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


Contents:
  Sanitizing (homebrew)
  Regulators/Fructose (A. J. deLange)
  Secondary Fermentation (Elde)
  Re: Papazian's Red Marzen ("derek a. zelmer")
  RE: Vacuum sealers and oxygen barrier bags (Art McGregor)
  Hesitation Marzen (Rob Reed)
  MiniKeg Debunging (George_L._Eldridge.El_Segundo)
  Safe for brewing??? ("Lee A. Menegoni")
  YMMV (Russell Mast)
  Red Marzen (Randy M. Davis)
  Brewing Science (Gary Plank)
  Temp controller for heating (Ken Schroeder)
  Growing Hops in the SF Bay Area? (KRUSE_NEIL)
  Gideon.Pollach raspberry ale:  Raspberry Catastrophe (EricHale)
  Re: Hesitation Red Marzen (GOODNER MICHAEL DAVID)
  Dry mercurying (Matt_K)
  Mittelfrueh Brew (Jeff Hewit)
  Hg and brewpubs ("Matthew W. Bryson")
  Water analysis anyone? (Jeff Guillet)
  Extract Brewers/Sanitation ("Douglas Rasor")
  Chimay Yeast for Belgian Pale Ale? (Jim Ancona)
  Yeast and zinc (Maribeth_Raines)
  Mail list (ke4lqw)
  Lautering (Richard Buckberg)
  Etiquette/Oak kegs/Tubing/Cold Keg Physics (Kirk R Fleming)
  extract vs all grain/brewing to style (DCB2)



******************************************************************
* 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: Thu, 1 Jun 1995 21:50:28 +0500 
From: homebrew at onix.com
Subject: Sanitizing


Ahhh!  It's good to be back on HBD again after almost a year.  I doubt
anyone remembers me, but this colective body has helped me make the best
beers possible.

Anyway, here's my question.....

Like the rest of the planet, I use bleach to sanitize my brewing
equipment.  Well, the bleach is shared by me and the laundry, and on a
few rare occasions, I have been stuck with scented bleach in the house.

Here's my question....Has anyone tried to use any of the new
Antibacterial liquid soaps on the market to sanitize brewing equipment.
Looking through a lot of beer literature, it seems bacteria are a bigger
problem than wild yeast or molds, so it seems like you could get away
with it.  The stuff may even kill fungi also, I really haven't
researched it.

===============================================================
Andy Pastuszak                                    ONIX BBS
Homebrew  at  ONIX.COM                               (215)879-6616
===============================================================



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 1 Jun 1995 18:48:45 -0500
From: ajdel at interramp.com (A. J. deLange)
Subject: Regulators/Fructose

In Nos. 1745 and 1746 (and a bit farther back than that) there
have been some questions about the effects of having the low
pressure regulator (in a CO2 suystem) in the refrigerator.

The regulator works by balancing line pressure (which acts on
one side of a diaphragm) against a spring (and the atmosphere)
which act on the other. If line pressure gets too high the diaphragm
moves against the spring which closes the supply valve valve. If line
pressure gets too low the spring moves the diaphragm opening the valve.
The point of all this is that the spring is made of metal and that
metal expands/contracts to some extent with heating and cooling.
It is possible to make springs whose tensions do not change with
temperature (invented by John Harrison in an attempt to win the
British Admiralty's chronometer prize) but it is unlikely that the
cheap regulators we buy to dispense our beer would include such
springs. It is thus possible that out regulators may change in
delivered gas pressure as the temperature of the regulator changes.
This should be a minimal amount.

Given that the regulator delivers the correct pressure (or nearly the
correct pressure) this pressure will be constant throughout the system
at equilibrium (so long as the pressure dialed in is more than the
initial pressure in the Cornelius keg; if the keg is at higher
pressure the check valve in the regulator will prevent back-flow).If
the regulator and the Cornelius kegs are at different temperatures
the densities of the gas at the regulator and keg may be different
but the pressures will be the same once equilibrium is reached. Were
they different, gas would continue to flow unitl they were the same.

The cheap Bourdon tube pressure gauges we use consist of a hollow
spring which is forced to uncurl by gas pressure much in the fashion
of those New Year's Eve party favors. It is quite likely that changes
in the properties of these tubes with temperature lead to changes in
the readings.

In 1746 Phil Gravel commented:

>(Note that for fructose to be inverted from one optical
>isomer to the other, 3 stereo centers (I believe) *all* have to be
>inverted, not just one.)

This is correct. Here's more than you probably ever wanted to
know about fructose:

Fructose belongs to the ketohexose family of which there are
8 members (stereoisomers) based on the presence of 3 "chiral"
carbons (to be defined). Four of these isomers are
shown below (and I hope some compression algorithm doesn't
take out spaces or this will be garbage):


1     CH2OH        CH2OH        CH2OH        CH2OH
      |            |            |            |
2     C=O          C=O          C=O          C=O
      |            |            |            |
3   HOCH          HCOH        HOCH          HCOH
      |            |            |            |
4    HCOH        HOCH         HOCH          HCOH
      |            |            |            |
5    HCOH        HOCH          HCOH        HOCH
      |            |            |            |
6     CH2OH        CH2OH        CH2OH        CH2OH

   D-Fructose  L-Fructose   D-Tagatose    L-Tagatose

The chiral carbons are the ones in the HCOH (HOCH) groups
(i.e. the ones numbered 3,4,and 5).The arrangement of the
H and OH around No. 5 (i.e.the chiral carbon farthest from the
carbonyl (C=O) carbon) determines whether
the sugar is designated a D or L sugar. The arrangement
of the H and OH radicals about the other two chiral carbons
determines the name of the sugar. Thus by fliping the HOCH
on No. 4 carbon in D-Fructose we get D-Tagatose,
a D because the arrangement is still HCOH at No. 5.
If we flip at all 3 chiral carbons we get an "enantiomer"
i.e. a mirror image with respect to the chiral carbons and we
have a sugar of the same name but with the L designation.
The diagrams should help. Computer types may think of
three bit binary words. Coding HOCH as 1 and HCOH as 0 with
No. 5 carbon as the MSB:

      000 = D-Psicose
      001 = D-Fructose
      010 = D-Sorbose
      011 = D-Tagatose

      111 = L-Psicose
      110 = L-Fructose
      101 = L-Sorbose
      100 = L-Tagatose

This is the total list of stereoisomers of ketohexoses. Only D sugars
are found in nature (whereas it is the L form of
amino acids that play the major role).

The choice of the most distant chiral carbon and the HCOH to
represent D are both aribitrary. Given this and that there
are other chiral carbons in the sugars (two more here, three in
the aldohexoses which include glucose and number 16 steroisomers)
it is not surprising that the optical activity is not dictated
by the D or L sense. D-fructose is, as has been noted, levo-
rotary. D-tagatose is dextrorotary. (The situation is further
complicated by the fact that in aqueous solution the chains
tends to form into rings in which carbons 2 and 5
are bonded to a common oxygen and the carbonyl (C=O)
group becomes an COH. The orientation of this hydroxyl makes two
"anomers" possible (alpha and beta) each of which has different
optical activity. Thus one sees the full specification for
a sugar as, for example alpha-D-(-)-Fructofuranose (alpha is
not spelled out but represented by the greek letter;
furanose is from the resemblence of the ring formed to
the cyclic compound furan and (-) indicates levorotation.)
In the usual case a solution is in an equilibrium of
concentrations of the two anomers and the net optical activity
depends on the specific rotations of the two and their concentrations.
(I don't have numbers for fructose but for glucose the mixture is
roughly one third alpha with a specific rotation of +112.7 and
two thirds beta with specific rotation + 18.7 for a net value
of + 52.7).

As for the use of the term "invert" it is widely, if perhaps
sloppily, used to refer to the inversion of the net optical activity
of sucrose when lysed into its constituents. It does NOT mean
that either monosaccharide is changed to its opposite enantiomer.

Sweet dreams!

A.J. deLange   Numquam in dubio, saepe in errore!
ajdel at interramp.com



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 2 Jun 1995 02:11:10 -0400
From: Elde at aol.com
Subject: Secondary Fermentation

Recently I ran across a reference, (can't remember where), that stated;
 "beers that undergo a secondary fermentation in the bottle often have port
or sherry-like notes".

How does what encourage this fermentation?

What exactly is a secondary fermentation?

Derek

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 2 Jun 1995 08:10:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: "derek a. zelmer" <zelmeda4 at wfu.edu>
Subject: Re: Papazian's Red Marzen

I have made (and quite enjoyed) the Marzen from Papazian's book. Don't 
worry about the color, it is sufficiently red, but  you are right about 
the body. Although appropriate for the style, it was not as full bodied 
as it would be if crystal malt was used, and may not lend itself to a red 
ale. I am just starting a batch of red ale that has a very similar recipe,
although I gave my copy of Papazian's book to a friend a year ago, so it was 
interesting to see your post. I'm using 6 lbs of pale 2-row, one lb of Munich,
and 1 lb of crystal. I'm hoping it will be a good compromise. 

				Derek Zelmer
				zelmeda4 at wfu.edu

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 02 Jun 1995 08:44:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: Art McGregor <mcgregap at acq.osd.mil>
Subject: RE: Vacuum sealers and oxygen barrier bags

In HBD #1747 Jim (james.nachman at cellular.uscc.com at smtp) asked about oxygen
barrier bags for vacuum sealers.  

I hade a similar question on the HBD about a year ago.  I basically got no
answers.  I checked with the local homebrew store for the name of the company
they bought their bags from, and the assistant didn't know but gave me the
name and number of the company that made their commercial vacuum machine.  I
finally got hold of a company that made oxygen barrier bags, and found that
you can order only large amounts of standard bags.  

I was quoted a prices for 1,000 barrier bags (smallest quantity sold) for $110
 - $132.  I don't need a thousand barrier bags, and didn't try to find locals
brewers to split the bill.  I never found a source for smaller quantities
(e.g., 100-200).  I wanted to use them for storing home grown hops, to divide
and store large (1 lb) orders of hops, etc.

I also went to the library and look in one of the industrial
catalogs for suppliers of barrier bags, but only one company was
listed.  I don't know what material the barrier bags are made of,
nor the thickness.  Most of the heat sealable plastic bags
mentioned in the catalog are polyethylene, but I don't know if this material
an oxygen barrier.  

That said, I did get a back issue of Brewing Techniques that had an article by
Mark Garetz (?) on storing hops (bags and temperature affects) -- I thought it
was very good.  He said that many of the bags that come with vacuum sealing
machines (retail version) are often barrier bags.  They have a slick or
slippery feel to them.  I believe his book on hops has a chapter on storing
hops.  I have found that the bags that came with my non-commercial machine
have kept the hops' aroma in, and not let it out into the freezer, so I
believe they are barrier bags.

On another note, I tried to reuse some of the barrier grain bags, etc. that my
supplies from the homebrew store are sold in, and found that they don't work
well with my machine.  The width of the bag is very critical for the vacuum
process to work on my machine -- if the bag is not wide enough, the air can't
be sucked out.  I have also found that the homebrew store's bags don't seal
well with my machine, so I have decided to just use the ones that are sold by
the company that made my vacuum sealer. :^)

Hoppy Brewing,

Art McGregor (mcgregap at acq.osd.mil) Northern Virginia, USA



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 2 Jun 1995 10:01:24 -0400 (CDT)
From: Rob Reed <rhreed at icdc.delcoelect.com>
Subject: Hesitation Marzen

Troy asks about Papazian's Hesitation Red:

> Has anyone tried making "Hesitation Red Marzen" from Papazian's TNCBHB? 
> <snip>
> 5 lbs 6-row pale
> 2 lbs Munich
> 1 lb  toasted pale (toasted in a 350F oven for 10 minutes)
> 
> I know Munich is on the dark side (~10L), but I still can't see this being
> very red.  So if you have tried it, how did it turn out?  Did the lack of
> crystal make it seem a little "thin"?  Or does the Munich compensate?
 
I made this beer many moons ago and it did come out a nice shade of reddish
brown.  The beers I have made with DWC *Aromatic* malt in the proportions
of 10-15% have had a reddish to burgundy color.  I know *red* beers currently
seem to be in vogue, but I have not yet seen on that was truly red.  If I 
were to suggest changes to this recipe, I'd use 30-50% Munich or Vienna malt
with 5-10% crystal malt in a lager malt base, e.g. Durst or DWC and I'd
employ one or more decoctions.

Cheers,

Rob Reed

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 2 Jun 1995 08:10:28 PDT
From: George_L._Eldridge.El_Segundo at xerox.com
Subject: MiniKeg Debunging

Received: by romulange.es.xerox.com (4.1/SMI-4.0) id AA00990; Fri, 2 Jun 95
08:10:17 PDT
 I have been using Fass-Frisch 5-liter mini-kegs to reduce the labor in
bottling my homebrew.  I was in Pavillions a few months ago and found German
Holsten beer for $11 in the same 5-liter mini-keg.  I figured I would use my
tap with the Holsten keg and then have another keg to refill. I was in for a
surprise when I tried to remove the bung.  The bung has a rubber coating, but
is injected with a plastic to make it permanent.  After a bit of experimenting
I developed the following technique to remove the bung without damaging the
keg. The first step is to drink the beer using your tapper.  When the keg is
empty remove the tapper.  Find a knife that can be heated.  Heat the knife
blade until it is very hot and use the hot knife to make a single cut through
the bung.  I insert the knife blade into the keg and tilt it so that it cuts
under the rim and then rotate the knife so that it cuts through the bung on top
of the rim.  The cut is a vertical cut slicing through bung.  It is like
cutting through one part of a donut.  It may take several times reheating the
knife to make the one cut. Repeat the cut on the other side so that you will
have two halves of a donut.  Repeat the cut twice more so that you will have
cut the bung into quarters.  Select one of the quarters and cut it in half with
another cut.  Take a pair of pliers and grab one of the eighth pieces.  It
should be possible to force it to the center of the hole and remove it.  Remove
the other eighth piece.  Grab each remaining quarter piece and remove it. You
should now be able to dump out the center piece of the bung which is at the
bottom of the keg.  Clean and dry the keg.  Purchase a new bung at your
neighborhood brew supply store and you are ready to go!

George Eldridge (eldridge.elsegundo at xerox.com)

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 2 Jun 95 11:14:06 EDT
From: "Lee A. Menegoni" <lmenegoni at nectech.com>
Subject: Safe for brewing???

I have found a magnetically coupled pump that has a Thermoplasic housing 
and impeller.  It is listed for use with aquariums and in chemically harsh 
evironments but isn't listed for use with drinking water.  Is this pump 
safe for use with wort.  I would use it as a recirculating pump in a RIMS 
system.   I can get other pumps with polyproplene impellers but this one is 
surplus and a fraction of the cost.

Lee Menegoni   LMenegoni at NECTECH.COM
 

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 2 Jun 1995 10:42:09 -0500
From: Russell Mast <rmast at fnbc.com>
Subject: YMMV

FOr those not in tune with geexspeax, that means your milleage may vary.

> From: "Harralson, Kirk" <kwh at roadnet.ups.com>
> Subject: Smoking grain, dude/sanitizing caps/styles/kits
> 
>      On sanitation -- I used to boil my bottle caps, but it was a big 
>      mistake.

I've boiled my caps for almost every batch, of about 30, and never had the
problems you describe.  Maybe it's in part due to your capper, bottles, or
brand of caps.  Bleaching is just as easy as boiling, so you might as well
stick to it if it works.

>      If I ever make a wheat beer, I will use a kit just to 
>      avoid any sparging hassles. 

I didn't have any problems with the wheat beers I've made, but, again, other
people I know have.  (Of course, I'm just an all-grain brewer.)

Name withheld :

> Hi, I wrote earlier to sign off of homebrew digest...

Is it my imagination, or is all the necessary info in the top portion of this
document every day?  Any time I've had a problem with those instructions, 
I always get an automatic message which includes instructions for dealing
with a real person, too.

 -R


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 02 Jun 1995 9:44:34 MDT
From: Randy M. Davis <rmdavis at mocan.mobil.com>
Subject: Red Marzen

Troy Howard asked about the "Red" in Charlie Papazian's Red Marzen
recipe. I use toasted 2-row (350F./10 min.) in a couple of my own
recipes and the color contribution of the toasted malt is significant.
If you have not toasted malt before you may be surprised at just how
"toasted" it gets in 10 minutes and the flavor it produces in the
finished beer. The resulting color is sort of a burnt orange but I
suspect that combined with Munich malt it might be more red.

You mention that you were looking for a red ale recipe. I would
suggest adding 1-2 ounces of chocolate malt to your favorite English
pale ale recipe. This will provide a definite reddish hue. I brew
23 liter batches and 2 ounces (along with crystal and sometimes toasted)
makes a very nice color addition. A 19 liter batch size will of course 
require less for the same degree of color.
- --
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Randy M. Davis  rmdavis at mocan.mobil.com   Calgary Canada  (403)260-4184 |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 2 Jun 1995 10:58:33 -0500
From: plankg at dgabby.mfldclin.edu (Gary Plank)
Subject: Brewing Science

From: plankg                Fri Jun 02, 1995 -- 08:32:10 AM
To: homebrew at hpfcmi.fc.hp.com~ at 
  After a week away I've just gotten around to catching up on the HBD.  As a 
firm believer in "Scientific Method" I am particularly impressed with #1747 
in which we see Mike Froelich's Big Yeast Experiment,  Jim Mosser's Oak 
Barrel Experiment (as posted under Terry Terfinko), and Kevin Hass' 
inquisitive look at zinc requirements of his yeast.  I believe you should all 
be congratulated for your efforts.

  In my opinion there are precious few leisure pursuits which mix art with 
science as effectively as Brewing.  This symbiosis between brewing art and 
science has been apparent throughout the recorded history of brewing.  For 
example, we now know that yeast is responsible for the fermentation process 
and no longer need to incant "god-is-good" when pitching for fear of being 
labeled as heretics or witches. We witnessed the pioneering work of Sedlmayer 
and Pasteur in the identification and propogation of lager yeasts and use of 
refrigeration which changed the way beer is produced and enjoyed throughout 
the European continent.  We also have at our disposal the work of Dr. George 
Fix and his Principles of Brewing Science.  We now accept as fact that alpha 
acids are responsible for hop bitterness in our favorite beverage and read 
with great interest mashing schedules with at least a rudimentary 
understanding of the chemistry involved.

  On the other end of the spectrum we have the pedantic mercury posting in 
#1744 by JimmyNick (Yo Jimmy, don't worry, we'll deal with your insipid flame 
bait later).  In this issue Jimmy writes:

> ...look at the "scientific" studies of PBCs, DDT and dioxin from two 
> decades ago when proclaiming the "studies" you quote as absolute truth. 
> Better yet, look at the "scientific" studies of dioxin from five years ago, 
> which claimed it was an overblown risk, and which have been overwhelmingly 
> refuted in the last eight months.

  The fact that new information when made available will often abrogate a 
previously held "scientific truth" is no new revelation.  For this very 
reason most research "scientists" with whom I am aquainted posess a very 
healthy dose of iconoclasm within their basic personalities.  They are able 
to leave their preconceptions behind and deal with the observations and data 
at hand.  If the present data and its analysis refutes previously held 
"truths" either the new data or the old "truths" are in error.  
Methodoligical errors notwithstanding, this situation doesn't make either 
study any less "scientific".

  Apologising in advance for bandwidth abuse, but when personally attacked in 
a public forum, I will respond in kind....

*****************asbestos on, entering flame zone****************************

  Yo JimmyNick, I'm talkin-ta-you here!!!!

  In # 1744 you said:

> Those of you who so pretentiously quote scientific studies on dental 
> amalgams as an absolution of the irrefutable medical hazards of mercury --- 
> and I refer specifically to Gary -- 

  If you had taken the time to read my post....I trust you do read....you 
would find that the comments were in DIRECT response to a posting by somebody 
calling himself "Doc" (apparently a chiropractor judging from his tagline in 
#1737 "Chiropractic, Like Gravity, Works Whether You Believe In It Or 
Not."....truly a statement firmly based in scientific reality) who writes 
that many people are having amalgams removed.  The literature citation you 
find pretentious deals SPECIFICALLY with the question of mercury 
toxacokinetics from amalgam....I did not state the citation to be nor did I 
imply that it was "an absolution of the irrefutable medical hazard of 
mercury" and I certainly did not initiate the question of amalgam toxicity.  
Quite the opposite, I was simply attempting to put the question to rest with 
SCIENCE by providing data and analysis from experts in the field before 
HBD'ers began flocking to their dentists for amalgam extractions because 
somebody calling himself "Doc" IMPLIED it may not be a bad idea.

> ....blind to science (including Gary the All-Knowing) or are victims of too 
> many toxins themselves.

  Quite clearly this is out of bounds and off any known topic.  Jimmy, Jimmy, 
Jimmy....if you have your little heart set on exchanging this type of 
sophomoric barb I'd be happy to discuss any and all topics including 
toxin ingestion, relative size of external genitalia, and even maternal 
sexual preferences with you, BUT NOT HERE!!!  Meet me over in rec.flamewars.

       Gary  ..... never claimed to be Omniscient 
       (oh, sorry Jimmy, FYI, that's a ten letter word for "All-Knowing")

******************** exiting the flame zone *************************

  I thank the rest of you for your indulgence and promise this is the last 
you'll hear from me on the topic of mercury.

  Have any of you ever had your serum molybdenum levels checked lately??
It has all the advantages of mercury with much less toxicity <G>.
______________________________________________________________________
"Reality is a crutch for those who can't handle a life of drugs"
                             quote attributed to Timothy Leary
______________________________________________________________________

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 2 Jun 95 09:00:28 PDT
From: kens at lan.nsc.com (Ken Schroeder)
Subject: Temp controller for heating

I am in search of a temp controller for HEATING my fermentation refrigerator.
If anybody has any info and/or plans for heating control, your help is
appreciated. Private email prefered (save the bandwidth). Email
to kens at lan.nsc.com. TIA

Ken Schroeder
Sequoia Brewing

Return to table of contents


Date: 2 Jun 95 08:59:00 -0700
From: KRUSE_NEIL at Tandem.COM
Subject: Growing Hops in the SF Bay Area?

Hi,
I was interested in growing my own hops.  I live San Jose... So, is
there a variety that is best suited for this region? Also,  I don't
remember seeing any plants/seeds at my local home brew store, are there
any recommendations for suppliers?  Any other tips/suggestions are
welcome.

Neil

Kruse_neil at tandem.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 2 Jun 1995 12:29:54 -0400
From: EricHale at aol.com
Subject: Gideon.Pollach raspberry ale:  Raspberry Catastrophe

Gideon.Pollach at mail.cc.trincoll.edu asks about Raspberry Ale:

This my wife=92s favorite beer of all time.  It is also the first fruit b=
eer I
ever made.  If it's your first, learn from my mistake.  The basis for thi=
s is
just a simple Pale Ale and add some fruit.  Here's my recipe for Raspberr=
y
Catastrophe (I'll explain the name below).

(I'll an extract brew and proud of it.  I can make some pretty good beer =
and
I don't have the time for all grain.) =


            R a s p b e r r y   C a t a s t r o p h e =


        1.5 kg      Premier Reserve Gold Unhopped Ale Extract
        1.5 lb      Muntons Plain Light DME
       (0.5 lb      Laaglander DME - see comments)
        1.0 oz      bittering Mt. Hood hop pellets (3.6% alpha acid)
        1.0 oz      flavoring Fuggle hop pellets (3.6% alpha acid)
        6 x 12 oz   Frozen Raspberries
        0.75 oz     Fresh Raspberries
                    Wyeast American Ale  (No. 1056)
	  0.5 cup     Priming sugar

Procedure:
        Boil 2.5 gallons of water with Extract, DME, and bittering hops f=
or
60 minutes.  Add flavoring hops at 10 minutes before the end of the boil.=

 Cool to almost pitching temperature.  Add wort and frozen raspberries to=
 AT
LEAST a six (6) gallon primary fermenter.  Add another ~2.5 gallons (to m=
ake
five gallons total).  Aerate (I put on lid and shake) and pitch yeast. Fi=
t
primary with a blow off tube, NOT AN AIR-LOCK.  Primary for two (2) weeks=

(some place where you don=92t care if it might erupt and check it daily),=

secondary for two (2) weeks, prime then bottle and drink in another two (=
2)
weeks.

Comments::
        I made a big mistake.  My normal primary/bottling-bucket was in u=
se,
so I used a 5 gallon carboy as my primary.  BIG MISTAKE.  At least I was
smart enough to use a blow off tube.  The stuff chugged along nicely for =
a
couple of days and then in about two days... Kablooey!  Raspberries
everywhere.  I mean everywhere!  I swore someone tipped over the fermente=
r
and didn=92t bother to clean-up.  I guess the sugars in the fruit took a =
few
days to complex into something the yeast REALLY liked to eat.  There was
about 1.5 gallons of beer and raspberries on the floor and walls.  I
panicked, breaking the first rule of brewing:  RDWHAHB.  Once some brewin=
g
compatriots got me to relax.  I immediately fitted the carboy with an
airlock, boiled 0.5 lb of Laaglander DME (because I had it hanging around=
) in
1.5 gallons of water, cooled it, and added it to the brew.  =


My wife says it is the best beer I ever made.  When I offered the beer to=

brewing gentiles, and told them what happened to the brew, they were
skeptical.  I said =93It=92s not like I scraped the raspberries off the f=
loor and
back into the beer.=94  I was thinking of it.  Raspberries are expensive =
when
you buy them in November.  Everything turned out fine.  There was a sligh=
t
wine quality to beer.  Just a little tart.  The longer it sat in the bott=
le
the better the head and carbonation.  If you can stand to wait about four=

weeks, it=92s great.  A friend told me he had been saving a bottle and op=
ened
it last week (about 6 months in the bottle) and it was great.

I=92ll be making it again when the berry prices come down later this seas=
on.
 Let me know how yours turns out.


Hoppy brewing,

Eric Hale
	EricHale at aol.com
	Eric.R.Hale at naperville.nalco.infonet.com


            E X T R A C T   B R E W E R S   U N I T E !




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 2 Jun 1995 11:02:14 -0600 (MDT)
From: GOODNER MICHAEL DAVID <goodner at spot.Colorado.EDU>
Subject: Re: Hesitation Red Marzen

I brewed up a batch of HRM this January, and I would say it has a "golden-red"
color.  Not very dark, but it does distinctly hint at redness.  The toasted
malt is what gives the almost-red color; toast it too long, and it will be like
adding chocolate or black patent.

Mike Goodner
Department of Chemical Engineering
University of Colorado at Boulder
goodner at colorado.edu

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 2 Jun 95 14:40:15 edt
From: Matt_K at ceo.sts-systems.ca
Subject: Dry mercurying

Message:
Russell Mast sez:
> I usually use a mercury-back just before my cooling coil.  I have, > 
however, had many delcious beers that were dry-mercuried.

Man an I glad I'm not the only one.  I've had this problem for the 
last few weeks but have been afraid to ask for help.  I brewed a batch 
of FMPA (Freddie Mercury Pale Ale recently.  This batch calls for 
several pounds of mercury to be added to the secondary which adds a 
unique twist to the aroma of this beer.  For a while everything went 
well.  I was concientious to re-suspend the mercury on a daily basis 
to maximize aroma qualities. (If you think a regular carboy is heavy, 
try doing the Lambada with a carboy that has been dry mercuried!!)  A 
few days before bottling I added gelatine to the batch to clear it and 
this is what has caused my problem. All the mercury has settled out in 
a nice solid cake at the bottom and my carboy has become a giant 
weeble.  I can't get this stuff outa there.  BTW  I bottled the beer 
and it's fine but is my carboy ruined?

Gratefully

Matt
in Montreal

Suds.... Gotta love'em  -- Kenny King --


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 2 Jun 1995 15:09:32 -0400
From: jhewit at freenet.vcu.edu (Jeff Hewit)
Subject: Mittelfrueh Brew



I recently brewed a batch of ale using the Mittelfrueh hops I
received from Boston Beer.  Some previous postings described
brew hopped with Mittelfrueh as unpleasantly "earthy."  I have
just tried my batch, which I bottled just two weeks ago, and
would also describe the aroma and flavor as "earthy."  However,
I am very pleased with my batch, and I hope I can control my
imbibing so it will have the opportunity to age before it's all
gone. For anyone who's interested, here's my recipe:

6.6 lb Amber LME (I used Northwestern)
1.0 lb Amber DME
0.75 lb med crystal malt
0.25 lb chocolate malt
0.25 lb roasted barley
1.5 oz Cluster hops - bittering - 60+ min
1.0 oz Mittelfrueh hops - 15 min
0.5 oz Mittelfrueh hops - end of boil
1.0 oz Mittelfrueh hops - dry hop
1.0 tsp gypsum
1.0 tsp Irish Moss
Liquid ale yeast (I used William's California Ale, aka Wyeast
   American)
0.75 cup corn sugar - priming

steep grains w. gypsum  at  150 deg F for 30 min
add Irish Moss whenever you think it should be added
Ferment in primary for about 1 week, transfer to secondary and
add dry hops
Bottle after a few more weeks ( I waited 3)


- --
Jeff Hewit
******************************************************************************
Eat a live toad first thing in the morning and nothing worse
will happen to you the rest of the day.

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 2 Jun 95 15:28:39 EDT
From: "Matthew W. Bryson" <MWBryson at lanmail.rmc.com>
Subject: Hg and brewpubs

>	A quick question. Should Mercury be added to the boil, just after
>boiling, or to the secondary?
>
>
>Harry

   I think that you're supposed to make a tea and add at bottling time for 
maximum flavor and aroma...

   For the person looking for brewpubs in NJ, MD, VA, etc., I don't know 
about anyplace else, but here in Richmond, VA, the Legend Brweery makes 
some fine beers, albeit some occasional problems with consistency. The 
Richbrau Brewery also serves some pretty good beers, although I personally 
don't rate them as highly as Michael Jackson.

YMMV,

   Duke Nukem

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri,  2 Jun 1995 18:46:00 GMT
From: jeff.guillet at lcabin.com (Jeff Guillet)
Subject: Water analysis anyone?


After one and a half years of brewing extracts (proudly, I may say) I'm 
on the verge of making the plunge to all-grain.  Yesterday I got my 
annual water quality report.  Can anyone tell me what components are the 
important ones (out of the 71 items tested)?  I would really like to 
know how my water is for mashing, but I really don't know if I'm too 
high on some things and too low on others.

Private e-mail is fine.  Thanks!

 -=Jeff=-   Pacifica, CA
jeff.guillet at lcabin.com

* CMPQwk 1.42-R2 * Reg #1757 *

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 02 Jun 95 16:35:36 EST
From: "Douglas Rasor" <drasor at HOFFMAN-ISSAA2.ARMY.MIL>
Subject: Extract Brewers/Sanitation


     I am quite the novice.  I started brewing in January of this year with 
     an Amber Kit and have since brewed:  Righteous Real Ale (papazian), a 
     stout, an american light ale, a pilzner, birch beer, root beer and my 
     own recipe.  So far, all have turned out fairly well (I brewed the 
     birch and root beer for nieces and nephews).  I don't see myself going 
     to all grain ever mostly do to the time and equipment that seem to go 
     along with what appears to be a great undertaking as compared to the 
     3-4 hours I personally spend now.
     My wife has been extremely supportive, except she thinks I drink to 
     much now, she helps me bottle, clean and provides guidance which I 
     accept and he guidance is mainly in sanitation.  I suppose I am a bit 
     anal retentive about this area.  I really do not want to have a batch 
     go bad.  I rinse my bottles immediately after they are emptied and 
     place them upside down in the box.  I hit them with a jet wash bottle 
     washer before I wash them in the dishwasher, no soap, on the sanitize 
     cycle heat dry.  I use B-Brite or clorox to sanitize all of my 
     utensils.  I will continue to use this process.  It may take a bit 
     more time, but I have had consistent results.  Thus far my only 
     problem was with the pilzner I made.  It was a kit.  I threw in some 
     honey, 1lb, and let it go.  When the O.G. was stable I bottled.  I 
     boiled, as I always do, 1 cup of water with 3/4 cup of corn sugar.  
     Only this time I put in maybe a tad more than 3/4 cup.  I had 
     exploding bottles, no gushers, and when I poured I got alot of foam.  
     A friend said that that is the way pilzners are in the father land.
     
     Anyway, I know I have used alot of bandwidth for this but I had to add 
     my thoughts since I normally just lurk about.
     
     
     Doug Rasor
     Note:  "No Romulan Ale to be Served at Official Functions."

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 02 Jun 1995 19:25:02 -0400
From: jpa at iii.net (Jim Ancona)
Subject: Chimay Yeast for Belgian Pale Ale?

One more Chimay question. I have my culture of Chimay Grand Reserve going.
It's not a real violent fermentation, but it does seem to be going ok. The
culture (fermenting at 70-75 degrees Fahrenheit) has a very stong molasses odor.

Has anyone else experienced this? If so, how did the beer turn out? 

Thanks!

Jim Ancona               jpa at iii.net                 janco at dbsoftware.com


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 2 Jun 95 17:12:48 PDT
From: raines at radonc.ucla.edu (Maribeth_Raines)
Subject: Yeast and zinc

Kevin is correct regarding zinc as a yeast nutrient.  I have seen and heard 
several references to zinc improving yeast growth but not to improving 
fermentation performance.  They usually suggest adding this to your starters 
or yeast propagation tanks, but not to primary fermenters. Interestingly most 
of these were from British brewers or brewing references.  

I should point out that most yeast nutrients which are amino acid/ 
vitamin-based yeast nutrients such as the BrewTek nutrient should contain 
sufficient quantities of zinc to reach the 0.5 ppm zinc optimum.  The BrewTek 
stuff if used as described should yield about 2-5 ppm.  This is another reason 
for supplementing starters with yeast nutrient.  I don't recommend using too 
much of this stuff in the primary since it can impart a flavor to the finished 
product. 

White crystalline nutrients are usually ammonium phosphate-based and may not 
contain zinc.  Also don't mix bleach with anything containing this stuff, I've 
been told it produces alot of ammonia gas.

For those of you attending the upcoming AHA conference, yeast propagation and 
maintenance will be the topic of my talk.  I will touch on several issues 
commonly discussed on HBD and will hopefully shed some light on this subject.  

Hope to see you there!

MB Raines-Casselman
raines at radonc.ucla.edu

Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 03 Jun 95 03:18:17 UTC
From: ke4lqw at ke4lqw.ampr.org
Subject: Mail list

Please add me to your mailling list. Thank you.
        Terry Shoemaker,
        ke4lqw at ke4lqw.ampr.org

Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 3 Jun 1995 23:21:02 -0700
From: Richard Buckberg <buck at well.com>
Subject: Lautering


I've been merrily lautering away dozens of batches, but it recently occurred
to me that my sparges go a lot faster than most.  So I wonder if I might be
doing something wrong.

I generally brew 5 gallon batches in a converted 11 gallon SS keg.  With a
copper manifold in the bottom attached to a valve, it serves as a
combination lauter/mash tun, and a boiling kettle.

I usually pour about 3-4 gallons of 180 F water over the grain bed, pouring
through a colander to distribute the flow.  I have not been recirculating
any of the runnings.  Generally the sparge is completed in about 10 minutes
at most.

I've recently read that most sparges take people an hour or more.  I wonder,
do most of you throttle down the valve so that the sparge goes slowly, or do
the grain beds in other tuns tend to really slow the process?  Why are my
sparges going so fast?

I should add that my extraction generally results in wort that is a bit
lower than predicted, sometimes by 0.003 to as much as 0.010.

Thanks in advance for any ideas.

Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 4 Jun 1995 00:25:55 -0600
From: flemingk at usa.net (Kirk R Fleming)
Subject: Etiquette/Oak kegs/Tubing/Cold Keg Physics

#1748 Protocol and etiquette (Rob Lauritson)
- --------------------------------------------
The topic of private vs public replies comes up again. Rob expresses some 
good ideas: private responses to questions collected and summarized by 
the asker then posted to the HBD, and the idea that "witty banter" does 
not translate well to the medium of the HBD.

I'm not sure what problem needs to be solved here--sometimes the witty
banter misses the mark (for me) and other times it's the high point of a
morning coffee.  Likewise, I doubt there will be much consensus regarding
private vs public replies--everyone makes a judgement call as to whether
a reply will be of general interest or not.

Three things drive ME nuts: the "where's a good place to drink in..." genre
of questions, never seeing replies to questions I *am* interested in, and
6 to 12 line sigs.  But, for what HBD costs me and given the fact it isn't
here for ME, how can I complain?

#1747 Oak Barrel Exp (Terry Terfinko on behalf of Jim Mosser)
- -------------------------------------------------------------
Jim brewed and aged 3 batches in an American white oak keg and reported
that the last one had markedly less keg-induced flavor.  I'd like to
corroborate with nearly identical results. My palate may be less trained
than Jim's, but I just pulled a glass from my 2nd batch aged in oak, and
could not attribute any flavor to the wood (with certainty).

My keg is not toasted on the inside at all, near as I can tell, and I 
didn't treat it with any caustics--just a strong Scotch ale for several 
weeks, followed by a Klages-based beverage I brewed solely for the purpose
of sweetening the keg.  I primed in the keg on the 2nd batch, and it's 
been sitting stationary at room temp since 18 May.  Tonight's sample was
extremely clear (but not "brilliant") and showed no sign of infection.

My conclusion is American white oak kegs provide an affordable alt to
importing English oak casks at over twice the price.  I'm unhappy my
"3 gal" keg only holds about 2.6 gal, but I've suffered bigger
disappointments in my life. :-)

#1748 Tubing for Steam (Mark Stevens)
- -------------------------------------
Thanks to Mark for the nice tabulation of tubing parameters.  One more 
comment about polyethylene tubing Phil didn't mention is that it loses its
mechanical properties quickly when it gets up toward the 180F mark.
Residual stress in the material at high temps causes it to bend as it
softens, and it doesn't behave all that well with barbed fittings.

#1747 CO2 Regulator in Fridge (Larry Bristol)
- ---------------------------------------------
Larry suggests the regulator's low press guage indicates the pressure in 
the line at the regulator itself, but not the pressure of the keg to 
which the line is attached.  Regardless of any other issue discussed in 
this ongoing thread, I assert there can be only ONE pressure in the entire
system between the regulator and the keg, regardless of what temperatures
any of the system components are.  My reasoning is this is a static system,
and unless gas is moving in the line between the keg and the regulator, there
is one and only one equilibrium pressure for any given regulator setting.
If someone will explain how this could be otherwise, I'm all ears...er, eyes.

An aside: is it possible these regulators are not temperature compensated?
Were they Bourdon tube affairs, I would expect the mechanical components
to be affected by temperature.



KRF


Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 4 Jun 95 0:59:18 PDT
From: DCB2%OPS%DCPP at bangate.pge.com
Subject: extract vs all grain/brewing to style

Pat Babcock was saying in HBD #1745:

>Anyway, the point of all this is not that 'all-grainers' are the 
>elite. Hell, anyone who makes a better beer than me is 'elite' - no 
>matter from whence their wort derives. (And, by that definition,  
>there's a lot of elite brewers out there! A whole lot!)
                              
Well, I switched to all-grain last year and since then have only done one 
batch of extract/grain. That was because I mash outdoors and it was 
raining   that day (screwed up my hops on that one).  Well, to make a 
short story long, I mash *not* because it makes me a better brewer but 
because I'm *not* a *good* *enough* brewer to brew beer the way I 
*want* it with extract.  When I used to buy kits I'd buy an Irish stout kit 
and expect to get Guinness <tm> out of it and instead I'd end up with 
something that was good but not much like Guinness except for the 
color.  Speaking of color, I don't know how many times I made an amber 
pilsner.  Just couldn't get the wort boiled without caramelizing too much. 
 Now mouth feel, Jeezz, Why didn't anybody tell me about Laglander 
before.  Chute, there's just too much to know about blending extracts to 
get the color and mouth feel right to suite me.  Give me some pale malt, 
caramel malt and/or cara pils, Wheat, chocolate malt (etc, etc.) and I'll 
brew you a fine ale but please don't make me learn how to brew with 
extract, It's just too darn complicated.
 
David (I'm just an All-Grain brewer) Boe.
Pacific Gas & Electric Co.
DCB2 at pge.com




Return to table of contents

End of HOMEBREW Digest #1749, 06/05/95