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


Contents:
  Re: Partial decoction, boiling kegs (Jim Dipalma)
  questions about mashing (GKING)
  hop usage; boiling times (GKING)
  HSA from RIMS Cavitation ("Ray Cooper")
  EM Probs, New Product (Jack Schmidling)
  Carbonation in two-day-old beer (Robert Paolino)
  Decoction/Sparge (A. J. deLange)
  Re: Dishwasher ("Thomas A. Wideman")
  kettle (DONBREW)
  Foam-in-a-can (C.D. Pritchard)
  Fermentation activity of lagers (freigang)
  catabolite repression ("Tracy Aquilla")
  stuck run-off ("Tracy Aquilla")
  Porter/Milds recipe ("James Hojel")
  Re: DMS (CCCEF.KHUIZING)
  Brewpubs in Greenville, SC (Decker at rmtgvl.rmtinc.com, Robin E.)
  Re: Quality (John DeCarlo              )
  Malt Dextrin (gravels)
  Stout High FG (Scott Bukofsky)
  Re: Bottle carbonation (Kris Thomas Messenger)
  Re: counter-flow chillers (Bill Pemberton)
  The great bubble debate (Jim Grady)
  bottle conditioning (Rolland Everitt)
  Strawberry Wheat (cmcgee)
  accuracy/precision, quality (GKING)
  stone-age lagering (Eugene Sonn)



******************************************************************
* 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.
#
#################################################################
NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS hpfcmgw!

Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew at hpfcmgw.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@ hpfcmgw.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 alpha.rollanet.org
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, 7 Dec 95 10:19:10 EST
From: dipalma at sky.com (Jim Dipalma)
Subject: Re: Partial decoction, boiling kegs


Hi All,

  In HBD#1901, Alejandro Midence writes about partial decoction:

>Get the malt with the enzymes, (the pale lager and munich), and take it
>through a regular step infusion mash.  Protein rest at 122 degrees,
>raising temperature to about 150 and then to 158, and finally to 170 to
>mash out.  Now, here's the twist, after mashout temperature has been
>reached, raise temperature of mash to a boil and add it to the crystal
>malts which have been steeping in water at about 150 all this time.  This
>should rais the whole thing to about 165 degrees.  Then, pour some water
>at an equivalent temperature through the grains in the grain bag thereby
>conducting some sort of a sparge.  Now, remove grains, bring water to
>boil and add extracts and hops and brew as normal as any other extract
>brew.
>
>Have I gone mad or is there *some* feasibility in what I've just
>written.

  Can't comment on your sanity Alex :-), but I do see a problem with the
procedure you've described. Boiling *all* of the lager and Munich malts does
two things. First, it will denature all of the amylase enzymes in the grain. 
Second, it will gelatinize additional starch, and release unconverted starch
into your wort. Since you have already denatured all of the enzymes, there is
nothing to convert the starch. You will very likely end up with a starch haze
in the finished beer.
  In a standard decoction, the boiled mash is added back to a "rest mash", ie,
grain that has not been boiled and still contains some enzymes. Typically, the
resulting temperature boost pushes the mash into sacc. rest range, activating
the amylase enzymes in the rest mash, and converting the starch released
during the boil.
  If you'd like some additional information on decoction mashing, I recommend
Noonan's "Brewing Lager Beer", or the classic style series books "Bock", by
Darryl Richman, and "German Wheat Beer" by Eric Warner. All contain excellent
descriptions of the process.

******************************************************************

Much as I tried, I couldn't resist getting in on the boiled kegs thread. Rob
Lauriston writes:

>I think that this is the *best* way to sanitize Cornelius kegs because the
>heat can penetrate into the nooks and crannies around the valves where
>liquid sanitizers might not reach.

  Agreed. I sanitize my kegs by putting a gallon of boiling water in, sealing
it up, rolling it around on the floor for a minute, then letting it sit for
about 5-10 minutes. I then attach a short length of beverage tubing to the
LIQUID OUT fitting, put a little CO2 pressure on, and drain the hot water
through the dip tube and out the fitting. This is exactly the same path the
beer takes when dispensed. Once the water is drained, a *lot* of steam comes
out of the beverage tubing. I'm of the opinion that the steam is very
effective as a sanitizer. I've done 60-70 batches this way over the years,
with zero infections.

Rob continues:

>Like any other method of sanitation, it assumes the keg is already clean.

  I soak my kegs overnight in TSP before filling them, then rinse well with
hot water. They are spotlessly clean before sanitizing.
  There has been some suggestion that using this method of sanitation results
in damage to the small O-rings on the poppet valves. In 4 years, I've replaced
a total of 6 of these. 5 of the 6 were on GAS IN poppets, which I believe is
related to my method of force carbonation and dispensing. I force carbonate,
but don't leave the CO2 attached, I chill the keg and re-pressure it twice
daily. As a result, the gas connect is repeatedly slid on and off the GAS IN
poppet, I think this is why these O-rings wear out more frequently than the
ones on the LIQUID OUT poppet. I'd like to get a definitive answer on this,
and settle the issue once and for all (HA!). Does anyone have any info on
temperature specs for neoprene, or whatever the silly little bleeders are
made of??

         Cheers,
           Jim               dipalma at sky.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 07 Dec 1995 16:30:18 -0500 (EST)
From: GKING <GKING at ARSERRC.Gov>
Subject: questions about mashing

Greetings, fellow homebrewers,

I have not yet ventured into the wonderful world of all-grain brewing
(or even partial-grain brewing, for that matter), but I enjoy reading
about it here in HBD (hopefully absorbing some knowledge in the
process).

There are a few questions I have about the mashing process that one
of you kind souls could answer (or point me to the relevant book(s)).

Why do some brewers use a single protein rest, and others use 2 or
even 3 rests?

What is accomplished in the "mashing out" step?

>From what I've read, one should avoid heating the mash above 170^F
(or is it 180^F?) because too many astringent phenolic compounds are
extracted from the grains above this temperature.  However, in decoc-
tion mashing, portions of the grain are removed, boiled (T > 200^F),
and then returned to the mash to raise the overall temperature of the
mash.  Doesn't boiling these portions of grain result in the extraction
of some unwanted phenolic compounds?

Any enlightenment on these topics will be appreciated. TIA.

Greg King
gking at arserrc.gov

P.S.  On another subject: does anyone know what type(s) of hops are used
      in the Molson ales?  Or in Yuengling's Lord Chesterfield ale?


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 06 Dec 1995 17:34:55 -0500 (EST)
From: GKING <GKING at ARSERRC.Gov>
Subject: hop usage; boiling times

Greetings Homebrewers,

I'd like to pose a question to "The Collective" regarding hop usage:

If hop aroma and flavor are pretty much gone after 10-15 minutes of
boiling in the wort, and extraction of the bittering alpha acids takes
at least 30 minutes of boiling time (with even longer times being
preferable), is there ever any benefit derived from an addition of hops
with 20 minutes left in the boil?

- --Greg King
gking at arserrc.gov


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 8 Dec 95 02:44:19 UT
From: "Ray Cooper" <Ray_Cooper at msn.com>
Subject: HSA from RIMS Cavitation

Ok HBD gurus,

I've read several articles cautioning against allowing cavitation to occur at 
the pump in a RIMS system to prevent Hot Side Aeration of the mash liquor and 
subsequent oxidation. Where does the _air_ (or O2) come from? As I 
understand, cavitation is caused by "boiling" liquid at the low pressure side 
of the pump impeller and that the only gas that should be there is H2O vapor. 
Also what is the consensus about all the beating around that the mash liquor 
goes through at the pump? Do these really affect the wort and the final 
product or are they just some more homebrew momisms?

Ray "sometimes the obvious is beyond me" Cooper

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 7 Dec 95 22:25 CST
From: arf at mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: EM Probs, New Product

 
 I think Al pretty well covered the problems Paul had with 
 his first EM experience.  Several other things may be 
 working here.
 
 First of all, on the air leaking into the hose at the 
 spigot, a hose clamp usually will correct the problem as Al 
 suggested but if it is caused by a rough parting line on the 
 forging, it is best to correct it.  If you look at the 
 spigot, you will note the parting line from the mold it was 
 forged in.  If this is rough or protrudes above the surface, 
 it will allow the entrance of air.  The simple fix is to 
 file or sand this down to a smooth surface.
 
 Like Al, I have never suffered a stuck mash with an EM in 
 about 4 years of use.  Based on a onetime experience proving 
 that one could make beer from flour, I made a successful 
 batch with malt that I ran through a Corona set so tight 
 that I could hardly turn it when empty and the husk was so 
 pulverized that the only way one would know it was there was 
 by the tan color it contributed.  This leads me to believe 
 that the "crush" is probably not the problem and I would 
 look to other variables.  Paul did not mention the kettle 
 size so we have no clue as the the depth of the grain bed.  
 My flour batch was a one gallon batch done in a six qt 
 kettle with an EM installed and this provides about the same 
 form factor and grain depth as my normal mash tun.
 
 It is also a point in the process when haste makes waste.The 
 longer one waits after the last stir of the mash, the faster 
 it clears and the better it flows.  I routinely let the mash 
 rest 30 mins before opening the spigot.  I then open it wide 
 and drain about two cups and slow it down to a trickle and 
 let it run into the kettle.  After a gallon or so, I open it 
 all the way and let it go.
 
 All earlier suggestions of a second stirring and clearing 
 step to increase the yield are hereby cancelled.  Subsequent 
 experience has shown this to be unnecessary and a waste of 
 time and no measurable increase in yield is achieved.
 
 To deal with the hot handle, I just keep a pliers handy.  
 The alternative is a far more expensive spigot and hence a 
 more expensive product.
 
                           .........
 
 NEW PRODUCT ANNOUNCEMENT..... skip if you think you will be 
 offended.
 
 
 Finally, I let a retailer on the West Coast talk me into 
 providing an EM specifically for use in the Gott cooler. He 
 claims it is the best of all worlds, has been selling them 
 for years and just throws away the EM spigots.  I have never 
 used a Gott so until I get one, I can make no claims for it.
 
 What the Gott EM is, is simply the copper tube, tubular 
 strainer and a hose clamp.  You push the copper tube through 
 a drilled rubber stopper till it protrudes enough to get a 
 hose on the end.  Push this into the hole on the Gott and 
 VOILA.....  Gott/EM.
 
 js

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 16:46:53 +1000
From: nigelt at delm.tas.gov.au (Nigel Townsend)


Date: Sat, 02 Dec 95 14:40:37 -0500
From: mmoss at PO-Box.McGill.CA
Subject:dishwasher

Mike Moss of Montreal said:

             --------------------------------------------------
Does anybody have experience using the dishwasher (as suggested by Dave
Miller) to sterilize bottles?  Do you use the full cycle or just the heat
cycle?  If full cycle do you use detergent as if you were washing dishes?
              ---------------------------------------------------

About 6 months ago some one on the HBD talked about this (sorry , forgot
the name but liked the idea).  I normally keg, but last weekend I wished to
bottle some lager.

I made sure that there was none of the glass sparkling stuff (new tachnical
term) in the little container, removed the filter from the bottom and ran
it on two rinse cycles with no soap.  This got rid of any gunk in the
system.  I filled it with bottles with the necks down and ran it on a full
cylcle with no soap.  The bottles are always well rinsed immediately after
use and so had no bits stuck to the inside.

When the cycle was finished, I opened the door pulled a bottle out, placed
it on the open door as a platform and started filling bottles. Any spillage
was trapped in the door and went into the bottom of the dishwasher at the
end.

 I had previously decanted the beer from my brewing container into another
brewing container with (brown) sugar dissolved in boiling water on the
bottom.  As the beer flowed in, it self primed.  I then filled the bottles
from this brewing container.

This process is  fast, easy and needs less cleaning up.  I will not know
for a while if there are any infections which may result. I will let people
know if there were.

The reason for several rinses and removing the filter is that my son has
the responsibility of loading the dishwasher if he wants his pocket money.
He doesnt always rinse the big bits off before placing in the dishwasher!

Assuming there are no problems with infection, I will certainly use this
system again.

Nigel Townsend
Hobart
Tasmania, Australia


NIGEL TOWNSEND
Environmental Planning Consultant
Division of Planning Department of Environment and Land Management
Tasmanian State Government



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 02:08:30 -0600 (CST)
From: Robert Paolino <rpaolino at execpc.com>
Subject: Carbonation in two-day-old beer

Anyone have thoughts on this one?

I rarely put an airlock on until after the vigourous "happy yeast" phase
(don't you love those technical terms---it's late and I'm getting a bit
goofy, I suppose)--I don't want to do a blowoff and I don't want a clogged
airlock.  My primary fermenters are those plastic (gasp! shock! horrours!)
7.5 gallon semi-opaque wine fermenter buckets with the lids that don't fit
tightly.  Until I'm ready for an airlock, I cover the drilled hole in the
lid with a piece of foil or plastic wrap.  (That's just the preface, but
if you have any comments on why I shouldn't wait to use an airlock, that's
fine, too, but also read on.)

Today was the second day in the life of a very healthy, happy, vigourously
fermenting big-ass (high gravity) brew.  The yeast had pretty much fallen,
but there was still a decent head on it.  The hole in the lid was still
covered with the plastic wrap (no airlock yet).  Don't ask why, but when I
was unloading the dishwasher I set down a coffee mug atop the plastic
wrap-covered lid.  A little while ago (maybe two hours after the forgotten
coffee mug), I decided it was time to move the fermenter to the beer
closet and put an airlock on, and noticed something odd, although it
shouldn't have entirely surprised me if I'd thought about it: the yeast on
top was pretty much gone except a bit around the circumference of the
surface of the liquid and the young beer was _very_ fizzy.  The CO2 that
couldn't escape as easily (but the bucket wasn't going to blow,
though--remember the lid is not very tight-fitting) had gone into
solution. 

IS MY BEER RUINED?  ;-)

Seriously, though, any thoughts on the effect of my having carbonated my
two-day old beer?  Have I adversely affected the yeast?  Can I expect the
remainder of the fermentation to proceed normally?  Whaddya know about
such things? 

Now go have a beer,


Bob Paolino                                     uswlsrap at ibmmail.com
Madison                                    rpaolino at earth.execpc.com
               Winner of the 1995 Great Dane Challenge
           Look for that 50IBU dry-hopped pale ale at the
         Great Dane--on beer engine--in early February 1996!
                       Columbus was a Hophead!


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 09:16:10 -0500
From: ajdel at interramp.com (A. J. deLange)
Subject: Decoction/Sparge

Recent discussion of decoction makes it look like time to repost the pros
and cons:

Pros (in order of importance with todays highly modified malts):
1. Enhances production of flavor and aroma compounds.
2. Reduces mash pH for better conversion and easier runoff.
3. Less trub in main boil and at chilling
4. Less chance of raw starch carryover to kettle
5. Extracts, coagulates and precipitates tannins, proteins and silicates.
6. Allows thicker mash for earlier rests
7. Better gelatinization of starch
8. Breaks down protein matrix thus releasing more starch and improving
extraction.
9. It's the traditional way to make some beers.

Note that 7 and 8 do become important where wheat malt or raw wheat are used.

Cons:
1. Complicated
2. Requires more equipment
3. Takes a lot more time
4. Darkens beer
5. Extracts tannins as grains are boiled
6. Danger of scorching
7. Uses more enerygy
8. Must be careful about starch released in final decoction
9. "The calassical three-mash system is a long-drawn-out affair and the
cheif criticism which has been levelsed against it is that mashing is too
intensive [i.e. protein is degraded too far]" Jean deClerk

Note that tannin extraction has been listed as a pro and a con. The good
news is that some of it is complexed and dropped in the decoction and that
as the tannins have been largely extracted in the decoctions one need not
be so careful about sparge temperature and pH. The bad news is that the
tannins have been released and long lagering is usually required for them
to drop out.

Suggestion for obtaining the thinnest part of the mash for lauter
decoction: Use a large kitchen sieve as a stuykmanden i.e. push it down
into the mash and ladle out the liquid.

In # 1940 Bruce Taber asked about checking on sparge runoff:

My procedure is to collect a sample jar full of runoff and immediately
place it in a 1 litre Erlenmyer flask which is full of water with a couple
of ice cubes. Let it sit for a minute or 2, pull it out and swirl it around
and then let it sit again. Repeat until it is close to the proper
temperature for your hydrometer. With a little experience you will be able
to get close enough to be able to tell by the feel alone. As you will be
measuring low gravities it is not critical that the temperature be exact.

When the sample is cool, measure and record the gravity. Then check the pH.
Yes, the test strips are accurate to within half a pH unit or better and
the problems of error due to wort color are minimized because the wort is
nearly clear towards the end of the sparge.

As for acidification: it may or may not be necessary depending on the
alkalinity of your water and the nature of the beer you are making. The
worst case is where you have only pale malts and alkaline water. Measure pH
and gravity during a sparge when making your palest beer. If pH gets above
5 before the desired runoff gravity is reached you should either terminate
runoff sooner (and lose sugar) or acidify the sparge water. The usual
choices for this are phosphoric acid or lactic acid which are generally
though to be more flavor neutral than citric acid, tartaric acid or acid
blend (which is a mix of these two). The sparge water pH should be adjusted
to somewhere between 5 and 6. The amount of acid required to do this
depends on the type of acid and the buffering capacity (alkalinity) of the
water. Proceded very slowly when adding the acid i.e. a ml or 2 at a time
with a measurement after each addition. It's probably a good idea to
experiment off line, i.e. on a day other than brew day, by preparing a
volume of sparge water as you would for brewing and doing the acid
addition. It is important to heat the test water as you heat the actual
sparge water because the heating process may precipitate temporary hardness
and lower alkalinity. On the other hand, adding acid and stirring will
cause precipitated carbonate to redissolve so that it is definitely best to
decant your sparge water if you notice precipitation when it is heated.

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



Return to table of contents


Date: 08 Dec 95 08:20:20 EST
From: "Thomas A. Wideman" <75710.1511 at compuserve.com>
Subject: Re: Dishwasher

>An another subject.  Does anybody have experience using the dishwasher (as 
>suggested by Dave Miller) to sterilize bottles?  Do you use the full cycle or 
>just the heat cycle?  If full cycle do you use detergent as if you were 
>washing dishes?

I have had great luck using the dishwasher.  I run it through the full 
cycle, but I only add detergent to the "pre-rinse" cup, not the one with 
the swing-out door, and normally only 1/2 the regular amount.  That way, 
I get one wash cycle, and lots of rinse cycles.  I also use the Water 
Heat and Heated Dry options.

When doing the above, the bottles are normally clean already; I just do 
it to sanitize them.  When drinking from bottles, I rinse thoroughly 
after decanting, leaving hot water stand in them until loading them into 
the dishwasher.  I then wash them in the dishwasher with the regular 
dishes, then set them aside.  When ready to bottle, I gather them 
together and do as described above.

A final note -- labels.  I apply paper labels, printed on my laser 
printer, to the bottles with Avery-Denison glue sticks (you know those 
paste sticks).  A quick swipe down each side of the label (none in the 
middle), then onto the bottle.  That way, after decanting, I can also 
simply peel the label off, leaving two slight glue trails on the bottle. 
which wash off in the dishwasher easily.

Cheers,
Tom


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 08:42:34 -0500
From: DONBREW at aol.com
Subject: kettle

Scott sez:
>My thought is to make a large circular manifold that runs along the
>top of the bottom bowl of the keg.  Whirlpool, let things settle,
>and everything should proceed smoothly, yes?  (This was suggested
>a while back by someone whose name I forget, and sounds like a good
>idea to me.)

   The 3" tube is way too short.
  What I have done:
1. turn the keg upside down, then wack away at the center of the "bowl" to
invert it.  Thus giving a ring around a bump on the inside. (20/20 hindsight
suggests to use an autobody type "hammer & dolly" to form the new
configuration).
2. make a large circular manifold (1/2" O.D.) to fit in the "ring"
3. let the wort sit for 3-5 min before running it into the CF chiller, this
to let the hops settle.  No whirlpool is needeed.
4. if you use only whole hops, they will act as a very nice filter.  When I
am done there is almost no liquid left, only what is absorbed in the
hops/break, and almost all of the break is left on top of the hops.
   From what I have read, I believe that the inversion (cone) on the bottom
of the keg would also give a better boil if you are using an external burner.
 I use an electric water heater element, so in my case it gives less dead
space at the bottom.

Don

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 8 Dec 95 09:03 EST
From: cdp at chattanooga.net (C.D. Pritchard)
Subject: Foam-in-a-can

korz at pubs.ih.att.com (Algis R Korzonas) in 1902 asked:

>Given that the lids on most coolers are simply hollow plastic and a source
>of a lot of heat loss, has anyone used that "styrofoam in a can" stuff
>to fill a cooler lid?  Any problems?

Long ago, I saw a post (in HBD?) regarding that.  Poster said he used
several shots to fill the lid.  I've only used the stuff for filling cracks.
It swells a lot as it cures.  I *guess* it could perhaps deform the lid if
you tried to fill the lid with one shot and foam extruded through the hole
in the lid you made the shot through hardened before the rest of the stuff
expanded fully.

My mash/sparge tun is an insulated a 6.5 gal. plastic pail.  The lid (& base
too) is 2 layers of 3/4" thick rigid beaded foam.  Since beads would flake
off readily and fall into the mash (I don't think it's got much in the way
of potiential fermentables <g>), I cut 2 disks from alunimum flashing,
fastened them to either sides of the top with double sided tape and put
aluminum duct tape (not the cloth stuff- doesn't hold up as well) around the
edges.  It laps over and seals against the the flashing also.  It's easy to
make and the aluminum skins reflect radiant heat back towards the wort.
Also, it's easy to make holes in it for sparge water hoses, stirrers and
such.  The only downside (minor IMHO) is that the tape conducts a bit of
heat around the sides of the lid.  
C.D. Pritchard    cdp at chattanooga.net


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 08:03:58 -0500
From: freigang at tcpcs2.dnet.etn.com
Subject: Fermentation activity of lagers


Question,
Now that winter has set in here in Kalamazoo, MI I decided to take advantage 
of the cold and brew my first lager (extract and specialty grains). 
OG was at 1.060 and it has been in the primary at 45 deg. for almost a week. 
Although the sediment has dropped and a decent sized yeast cake has formed 
on the bottom, there appears to be no real active fermentation taking 
place (as you would typically see with an Ale).

I will check the S.G. this weekend when I rack to the secondary, but in the 
meantime I would like to know if this is normal fermentation activity for 
a lager.  

Private Email is fine.

Thanks for your help
Al Freigang

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 8 Dec 95 09:08:05 CST
From: "Tracy Aquilla" <aquilla at salus.med.uvm.edu>
Subject: catabolite repression

In Digest #1903:
awalsh at crl.com.au (Andy Walsh) says:

>This is kind of interesting.
>I have had some trouble with stuck fermentations when making Belgian style
>ales using glucose and Wyeast 3944 (wit yeast), which is often recommended
>for ale styles as well as wit (I do not recommend this one after some
>expermentation - it seems easily shocked into catabolite repression by
>glucose).

It isn't clear to me what you're saying here. Can you please expound on
this?

Thomas T. Aquilla, Ph.D.         .***.   .***.           .***.   .***.
Molecular Physiology and Biophysics    * | | | *       * | | | * | | | *
University of Vermont Medical College*   * | | | *   * | | | *   * | | | *   
Health Science Complex, Given E-201*       * | | | * | | | *       * | | | *
Burlington, VT 05405-0068    '***'           '***'   '***'           '***'

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 8 Dec 95 09:55:28 CST
From: "Tracy Aquilla" <aquilla at salus.med.uvm.edu>
Subject: stuck run-off

In Digest #1904:
korz at pubs.ih.att.com (Algis R Korzonas) says:
Subject: water loss/set mashes/CO2 in solution/DMS OOPS!/decoctions

>A few days ago someone blamed a set mash on too much water in the tun
>"compacting the grain bed."  I don't believe this to be true either.
>As an exercise, I pose this question:  Have any of you had a set mash
>(stuck runoff) while using a non-adjustable (one less variable) JSP
>MaltMill(tm) on an all-barleymalt mash?  My guess is no.

Yes, I have (I have witnesses too!). I made an O'fest a while back that
stuck like a pig. It was 100% barley malt and I used an EZ-Masher (they
'never' stick) in a GOTT cooler! The malt was crushed in a fixed MaltMill,
as usual. I did three decoctions (I seem to recall?), including both
B-glucan and protein rests. This mash included about 12 pounds (or more?) of
malt in a 5 gallon GOTT, which was really pushing the limits of this tun.
The liquid level was at the very top and the grain-bed was over one foot
deep. I attributed the stuck run-off to a highly compacted grain-bed. I
tried everything to 'un-stick' it, but no luck. It was a real drag.
    Tracy in Vermont
    aquilla at salus.med.uvm.edu

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 8 Dec 95 14:51:42 UT
From: "James Hojel" <JTroy at msn.com>
Subject: Porter/Milds recipe

I'm looking for some good all-grain recipes for Porters and Milds.  Any input 
would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you,

JTH

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 10:13:04 -0500
From: CCCEF.KHUIZING at capital.ge.com
Subject: Re: DMS


     Not to nit pick, but in HBD 1903 Robert Bush writes  : "You could boil
     the wort longer than usual, as this will diminish DMS".  I don't
     believe this is actually the most effective way to reduce DMS.
     Remember DMS is created throughout the boil from the precursor SMM,
     with heat as the main catalyst.  Therefore, when you stop boiling, DMS
     is still being produced.  I am not sure at what point the reaction is
     slowed to a negligible level, but as Al K. stated in HBD 1902, rapid
     cooling of the wort is the best way to keep DMS to a minimum, assuming
     no fermentation infections.


     Keith Huizinga
     cccef.khuizing at capital.ge.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 01 Dec 1995 00:00:00 
From: Decker at rmtgvl.rmtinc.com, Robin E. <ROBIND at rmtgvl.rmtinc.com>
Subject: Brewpubs in Greenville, SC


Clay mentioned this subject in HBD #1904

There are three Brewpubs in Greenville.  They have all opened this year.

First to open was the Chicago Brew Pub on Woodruff Road.  It was started by 
a successful restauranteur here in Greenville, so you would expect at least 
the food & service to be above average.  Unfortunately, tain't so.  Also, a 
myriad of problems in the brewhouse, including switching yeasts and 
switching brewmasters, has prevented their beer from being all it could be. 
 The good news is, they regularly host the new "SCHOLARS" homebrew club 
meetings, and they are right across the street from Greenville's only 
full-line homebrew supply shop, Biermeisters.

Biermeisters opened ~6 weeks ago, and is already hosting brewing seminars, 
which are being taught by the local brewpub & microbrewery brewmasters 
(except Chicago's <g>).  They  also have over 205 beers in stock & almost 
none of the "big 3".

The 2nd brewpub opened was Blue Ridge Brewing Co.  I give them high marks in 
all categories.  They have an outstanding hefe weizen, their food is Real 
Food, with lots of game...think nouvelle cuisine goes rustic...their service 
is excellent, and the atmosphere is true "pub".  The rest of their beers are 
good quality, if a touch conservative.  Blue Ridge is located on Main Street 
across from the Hyatt hotel.

The latest offering is the Downtown Brewing Company on Coffee Street.  This 
is a short 2 blocks from Blue Ridge, which makes for an interesting night on 
the town.  I haven't personally tried the food, but I have heard rave 
reviews....  The beer is the best of the three brewpubs.  Brewmaster Ben 
Pierson has studied at various breweries in Germany, as well as helping to 
start-up several brewpubs in the states.
He even has an open fermenter for special brews....  The porter that will 
hit the serving tanks in January is excellent...the best he's offered so 
far, but remember, DBC is only a couple of months old.  We were lucky enough 
to get a personal tour and tasting, guided by Ben, and believe me, his 
brewhouse is "a beautiful thing".

So if any of you are within 100 miles of Greenville, come on out and support 
the craft brew industry...it's well worth the effort.  And don't forget to 
look for the Reedy River Brewery's products, scheduled to hit the stores in 
January (it's already on tap at some local restaurants/pubs), and the 
Highland Brewery's 22 oz. bottles (from Asheville, NC), which are already 
available.

Happy hunting,
Goldings


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 8 Dec 95 10:29:21 EST
From: John DeCarlo <jdecarlo at homebrew.mitre.org>
Subject: Re: Quality

Craig Amundsen writes:
>  When thinking about quality I like to keep the words accuracy and 
>precision in mind.  A quality beer is one that is produced in an accurate 
>and precise manner.

This is interesting because I was also thinking about weighing in on 
quality, but had refrained until now <g>.

Most people use the term "quality" to mean (Random House Dictionary 4.) 
"high grade; great excellence".  So a beer of high quality (or just a
quality beer) is one that is of high grade or is excellent.

This is very different from your definition, and accords with how people use
the word.  And gets back to whether you measure excellence by what you like 
or not.  Most people can agree that _War_and_Peace_ is an excellent novel of
high quality, but may not ever want to read it.

>[...] So, a quality beer is one that tastes the
>same from one batch to another and that taste is exactly the taste that is
>desired.

I would argue that this is exactly wrong.  High quality can also mean that 
it is hand-crafted and every one is different--mass-produced so every one is
the same can result in very poor quality stuff.  

Homebrewers can therefore make very high quality beers, with high quality 
ingredients and procedures and equipment.  I would also argue that Bud is 
high quality lawnmower beer, though I don't think that the lawnmower beer 
style is all that interesting.  

John DeCarlo, MITRE Corporation, McLean, VA--My views are my own
Fidonet:  1:109/131  Internet:  jdecarlo at mitre.org


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 08 Dec 95 07:56:54 EST
From: gravels at TRISMTP.npt.nuwc.navy.mil
Subject: Malt Dextrin

Hi All,

I picked up aome powdered malt dextrin at the homebrew supply store 
last night.  I've heard that it will add body to your brew.  The 
question is, how do I use it?  I have a batch in the secondary right 
now, can I mix some dextrin on the stove with some water, boil it to 
kill any nasties, cool it, and then add it back to the beer when I 
keg?  Am I way off base with this procedure?  What is the proper 
procedure, and what is the proper amount?  I know the amount will vary 
depending on how much 'mouth feel' you want, but what is an average 
amount, 1 tsp, 1 Tbs or 1 cup?  TIA.

           Steve Gravel          Newport, Rhode Island
                gravels at TRISMTP.npt.nuwc.navy.mil
       "Homebrew, it's not just a hobby it's an adventure!"


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 08:45:38 -0500 (EST)
From: Scott Bukofsky <scott.bukofsky at yale.edu>
Subject: Stout High FG

I have a stout that finished with a higher final gravity than I expected.
details:

  3   lb Schreier two-row
  1   lb Aromatic Malt
  1/2 lb roasted barley
  1/2 lb black patent
  1/4 lb flaked barley
  3.5 lb M&F dark DME
  1   oz Bullion hops  60 min
  1   oz Willamette    30 min
  Wyeast Irish

Mashed grains at 155 deg.  O.G. 1.063
I pitched a very active starter, and had visible fermentation within 3 
hours.  The next morning, the fermentation was furious, and my fermometer 
read 75 deg.  Concerned that the temp was too high, I draped some wet 
towels over the carboy.  The next day the temp was 64 degreres, and the 
yeast looked pretty sluggish.  After the 3rd day, all activity stopped, I 
racked to secondary with a gravity of 1.017.

Is this a typical attenuation for Wyeast Irish, or could I have shocked 
the yeast somehow?  My thought is that an ale yeast shouldn't mind the 64 
degrees, but I may be wrong.  I also hoped that by racking I might awaken 
the yeast again, but this has not worked.  Is there a solution to this 
too sweet stout?  Should I bother trying to add more yeast?  Any help 
would be appreciated.

 -Scott

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 08:10:56 -0800
From: Kris Thomas Messenger <kmesseng at slonet.org>
Subject: Re: Bottle carbonation

The recent thread on priming and how long it takes for priming to occur
included the following quote from Dave Miller's book:

>O.K., here's the direct quote from _Dave Miller's Homebrewing Guide_ , 
>Chapter 25, p. 218:
>
>"In practice, saturation is not always easy to achieve. For example, 
>with bottle-conditioned beer, the priming sugar will ferment in 24
>hours or less. At the end of that time, all of the gas is in the bottle. 
>However, most of it is in the headspace, because it just rises through 
>the beer as it is produced. It can take weeks for the headspace gas 
>to dissolve into the beer until, finally, equilibrium is achieved and
>the beer is saturated."

A few people thought this makes sense. The approximately 60 or so batches I
have brewed do not understand this principle as none of them have acted in
this way. Here's how it works in my beer.

<<<IF>>> the sugar is fermented in 24 hours, then the CO2 is in the bottle.
There are only two places for it to be: in the beer or in the headspace.  If
it's in the beer then the beer is carbonated. But we all know that our beer
takes in general 3 to 4 weeks to come up to full carbonation. So it isn't in
the beer.  Therefore it MUST be in the headspace.  If it is in the
headspace, then 2 or 3 days later, you could open a bottle of flat beer but
hear an enormous hisssssssssss as all that CO2 rushes out. Sorry.

This does not happen.  After about a week, open one and it hisses a little.
After two weeks, the hiss is more prominent. And after one month, there is a
good hiss and the beer is indeed carbonated.

I firmly believe the fermentation process to follow <more or less> an
exponential decay curve.  At least that's how mine seems to work.  After the
fermenting gets going, it peaks and begins a long subsiding.  Bubbles come
up slower and slower. Take gravity readings in your beer. You will see that
the gravity gets lower and lower over a long time; not in "24" hours.

The real point is that it does take nearly a month or so to get your beer
carbonated so if this is how you like your beer, I can only say: Brew early
and brew often! Cheers.

- ----------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Messenger, Los Osos, California, USA *** kmesseng at slonet.org
- ----------------------------------------------------------------


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 11:39:37 -0500 (EST)
From: Bill Pemberton <wfp5p at tigger.itc.virginia.edu>
Subject: Re: counter-flow chillers



Ronald Moucka asks about counter-flow chillers.

I've got got copper in garden hose chiller that I made and I don't find it
to be cumbersom at all.  It is a little bit larger then the PVC type that
I've seen, but not so much so that it is hard to deal with.

The efficiency that I get is great -- it takes about 6 minutes to transfer 5
gallons from boiling to tap water temp.

 - --
Bill

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 08 Dec 1995 12:32:34 -0500
From: Jim Grady <grady at an.hp.com>
Subject: The great bubble debate

Regarding the current discussion about whether the bottle conditioning time is 
spent producing or dissolving CO2, I am going to jump in on Kelly's side here.  

When I open a bottle that hasn't conditioned long enough, there is little or 
no sound of gas escaping as the bottle is opened.  This means that the CO2 is 
not all there under high pressure waiting for a couple of weeks to pass to 
dissolve into the beer.  The beer is flat BTW.

As time goes on and the beer gets carbonated, the sound of gas escaping as the 
bottle is opened increases.

- ------------
On another note, here is a beer judging tip for the cold & flu season:  Don't 
evaluate your beer after having a mentholated cough drop.  It might be judged 
too harshly.

(You probably knew that already.)
- -- 

Jim Grady				|"Under the sod and under the trees
grady at an.hp.com				| lies the body of Jonathan Pease.
Hewlett-Packard Medical Products Group	| He's not here, there's only the pod:
Andover, MA				| Pease shelled out and went to God"
                                        |        Tombstone in Nantucket, MA

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 12:31:55 -0500
From: af509 at osfn.rhilinet.gov (Rolland Everitt)
Subject: bottle conditioning



I have read with interest the several posts on how long it takes
for bottle fermentation, and the controversy over whether CO2
produced in the bottle goes directly into solution, or into the
headspace to be dissolved later.

I have no scientific evidence, but I can give you some easily
verified anecdotal evidence.  I use PET bottles.  Among their
advantages is the ability to "feel" the carbonation level.  Ever
handle a plastic bottle of Coke?  It's like a rock.  Crack it
open and immediately close it tight - only a fraction of the
dissolved CO2 has escaped, but the pressure in the headspace is
reduced to near atmospheric.  The bottle is now much softer.

I feel my bottles from time to time after bottling to check the
progress of carbonation.  I have no metrics, but although I can
usually detect a rise in pressure within a day or two, it takes
10-15 days for the bottles to get as hard as they are going to.
During this period, I conclude, the head space pressure is 
going up, not down.

I believe that CO2 being produced in the bottle goes into
solution, with some portion outgassing into the head space to
reach equilibrium.

Rolland Everitt
af509 at osfn.rhilinet.gov

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 12:50:47 -0500
From: cmcgee at hom.net (cmcgee)
Subject: Strawberry Wheat

        I'm new to this list, so I thought I'd drop a recipe for a KILLER
strawberry wheat beer that I've enjoyed immensely.
        "Fruit?  In Beer?  Yuck!"  Well, that's what I said, too, before a
friend gave me a Rasperry Wheat or ten to taste...

        (This is a kit beer recipe- email me if you want my all grain
rendition.)

        STRAWBERRY (or whatever..) WHEAT

        1 1/2 lbs honey
        1 can Morgan's Wheat
        1 1/2 lbs lt dried malt
        2 oz Tettnangers   (reduce if you don't like hoppy beers)
        2 lbs fresh or frozen berries
        Irish moss

Boil the honey, an ounce of the hops, & the Irish moss in some water 15 minutes.
Add Morgan's kit malt and bring back to a boil. Add fruit. Lower heat.
Steep at 150 degrees 20 minutes with the second half of the hops.

        That's it! Toss in some cold water & yeast and let 'er go.

After 4 days, rack off into a secondary fermenter, leaving the fruit behind
in the primary.


        Scoff if you may, but this is a killer brew. I've had the best luck
with strawberry wheat (and one batch in particular...!), but I've tasted a
couple heavenly rasperry wheats too. Cherry wheats never seem to be too
good for whatever reason. If you have good luck with a different kind of
fruit, please let me know.
        Original credit for an earlier version of this recipe goes to Mike
Raimey, Braumeister Ekstrordinar.

        Enjoy!

        --C



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 08 Dec 1995 12:56:55 -0500 (EST)
From: GKING <GKING at ARSERRC.Gov>
Subject: accuracy/precision, quality

In Homebrew Digest #1904 Craig Amundsen <amundsen at biosci.cbs.umn.edu> writes:

>When thinking about quality I like to keep the words accuracy and precision
>in mind. A quality beer is one that is produced in an accurate and precise
>manner. In the world o' science, a measurement is accurate if you get the
>same number when you repeat the measurement. The precision of a measurement
>is how many units (furlongs, hogsheads, microliters, etc) separate two
>divisions on your measuring tool.

Your definitions of accuracy and precision are not that accurate (pun
semi-intended).  Precision has to do with how close together repeated
measurements are to one another (the closer together, the higher the
precision).  Accuracy has to do with how close the measured value is to
the *actual* value.  Thus it is possible to measure something (e.g.
specific gravity) with a high degree of precision, yet with poor accuracy
because one's measuring instrument (e.g. hydrometer) has not been calibrated
correctly.

>So, a quality beer is one that tastes the
>same from one batch to another and that taste is exactly the taste that is
>desired.

I agree with this, but I would stress the "Does it have the desired taste?"
aspect over the "Does it taste exactly the same as the last batch?" aspect.

>Budmilloormolatts
>have managed to convince the beer drinking public that quality means good
>not repeatable.

Don't you mean just the opposite here, Craig?

Greg King
gking at arserrc.gov


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 8 Dec 1995 12:55:00 -0500 (EST)
From: Eugene Sonn <sonn at oswego.Oswego.EDU>
Subject: stone-age lagering

Holiday Greetings to the HBD,
	I'm  seeking information  from people who have experience  
lagering  in  an  uncontrolled, yet cold environment.  I have an  attic 
which is only  slightly  warmer  than  the outside temperatures  and 
would  like to  start lagering up  there.   Any  advice or experiences 
would be  appreciated.  Please send private e-mail and I'll  post  the 
findings to the HBD.

Thanks  in  advance,

Eugene

Return to table of contents

End of HOMEBREW Digest #1906, 12/11/95