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


Contents:
  Bad chile beer - Diagnosis? (Brian McGovney)
  Seeking London (and area) places to drink and stay (Martin Wilde)
  Water Synthesis Series on the Web ("Fleming, Kirk R., Capt")
  re: diacetyl for ESB/IPA (Keith Frank)
  Re: #2(3) Homebrew Digest #1766 (June 27, 1995) (RobHaiber)
  Motorizing the Maltmill(tm) - Recommendations sought... (Robert S Wallace)
  hop freshness (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
  hop identification (Rob Lauriston)
  copper vs stainless steel ("terence tegner")
  copper vs stainless steel ("terence tegner")
  Blank Mail Note (Tom_Tills.wbst214)
  Laaglanders malt (RevEd - Ed Blonski)
  Grain bags, Seltzer etc. (Steven Lichtenberg)
  Ultra hops? (Steve Zabarnick)
  Sam Piper's rebuttal on Styles & Judging (dhvanvalkenburg)
  search for Real Ale book (Chuck Wettergreen)
  no more bottles! (ClearBeer)
  Yeast Ranching Guide for Busy(Lazy) People (ESMPD)" <gcunning at Census.GOV>
  Secondary fermentation in plastic bucket (larry.carden)
  Crushed Lupulin Glands? (Ken Schroeder)
  malt vinegar (MILLER.SA)
  How's my agua? (Jeff Guillet)
  Whole Hops vs. PPProcessed (Norman C. Pyle)



******************************************************************
* 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: Wed, 28 Jun 1995 12:27:46 -0700
From: chemist at io.com (Brian McGovney)
Subject: Bad chile beer - Diagnosis?

        Merry met to one and all.  I've recently made my third batch of
beer, a chile ale listed in the (Winter?) Zymurgy as a silver medal winner.
Opened it on May 25, and it tasted .. pickled?  Vegetal?  Sulfurous?  These
words all come to mind, in that order.
        So I let it sit for a month.  Still there, very little diminishment.
I'll let it sit for a few more months if neccesary (the recipe stated it was
judged after four months in the bottle), but I must admit I am beginning to
Worry.  My sanitary precautions are second to none (my fiance often worrys
about my mental health re: kitchen anality), and I used bleach water on
*everything*.  Does anyone have any suggestions on how to save this very
spicy beer, which I would love were it not being overpowered?  Here's the
recipe:

For 5 Gallons U.S.:
5.5 lbs. light DME
1 lb. Cara-Pils Malt
1.75 oz. Cluster Hops (boiling) 7.0% alpha-acid
1.25 oz. Willamette Hops (bittering) 4.5% alpha-acid
0.75 oz. Willamette Hops (aroma) 4.5% alpha-acid
14 g. Yeast Labs Whitbread Ale Yeast
10 chopped serrano chile peppers
0.75 c. dextrose (priming)

O.G. = 1.050
F.G. = 1.022

NOTES:  Grains steeped for 15 min  at  150-165 F.  Hops added to boil at 0, 40,
and 55 min, respectively.  One hour boil. Chiles added at end of boil,
pasteurized for 15 minutes, threw all into carboy w/cold water.
        Fermentation began VERY sluggishly 17 hours after pitching.
Transferred to secondary after one week.  Toward the end of fermentation,
the sediment seemed to "creep up" the sides of the carboy a little.  This
leads me to suspect contamination, dagnabbit.

Any advice will be appreciated and rewarded with civic kickbacks, a piece of
the local numbers racket, and possibly election to public office.  Posted
answers preferred for teaching purposes, but email is OK.  Thanks a lot in
advance!

 -Brian "yeah, but my CHILI chili worked out great!" McGovney
 chemist at io.com


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 28 Jun 95 12:48:00 PDT
From: Martin Wilde <Martin_Wilde at ccm.jf.intel.com>
Subject: Seeking London (and area) places to drink and stay

Looks like I will have the rare opportunity to spend two nights in 
London next month.  I will probably stay in the Victoria Station area 
since I will be car-less.  

Are there any good recommendations of where to drink and stay while in 
the London area?

thanks
Martin Wilde

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 28 Jun 95 14:16:00 MST
From: "Fleming, Kirk R., Capt" <FLEMINGKR at afmcfafb.fafb.af.mil>
Subject: Water Synthesis Series on the Web


For those who've been following AJ deLanges's wonderful water series
with enthusiam and anticipation, I've been capturing his posts and
loading them up at The Brewery web site for your continued enjoyment.

I know quite a few readers have privately encouraged AJ to continue
producing solutions for the remaining 'brewing towns' listed in
Dave Draper's Waters of the World paper (also at the Brewery), so I
anticipate adding those results in as time goes by.

Please take a look at what I've done and feel free to send me suggested
improvements regarding the *organization* of the information.  Any
comments regarding the analyses themselves and chemistry in particular
should of course be directed to AJ.

The tables are at "http://alpha.rollanet.org/~fleming/watersyn.html"
through the graciousness of Karl Lutzen and Mark Stevens.

KRF Colorado Springs

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 28 Jun 1995 15:56:57 -0500
From: keithfrank at dow.com (Keith Frank)
Subject: re: diacetyl for ESB/IPA

***** from Bruce Debolt *****

Graham Barron - I tried to e-mail you but it bounced.

On 6-28 Graham asks:
>Finally, I'd like to solicit opinions from everyone about a good ale
>yeast that will give me a firm but not overpowering diacetyl flavor.

I recently did an interesting split batch experiment with an IPA, 1.060 OG.  
I split an identical IPA wort, 1.060 OG, into two fermenters, one with Wyeast 
1056 (American Ale), the other with Wyeast 1968 (ESB).  Both fermented out 
to a FG of 1.013.  The differences in taste are interesting.  The 1056 beer 
is bitter from the beginning, sort of an "in your face" bitterness, but the 
1968 beer has a mellow diacetyl taste at the beginning, then the bitterness 
kicks in and lingers nicely.  I like them both but prefer the ESB version, 
as do most people I've given them to.  I think the Wyeast 1968 yeast will 
work for you.  By the way I didn't do any "dropping" as you may have read 
on recent posts, just the usual careful racking with minimum aeration.    

Another thing I noticed was that when I poured the first bottle of
Wyeast 1968 IPA, it smelled just like Redhook ESB, which is one of my 
favorite commercial beers.  Now I know what yeast to use to try to 
duplicate it.  I've seen Redhook clone recipes posted using Wyeast 1098? 
English Ale, but I think 1968 might work better.

This was the first time I'd tried this yeast, after reading many positive 
comments on HBD.  I will definitely use it more often.  I'll post the 
details of the recipe, conditions, etc. in a few weeks.  

Bruce DeBolt
Lake Jackson, TX

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 28 Jun 1995 15:42:50 -0700
From: RobHaiber at eworld.com
Subject: Re: #2(3) Homebrew Digest #1766 (June 27, 1995)

In reply to James.M.Herter's RFI on starting a home-brew club:

JAMES,
The Association of brewers has a file on this, or if you are on eWorld you
can download a fully formatted file in the Beer & Brewing Central. I am sysop
of B&BC.
The AOB address for this file, and others, is: <<info at aob.org>>

More information can be requested from the Association's AUTOMATED
information e-mail line by sending e-mail to info at aob.org and including one
or more of the following key words in the body of the e-mail.  Please do not
expect a "real person" to read e-mail sent to info at aob.org.

AHAINFO:    Request more information about the American Homebrewers
Association, including membership information.

CATALOG:    Request our on-line catalogue.

HOWTOBREW:  A short guide explaining how to brew your first batch of
homebrew!

CALENDAR:   The American Homebrewers Association's Calendar of Events.

CLUBLIST:   The AHA's list of registered homebrew clubs.  (58K file).

GABFINFO:   Information about the upcoming 1995 Great American Beer Festival.

 STYLES:     The 1995 National Homebrew Competition Style Guidelines.
 (Verbose descriptions of the styles)

CHART:      The Style Guidelines Chart.  This file is a table of
                gravities, IBUs, colors, etc.  Please note that this chart
                is 120 characters wide and will not display properly on 
                80 column screens.

NHCRULES:   The 1995 National Homebrew Competition Rules.  (Excluding the
style guidelines in the STYLES file.)

WINNERS:    The winners list of the 1995 National Homebrew Competition.

INDEX:      Partial index of "zymurgy", 1985-1994.

STARTCLUB:  How to start and run a homebrew club.

TEACH:      How to teach a homebrew class.

CRAFTBREW:  The Institute for Brewing Studies' Craft-Brewing Industry  chart.

AOBINFO:    General information about the Association of Brewers and its
 four divisions.

HBDAY:      A quick fact sheet about National Homebrew Day, May 6, 1995.

BEERTIME:   Schedule for Planet Beer, the American Homebrewers Associations
National Homebrewers Conference.

Other Internet services:

WWW Users:  Check out our World Wide Web site!  The URL is:
http://www.aob.org/aob

Membership         Send e-mail to expire at aob.org to find out
    Verification:      how to check your expiration date by e-mail.      
 (I'm still testing this, please send comments to comments at aob.org).

 E-mail orders:     Send e-mail to orders at aob.org
                       (AHA membership is $29 for Domestic,
                       $34 Canadian, or $44 International)

Customer service:  Send e-mail to service at aob.org

Please note that we are currently adding more information to the Association
of Brewers' info line, so keep checking and stay updated on what's happening
at the Association of Brewers.  If you have any comments about this utility,
please send e-mail to webmaster at aob.org.

American Homebrewers Association, "zymurgy", and Great American Beer Festival
are registered trademarks of the Association of Brewers.  All contents of the
Association of Brewers' info e-mail line are copyright 1995.  All prices are
subject to change.

Hope this helps.
Rob Haiber, sysop Beer & Brewing Central


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 28 Jun 1995 17:47:25 CDT
From: Robert S Wallace <rwallace at iastate.edu>
Subject: Motorizing the Maltmill(tm) - Recommendations sought...

Fellow Homebrewer-tinkerers:

     I am seeking information from successful motorizers of the JSP
 Maltmill (tm), regarding:

1.  Optimal roller speed for good overall crush (non-adjustable mill).

2.  Motor speed and horsepower used.

3.  Pulley ratios for drive and driven pullies. Plus souces for said pulleys.

I recently posted a similar query to the Usenet group rec.crafts.brewing and
received a few useful replies; I'd also like to sample the relevant wisdom
here on the HBD, and compose/post a summary of how to motorize this excellent
unit to both groups, based upon received responses.

At present I have 1 inch drive and 7 inch driven pulleys available to me. 
With a 1725 rpm motor this gives a 246 rpm roller (shaft) speed.  Does this
fall in the range "acceptable" for milling grain, including malted wheat? 
Will I over-fragment/flour the grain at this speed?  Source for larger
diameter driven pulley with "thin" bore to fit the MM shaft?

To save HBD BW, please reply to:  rwallace at iastate.edu; I will post all
summaries and cc to those responding.  Thanks for your help.

Rob Wallace, Iowa State Univ. Botany Dept., Ames, IA 50011 rwallace at iastate.edu

Return to table of contents


Date: 28 Jun 95 13:16:00 -0500
From: korz at iepubj.att.com (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
Subject: hop freshness

Paul writes:
>The US- type hops in plug form are a new
>generation of pellet types,  taken from US to UK, turned into plugs and
>shipped back to US. The quality varies!  In the US, unless you buy your hops
>in at least 5 kilo bales, sealed under vacuum, and keep them frozen, plugs are
>better than anything else you  can buy.

With all due respect, Paul, I beg to differ.  One retailer I'm familiar with
buys his whole hops from Freshops and HopUnion in 10 to 25 pound bags in the
early fall, right after harvest.  He then immediately splits them up into
1 pound and 1 ounce oxygen-barrier packages and purges with CO2 before heat
sealing.  These are all stored cold until his customers buy them.  I would
say (and I'm sure you would agree) that with this type of procedure the hops
are as good as if not better than plugs.  Homebrewers have the advantage over
commercial brewers in that they are able to afford to buy their hops packaged
in small packages and they have the room to store several months worth of
hops in the freezer.  I visited a half dozen or so breweries in Britain last
year (from Edinburgh to Faversham) and although the bulk of their hops were
stored cold, the current open (50kg?) bale just sat open at room temperature.
In one brewery there were three or four bales sitting out at room temperature!

>They are not as good as the best
>fresh East Kent Goldings [whole] hops you get in Kent, but what is!

Surely!  Ideally, one would like to travel to London every year for the
GBBF then wander around the UK till the hop harvests are done and then
bring back a year's worth of East Kent Goldings (yum!).  However, I think
the USDA might have something to say about that!

Al.

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Jun 95 01:09:13 -0700
From: robtrish at noif.ncp.bc.ca (Rob Lauriston)
Subject: hop identification

Scott Bratlie asked about identifying hop varieties on the bine.  Wanting to
start a thead, I'll pig on BW with meagre knowledge and hope hop-growing
lurkers will show me up.
     The best ID on your hops will be if someone can track down the
Washington State development link.  Meanwhile...
     I'm in the same situation as you, having hops that are growing without
knowing what variety they are.  I bought some hops from the local nursery;
on the hills around here some people use them as quick covers for the tall
posts supporting decks, etc. 
     The shape of the leaf is one means of identification.  I had a pamphlet
from Haas which gave the typical leaf shape of different varieties.  Hops
have lots of different leaf shapes.  They range from the simple spade shape
(deltoid, I think the botanists would call it and that's the end of the
jargon I know), to three pronged and five pronged leaves.  I also had bines
growing from two known varieties, Willamette and Mt. Hood.  Mt. Hood was
also a hybrid, and I noticed (what seemed to my horticultural ignorance to
be peculiar) that different leaves on the same bine were different shapes,
and some leaves were 'mitten shaped'; that is, spade shaped on one side and
on the other side was half of a three-pronged leaf -- if you can picture
that.  So if yours is a hybrid, you might also have a variety of leaf shapes
that make ID more challenging.
     My unknowns had broad deltoid leaves and I casually call them Cluster
or Cascade -- well, I actually call them Swan Lake hops after the nursery
where I bought them.  My Willamettes have a five-pronged leaf with narrow
fingers.  I have also noticed that on mature stalks, with the thickness of
pencils, some are pale green and some (Mt . Hood) are dark (brownish-red).
I don't  know if this can be used for ID or not.
     As you say, ID is not much of a problem.  Deciding how to brew with
them can be a problem.  One theory is to use them for aroma because the
alpha isn't known.  Then you have to judge whether the aroma is desirable.
It's hard to go from evaluation of dried hops to evaluation of hops on the
bine, because the ones on the bine are moist and growing.  You try to smell
them between your hands and all you get is the smell of fresh mowed grass --
green and wet.  Last year I used most of mine in bittering brown ales.  With
some acidity from the malt, the exact hop bitterness balance was less
important.   
 Rob Lauriston, The Low Overhead Brewery             <robtrish at noif.ncp.bc.ca>
 "Moderation in all things, especially moderation"    Vernon, British Columbia 
 


Return to table of contents


Date:          Thu, 29 Jun 1995 16:09:20 +0200
From: "terence tegner" <tegbrew at iaccess.za>
Subject:       copper vs stainless steel

Could the brains on the HBD please tell me why a pressurised 
fermenter made out of copper is constructed from 1 mm material 
whereas a stainless equivalent needs 3 mm material?  Is copper 
tougher that stainless or are there other factors that I know nothing 
about?  Your wisdom would be appreciated.
I am still convinced that beer brewed in copper has a much rounder 
taste and more body than the same recipe brewed in other types of 
vessels.  Am I alone in this conviction?
Thanks to all of you out their for your individual and collective 
help in the past.  This is what the HBD is all about IMHO.
I do wish the robot would get its brain seen to as I get withdrawal 
symptoms every time it hic-cups and I don't get my HBD fix.
regards
Terence Tegner.

Return to table of contents


Date:          Thu, 29 Jun 1995 16:00:01 +0200
From: "terence tegner" <tegbrew at iaccess.za>
Subject:       copper vs stainless steel


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Jun 1995 05:30:58 PDT
From: Tom_Tills.wbst214 at xerox.com
Subject: Blank Mail Note

>Plugs.  An obvious drawback of plugs, BTW, is that the pressure used to
>Create them is enough to burst probably all of the lupulin glands in the
>flowers.  This should, in theory, expose them more to oxygen.  Combine that
>with the long boat ride(s), and I can certainly believe the poor assessment

I thought we were comparing plugs to pellets.  I don't see how pressing the
plugs  would expose the lupulin to more oxygen than grinding them into little
bits, then using pressure to create little plugs made up of those little bits.
If the manufacturer cares about his product anyway, the hops would be
immediately be packaged in oxygen barrier bags for transport.

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Jun 1995 08:38:57 -0500
From: reved at ix.netcom.com (RevEd - Ed Blonski)
Subject: Laaglanders malt  

  Ok, so colour me naive, colour stupid, (some of you will just laugh and
chalk it up to being a Rush fan!:) )
  I went to a local brew store (actually not so local as its an hour from my
house. Lovely living in the boonies!) and bought 12 lbs of Laaglanders malt,
thinking it sounded good for a barley wine. I ask the wisdom of the digest
about this and recieved three very helpful (if not disappointing) replies
from Algis R. Korzonas, Michael MacGuire, and John Glaser (not a Rush fan!:)
) They have told me that Laaglanders is not the malt to use. Then I see in
the 6/26 issue of the digest a blurb about how one brew shop stop selling
Laaglander because of complaints.
  So, my question is, what do I do with 12 lbs of this malt? I've got two
cultures of Belgian Abbey yeast going right now, and I don't know what to
do? I've got a pound of cystal malt, and 6 lbs of Munton and Fison light
malt extract. Can I add 3 lbs of the Laaglanders and get a nice dark beer?
  Again, I put myself on the mercy and wisdom of the digest!

BTW, please send me any outstanding Barley Wine recipes you may have. I have
Cats Meow II, and John Glaser sent me one, but the more the merrier!

TIA
*-----------------------------------------------------------------------*
*Rev. Ed Blonski (reved at ix.netcom.com) "But I'm young enough to remember* 
*Christ Lutheran Church, LC-MS          the future and the way things   *
*White Cloud, MI                        ought to be!" NP                *    
*Rush fan (the band and the man!)                                       *
*-----------------------------------------------------------------------*


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Jun 1995 09:13:38 -0400 (EDT)
From: Steven Lichtenberg <steve at inet>
Subject: Grain bags, Seltzer etc.

In response to recent postings from Troy and Robert in reference to using 
Zapap tuns and/or grain bags I thought I would relate my experiences.  
Prior to switching to my current set up using a copper manifold in my 
mash tun, I used a grain bag in a bucket set up.  I took a piece of thin 
fabric, in my case an old drapery sheer, and cut it to fit my plastic 
fermenter.  I sized this bag to fit snugly to the diameter of the 
fermenter and made it long enough for a 4" cuff over the top of the 
bucket.  I then put elastic in the top seam tight enough to fit overthe 
bucket snugly.  The bag goes into the bucket prior to adding the grains 
and mash continues as usual.  At sparge time, just open the vavle at the 
bottom of the bucket as needed and add sparge water to the top.  Works 
great as you can mash and lauter in the same vessel, grains are held back 
and all the other benefits of AG brewing are realised.  I only changed to 
the copper manifold system as I increased the size of my brewery and the 
bag system would no longer be effective in my current set up.

_______________
Martin asked about his flat seltzers. Commercial soda dispensing systems 
use a carbonator pump to carbonate the water as it is being dispensed.  
This allows for the high volume needed by these systems.  Most of these 
run at 60-65 psi.  That is why you see fountain soda with that great big 
head nad relatively little carbonation in the soda.  The only way to keep 
ANY carbonation in the soda is to put lots of CO2 into the line.  Try 
upping the pressure on these tanks to 60psi and see if this makes a 
difference.  Keep in mind that the kegs we all use were originally made 
for the soda industry and are designed to handle VERY high pressures (I 
think they are tested to 150 psi).

Hope this helps--



       **** ---- "There's always time for a Homebrew!" ---- ****
      O|~~| ------------ Steven Lichtenberg --------------- |~~|0
       `--'  ---------- steve at inet.ttgva.com -------------  `--'
              -------- Programmer/Analyst - TTG ---------
                 ---------- Alexandria, VA ------------
                  -----------------------------------
                  ENJOY LIFE--THIS IS NOT A REHEARSAL



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Jun 1995 11:18:23 -0400
From: steve at snake.appl.wpafb.af.mil (Steve Zabarnick)
Subject: Ultra hops?

Is anyone familiar with the a hop variety called ultra? I recently won some
in a competition and would like to know what type of beer style in which
they would be appropriate. I believe the alpha acid percentage was 4%.

Steve Zabarnick



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Jun 95 08:25:42 PST
From: dhvanvalkenburg at CCGATE.HAC.COM
Subject: Sam Piper's rebuttal on Styles & Judging

     Again I bring you Sam Piper's comments.  As before responses can be 
     made to my Email at: dhvanvalkenburg at ccgate.hac.com.  First a few 
     comments of my own.  Sam is an excellent brewer and contest judge. He 
     has won many of S. Calif. contests, including at least one best of 
     show that I am aware of.  Incidentally the best of show was a 
     peppermint porter.  Now, that's creativity for you and I don't think 
     it was entered in the porter category.  
     Don 
     --------------------------------------------------------------------- 
     In the past year I've written a number of essays for the Barley Bandit 
     Homebrew Club Newsletter, The Brew HaHa.  Some, my "Beer Crafter" 
     series, are designed to inspire quiet thought and have touched on the 
     spiritual and historical aspects of brewing.  But I have also written 
     an opinionated, cantankerous, and humorous series designed to engender 
     debate.  These are my "Beer Curmudgeon" essays, one of which, about 
     beer styles, was copied onto the Internet by my friend, Don Van 
     Valkenburg.  Not having a modem or a mailbox myself, I'm a Net 
     neophyte and was surprised at the response I got.  
     
     Thanks to all who took the time to read or respond, and if you are not 
     yet bored to death with either me or the subject, here's a few more 
     words, this time intended for the Internet, and reflective of your 
     feedback.
     
     First, I'm a little surprised at the reaction I got to the essay, for 
     I've usually been a champion of excellence and a "go for it" kind of 
     guy.  Though to listen to me criticize standards and categories one 
     could get the idea that I'm just a ham and eggs brewer, somebody 
     content to drink whatever he ferments, without a care to quality, 
     growth, or the achievements of those who came before him.  But had I 
     anticipated the large audience I got and the fact that I was speaking 
     to people who did not know me, I might have been more precise.  Let me 
     be so now.
     
     Most people who took issue with me focused on the anarchy they thought 
     would prevail without style standards, largely in the hundreds of 
     contests that now exist.  Many also spoke of the challenge and 
     learning opportunity presented by striving to brew a beer within a 
     certain style.  These points are, I believe, valid.  I could easily 
     champion them myself.  But for the sake of our mutual growth, I would 
     like to throw out a challenge:  let's see if we can hold conflicting 
     ideas in our minds and our debate, suggesting that both may be true.
     
     The poles of thought within our debate may be like the difference 
     between Jazz and Classical music.  Like classical music, with it's 
     narrow prescriptions for form, tonality, balance, meter, and 
     arrangement, brewing to a style standard does not allow for much 
     variation as the styles tend to be defined and interpreted, but they 
     do develop one's skill as a brewer.  Also, they make judging rather 
     easy from an evaluative perspective:  if you know the style definition 
     and your palate is working, no problem.  It gets to be rather 
     objective, so long as you don't have to tell a Bitter from a Pale Ale. 
      Consensus is easy to reach.
     
     However, in my previous essay [and in my remarks now] I hope to 
     champion creativity.  One of the hallmarks of homebrewing, and I think 
     one of the essences of our hobby, is the extent of creative 
     experimentation we can do.  This is what distinguishes us from the 
     professional brewer, who is subject to the rigors of the market place. 
      Budweiser, Miller, Coors-- these guys cannot in all honesty make a 
     beer that is only enjoyable by a small group or in very specialized 
     conditions.  Their business is based upon large economies of scale.  
     Micro brewers, thank God, can take greater risks and go after narrower 
     niches, but still they must have a market that will pay their expenses 
     or they are out of business.  Pub brewers have even greater 
     opportunity for variation, but they still have to sell their beer to 
     hundreds of people, who also have to come back and buy more, or 
     goodbye grundy tanks.
     
     But not Homebrewers!  We can go where they cannot, and we do, but I 
     don't think that our contests, our judge training, and our style 
     definitions address these unique qualities of our hobby.  I do see a 
     difference between homebrewers and professional brewers, and I think 
     it is important for each group to support the special needs of 
     themselves.    Something that is special and unique to homebrewers is 
     our jazzy creativity, our stretching of definition, our tendency to 
     add and delete steps, ingredients-- what have you.  But do our 
     contests encourage us to be homebrewers, or do our contests encourage 
     us to imitate professional brewers?
     
     I do not believe that the purpose of homebrewing is to suck up to 
     professional brewers or to live within their constraints.  Don't get 
     me wrong-  I have the utmost respect for commercial brewers.  I might 
     like to be one myself some day.  But while we both make beer, we 
     operate in different milieus.  I believe that homebrew clubs and 
     homebrew competitions should encourage and foster the uniqueness of 
     homebrewing.  I do not subscribe to a perspective that sees commercial 
     brewers and beers as better than homebrewers or as something 
     homebrewers should strive to emulate.  I see us as different.  But I 
     don't see that our style guidelines or our competitions recognize that 
     fact.
     
     I would argue that despite the obvious skill as a brewer one achieves 
     in brewing to traditional styles, that in the process of rigorous 
     judging to those styles one is encouraging a person to brew to past or 
     present commercial market choices, with the result that what is 
     special about HOME brewing is being sacrificed and replaced by what is 
     special to PROFESSIONAL brewing.
     
     What would I do?  I have three suggestions.  They may not all be 
     compatible with each other, but while the BJCP is in a period of 
     reorganization, perhaps those in the fray would like some input.  1.  
     Add a criterion to the evaluation process to allow a judge to grant 
     points for creative variation on a style.  Even more important, 
     integrate into judge training an expectation for judges that they be 
     flexible and able to tell a flaw from a successful variation.  [No, 
     that's not easy, and my arguments have never been designed to create a 
     cop-out but to honor the hobby. ]  2. Abolish the specialty and the 
     fruit-beer categories, forcing judges and brewers to come to grips with 
     our creativity.  Maybe a cherry porter should be in the porter 
     category.   3. Double up some categories:  have a competition for 
     Classical Porter, and a separate one for Porter variations.
     
     This last idea might be worth an experimental try by someone out there 
     with a contest large enough to do this in a category or two.
     
     Finally one last thought.  Is Jazz musical anarchy?  Many would argue 
     that it is.  
     


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Jun 1995 12:42:59 -0500
From: chuckmw at mcs.com (Chuck Wettergreen)
Subject: search for Real Ale book

Does anyone know if CAMRA sells it's publications in the US?  I'm looking 
for _Brewing_Your_[Own?]_Real _Ale_at_Home_. It is supposedl;y published by 
CAMRA.  Is this the same book written by Graham Weeler and Roger Protz? Is 
this the correct title?

I'm in the Chicago area and am interested in a local supplier.

TIA,

Chuck
 
/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*
Chuck Wettergreen
chuckmw at mcs.com
Geneva, Il
/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Jun 1995 13:47:19 -0400
From: ClearBeer at aol.com
Subject: no more bottles!

Hi Scott:
I saw your post on HBD and thought I would offer you my views since I have
tried just about every way imaginable to keep from bottling beer.

Party Pigs: these 2 1/4 - 2 1/2 gallon kegs work pretty good. But be aware
that the self inflating bladders which go into them have a short shelf life
and if they are too old they don't dispense all the beer. Then you are stuck
looking at good beer and no way to get it out. The bladders go for about
$3.50 each plus shipping.

5 Liter Minis: these 1.32 gallon kegs work even better! Since the dispensing
system is CO2 in an external bulb, if you run out of CO2 just pop a new bulb
in and pour away. Try to find the system that uses 16gram bulbs, they work
the best. Also these kegs are easy to fill and there is no clamping system
with lots of screws like the pig has. 16gram bulbs are $1.25 each in a 10
pack.

Cornelius Kegs: after using the previous two methods with good but not
fantastic results I decided to try a real kegging system.
This is the best. Easy to fill, easy to clean and VERY easy to drink.
The only draw back is the size. You will need an extra frig or some other
method of cooling, unless you are a bachelor and don't use your frig for
food! I have seen used 5 gal. Corny kegs for $20, used CO2 tanks with
regulators for $50. All you will need is a couple of fittings and hoses.

You also mentioned "force carbonating", the pig and the minis cannot be
forced carbonated. You will have to prime them and deal with the sediment.
But the Corny kegs can be forced at 30psi and believe me not having to deal
with the sediment is great. My last batch took 2 1/2 weeks to brew and I
kegged it directly from the secondary (no priming bucket). I forced
carbonated the keg and started drinking it the next day, didn't have to wait
two weeks like you do with the pig or the minis.

I think having a Corny keg for home and a few minis to take to friends is the
best of both worlds.

Good luck,

Larry Hawley
 
                  

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Jun 1995 13:53:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Jerry Cunningham (ESMPD)" <gcunning at Census.GOV>
Subject: Yeast Ranching Guide for Busy(Lazy) People

Hi everybody,

I know there are better ways to propogate yeast than my method - they 
have been discussed here by persons much more qualified than I. But hey, I 
don't have a lot of time to step up yeast cultures from a slant to a 
frothing 10 gallon starter from hell. (This is not a slam at people who 
do this - actually, I'm quite envious). I originally wanted to propogate 
yeast to save money. I'm not sure if the extra effort is worth it just to 
save a few bucks a batch. What _does_ make it worthwhile is the great 
starts you get using the 2nd (or later) "generation"! Here's my method:


Extra stuff you need:
- --------------------
Pyrex measuring cup
lighter
grain alcohol
q-tips
12 oz beer bottle (for storage)
      -or-
whatever you use to make a starter


I use the yeast from the secondary, since I figure it's already been 
"washed" once, and probably has a higher yeast:trub ratio. I've heard 
some people suggest that you are grabbing less-floculant yeast this way, 
but I haven't noticed this in practice.

Extra things to do when bottling:
- --------------------------------
* Sanitize measuring cup, bottle, cap (if storing) or stopper & airlock 
(if making starter).
 
* When racking to bottling bucket, keg, or whatever - leave a small 
amount of beer covering yeast at the bottom of the secondary. 

* Swirl the carboy to resuspend the yeast (and yes, some trub).

* Swab with alcohol and flame: mouth of carboy, spout of measuring cup, 
and the mouth of the bottle.

* Pour yeast into measuring cup. Pour yeast from cup to bottle/starter. 
Cap and store in fridge, or put airlock on your starter and watch it go! 
(my last starter was foaming out the airlock in about 8 hours).

 
I've had great success with this admittedly less than ideal method the 
last year or so. I usually don't go more than 3-4 generations before 
starting from a fresh culture, and I've only tried it with Wyeast 1056 
(American), Wyeast 1028? (London), and Wyeast 2112 (California). It's a  
middle-of-the-road approach for those of us who don't have a lot of free time.


Jerry Cunningham
Annapolis, MD



Return to table of contents


Date: 29 Jun 95 09:35:00 -0500
From: larry.carden at pscmail.ps.net
Subject: Secondary fermentation in plastic bucket

     Tom Williams writes:
     
     >Questions:

     >1.  Why are plastic buckets unsuitable for secondary?

     >2.  Is the answer to question #1 serious enough to warrant siphoning
     >(and aerating) the beer twice just to reuse the glass carboy?

     >I normally use my glass carboy for primary, siphon to the plastic
     >bucket for secondary.  At bottling time, I put the priming sugar
     >solution in the glass carboy and siphon back to it for bottling.  I
     >haven't noticed any problems with this, but I am always on the lookout
     >for improvements.

Answers:

1. Secondary fermentation is an extended period of time.  The plastic 
buckets 
allow air in (the plastic is air-permeable), over time, and oxygen is bad 
for 
beer (and other foods). So the top homebrewers, Papazian's books, etc., 
recommend using a glass carboy for secondary fermentation.

2. You can very easily siphon without aerating.  Just don't allow the beer 
to 
splash. Keep the end of the tube under the beer.

>From all the advice I've read, if you use a plastic bucket during 
fermentation, 
it should be for primary, as long as the yeast completes fermentation within 
a 
week.  Some low flocculating yeasts, such as Wyeast 3068 Weihenstephan, have 

taken 2 weeks to ferment in my primary carboy!  I would not want to use a 
plastic bucket for that, although maybe in a plastic bucket the 2 weeks 
would be
reduced...

Another disadvantage of plastic buckets is that they are not as easy to 
sanitize, in the long run.  In my experience, they are harder to clean the 
smell
out of, after being used for fermentation.  Plastic is easily scratched, and 

bacteria can hide in the scratches and crevices.  That's what the books say.

You may get pleasing results with your approach, and after all, that's all 
that 
matters.  For me, using a glass carboy all the way just puts more factors in 
my 
favor, and results in a consistently great beer.  I don't like to waste the 
time
and money of a bad batch. My first homebrew was fermented in a plastic 
primary, 
and I will never go back. 

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Jun 95 11:47:44 PDT
From: kens at lan.nsc.com (Ken Schroeder)
Subject: Crushed Lupulin Glands?

Norm writes that the pressure to create hop plugs would "burst probably 
all of the lupulin glands." IMHO, do not support this theroy, in fact,
I tend to disagree. But, I have no evidence to support either argument. 
Does anybody have evidence (nothin but the facts...;-) to support either 
side of this "bursted lupulin gland" argument?  

I am brewing with plugs this weekend. I will try to pull some of the cones 
out of the boil as soon as the cones are "freed" from the plug and examine 
the glands. I'll report back what a non-magnified visual expection yeilds.

This brings up another question : what about pellets and crushed (ground) 
lupulin glands?

I can see an argument for the oxygen exposure, if the hop are not properly 
stored. IMHO (again), all hops should be in a sealed oxygen barrier bags 
and placed in a freezer. Flowers, pellets, plugs and "leaves". This should 
solve the oxygen issue. Should "perfect" storage be an issue, I believe, in 
equal conditions, plugs and pellets should perform about the same in oxygen 
exposure issues. Any evidence to support this?

I still support the, idea that plugs are the superior packaging form for 
most homebrewers, if not all brewers. I am looking to support or invalidate
my opinion with facts.

Hoppy Brewin' (of course)

Ken Schroeder
Sequoia Brewing

Return to table of contents


Date: 29 Jun 95 14:59:25 EDT
From: <MILLER.SA at ocf.compuserve.com>
Subject:  malt vinegar


*Message:
From: MILLER.SA at OCMTV01
Date: 6/29/95 2:43PM
To: >internet:homebrew at hpfcmi.fc.hp.com at OCF_INFORM
Subject: malt vinegar
Contents:

Text item: Text_1

Have any of you tried making malt vinegar, perhaps as a side project?  If so I 
would be curious to know the procedure.  The only brand I've been able to find 
is Heinz which has a fairly large amount of corn extract...(the 
Bud-Mill-Ameri-swill of the malt vinegar world I guess). :)

Thanks,
Scott



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Jun 1995 20:38:00 GMT
From: jeff.guillet at lcabin.com (Jeff Guillet)
Subject: How's my agua?


I recently got my water quality report from my water company.  I've been
brewing extracts for the last year and a half and am ready to take the 
plunge to all grain  Would some kind soul please tell me how my water is
and what I should do to correct any problems?

Alkalinity (CaCO3)      54 mg/l
Calcium                 21 mg/l
Chlorine                0.54 mg/l
Chloride                20.5 mg/l
Hardness (CaCO3)        84 mg/l
Iron                    0.014 mg/l
Magnesium               5.3 mg/l
pH                      7.7
Potassium               0.5 mg/l
Sodium                  16 mg/l
Total Dissolved Solids  101 mg/l

Did I leave anything out?  Thanks very much for your expertise!

BTW - Samuel Adams new Scotch Ale is *delicious!* (Jim Koch be damned).  
Nice malty, peat smoked taste.  The new Sam Adams Cherry Wheat, however, 
sucks.  WAY too much cherry for me.

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

* CMPQwk 1.42-R2 * Reg #1757 *

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 29 Jun 95 15:31:12 MDT
From: Norman C. Pyle <npyle at hp7013.ecae.StorTek.COM>
Subject: Whole Hops vs. PPProcessed

I can't let these comments by Ken Schroeder go unchallenged (nothing
personal, Ken, maybe too much lupulin in my brain):

>The quality of hop plugs, IMHO, is outstanding. Pellets produce a
>glop at the bottom of my mash tun which the wort will not flow through.
>The quality of the hop bitterness, flavor and aroma seems fair to good.
>Pellets are execellent for dry hopping. The compact size makes them easy
>to get into the carboys. I have yet to see a bag of "flowers" contain

I find the aroma from fresh whole hops to be as good as it gets.  Also,
whole hops are easier to separate from the wort, which for me is more
important than a little hassle getting them into the neck of the bottle.
OTOH, I'm not doing much dry hopping anymore.  If I want do it, I just add
them to my kegs nowadays.

>mostly flowers. These bags should be called cone leaves or crushed cones.

I think the problem here is the source of your whole hops.  I buy my hops
mail order, previously from The Hop Source and now from Just Hops (who bought
out THS).  The quality of these hops is wonderful compared to what I've seen
in the local retail homebrew stores.  The price is much better as well.  I
buy at least a 6 month's supply each time, to make it more convenient.  Yes,
this fills up my freezer, but what the heck.  I'd rather see it stuffed with
green bags of humulus lupulus than with bread and bagels as my wife would
have it.  As far as the condition of the cones, they are not 100% intact
cones, but they are usually in pretty fine shape, with a bright green color,
and no signs of oxidation.

>Flowers tend to oxidize, which not a problem with properly stored pellets
>and plugs. Flowers quality seems to go up and down and many times appear

ALL HOPS TEND TO OXIDIZE.  This is not debatable.  If you store your hops
cold in barrier packaging this is not much of an issue no matter what form
the hops come in.

>light green and brownish, a sure sign of aged hops. Probably the best
>testimony to plugs is the 90% plus cones I find in the mash tun after
>boiling. My hop utilization went up when I switched to plugs. That may be
>a subjective determination, but almost all who know my beers claim an
>increase in hoppiness. It is my hope that the superior packaging (IMHO)
>becomes popular and we may find plugs for all of our favorite hop varieties.

Plugs are a good form of hops, as are pellets.  What I don't understand are
those who claim that taking fresh hops and chopping them into tiny bits,
then using great pressure (and its associated heat) to form them into
pellets, is going to improve them!  And how can you take fresh whole hops,
send them across the ocean, compress them until all of the lupulin glands
burst and are exposed to oxygen, then send them back across the ocean, and
claim they are better?   Pellets and plugs are more compact and sometimes
easier to dry hop with.  I just can't buy the claims that hops are improved
by processing them.

Russell (two L's) Mast and I have been discussing this via email.  He's seen
a lot of poor quality whole hops in retail stores, as have I.  For whatever
reason, by the time they make the retail scene they aren't *usually* in the
best shape.  I think this is why pellets and plugs have gained such a good
reputation.  They take up less freezer/refrigerator space so they are
probably treated better by distributors and retailers who have limited cold
space.  They may even store better under adverse conditions, which might
explain their reputation for better consistency, though I've never seen proof
of this.

I honestly don't think most people have ever seen good whole hops, at least
not consistently good ones.  I never did until I started mail ordering them,
and until then, I guess I didn't really know the difference.  Fresh whole hops
are available to homebrewers today, so seek and you will find, brew with them
and you will be happy, IMHO.

Cheers,
Norm

Return to table of contents

End of HOMEBREW Digest #1770, 07/01/95