudson at bom.gov.au


Return to table of contents


Date: 26 May 95 09:19:28 EDT
From: Jay Reeves <73362.600 at compuserve.com>
Subject: Unmalted Wheat & wort chiller responses

A few weeks ago I threw a post out asking about a 
counter-flow type wort chiller I built using a PVC 
jacket.   I got several good responses, so if anyone
want's to see 'em, drop me a line and I'll send you
a copy.

On another subject, does anyone have the figures
on un-malted wheat?  I'm looking for pts/lb/gal and
the color it contributes.  I wouldn't think it adds to the
fermentables (?) but the unconverted starch should
add to the OG, shouldn't it?

Any info anyone has on how un-malted wheat should
be figured into a batch of wit (other than ~50% of grain
bill) would be appreciated.

                                  -Jay


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 26 May 1995 09:36:49 -0500
From: wesleyd at harlequin.com (Wesley Dunnington)
Subject: re: bad news bungs

Unfortunately, you got the only brand that I am aware of that uses the non
removable (without great effort) bungs. Dinkel Aker, Grolsch, Chicago Lager,
etc, all come with nice soft rubber outer plugs that you can easily pull out
and then reuse. 

I guess if you really want to get them out the cutting wheels in a dremel
moto tool would be the best thing. We have cut them off in the past with
tin snips, with mixed results.

Feel free to write back if you have any questions.

Wesley Dunnington
wesleyd at harlequin.com


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 26 May 1995 09:46:25 -0400
From: Btalk at aol.com
Subject: boiling extracts

The suggestion was made to not boil prehopped extract wort for fear of
driving off the aroma.

You most certainly do want to boil!
 Here are a few reasons: sanitize the wort, maximize hop utilization
(bitterness),and protein coagulation (hot break). You could also include to
reduce wort volume and to darken the color.

Boiling a 'lower' gravity wort increases hop utilization and decreases
darkening.
Use some Munich malt if you want more maltiness. Add your hops real late or
dry hop for hop aroma.

Interestingly, Why do you boil wort? was a question on the BJCP exam I took
last August.
Regards,
Bob Talkiewicz, Binghamton, NY <btalk at aol.com>

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 26 May 1995 09:24:22 -0500
From: Russell Mast <rmast at fnbc.com>
Subject: Comments


First, in regards to several posts about homebrewers worrying "too much"
about sanitation or professional brewers not worrying "enough":

In my mind this issue was pretty much cleared up when someone, I forget who,
pointed out that the conditions are much different to brew under.  When I
brew in my kitchen, that's the same room I cook food in, and I poop in the 
next room over for heaven's sake.  In a professional brewery, even small ones,
there's usually less need for attention to sanitation, because a lot of that 
work is already done.  

> From: "Lee C. Bussy" <leeb at southwind.net>
> Subject:       Piper's stand

> Many a homebrew that was simply divine 
> defied any attempts at classification.  These are meant to be 
> enjoyed.  If you are of the other type of brewer, one who enjoys the 
> challenge of conformity to style, then competitions provide valuable 
> feedback.

I just want to add that one of the real joys of homebrewing is that you
can be both types of brewers.  One week, you can try to replicate the 
"ultimate" Bavarian Weizen, or the "most like Guinness" stout.  The next 
week, you can brew a rasberry/nutmeg honey wheat-germ porter-lager with a
hint of molasses in the finish, and all 5 kinds of hops you have in the 
freezer.  

I guess what it comes down to is not telling another homebrewer that what 
they do is "wrong", unless of course they aren't happy with their beer.  
The only one qualified to pass final judgement on your beer is you, whether
or not you get "help" in that judgement from experienced tasters.

 -R

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 26 May 95 10:15:48 est
From: Joseph.Fleming at gsa.gov
Subject: Around & about

 
 Russell Mast:
 |I've always found lurking about as exciting as drinking in moderation.  
 |It's okay, if you like that sort of thing.
 
 My new motto.  Russell, wanna go in on T-shirts?
 
 
 Style & Creativity:
    You can tell homebrewers tend to be an retentive bunch when some use 
 style classifications as recipes.  Well, hey - constant sanitizing will 
 make anyone anal.
    It's good to hear from people who think brewing in style means wearing 
 sunglasses during the boil.
    (That potato mashing post keeps coming to mind...)
 
 
    Q: What do y'all do with your hydrometer samples: drink 'em or toss 'em 
 back in the brew?  How 'bout OG samples vs. FG samples?  Man, it's almost 
 a pint!
 
 
    Tip corner: Attention siphon impaired!
    Do you find sinking three pointers easier than starting a sanitary 
 siphon?  Do you have fluidity problems with your 8 gal batch and 2 gal 
 boil?  Can't bring yourself to play lactobacillus roulette with a mouth 
 siphon?
    Introducing the EasySiphon!  Well, it's that bulb used for siphoning 
 liquids.  For those unfamiliar with it, it's a plastic bulb that has two 
 opening with flaps on them.  Plastic hose goes on each end of the bulb, 
 the device is rapidly squeezed, and liquid flows through one end, through 
 the bulb, and out the other end.
    For use in brewing: buy one, dedicate it for brewing, sanitize it 
 before & after use.
    Put your normal, food-grade racking hose in your nectar of the gods, 
 and create a U shape with the low point of the hose near at or below the 
 bottom of the container.  Insert the correct end of the bulb in the other, 
 raised end of the hose (the sucking and not the blowing end...no comments 
 please).  Squeeze away and your beer will flow into the bottom of the U.  
 Before it starts to rise into the bulb, remove the bulb, and place the 
 hose end into your beer receptacle or thirsty friend.  No fuss, no muss, 
 no non-food grade plastic or lactic acid potential in contact with your 
 beer.
    If your bulb does not fit snugly in your racking hose and you don't 
 want to take the obvious step of replacing one or the other with the 
 corresponding size:
        - squeeze REAL fast to compensate for lost pressure (this works!)
        - pinch the tube around the bulb end with your fingers; less        
            sanitary of course
        - gear clamp (sanitary) the hose to the bulb; remove once beer is   
            in the bottom of the U
    Works well with chore boy/racking cane/Venturibernoulli devices.  Best 
 of all: cost = $1 or $2.
 
    Enjoy.
 
                    Joe - joseph.fleming at gsa.gov
 
 
 p.s.   Is this mercury thread starting to make anyone else pine for the 
 days of the keg crimes thread? 


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 26 May 1995 10:45:05 -0400
From: EricHale at aol.com
Subject: Pete's Wicked Ale / and Summer Brew  ???

I just cracked a bottle of a Pete's Wicked Ale clone.  I take no credit for
the recipe.  I got a copy of it from Steve Bailey at the Home Brewing and
Wine Making Emporium (my favorite home brew store - 800 455-BREW).  *Not an
ADVERTISEMENT - just an ACKNOWLEDGMENT* 
I've renamed after my wife... 
     
     Stacie's Wicked Ale

     6.6#  Northwestern Malt Extract - Gold
     4 oz Chocolate malt
     8 oz Klages Malt
     8 oz 60 Lovibond Crystal Malt
     8 oz Black Barley
     1.5 oz Northern Brew Hops at 60 min
     1.0 oz Hallertau Mittelfreu at 10 min
     0.5 oz Hallertau Mittlefreu dry (in secondary)

     Steep grains in 150 to 160 degree F water for 60 minutes.
     Remove grains and bring to boil.

     Primary for 3 weeks      
     Secondary for 3 weeks
     Bottled for 2 weeks.    
     (I shoulda racked earlier.  But I got busy... didn't even read the 
     HBD!  Can you believe it?)

Anyway, there are a bazillion Pete's clones out there.  This one is sorta
close to Pete's.  It's got the flavor and color.  It's much more rich,
though.  More hoppy, too.  Probably a little too much Barley and Choc Malts.
 I'll cut them back by 25% next time.  

==================================================
Anyone got a recipe for PETE'S WICKED SUMMER BREW?
==================================================

Er!c Hale

Return to table of contents


Date:         Fri, 26 May 95 08:10:14 CDT
From: LBRISTOL at SYSUBMC.BMC.COM
Subject:      Kegging Question

> ... but did not answer one question: is it ok to keep the CO2 tank in the
> fridge with the kegs or does it need to be kept at room temp.? What if any
> are the problems and/or dangers of doing so?

That's TWO questions (but who's counting?). <g>  Information regarding
personal experience follows.  I have done this both ways - I ran my system
with the CO2 bottle inside the cooler for several months, but moved it outside
the cooler a few months ago.

Opinion - it is OK to have the CO2 bottle and regulator inside or outside.
Other than the readings on the pressure guages (more on this below), the only
difference pertains to the amount of moisture to which the regulator is
subjected.  Perhaps someone with good technical information can explain why
this is significant.  It is my understanding (momism?) that such exposure
shortens the useful life of the regulator.

Of more importance (to me, anyway) is the fact that the pressure guage(s) on
your regulator will give dramatically different readings depending on the gas
temperature, and you need to adjust your pressure calculations accordingly.  A
bottle containing liquid CO2 at room temperature will show a pressure around
850psi; let that same bottle stabilize inside your cooler at (say) 45F, and the
same guage will read only about 500psi.  There is no less CO2 than before;
it merely exerts less pressure.  The readings on the low pressure (output)
side of the regulator are similarly effected.

The kicker is that the regulator is a mechanical device that (essentially)
operates in the same way regardless of the temperature.  If you set it to
deliver 17psi at room temperature, it will deliver 17psi at 45F, 55F, 85F,
105F, and so on.  However, the amount of CO2 actually "delivered" to your
keg(s) will be significantly different.  17psi/70F is significantly LESS than
17psi/45F; the equivalent amount of CO2 is only about 10psi/45F.

You have to interpret the reading on your CO2 pressure guage(s) based on the
ambient temperature of the gas.  The best situation is where the CO2 bottle
and regulator are at a constant known temperature, enabling you to interpret
the readings without constant adjustment.  Such conditions apply inside your
cooler!  They also apply outside of the cooler if still within a temperature
controlled environment such as inside your house or apartment.  The worst
situation is where they are in an uncontrolled environment, such as outside
the cooler sitting in your unheated/uncooled garage.

That's where mine is right now, sitting outside the cooler on my patio.  The
high pressure readings vary anywhere from 500psi to 1200psi depending on the
weather; the low pressure reading, however, never varies.  To complicate
matters, the pressure coming off that regulator is used for delivery of
soft-drinks; I have an in-line regulator (INSIDE the cooler) to step the
pressure down to that needed for delivery of my beer.  The nice thing is that
since this regulator is inside the cooler (at a constant temperature), the
outside temperature variations only affect the soda and not the beer. <VBG>

- --------------------------------------------------------
|  Larry Bristol    |     A brave, Zen-like effort!    |
|  SYSUBMC.BMC.COM  |                                  |
|  (713)918-7802    |         ... but it fails.        |
- --------------------------------------------------------

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 26 May 95 9:17:40 MDT
From: Norman Pyle <npyle at hp7013.ecae.StorTek.COM>
Subject: Styles

Joe Wirtz writes, about the article slamming the concept of brewing to
styles:

>     Excellent article that I FULLY agree with! I brew beer that I like not
>really caring what it's style is.
>     A few years ago I was involved with a club that ONLY brewed to style -
>these folks were obsessed with trying to create one style or other. With
>every
>meeting being a contest to see who could brew to the 'style of the month' - I
>hated it. My beers never fit into their styles, and thus I never fit into
>their club.

I disagree with much of what was said in that article.  Brewing to styles is
about technique, yes, definitely.  But without technique, where are you?  If
you cannot brew a beer to a goal (style), then you cannot brew the beer you
want to brew, whatever its style.  The same can be said for cloning certain
beers.  If you can brew a beer that is very similar to another (clone it)
then you have gained some skills to serve you well in the future, when you
decide to unleash your creativity.

If you like Pumpernickle Barley Wine, which all would agree is not to any
particular style, how will you brew it?  If your technique doesn't allow you
to control your results, then you will brew the beer, and maybe like it,
maybe not.  So you give it another shot, maybe you like it, maybe not.  Give
it another shot, ad nauseum.  Without some skills for pre-determining the
results, it is a total crap shoot.

Now maybe the club you mentioned was a bit overboard, I don't know, but it
may be that they were just trying to become better brewers.  Brewing to
styles is one very good way to do that.  A final comment:  there are some
styles which allow such creativity within them that you may really like them.
Many of the Belgian styles are this way; the Belgians use the styles as
tools, rather than shackles.  Check it out.

Cheers,
Norm

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 26 May 95 9:50:09 MDT
From: Jeff Benjamin <benji at hpfcbug.fc.hp.com>
Subject: Re: cost, brewing to style

Derek (Elde at aol.com) wrote:
> IMHO, homebrewers spend to much time worrying about
> relatively minor amounts of $$. (Witness the heroic efforts
> expended to reculture yeast.)

In general, I agree (although not about yeast reculturing -- when you're
brewing all grain, a pack of WYeast can be the largest single expense).
Remember all the discussion about how to remove the soda-pop-syrup odor
from keg o-rings?  For crying out loud, a set of brand-spanking new
gaskets costs $1.50.

IMHO, it's nice if you can save a dollar or two, but I doubt that most
of us brew to *save* money.  If you factor in our valuable time, it's a
big net loss :-).

On the subject of brewing to style, Gerald_Wirtz at vos.stratus.com wrote:
> A few years ago I was involved with a club that ONLY brewed to style -
> these folks were obsessed with trying to create one style or other.
> With every meeting being a contest to see who could brew to the 'style
> of the month' - I hated it.  My beers never fit into their styles, and
> thus I never fit into their club.

I don't think everyone needs to brew perfectly to some abstract style,
but personally, I'm leery of homebrewers who don't even seem to know
what they've made:  "Well, this is a stoutly-brown-pale-ale-barley-wine
kind of thing; I don't know what you call it but it tastes pretty good."
I've heard a number of comments from such homebrewers.  The beers can
even be quite good, but if they don't seem to know how to manipulate
ingredients to get something they want, I have to suspect the rest of
their process as well.

You don't have to brew to a pre-defined "style" (we all know they're
arbitrary anyway), but I do expect a good homebrewer to understand what
they're putting into the kettle.  I'd rather hear someone say, "This is
kind of a brown ale, but with extra dark malt and German hops" than, "I
made this but I don't really know what it is...  try some."  At least
with the first, I have some idea what to expect, whether I'm judging it
in a competition or just swilling a pint.

- --
Jeff Benjamin                      benji at fc.hp.com
Hewlett Packard Co.         Fort Collins, Colorado	
"Think!  It ain't illegal yet."  -- George Clinton

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 26 May 1995 13:24:02 -0400
From: EricHale at aol.com
Subject: Pete's Wicked Ale - Forgot to mention the YEAST type

I forgot to mention the yeast type I used in that Pete's clone.

I used harvested Bell's Amber Ale yeast.  I've been told that it's just
Ameican Ale Wyeast (1056?).  According to the yeast.faq, Wyeast 1056 is
reported to be Seibels BRY 96 

=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
BTY for those of you still using dried yeast... stop it now!  I get lazy
every now and then and just pop in a dry yeast package. Yuk.   IMHO, It's the
biggest difference you can make in your beer.  
=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Er!c

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 26 May 1995 13:24:38 -0400
From: Beersgood at aol.com
Subject: Standards

To quote one key phrase, Sam Piper wrote:    "The more we succumb to beer
style standards, the less room there is for the individual, be that person a
consumer, a brewer, or a business man."

I think this is a misconception of the purpose of a standard. The idea behind
a standard, at least in beer, is to give us some point of reference.
Afterall, it would be terribly arrogant of me to think that I could brew a
superior brew to Guiness upon my first effort. If Guiness is that standard
then I have an idea of what I'm getting into. Millions of people have
affirmed that Guiness is an excellent beer, who would I be to suddenly tell
them they are all wrong? Let's have some respect for the brewers who have
gone before us.

Of course, the great thing about brewing your own beer is that your own
subjective tastes can be indulged. You can, with experience, make a superior
stout to Guiness. When you bring that beer to others for their opinion, they
will use their subjective tastes to decide if it is better than other beers.
If it is a stout they will compare it to their favorite stout. If you don't
care what they think, then don't ask them and just enjoy it yourself.

If we do away with standards and claim that all beer is equal then you are
allowing for Budwieser, Miller, and anything and everything that has been
fermented to stand together. Instead of rebeling against standards and
throwing away the past let us rejoice in the achievements of others and
strive to build upon that foundation.

And if you think that the judges have been unkind or unfair then become a
judge yourself, and let your subjective taste buds influence things a bit!

Dave Petersen
Crete, NE

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 26 May 1995 13:50:30 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Jerry Cunningham (ESMPD)" <gcunning at Census.GOV>
Subject: cleanliness


Bill Rucker wrote:

>Also awhile back there was a comment about homebrewers being too
>cautious about cleanliness. I would like to hear some other opinions
>and facts from those who care to comment, especially from those who

I don't know if all homebrewers are too cautious, but the people who post 
here sure seem to be. I just sanitize with bleach, 1-2 tsp/gal - 
depending on how clean I feel. I also only sanitize 48 bottles per batch, 
and if I have extra beer I just fill _unsanitized_ bottles (collective 
gasp!!!). I've never tasted bleach (I always rinse) and I've never had a 
problem from sanitation in a year and a half, that I can tell. (My 
Annapolis Lambic-style Brown Ale was another story though! Jerry's 
helpful hint-of-the-day: don't leave your kitchen window open, in 
summer, with open fermentor full of very warm wort - duuuhhh.)

For what it's worth,

 - Jerry Cunningham
  Annapolis, MD

ps I'm chugging a nice tall glass of mercury right now.

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 26 May 95 10:57:34 PDT
From: Martin Lodahl <malodah at kriek.scrm2700.PacBell.COM>
Subject: Styles:  Another View

I'd like to offer an opinion on the question of the validity of brewing
to style.  As I'm Styles Editor of Brewing Techniques magazine, a long-
time judge and contest organizer, and a recent addition to the BJCC,
you can guess what that opinion is.

This question seems to come up now and then.  Why is it an issue?  If
you can't personally relate to brewing within an agreed-upon set of
intentions and standards, then don't do it!  What could be simpler?
What is it to you, if others have decided that they can speed their
growth as brewers by using the feedback they get from contests?  

Personally, I think they're on the right track.

Yes, contests impose an artificial set of standards, and in fact the
concept of styles is an after-the-fact means of classifying beers as
we find them.  Without styles, though, judging becomes meaningless;
all you can say about a beer is either, "May I have some more?", or
"Take this sheepdip away!"  What's being judged in a contest is what
the brewer's intentions were, and how close they came to realizing
those intentions.  The motto of the builders of the Gothic cathedrals
was "Ars sine Sciencia nihil est;" they understood that intentions
aren't worth much if you can't carry them out.  Technical competence
is not enough to make a beer a winner, unless the other beers in the
flight are a pretty sorry lot (which happens).  To be creative within
narrow limits is a difficult art to practice.  It asks a lot of a
brewer, but pays amazing dividends to those who master it, especially
if they plan to turn pro.  I personally would never consider investing
my own money and effort in a commercial brewery if I didn't feel I
could very precisely "visualize" a beer, and then produce exactly what
I'd visualized, repeatedly.  To do otherwise is to rely pretty heavily
on luck.

I know this sounds like a condemnation of those who choose to ignore
styles, but that's not my intention.  I've been handed many tasty and
interesting beers by brewers uninterested in styles and standards.
But the only truly great beers I've had, beers of remarkable depth and
truth, came from people who actively sought the evaluation of their
work by others.  In my neighborhood, chicken farmers never cull their
own flocks, but ask a neighbor to do it for them, so their feelings
won't get in the way of their judgement.  So it is with our brewing.
We can blind ourselves to things that keep us from growing as brewers.
If you already brew exactly the beer you want to brew, then fine, don't
change a thing.

        - Martin

= Martin Lodahl     Systems Analyst, Capacity Planning      Pacific*Bell =
= malodah at pacbell.com      Sacramento, CA USA               916.972.4821 =
=    If it's good for ancient Druids runnin' nekkid through the wuids,   =
=  Drinkin' strange fermented fluids, it's good enough for me!  (Unk.)   =



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 26 May 95 13:58:59 EST
From: Tim_Fields_at_Relay__Tech__Vienna at relay.com
Subject: re yeast strains

In HBD 1741, Darren Robert Gergle <dgergle at umich.edu> asks:

>anybody know of any good documentation on yeast strains and the
>differences in many different types of yeast available to us
>homebrewers.  

Try the yeast FAQ.  It has very good descriptions of MANY MANY yeasts.  
Available via FTP from the archives ( see the HBD header), and also (I 
think) via WWW from the likes of Spencer's Beer Page.  No affilaition with 
the yeast or the internet or Sir Spencer or WWW, etc.


Tim Fields
 Timf at relay.com
 Relay Technology, Inc.
 Vienna, VA, USA

"The smell of wet Irish moss is like a trip to the beach" ... James Ray
"Reeb !" ... Cask-Conditioned Cole & Old Speckled Clyde
Let's hear it for extract brewers (cheers from the audience)


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 26 May 1995 14:22:12 -0400
From: HOMEBRE973 at aol.com
Subject: nonToxic, crystal malts

Nobody responded to the body of my post re: getting a dark purple iodine test
when steeping cra pils from Dewolf-Crosyns.  should crystal malts give
positive starch tests when they are not mashed.  The steep was at 170 F for
30 min.  

Andy Kligerman
homebre973 at aol.com


Return to table of contents

End of HOMEBREW Digest #1743, 05/29/95