---

   FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
        Shawn Steele, Digest Janitor
        Thanks to Rob Gardner for making the digest happen!

Contents:
  I've had enough... (Marty Tippin)
  5L kegs ((William P Giffin))
  Re: Al's Posts vs the Truth (Part 2) (korz at pubs.ih.lucent.com)
  Dial-type Thermometers (bturnbaugh at kktv.com)
  La Chouffe  (Bob Waterfall)
  Comment to the Collective on Nokomaree ((David C. Harsh))
  autolysis and secondaries/Victory vs. Munich (korz at pubs.ih.lucent.com)
  KitchenAid Grain Mills (Michael Beck)
  "Surrender" Nonsense ((Dennis J. Templeton))
  identity of mystery recipe (Gregory King)
  wheat decoction/secondary fermenters (M257876 at sl1001.mdc.com (bayerospace at mac))
  Re: wyeast belgian wit (Kit Anderson)
  Re: wyeast belgian wit (Kit Anderson)
  Re: sanitation, ((Nigel Townsend))
  re: A Specific Question about Specific Gravity (Ken Parsons)
  giving recipies / adding amylase during mash ("Keith Royster")
  Brewheat use ("CHUCK HUDSON, ER LAB 3-2865")
  re: fruit beer musings ((Dick Dunn))
  re: recipes (sharing them) (bob rogers)
  When to pick hops (michael j dix)
  nokomaree redux (m.bryson2 at genie.com)
  Event stuff (Kyle R Roberson)

For SUBMISSIONS to be published, send mail to:
  homebrew at aob.org
For (UN)SUBSCRIBE requests, send mail to:
  homebrew-digest-request@ aob.org
  and include ONLY subscribe or unsubscribe in the BODY of the message.

Please note that if subscribed via BEER-L, you must unsubscribe by sending
  a one line e-mail to listserv at ua1vm.ua.edu that says: UNSUB BEER-L
If your address is changing, please unsubscribe from the old address and
  then subscribe from the new address.
If your account is being deleted, please be courteous and unsubscribe first.
For technical problems send e-mail to the Digest Janitor, shawn at aob.org.

OTHER HOMEBREW INFORMATION
  http://www.aob.org/aob - The AHA's web site.
  http://alpha.rollanet.org - "The Brewery" and the Cat's Meow Archives.
  info at aob.org - automated e-mail homebrewing information.

ARCHIVES:
  At ftp.stanford.edu in /pub/clubs/homebrew/beer via anonymous ftp.  Also
  http://alpha.rollanet.org on the web and at majordomo at aob.org by e-mail.


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

From: Marty Tippin <martyt at sky.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 13:06:52 -0500
Subject: I've had enough...

Well, I've had about enough of the degeneration of the HBD and will be 
unsubscribing shortly.  Seems to me that the decline of this forum started 
about the same time the AOB took over and screwed everything up. 
Coincidence? I dunno.  But I've got better things to do with my time. 
 
If anyone needs me, I'll be lurking in rec.crafts.brewing instead... 
 
- -Marty 
- -------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Marty Tippin          | Tippin's Law #24:  Never underestimate the 
martyt at sky.net        | power of human stupidity. 
- -------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Check out my 2-Tier Converted Keg Brewing System Design Plans 
and other homebrew gadgets at http://www.sky.net/~martyt 
- -------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 

Return to table of contents


From: bill-giffin at juno.com (William P Giffin)
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 14:33:38 cst
Subject: 5L kegs

Good afternoon, 
 
I counter-pressure fill my 5L keg when I use them.  It is a great way to 
get the beer into the little rascals and you are sure that they will not 
be over carbonated. 
 
Works Great! 
 
Bill 

Return to table of contents


From: korz at pubs.ih.lucent.com
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 96 13:55:02 CDT
Subject: Re: Al's Posts vs the Truth (Part 2)

I was just about to send this to Michael directly, but then I noticed that 
he included the HBD on what should have been sent via private email.  Since 
Michael has taken this to HBD, I feel compelled to respond via HBD to 
defend myself.  Please note that this was initially written as private email 
to Michael.  I probably would not have been as thankful for his criticism 
of me had I realized earlier that he was posting this to the HBD. 
 
As for the Subject, for the record... Al tries his very best to post the 
truth and to help fellow brewers.  He's not perfect, but he has good 
intentions. 
 
Michael-- 
The knee-jerk reaction to Wheeler was, just as you called it.  I am 
in the process of writing a pair of books and therefore felt it was a bad idea 
to criticize Wheeler's book on HBD... it would look to everyone as if 
I was simply trying say how my book is better.  In stead, I did something 
worse... frustrated, I overreacted to Wheeler's article, indeed criticized 
points that I simply misread and frankly mucked things up quite a bit.  As 
you pointed out, this diluted my credibility in my posts and perhaps my 
book too.  Shame on me. 
 
If you are interested in my comments on Wheeler's book (some of which I 
compiled for an offline discussion with another brewer, but never posted) 
please email me.  I don't plan to post them.  Since these are the things 
that initially drove me to slam Wheeler, perhaps they are relevant. 
 
My contradictions of Burley, I feel, were quite a bit more than "is so...is 
not" as you suggest.  Burley is quite a character.  We have been arguing 
this point off-line (I, somewhat from textbooks, but mostly from practical 
experience and Steve from the textbooks and "enzyme kinetics" perspective) 
and it is still going on.  If you are indeed interested in what we have 
been saying, you should have joined our off-line group.  If you want to 
hear what we have said to date, I've saved it.  I can ask Steve, Charlie 
and Dave if they mind if I send you a copy (it was private email, after all). 
Let me know. 
 
>I followed closely your argument with Dave Burley regarding conversion and 
>beta amylase. I was shocked when you demanded that he quit "posting 
>misinformation" simply because he held a different perspective than you. It 
 
No, I'm afraid you are wrong here.  He was indeed posting misinformation. 
I used the strongest possible, civil language I felt was appropriate for the 
HBD in an effort to break his spirit.  It was clear to me that this was not 
your usual arguer.  I had hoped that I could cut off the thread with my 
post.  It did not work. 
 
>was a bit insulting to the general HBD readership as well, IMHO, when you 
>expressed fear that the statements of you "gurus" might mislead the newbies, 
>and that it would be better to have the conversation in private email and 
>then post a summary. 
 
I did not use the term "gurus," I don't think.  My concern was indeed for 
the beginners.  Seeing two opposing "facts" battling it out does not help 
anyone who is new to the whole topic.  They simply don't know enough to 
judge who's right and this is a source of confusion.  The discussion between 
us is still going on... we would have all been banned from the HBD by now. 
 
> While some welcomed such an idea because the discussion 
>-cum-pissing contest was wearing thin, to me it simply demonstrated your 
>egotism. We brewers are, as far as I can see, a reasonable cross-section of 
>the general public, and most of us are able to think for ourselves. 
 
I don't disagree that you can think for yourselves, but besides it getting 
boring and taking up an unreasonable amount of bandwidth, beginning mashers 
and potential mashers do not have the depth of knowledge to know who's "facts" 
are right: Dave's, Jim's, Steve's or Al's?  Please note that Jim Busch was 
the first to contradict Dave.  None of this has anything to do with ego. 
 
Regarding determining lactic versus acetic acids by smell only: 
>This is rather disingenuous. Taste relies on info from both tongue and nose; 
>this olfactory involvement does not render vinegary sourness a pure aroma. 
 
I'm sorry, but the difference between vinegar and lactic acid by humans can 
only be determined by smell and not taste (tongue).  On the tongue they both 
are simply sour.  This was my point and I stand by it.  My assertion was 
confirmed by a subsequent poster, I believe. 
 
Your points are well taken and I will try to be less reactive, but I am 
passionate about beer and brewing and my intentions have always been noble 
(although it may not appear that way at times).  I only recently came up 
with the idea of writing a book.  I assure you it is well-researched and 
contains no speculation without saying clearly that it's speculation.  No 
shooting from the hip. 
 
I want to believe that this pair of books will be the best available brewing 
texts for homebrewers.  They contain information collected from sources 
such as Malting and Brewing Science, DeClerck, the Proceedings of the ASBC 
and Brawwelt.  It distills this info into practical knowledge usable by the 
homebrewer.  It also contains a lot of insight from HBD.  I like to think 
that if there's one thing I've learned well on HBD is how to explain things 
to beginners.  I've used this skill in my books, I hope, to make advanced 
knowledge accessable.  I wrote these books primarily because I saw a need. 
If they make me some money, great, but I didn't think of them as moneymakers 
to begin with. 
 
I appreciate your feedback... I will do my best. 
 
Let me know about whether you want the Wheeler comments and/or the 
beta-amylase discussion notes. 
 
Al. 
 
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL 
korzonas at lucent.com 
Copyright 1996 Al Korzonas 
 

Return to table of contents


From: bturnbaugh at kktv.com
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 13:07:20 -0500 
Subject: Dial-type Thermometers

Hi All,   I am looking for S-S dial type thermometers,  the 
             kind you can screw into a fitting welded to the side 
             of a S-S keg/mashtun.  I called American Science & 
             Surplus and the lady there said they don't carry them. 
 
             Any info on phone#'s and stock #'s would be greatly 
             appreciated.       Thanks:   Bob T. 
 
 

Return to table of contents


From: Bob Waterfall <waterr at albany.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 15:34:48 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: La Chouffe 

Mark Peacock says: 
>Chastened by earlier posts not to request recipes, I will instead ask for 
>directional suggestions for development of a La Chouffe-like beer. 
 
That's good because all I have are sugestions.  Back in hbd 1984, I stated 
that La Chouffe seemed to have a lot of honey character (attributed to 
2,3-pentanedione, not the use of honey in the recipe).  Subsequent 
discussion in the next several digests suggest that choice of yeast and 
other fermentation parameters like aeration and pitching rate may affect the 
amount of pentanedione and other vicinal diketones (eg., diacetyl) in the 
beer.  I suggest searching the archives (online at 
http://alpha.rollanet.org) for La Chouffe, dione, diketone, vdk, etc. for 
any clues as to what you need to get that honey character that (to me 
anyway) would be vital for reproducing La Chouffe.  My search uncovereed the 
possibility that there are additional herbs and spices at work than just 
coriander. 
 
>Is La Chouffe a wit-like beer without the lactic acid component? 
 
Not in my opinion. 
 
>Is Jim Busch's Esprit d' Boire recipe from Winter 95 Zymurgy a better 
starting point? 
 
Jim could address this better than I, but from what I recall it was supposed 
to be a Belgian Strong Ale, which is also what I would call La Chouffe.  So, 
yes. 
 
On a different topic, let's all take a deep breath, count to 10 and not bite 
when the fisherman trolls these waters. 
 
Bob Waterfall <waterr at albany.net>, 
Troy, NY, USA 
 

Return to table of contents


From: dharsh at alpha.che.uc.edu (David C. Harsh)
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 15:52:03 -0400
Subject: Comment to the Collective on Nokomaree

        AOL claims that they want to know about abuse of the usenet from 
their members.  So, if you send mail to ABUSE at AOL.COM and include the text 
from Noko's postings, maybe they'll do something about it if enough people 
bring it to their attention. 
        My only further comment on the nameless wonder will be to forward 
copies of all of his/her/its postings to aol with a request that they do 
something about it.  I recommend you all do the same. 
 
        Did you notice the comment "mean spirited and nasty... behind an 
anonymous keyboard" in the last posting?  Did I miss the name in noko's 
postings or was this a self-reference? 
 
Dave 
 
 

Return to table of contents


From: korz at pubs.ih.lucent.com
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 96 15:40:35 CDT
Subject: autolysis and secondaries/Victory vs. Munich

Gregg writes: 
>is there any real benefit to be gained by racking to a secondary, other than 
>avoiding autolysis?  My own experience leads me to believe that Miller, 
>Papazian, et al might just be blowing smoke when they warn against autolysis 
>setting in after a month or so in the primary. Has anyone actually had a batch
>go south due to autolylisized yeast? 
 
Not me.  I think that part of this reason is that back when Papazian and 
Miller started forming their brewing knowledge: 
 
1. there were few good, healthy yeasts available, 
2. liquid yeast was not available, 
3. rehydration of dry yeast was not usually done, 
4. little was known in amateur brewing about glycogen levels and yeast 
   starvation. 
 
I think that with healthy yeasts, rehydration of dry yeasts, big starters 
from liquid yeasts, pitching shortly after high kraeusen and not letting 
the fermenter ever get too warm (say, over 75F) we could easily go four 
weeks without any off-flavours from autolysis.  My Barleywine, which one 
a 1st in the 1st round of the 1996 AHA Natiionals sat in the primary for 
nearly 9 months!  The temperature was kept between 60 and 65F and I pitched 
twice, once after cooling (effectively a 4 liter starter) and once again 
(dregs from a 2L starter) when the beer seemed to stick at 1.035 (down from 
1.102) -- FG was 1.027.  The reason I say "effectively" a 4 liter starter 
is because I routinely make big starters by fermenting a 2L starter till 
it settles, pouring off some of the spent wort and then adding fresh wort. 
I can then pitch a much larger "effective" starter while adding only a 
fraction of the spent wort.  Oh... the yeast was Wyeast #1056 American Ale. 
 
Similarly, Steve writes: 
>Al,  reading this comment startled me.  I guess I realized that you could 
>make some styles of beer very satisfactorily with only a primary 
>fermentation, but what about lagers and diacetyl reduction? 
 
As Steve guessed, most of my beers have been ales, but since I posted this 
(i.e. Fri, Sat and Sun ) I've brewed two lagers and eight fruit beers (split 
batch).  Those 10% were indeed lagers and fruit beers.  I do use a 2ndary 
for lagers (because they really do sit around for months on the dregs and 
don't have the flavour intensity of a Barleywine to cover *any* off flavours) 
and fruit beers (in which I usually need to make room for the fruit). 
 
In a related post, Rob writes: 
>Racking to secondary has numerous benefits with only a few drawbacks: 
> 
>1) Secondary fermentation allows time for yeast to drop and allows 
>   time for your beer to clear naturally (via tannin-protein complexing) 
 
I just leave the beer in primary longer. 
 
>2) A two-step process frees up your primary fermentor and allows the 
>   brewer to bottle or keg as time permits (weeks to months) 
 
Except for my two 20gal HDPE, one 20gal Oak and one 50L demijohn, all my 
fermenters are 3-, 5- and 6-gallon glass carboys.  Altogether I've got 
about 40 fermenters.  Right now, about 18 of them are full (thanks to 
the eight 1.5-gal fruit beers in 3-gal carboys). 
 
>3) Two-step fermentation allows much of the dissolved CO2 to outgas 
>   and yields more consistent carbonation for bottled beers 
 
This is incorrect.  The amount of CO2 in solution is simply a function 
of temperature.  All the time in the world will not reduce the amount 
of dissolved CO2 in the beer at a given temperature.  Yes, more CO2 
may bubble out in the secondary, but that's only because of fermentation, 
rise in temperature during racking or agitation during racking. 
 
>4) Clarity can be assessed easily and fining agents may be added 
>   as desired.  While Polyclar, Si Gel, and bentonite seem to work 
>   quickly, gelatin takes longer in my brewery. 
 
I sometimes use finings, but usually these are on lagers for which I do 
use a secondary.  I have used Isinglass in the primary for several Bitters. 
There were no problems with it although I could not stir it in -- I just 
poured it into the carboy. 
 
On the subject of clarity, the yeast will settle out.  I have gotten comments 
from judges regarding the amount of yeast on the bottoms of my bottles like: 
"nice lunar landscape..." so I do sometimes have more yeast in the bottles 
than most, but this is also a function of how long I keep the beer in the 
primary and how stingy I am siphoning every last drop out of the primary. 
 
*** 
Don writes in his mystery recipe: 
>4 lb Victory or Dark Munich 
 
These are two very different malts and I don't want anyone to get the idea 
they are equivalent.  Dark Munich is made by kilning green malt at a higher 
temperature than that used for Pils, Pale Ale, Vienna or (presumably) lighter 
Munich malts.  Victory is made similarly to DeWolf-Cosysns Biscuit.  They 
are made by taking a normally-kilned malt like Pilsner and then roasting it 
lightly at high temperatures.  The resulting flavours are quite different, 
the Victory and Biscuit having a toasty flavour with some similarty to bread 
crust. 
 
Just say 'Yes' to Wyeast...  sorry Jim, we are all entitled to our opinions. 
 
Al. 
 
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL 
korzonas at lucent.com 
Copyright 1996 Al Korzonas 

Return to table of contents


From: Michael Beck <101465.1255 at CompuServe.COM>
Date: 12 Aug 96 17:02:38 EDT
Subject: KitchenAid Grain Mills

Does anyone have any FAQs, tips, or lessons learned from using a KitchenAid 
mixer with the grain mill attachment for cracking 10 to 20 pounds of grain? 
 
Mike Beck 
101465.1255 at compuserve.com 
 

Return to table of contents


From: djt2 at po.cwru.edu (Dennis J. Templeton)
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 17:12:59 -0400
Subject: "Surrender" Nonsense

Last week Al ended another lengthy post with 
 
>Surrender Dave...            ;^). 
 
>Al. 
 
>Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL 
>korzonas at lucent.com 
>Copyright 1996 Al Korzonas 
 
 
Which I view as an admission that the intent of this flame battle was not 
to promote good brewing but rather to prove the machismo of Mr K. This is 
pointless, and makes reading the HBD an unpleasant event. (You can 
copyright that one too). 
 
BTW I am a research scientist who knows what "sterile" means, but I find it 
ridiculously pedantic to castigate someone for using "sterile" instead of 
"sanitize". This is a catchword that causes politically correct responses 
by AHA types hoping to to distinguish those who are "in" from the "outs". 
Who among us thinks that Al's two liter starter is 100% saccharomyces? 
(Make that 100.000000000% for Al's desired level of precision.) 
 
Sulfites are good tools to reduce bacteria and molds in wine (and even beer). 
Baking your bottles will kill (nearly) all microorganisms. In neither case 
can you prove that the result is sterility, since the proof is the absence 
of bacteria, and you cannot sample the whole, under all situations. 
 
Let's get back to discussing beer, and not trying to prove ourselves. 
 
On a related note, is there a digest reader that has a kill file? 
 
Dennis 
 
 

Return to table of contents


From: Gregory King <GKING at ARSERRC.Gov>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 17:27:09 -0500 (EST)
Subject: identity of mystery recipe

Don Trotter <dtrotter at imtn.tpd.dsccc.com> posted the following challenge: 
 
<<<<< 
I'll let you guess the style and what commercial beer it is an attempt at. 
 
7 lb US, 2-row (Klages) 
7 lb US, 2-row pale (Harrington) 
4 lb Victory or Dark Munich 
1 lb Crystal 10L 
1 lb Crystal 20L 
1 lb Crystal 40L 
1 lb Crystal 90L 
1-2 oz Chocolate malt 
 
0.5 oz Centennial 60 min 
1.0 oz Centennial 40 min 
1.0 oz Centennial 20 min 
1.0 oz Centennial  5 min 
 
Bitter to the tune of 40 IBU 
>>>>> 
 
That's an easy one, Don.  Coors Light.  What do I win? 
 
Greg King 
gking at arserrc.gov 
 

Return to table of contents


From: M257876 at sl1001.mdc.com (bayerospace at mac)
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 17:05 -0600
Subject: wheat decoction/secondary fermenters

collective homebrew conscience: 
 
mike spinelli asked about boiling only the wheat malt for a decoction 
weizenbier.  can anybody think of a reason why this is a bad idea?  the 
only criticism i can think of is that you won't extract a lot of malty 
flavors from the barley malt, but, hey, it's a wheat beer, right? it seems 
to me this would emphasize the maltiness of the wheat malt over the barley, 
plus you're physically breaking down every last bit of wheat malt, which is 
very desirable considering the typical crush you get with the stuff.  the 
main purposes you utilize the barley malt for are enzymes and filterbed, and 
you avoid the tannin extraction almost entirely, which i should point out, 
i've never really had a problem with, but some apparently have. 
 
i say go for it, mike.  and let us know what happens.  outstanding. 
 
regarding racking to a secondary fermenter, i've done this with a few 
beers this spring, particularly a couple of pilsners that i gradually 
lowered the temperature on in the freezer after about a 10 day primary, 
and i noticed the flavor was very good, but i did not fine either of them, 
and they have a bit of chill haze.  neither of them have even a suggestion 
of diacetyl flavor, which supports the belief that keeping the 
yeast in contact with the beer helps to reduce it.  the next time i brew 
these beers, the only change i'm making is fining them.  if they're still 
hazy, i'll consider racking, but i don't want to change anything if i don't 
have to. 
 
i have heard people claim that letting the beer sit on the primary sediment 
too long can lead to "old" or "stale" flavors in the beer.  they were not 
specifically referring to full-blown autolysis (burnt rubber).  does anybody 
know why this might be true?  my pilsners really don't support this claim, 
but they were at below 40 degF for the majority of the extended period 
on the sediment.    perhaps typical ale fermentation temperatures 
would result in a damaged product?  yeast experts?  is there a gray area 
of flavor impairment by yeast that's not quite to the autolyzed state? 
 
my $.02 on the recipe debate:  i personally believe that technique is vastly 
more important than a list of ingredients.  and i support the free exchange 
of information that will help all of us to brew better beer, regardless 
of who wins the competitions.  i was under the impression that this was why 
this forum was created, and this is why i participate. 
 
brew hard, 
 
mark bayer 
 

Return to table of contents


From: Kit Anderson <kit at maine.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 18:03:49 -0500
Subject: Re: wyeast belgian wit

 
>At 02:50 AM 8/8/96 EDT, you wrote: 
>>regarding your post on wit brewing: 
>> 
>>i don't agree with your assessment of the lengthy fermentation 
>>as a result of the brewer's technique and not the yeast itself. 
>>i've made several all-grain batches using wyeast belgian white 
>>in the past year, recently using a pint starter. in all cases, 
>>the fermentation was initially vigorous but then dropped to a 
>>continuous slow level for up to four weeks before finishing. 
>>from responses to earlier posts, i've learned that this seems to 
>>be a commonly experienced situation with this yeast. the only 
>>methods i think that can improve my technique would be to 1) 
>>grow a much larger starter (1/2 gal+) or 2) aerate with O2. 
>>either should help, but given my experience with other wyeast 
>>varieties, i don't think that they should be necessary for any 
>>old joe homebrewer to produce a good beer quickly. 
>> 
>>maybe i'll try the brewtek variety sometime. 
>> 
> 
>Hi, Ted. Being a natural born science major, I went and bought a new pouch 
of Wyeast and put it in a 1/2 gal starter after activating.  It has taken a 
week, but is not clearing. The fermnentation is not nearly as vigorous. 
> 
> So..... The culture Wyeast is now selling is not the same as they had 
originally. I still have a slant of that. I'll be interested to taste any 
difference. It acts a lot different than BrewTek's wit and saison as well as 
Yeast Labs and GW Kent. I have a slant of Celis from a micro lab in Texas 
and it is the same as BrewTek's.(IMHO) Get that yeast. Life will be much 
better.
> 
- - --- 
 
Kit  Anderson 
Bath, Maine 
<kit at maine.com> 
The Maine Beer Page  http://www.maine.com/brew 
 
 
- ------------------------------ 

Return to table of contents


From: Kit Anderson <kit at maine.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 18:03:49 -0500
Subject: Re: wyeast belgian wit

 
>At 02:50 AM 8/8/96 EDT, you wrote: 
>>regarding your post on wit brewing: 
>> 
>>i don't agree with your assessment of the lengthy fermentation 
>>as a result of the brewer's technique and not the yeast itself. 
>>i've made several all-grain batches using wyeast belgian white 
>>in the past year, recently using a pint starter. in all cases, 
>>the fermentation was initially vigorous but then dropped to a 
>>continuous slow level for up to four weeks before finishing. 
>>from responses to earlier posts, i've learned that this seems to 
>>be a commonly experienced situation with this yeast. the only 
>>methods i think that can improve my technique would be to 1) 
>>grow a much larger starter (1/2 gal+) or 2) aerate with O2. 
>>either should help, but given my experience with other wyeast 
>>varieties, i don't think that they should be necessary for any 
>>old joe homebrewer to produce a good beer quickly. 
>> 
>>maybe i'll try the brewtek variety sometime. 
>> 
> 
>Hi, Ted. Being a natural born science major, I went and bought a new pouch 
of Wyeast and put it in a 1/2 gal starter after activating.  It has taken a 
week, but is not clearing. The fermnentation is not nearly as vigorous. 
> 
> So..... The culture Wyeast is now selling is not the same as they had 
originally. I still have a slant of that. I'll be interested to taste any 
difference. It acts a lot different than BrewTek's wit and saison as well as 
Yeast Labs and GW Kent. I have a slant of Celis from a micro lab in Texas 
and it is the same as BrewTek's.(IMHO) Get that yeast. Life will be much 
better.
> 
- - --- 
 
Kit  Anderson 
Bath, Maine 
<kit at maine.com> 
The Maine Beer Page  http://www.maine.com/brew 
 
 
- ------------------------------ 

Return to table of contents


From: nigelt at delm.tas.gov.au (Nigel Townsend)
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 1996 09:21:53 +1000
Subject: Re: sanitation,

 
 "John Penn" in HBD 2142 asked about using bleach 
                       . 
> Should I periodically remove the spigot and soak it separately as a possible 
source of contamination around the rubber gasket?< 
 
I do not do this each time, but will if it has been stored for a couple of 
months, or a "mould" has developed inside (still damp when stored!), then I 
will take the tap out and soak it.  I always run bleach through  my tap 
when I drain it, so that any bugs inside get a shot of bleach too.  I feel 
(unproven) that there is a potential for an air bubble to form inside the 
tap, preventing bleach contact with all the surface.  I could be wrong, but 
dont feel that it is worth the risk. 
 
Nigel Townsend 
Hobart, Tasmania 
 
 
 
 

Return to table of contents


From: Ken Parsons <klondike at sonnet.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 96 17:59:40 -0700
Subject: re: A Specific Question about Specific Gravity

     Dynamic Don posed a problem where 1 lb dextrose was added to 1 
gallon H2O.  What is the resulting specific gravity? 
 
     Don calculated that the specific gravity should be 1.060 rather than 
the 1.040 listed in his reference source. 
 
     The calculations he used look reasonable.  The portion that looks 
shaky to me is the measured volume increase due to the addition of the 
dextrose.  It appears that an assumption was made that the 1/4 cup of 
dextrose was equal to 0.25/2.66 or 0.094 lb.  This would only be true if 
the dextrose was packed to the same density as was used in the reference 
calculations.  A more accurate determination could be obtained by 
weighing out the dextrose and measuring the resulting increase in volume. 
Other inaccuracies could be introduced by the volume measuring device. 
Was it a graduated cylinder that might have a +/- 1% accuracy or better 
or was it a flask that may have only a +/- 10% accuracy? 
 
     I used a different approach to arrive at the answer.  I first 
calculated the Plato value and then converted to specific gravity. 
 
     Plato is (mass extract/mass wort)*100.  1 lb dextrose is added to 1 
gallon H2O.  1 gallon H20 = 8.327 lbs.  The total mass of the solution 
would be 1 + 8.327 = 9.327 lbs.  The Plato would be (1/9.327)*100=10.72P. 
 
     At low gravities the specific gravity is approximately equal to 
1+(Plato*4)/1000)) or 1+(10.72*4)/1000))=1.043.  This would be in fairly 
close agreement with Don's reference.  Based on this calculation the 
total volume of the solution should be about 4.064 liters. 
 
 
                             Klondike Ken 
 
 
 

Return to table of contents


From: "Keith Royster" <keith.royster at ponyexpress.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 22:07:51 +0500
Subject: giving recipies / adding amylase during mash

Don Trotter <dtrotter at imtn.tpd.dsccc.com> writes: 
 
> How many of us give up our recipes? 
> 
> Seeing all the recipe requests in HBD doesn't make me feel well. 
> Can't any of the requesters develop their own recipes?  It really 
> isn't difficult.  A little light reading and a little light math, or 
> a recipe formulation program is all it takes. 
 
Perhaps nobody else will admit it, so I will.  Yes Don, some of us 
can't develop our own recipies......yet!  Brewing is a wonderful 
blend of science AND art.  While I thoroughly enjoy both of these 
aspects of brewing and want to excel in them both, I am much more 
lacking in the creative side of things. While I may catch on quickly 
to the equations and concepts of what's happening in the boiling 
kettle, I'm a little slower to learn what grains contribute what 
flavors and how the whole thing will/should taste in the end. Sure I 
can read that crystal imparts this flavor, and carapils that, but it 
takes an artistic talent to be able to understand how all of those 
flavors will mesh together.  Especially when trying to duplicate a 
specific beer.  Therefore, I learn by example (after example after 
example).  So please, keep sending in recipies. 
 
- ------------------------- 
 
On another note, I have some left-over powdered amylase and was 
wondering if I should consider using it in my mash.  I originally 
bought it to fix a couple of stuck fermentations but haven't used it 
since.  Rather than waste it, I was toying with the idea of adding it 
to my mash.  Any comments or suggestions?  Will it improve my yield? 
Is powdered amylase mostly alpha or beta, or an even mixture?  How 
much? 
 
 
Keith Royster - Mooresville, North Carolina 
"Where if the kudzu don't gitcha, the Baptists will!" 
 
mailto:keith.royster at ponyexpress.com 
 at your.service: http://dezines.com/ at your.service 
Carolina BrewMasters: http://dezines.com/ at your.service/cbm 
My RIMS page: http://dezines.com/ at your.service/RIMS (rated COOL! by the 
Brewery)

Return to table of contents


From: "CHUCK HUDSON, ER LAB 3-2865" <CHUDSON at mozart.unm.edu>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 20:30:18 -0600 (MDT)
Subject: Brewheat use

I am in need of information on the Brewheat Electric kettle. After 10 years I 
have decided to look into an electric boiling vessel and if any one can help it
would be greatly appreciated. Specifics, I am looking for any Info on all grain
use of one of these toys,can it be used to kettle mash and what types of drains
does it have? I have already decided on the 220 volt model. 
 
Thanks 
Chuck Hudson 
Albuquerque NM 
chudson at mozart.unm.edu 
 

Return to table of contents


From: rcd at raven.talisman.com (Dick Dunn)
Date: 12 Aug 96 20:58:42 MDT (Mon)
Subject: re: fruit beer musings

Curt Speaker wrote: 
>...I also understand the conventional logic:  Fruit added to the primary 
> loses many of its desirable tastes and smells due to CO2 scrubbing; volatile 
> esters that give fruit most of its smell and flavor are blown out with the 
> CO2 that is produced by vigerous fermentation... 
 
Like Curt, I've heard this argument...and also like Curt (comments later in 
his note) I've tasted some dandy empirical evidence against it.  Now, I'd 
admit that more of my experience is with meads (i.e., melomels), and the 
primary fermentation of a melomel isn't quite as wild as a fruit beer, but 
it's not tame by any means. 
 
Beyond that, consider that fruit wines are, almost by definition, made with 
the fruit in the primary fermentation, and they don't seem to have any 
trouble retaining fruit character! 
 
I could also wonder what effect the difference in alcohol has...during the 
primary fermentation, there's a lot of extraction from the fruit early on 
(noticing how it fades) when the alcohol is relatively low. 
 
Is there a real basis for the advice against adding fruit to the primary? 
Has somebody done a careful side-by-side comparison?  Are those of us who 
use fruit in the primary just making up for the loss by using more fruit-- 
or is there any loss at all? 
 
Also, KennyEddy at aol.com wrote: 
 
> >From what I've gathered (and I think AlK touched on it recently), perception
> of fruit in beer relies heavily on *aroma* and *sweetness*, moreso than fruit
> "flavor".  Since the fruit causes additional fermentation, the alcohol thus 
> produced "thins" or "dries" the beer (FG's of around 1.000 or even less are 
> not unheard of).  To enhance the fruit character, be sure to brew such that 
> you leave a higher-than-normal degree of residual sweetness... 
 
It's true that a little bit of sweetness will bring out a fruit character. 
On the other hand, more alcohol will more readily carry the fruit character 
to the nose. 
 
Again, appealing to mead (because I know it better and because it's an edge 
case relative to beer), you can find yourself at 0.992 FG, 10-12% alc v/v, 
and plenty of fruit character.  A tiny bit of residual sweetness if you can 
get it still does wonders to enhance the fruit, but it's still there even 
if the melomel is bone-dry and 2-3x the alcohol of a beer. 
- --- 
Dick Dunn         rcd at talisman.com         Boulder County, Colorado  USA 
   ...walstib 

Return to table of contents


From: bob rogers <bob at carol.net>
Date: Sun, 11 Aug 1996 23:46:59 -0400
Subject: re: recipes (sharing them)

i think that the homebrewer who declines to share a recipe is a small person. 
 
as a homebrewer you have no commercial interest by definition. 
 
if someone can use your recipe and produce a better beer then you need to 
work on your technique. 
 
my mom has a shoebox full of blue ribbons from the county fair for baking 
and jams and such. she has never hesitated to share a recipe for the simple 
reason that someone with experience can derive the recipe (or one that 
produces the same results) with very little effort. shoud there be a 
commercial interest they will be able to duplicate any desired results with 
ease. 
 
in fact, the only person who will be set back by your not sharing a recipe 
is a beginner, who will be unable to identify the various flavors and 
textures of your brew, and a beginner is not likely to be your competition 
anyway. 
 
all that said, here is my recipe for a wit sort of beer: 
 
6# 6 row, 1#cara-vienna, mashed at 155F for about 2 hours. i added 1/2 oz 
7.8% (old) cluster hops and 1.5# honey at the start of the boil. 
when i shut of the heat at the end of the boil i added 3/4 cup of freshly 
pounded coriander seed. 
 
the resuting beer does not have quite as much orange flavor as Wit!, but it 
is very drinkable. i think next time i will use less coriander, maybe 1/2 cup 
 
bob 
brewing in the heart of the bible belt. 
 
bob rogers 
bob at carol.net 
 

Return to table of contents


From: michael j dix <mdix at dcssc.sj.hp.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 96 10:11:53 PDT
Subject: When to pick hops

I picked my Hallertauer vine just last week, in San Jose, Calif. 
I wait for the cones to get to the "crunchy" state when rubbed 
with the finger tips.  I might have picked them a bit too soon: 
Some but not all of the "petals" had turned that clear light shade 
of green. But the yellow "glands" were a good size, and my sample 
smelled great when rubbed firmly. 
 
I hate to let them go too late, when they look sun-bleached and 
the glands fall out of the cones. 
 
Mike Dix 

Return to table of contents


From: m.bryson2 at genie.com
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 96 04:18:00 UTC 0000
Subject: nokomaree redux

   I'm about to make a comment that is brewing related only in that it is a 
thread I have followed on the HBD for a while. Anyone not interested, page 
down now. 
 
   With the sporadic HBD service lately, I apparently missed whatever 
comments that NOKOMAREE( or whatever) made that really seemed to irk some 
people. I then viewed with amusement the exceptionally numerous replies that 
ensued. Did it not occur to anyone that this person was just trying to push 
people's buttons to get a response? That is a favorite tactic of a few in a 
lot of newsgroups( I know, the HBD is not a newsgroup). Such a plethora of 
responses waste time/bandwidth like that stupid Good Times virus scare. It 
seems to me that simply ignoring "stuff" instead of falling for the dangled 
bait might reduce similar occurences. Or maybe I am just naive. It just 
seems to me that this digest is too valuable a resource to let a little 
irritation interrupt our brewing discussion. 
 
   Feel free to flame away at me on my spambox. 
 
        Matthew Bryson 

Return to table of contents


From: Kyle R Roberson <roberson at beta.tricity.wsu.edu>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 23:37:11 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Event stuff

I went to the Prosser Wine and Food Fair last weekend as I 
mentioned in a previous post about the GABF. It was dominated 
by the wineries, but they had three microbreweries in 
a tent at the end of the field. It was very well received and all 
three breweries ran out of beer by 8:15pm or so. But... 
 
The micros could not bring more beer in after the festival started. 
The micros could not display bottles, they could only use kegs. 
The micros could not sell beer to take out. 
 
The wineries had runners whos job it was to keep them supplied with 
wine as they ran low. 
The wineries could display their bottles. 
The wineries could sell wine by the case or by the bottle as 
people left the festival. 
 
I don't know whether these inequalities are based in state, county 
or city law or in the law of whos ball it is makes the rules. To be 
fair, I should mention that the festival BOUGHT the beer from the 
micros and the brewery reps were serving it and chatting up the 
festival goers. So they can make up whatever rules they want. I just 
don't know if they have a reason for the difference between how they 
treat wine and beer. 
 
While it was hot, the lines were VERY long in front of the 
micro tent! 
 
Good time was had by all, I believe. 
 
Kyle 
 

Return to table of contents