HOMEBREW Digest #2362 Sat 01 March 1997
![[Prev HBD]](/img/previous.gif)
![[Index]](/img/index_button.gif)
![[Next HBD]](/img/next.gif)
![[Back]](/img/up_level_button.gif)
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Digest Janitor: janitor@ brew.oeonline.com
Many thanks to the Observer & Eccentric Newspapers of
Livonia, Michigan for sponsoring the Homebrew Digest.
URL: http://www.oeonline.com
Contents:
Little Apple and BT-Infections/Old Hops ("Rob Moline")
Dropping that brew (Mike Spinelli)
Beer Dogs (John C Peterson)
Specific Gravity and yeast (Bob Sinnema)
Brewing Science Texts ( STEVE GARRETT)
Home malting, part 3 (GuyG4)
How to use Irish Moss ("M. Arneson")
Sweedish Beer Style Info (BernardCh)
AHA (Ken)
an important lesson ("Robert DeNeefe")
AHA and Boston Beer present the Nat'l. Long Shot Homebrewing Competition! ("Brian Wurst")
re: vigorous evaporation (Sharon/Dan Ritter)
Re: Tons of Trub ("M. Arneson")
AHA Thread ("C&S Peterson")
AOB/AHA advertisers perspective (Jim Martin)
RE: Bottling yeast (George De Piro)
Tons of Trubble ("David R. Burley")
FESB followup (Charles Rich)
American Hop Ale: A Direct Hit? ("C&S Peterson")
RE: Fermenting in 10gal Corny? (hbd)
different yeast strains/lambic question (BAYEROSPACE)
Rice is nice (Bill Giffin)
Recipe - Root Beer (Rich Larsen)
mulitple kegs ("Bryan L. Gros")
Re: yeast starters (korz)
Re: Trub (korz)
Re: Hop Age (korz)
NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS: brew.oeonline.com
Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew at brew.oeonline.com
(Articles are published in the order they are received.)
Send UNSUBSCRIBE and all other requests, ie, address change, etc.,
to homebrew-request@ brew.oeonline.com BUT PLEASE NOTE that if
you subscribed via the BITNET listserver (BEER-L at UA1VM.UA.EDU),
you must unsubscribe by sending a one line e-mail to listserv at ua1vm.ua.edu
that says: UNSUB BEER-L
Thanks to Pete Soper, Rob Gardner and all others for making the Homebrew
Digest what it is. Visit the HBD Hall of Fame at:
http://brew.oeonline.com/
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: Wed, 26 Feb 97 14:55:22 PST
From: "Rob Moline" <brewer at kansas.net>
Subject: Little Apple and BT-Infections/Old Hops
From: kathy <kbooth at scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us> Jim Booth
Subject: Little Apple and BT
> Unfortunately Rob Jr wasn't pictured.
He was getting his tuxedo dry-cleaned at the time, and couldn't be there.
>PS How again did the clogged heat exchanger lead to infections?
The proceedure used by the 1st brewer at LABCO was to run hot water from
the kettle through the HE and fermenters, for a final sanitize.. The next
brewer ran an iodophor for sanitizing the HE, hoses and fermenter. Both
brewers ran caustic prior to this final step.
In both cases, after a period of a few months, a distinct flavor of
infection began to show through. Of course, by the time you could taste it
in one beer, all the beers, in all 12 vessels were affected. And had been
for some time, IMHO; I'm sure that the process had just been sub threshold
for taste.
After the 1st occurrence, which lead to the sacking of the brewer, the
second brewer felt sure that his process had it handled, and was most
adamant that his incident of infection could not have come from the HE, as
this was standard proceedure at all the other B-P's in our area.
But after opening the HE, the culprit was obvious. All kinds of trub,
spent hops and even some spent grains were seen with all kinds of growth
evident. Thus the need to take apart the HE.
I don't blame this on the HE, as it is a great little unit, but on the
inadequate hop gate in the kettle, and the small diameter (42 inches for 7
BBL) of the kettle. On lightly hopped beers, it is not such a problem, but
the rates I use are not really recommended for this kettle.
For really big rates of hopping, like 14 pounds of pellets on the
Barleywine, the whirlpool is unable to keep the hops back, and the HE gets
clogged to the point that flow to the fermenter is stopped. Thence the need
to dissassemble, clean, reinstall and start again.
Most recently, I have installed a valved "T" at the hot and the cold
sides of the HE, such that when it gets blocked, I interrupt the flow of
wort through the HE and blast city water through in a reverse flow, blowing
the hops out. Then I run a small amount of wort through and discard, before
restarting the chilling once more. (I know the purists will be slack-jawed
at this use of city water, but it works, with no infection.)
This doesn't mean that it removes the need for dissassembly, which is a
PITA, but its easier than the heartbreak of throwing away a bunch of beer.
FWIW, the only incidence of infection was when we tried to get away with a
50 % strength PBW for a handful of kegs. A couple of days later, when
statring to fill one, my assistant notice a distinct vinegar smell being
vented. We pulled all kegs cleaned that day, and re-did them when our next
supply of PBW arrived. No such kegs were delivered to customers, though I
did later drink the beer in the 1st keg myself, and it showed no
off-flavors. ( More free beer for the brewer....!)
Old Hops....
On a similar note, when a previous crop of EKG was slim to none, I locked
up a years supply of them, and ordered packets when needed. But now that
time is moving on, the last pack's hops were looking a little worse for
wear, not as compact and prone to easily crumble, though they performed
well for aromatics. But the thing is when added at end of whirlpool, the
bloody things floated! Not that they sat on top of the hot wort, but they
could be seen suspended in the wort, rather than settling to the bottom, as
normal. (In dry hop, the bag of hops did float for a time.) This leads to
more clogging of the HE, when these things get sucked into the outlet.
Anyone heard of this before? (Yes, I have ordered more, the new crop is due
anytime now.)
Jethro Gump
Rob Moline
Little Apple Brewing Company
Manhattan, Kansas
"The More I Know About Beer, The More I Realize I Need To Know More About
Beer!"
Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 97 16:59:34 est
From: paa3983 at dpsc.dla.mil (Mike Spinelli)
Subject: Dropping that brew
HBDers,
I recently "droped" a pale ale due to what I thought was excessive trub
carryover from the boil tun. The excess was due to not being able to use my
perf. plate in my boil keg becuase I was outta leaf hops. I only had pellets,
so even with immersion chilling and then whirlpooling, I still got alotta gunk.
So, anyway, roughly 20 hrs. after pitching, my 'boys were at high krausen with
chunks 'o trub smashing into the interior walls of the 'boy. That Wyeast 1272
is a flocculent puppy. So I siphoned the wort into 2 other 'boys and left the
dirty krausen and bottom-dwelling trub behind. The neat thing is that the next
day, a brand new nice shiny clean krausen reformed and fermentation continuing
chugging away.
Now I haven't a clue as to whether the finished beer will benefit from this
practice, but one real benefit I see is that the resultant yeast cake I will
reuse from the bottom of the 'boys will be much cleaner than if I hadn't droped
the beer. That might be worth the effort of dropping in the first place, no?
By the way, I did not aerate the wort during the siphoning.
P.S. Does anyone know whether the 1272 Ale II strain IS the Pacman yeast??
Mike Spinelli
Cherry Hill NJ
Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 18:31:58 EST
From: petersonj1 at juno.com (John C Peterson)
Subject: Beer Dogs
I have to jump in on this beer dog thread. Now, a lab is a great beer
dog. One drawback is that their tail is designed at the correct height
to knock beer bottles off coffee tables.
My favorite has to be the Cocker Spaniel. It comes in the same colors as
the Lab but also you can get a Red or a Black and Tan. You can also get
English and American (sorry, no German) varieties. The only drawback
with my Red is that his ears get into the beer when he drinks.
John C. Peterson
Aurora, Colorado
petersonj1 at juno.com
http://www.geocities.com/Yosemite/6841
Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 17:00:09
From: Bob Sinnema <rjsinnem at mailbox.syr.edu>
Subject: Specific Gravity and yeast
Awhile back, there was a discussion about the effect of break material on
SG measurements. I don't recall what the conclusion was, but in fact my
question is slightly different: What effect does yeast have on the SG?
I usually measure SG using a sample taken before pitching my yeast, but
lately I've been pitching onto the yeastcake from a previous batch --
there's really no way to get a sample that doesn't contain yeast. Is the
gravity affected at all? If it is affected, should a "yeasty" sample read
high or low? (my readings seem to be a little high).
Thanks,
Bob Sinnema
rjsinnem at mailbox.syr.edu
Syracuse University College of Law
Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 20:41:20, -0500
From: sdginc at prodigy.com ( STEVE GARRETT)
Subject: Brewing Science Texts
Having now completed over 60 batches (36 all-grain), I would like to
delve into the more technical aspects of brewing science. I've pretty
well scoured and digested the more basic texts like TNCJoHB, Noonan's
Brewing Lager Beer, and the Classic Beer Style Series.
I am considering :
1. A Textbook of Brewing by De Clerck
2. Malting and Brewing Science (2 volumes) by Chapman and Hall
3. Principles of Brewing Science by Fix
I am looking for recommendations or alternatives. Thanks in advance.
Cheers!
Steve Garrett
sdginc at prodigy.com
Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 23:53:38 -0500 (EST)
From: GuyG4 at aol.com
Subject: Home malting, part 3
When I last posted on this topic, several readers had made great suggestions
on how to increase my yield from home-malted barley. By the time I got around
to doing anything, several more of you had suggested: Hey, crush better, and
try again...
With little to lose, I went to my local homebrew shop, who I would gladly
write a long and involved love letter for if this were the place..(If you
need a good one, email me....) and they gave me a loaner grain crusher...one
of the better ones on the market...OK, a Glatt mill (don't start that thread
again...) and I crushed some up. I ended up after step mashing a pound of
this good stuff with a gallon (preboiled) of 1.022 "wort". The crush was
excellent, and I think the yield is acceptable for my needs.
I'll take the advice of one of you (You know who you are, you crafty ol'
brewster) and blend some of this with some commercial stuff, and make some
beer. Hopefully, pheasant hunting rights secured by a gift of homebrew.
I'd be interested in reading others experiences malting their own barley.
What I've learned: Patience. Again. I believe now I didn't let the
acrospire grow far enough. I believe I should've kilned at a higher temp, but
since I've got to take the loaner back or buy a mill (and I don't have a
C-note right now) I'll save that for another day.
I've also learned that in spite of all the posts since I've been lurking (2
years) about how unfriendly this forum is, I've found when I have taken a
chance, tried an experiment in brewing, and posted about it warts, feathers,
and all, lots of really good people help you out. I've had personal emails
full of encouragement from names recognizable on this forum and others as the
giants of the hobby.. and others whose advice is sometimes even more
insightful but whose names you might not readily recognize. It makes a humble
homebrewer feel like a brother. Thanks, folks.
GuyG4 at aol.com
Guy Gregory
Lightning Creek Home Brewery
Spokane, WA
Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 00:28:50 -0500
From: "M. Arneson" <marnes at hom.net>
Subject: How to use Irish Moss
I'm planning on brewing an IPA and I've seen a lot of recipes that use
Irish Moss.
Does anybody have any good tips on how to use it?
I bought some a couple of years ago and, after smelling it, decided not
to put into my wort.
I'm not really sure exactly what it does and how it does it.
Thanx in advance!
Mark Arneson
marnes at bigfoot.com
Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 01:07:46 -0500 (EST)
From: BernardCh at aol.com
Subject: Sweedish Beer Style Info
Posting for and acquaintance who is Internet deprived.
He wants to brew a Sweedish Ale using Wyeast 1742 Sweedish Ale Yeast.
Neither one of us could find any information on this style in any of our
resources (WWW sources included).
Who can provide information about appropriate malt profile, malt type, hop
profile and hop for a Sweedish Ale? IBUs, OG, Color?
I've already made all the jokes about using meatballs in the mash, in the
boil, dry hopping, etc. :)
Private E-mail would be fine. I'll summarize the comments in a future
digest.
Thanks in advance.
Chuck
BernardCh at aol.com
Music City Brewers
Nashville, TN - Music City USA
Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 07:36:06 -0500
From: Ken <kbjohns at oscar.peakaccess.net>
Subject: AHA
I think Bill did a great job in summing up the AHA situation.
I agree. The AHA should be responsive to it's membership. It currently is
not. In the last few years, they've screwed up (BJCP, HBD World HB Comp in
Boston) more than they've benefited
<Bill wrote>
I honestly don't care how much Charlie makes. I do care that they have
messed up the HBD for a period of time. I do care that because of
personal difference that they pulled out of the BJCP and caused quite a
bit of grief. I do care that it appears that they care more about their
advertisers then they do about the homebrewers in America and the
world. I care that they are more concerned with the "business" of the
AOB then the membership.
Bill
Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 07:37:24 -0600
From: "Robert DeNeefe" <rdeneefe at compassnet.com>
Subject: an important lesson
Last evening I had the opportunity to learn a very important lesson in
homebrewing. It doesn't concern aeration, flocculation, or even the
biggie, sanitation. It is simply this:
Never, ever, walk around in socks on a slightly wet tile floor while
carrying a glass carboy.
If you can't imagine what would happen, picture the homebrewer's feet
quickly flying out from under him, the homebrewer and the carboy
(thankfully!) seperating in mid-air, and both ending up hitting the floor
HARD. The carboy is now in a million pieces, and I, faring slightly
better than my deceased glass friend, am still intact, albeit slightly
bruised. I somehow managed to escape with no cuts from the broken carboy.
I did manage to get a nasty scrape on my leg from the edge of the
dishwasher, bruise the heck out of my elbow, and hit my finger on
something hard enough to make it swell to the point of being almost
unusable. After the shock wore off and the pain from the abovementioned
injuries died down, I stared at the glass shrapnel and thought just how
lucky I really was. This could have been a serious disaster. From here
on out, I will carry my carboys with much more respect and care, as I
wouldn't want to try my luck in a repeat incident.
Robert DeNeefe
Flying Glass Brewing Co.
Optimist note: Since my secondary fermenter ceased to exist 30 seconds
before I was about to rack into it, I am doing my first experiment with
finishing a brew in one vessel. I shoved the bag of Cascades for dry
hopping into the intact, full carboy and politely asked my wife to carry
it back to the closet. :)
Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 08:11:59 -0600
From: "Brian Wurst" <brian at catamaran.netwave.net>
Subject: AHA and Boston Beer present the Nat'l. Long Shot Homebrewing Competition!
Like some of you, I have received my latest Zymurgy....bundled in the
plastic with the Z. was the Beer Enthusiast, a catalog of things sold by
the AHA. Usually I throw this thing away without a glance (recently the
Z.s have been following them in fairly quickly) but something in the
newsletter on the cover caught my eye:
- ----------------
"We plan on having two rounds for the National Homebrew Competition, with
the first round also serving as the qualifier for the Boston Beer "Long
Shot" homebrew search. Boston Beer is looking for nine beers with
commercial potential - style is unimportant."
- ----------------
Huh?!
I know Pete's would take the winner of some category and brew a seasonal
beer with them but now all first round winners automatically become fodder
for Sam Adams? Must be the Long Shot competition's level of quality wasn't
up to the AHA's NHC - I offer LS Hazelnut Brown as an example - so I guess
they bought themselves in big enough to get a bottle of each of the first
round winners. Look for the fine print on your entry that assigns all
rights to your recipe to Boston Beer. Gee, Cathy and Charlie, how much DID
they pay?
Boston Beer's connections with the AHA/AOB have been, well, ethically shady
(don't forget how Boston Beer was sued for their claims of "winning" the
GABF.) howinthehell did the AHA suddenly forget that particular bit 'o
history? Must be the altitude...or the money.
I'm also very glad to know that, for a competition, "...style is
unimportant."
Sheesh,
Brian Wurst (brian at netwave.net) Lombard, Illinois
"Nature has formed you, desire has trained you, fortune has preserved you
for this insanity." -Cicero
Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 06:54:59 -0800
From: Sharon/Dan Ritter <ritter at camasnet.com>
Subject: re: vigorous evaporation
Robert Deneefe posts:
>So, all you propane spewing homebrewers out there, do you boil like mad
>and get >a high evaporation rate, or do you "tone down" the boil and still
>get nice >utilization/hot break?
I'm in the Boil Like Mad camp. I too use a propane cooker outdoors and boil
all my batches for 90 minutes with the lid off. For a 5 gallon batch, I
usually start with 6 1/2 gallons of wort and typically lose 1 to 1/3/4
gallons due to evaporation (sometimes I Boil Like Mad on days when the
outside temp. is 20F!). I keep two gallons of pre-boiled tap water on hand
during the boil and replace enough of the evaporation losses so I have ~6
gallons left in the pot after the boil. I add the water a 1/2 gallon at a
time during the boil always making sure to stop the timer until the wort
resumes boiling. It works for me but is it the best thing to do? Don't
know, but I'd be interested to hear what others do.
Dan Ritter <ritter at camasnet.com>
Ritter's MAMMOTH Brewery
Grangeville, Idaho
Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 10:39:05 -0500
From: "M. Arneson" <marnes at hom.net>
Subject: Re: Tons of Trub
>Mashed 2 lbs of Great Western 2-row malt with 1/2 lb crystal and 1/4 lb
>carapils at 152 degrees for 1hour. After sparging into brewpot, added 6
>lbs pale liquid extract and water to make about 4 gallons (in my 5 gal pot,
>not a full batch boil). I used whole hops, and added re-hydrated Irish
>moss with 20 in. left in the 1 hour boil. Cooled in a sink full of ice
>water and let settle for an hour or so. Got tons of trub.
>
Hmmmmm...I had the exact same problem when I use chocolate in my
Chocolate Stouts! I added 1/4 to 1/2 Lb to my wort and ended up
with about 12 inces of trub. It only happened when I added chocolate!?
I'm not sure what carapils is...Is that malted grain?
(sounds kind of suspicious).
Mark Arneson
marnes at bigfoot.com
Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 97 11:20:37 UT
From: "C&S Peterson" <CNS_PETERSON at msn.com>
Subject: AHA Thread
HBDers -
I've been reading with great interest the many comments regading the AHA and
how it is run. FWIW, I tend to support Terry White's posting, but I can see
that there may be a problem with the AHA Board. It does seems it should be
elected by the membership.
But what really, specifically, needs to change with the AHA's approach? I
haven't yet heard exactly what folks are upset about. What has the AHA
done/not done? Dues too high? Zymurgy content sucks? If the AHA allowed its
members to pick the BOD, would that solve your problems? Perhaps, but
probably not.
I think there may be some parallels between the old "freshman HBD" thread and
this AHA thread. Here's what I mean. Both the AHA and the HBD have
experienced enormous sucess; eg: increased membership. This success has led
to a diversity of interests, and these interests conflict [grain vs extract,
theory vs practice, Al vs the world (just a little humor here.....)] So while
I'm not a fan of starting the freshman HBD idea, I do think that the AHA can
no longer be all things to all brewers. This is why we've seen the increase
in beer periodicals. Some more geared toward emerging brewers, some for
intermediate, and some for advanced and pros. This is a good thing. So I
think the AHA needs to take a chunk of the maket and see how it can best serve
that market. And in all liklihood, the hand pick board was at one time I'm
sure a necessity. Most young organizations start with the founder(s) vision,
and to succeed, the founder usually needs to control the whole thing or the
organization never gets focused enough to get off the ground.
So the question for the AHA is: Do you want to contune to be the only
national organization for homebrewers? Maybe. Maybe not. If they do want to
keep this role (which as some have pointed out they may already losing grasp
of), then clearly they may want to incorporate, establish a membership elected
BOD, etc. Heck then they might even run an IPO -- imagine the money Charlie
could make on that deal! :-) Or they may want to simply focus on the
"beginning to intermediate brewer" and have another organization for "brewing
science" or some sort of thing.
Which gets me to my last point. We can quibble about Charlie making too much
money, but really, if I had put everything on the line for a company,
organization, whatever, I know it I would only take such a risk to do
something I truly enjoyed and, if I was successful, get paid handsomely for
it. This is the free market at work here; come up with a good idea, take some
risks and if you're right, you too can get a handsome salary, do something you
love, and still play golf. In that respect, I'm glad Charlie is able to be
paid what he's being paid.
I'm a member of the AHA and I don't feel like I'm being ripped off at $27 per
year. I understand the AHA is not a chairity organization. My fees go to pay
people's salaries. Sure Charlie's salary is high, but not that high. If I
opened a micro brewery, risked my house and future income on it, you can be
damn sure I wouldn't be giving beer away to keep my salary down. I would
charge the going rate. To do otherwise distorts the market, which can keep
other micros from entering the market. Maybe some of the "HBD heavyweights"
should get together and publish their own magazine? Why not, they're writing
articles now. And I for one would subscribe.
Finally, FWIW, Charlie's travels may sound like fun, but my personal
experience (international standards) is frequent travel quickly becomes
exhausting and eventually grow stale. Try a few 24 hour duration trips to
Asia and you'll see what I mean.....
Chas Peterson
Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 09:05:05 -0800
From: Jim Martin <fermntap at concentric.net>
Subject: AOB/AHA advertisers perspective
Bill Giffin wrote...
"I honestly don't care how much Charlie makes. I do care that they have
messed up the HBD for a period of time. I do care that because of
personal difference that they pulled out of the BJCP and caused quite a
bit of grief. I do care that it appears that they care more about their
advertisers then they do about the homebrewers in America and the
world. I care that they are more concerned with the "business" of the
AOB then the membership." END
As an advertiser for three years, I have finally decided to quit
advertising in Zymurgy, For all the reasons mentioned above.
I agree with most of that except the part about the advertisers getting
preferential treatment. Zymurgy magazine provides little or no support
to the advertiser (compared to BT or BYO). The same services that should
be given to readers is not even offered by Zymurgy, and that effects the
advertisers as well.
So rather than "bitch" about it I'll pull my advertising dollars and
focus them where readers/ customers can benefit. With all that potential,
I can't understand why things haven't progressed at the AHA.
I've watched "Brew Your Own" in just two years time take over and
and exceed in sales because Zymurgy has failed to address the needs
and issues of homebrewers.
Jim Martin , Pres./ owner Fermentap
Support your local Homebrew Supplier... Brew more beer.
Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 08:12:22 -0800
From: George_De_Piro at berlex.com (George De Piro)
Subject: RE: Bottling yeast
Hi all,
S. Murman wrote in asking why one would bottle with a yeast other than
the fermentation strain. There are several reasons for adding fresh
yeast at bottling time. The most important one (to homebrewers) is
relevant to high-gravity brewing (dense wort, not brewing on Jupiter).
After fermenting a wort down to >~7% ABV, the fermentation yeast will
often be too weak to carbonate the beer in a reasonable amount of
time. In this case it is almost essential to add a fresh dose of
yeast at bottling time. It can often be the same strain as the
original fermentation, although some people opt for a strain known for
high alcohol tolerance.
Another reason to add a different yeast at bottling time is for
product stability/clarity. Almost all Bavarian Weizens are bottled
with lager yeast, after the original ale yeast has been removed. This
is done (in part) because of the superior flocculation properties of
the bottling yeast. In this way, the beer can be poured clear if the
consumer so desires. This is also why so many people beat the heck
out of their bottled commercial Weizen to rouse the yeast-it does
stick to the bottom well!
Yet another reason to add fresh yeast at bottling time is when brewing
lagers. After several weeks (or months) at 32F (0C), some yeasts just
will not wake up to carbonate the beer in a reasonable amount of time.
The solution is to add a fresh dose of yeast at bottling time.
You probably would not want to add ale yeast to a lager beer because
the fermentation byproducts that are produced by most ale yeasts are
undesirable in lager beers.
Most homebrewers (including myself) do bottle with the same yeast that
carried out the primary fermentation, and many don't add fresh yeast
at bottling time. This is perfectly acceptable if you are getting good
results.
Have fun!
George De Piro (Nyack, NY)
Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 12:20:14 -0500
From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com>
Subject: Tons of Trubble
Brewsters:
Greg Porter (nice name) complained about the amount of trub, and inability
to get a clear wort.
Several things may have happened.
Cold break is much less flocced and more dispersed than hot break and if
you chilled before racking then this is what you saw. Don't worry about
it.
Choreboys or other hops/trub filters do get pluggged if you don't pay
attention to a simple rule. Keep the end of the racking cane away from the
edge of the choreboy. If the choreboy were a sphere, the end of the cane
should be at the center.
If you are using rabbit food sized hops "plugs" they will 'plug' almost
anything, switch to whole leaf or at least the 1" dia plug hops. If you
persist in using these small hop pieces for other reasons, try a nylon
cloth or screen covering on the outside of the choreboy. That should work.
Swirling or whirlpooling the wort about 10 minutes before you rack to get a
pile of hops in the middle, followed by racking at the lower edge of the
boiler will work just fine with large hops
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
103164.3202 at compuserve.com
Voice e-mail OK
Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 11:43:11 -0800
From: Charles Rich <CharlesR at saros.com>
Subject: FESB followup
In HBD 2359 Jim Busch writes:
>Charles is on the noble Fullers ESB quest:
<..snip..>
>Sounds good to me but Id lose the Cara-Pils Dextrine malt. If you
>want a light caramel malt, use DC caraVienne but its not needed. The
>British ale malt will provide color enough to go with the UK Crystal.
I'll try that.
>Dont forget to dry hop at 1/4 oz per 5 gals.
Yup. Thanks. I think the hopback addition has let me get by without
this, but true FESB is dryhopped in the cask.
I recently dryhopped this recipe with more than you suggest (1 oz for
6-days) and it bent the resulting beer in a way I didn't like. Too
prominent and too green a hop flavor, not aroma. These were very fresh
flowers, and I added them after the ferment instead of the tail end when
the yeast could have better reduced any air that came in with the
flowers and possibly vented some undesirable flavor components,
mellowing the profile. So HBD-ers, don't do what I did.
> Also to get the true taste you are looking for will require cask
conditioning
>and dispense from beer engine or gravity, this is a real key to the overall
effect.
Yes! This is absolutely true and important. I do cask condition, but
push it with CO2 and then vent the excess pressure after a "serving
session" to preserve low carbonation. It's not as luscious a beer if
very carbonated.
Thanks for your comments Jim. I'd like to ask the readership again,
that if anyone knows the hopping schedule that Fullers uses would you
please step forward and say. I know they use Challenger, Northdown and
Target but in what proportions and when are the additions. I suspect
they begin with a charge of Challenger for the whole boil, but what
about the rest, are they blended additions? TIA.
Cheerfully
Charles Rich
Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 97 11:53:42 UT
From: "C&S Peterson" <CNS_PETERSON at msn.com>
Subject: American Hop Ale: A Direct Hit?
HBDers-
I recently was in San Diego and ordered what I thought was a local microbrew
called American Hop Ale. For those that haven't tried it yet, I thought it
was an excellent example of the West Coast Amber style. Its reportedly got 40
IBUs, which leads to a nice strong but smooth bitterness, and of course a
strong hop flavor. It had a slight fruitiness, and good malt background. I
had two in a row; a rarity for my fickle beer heart.
I was shocked to learn this is an AB product.
Unlike other megabrewer efforts to lure in craft brew drinkers, this beer had
a lot of character. [Miller's Reserve line was OK, but clearly toned down any
big malt or hop flavors to provide general appeal. Most of the psudo big brew
names, like Plank Road, Red Dog, and Red Wolf, I consider Just More Swill]
Given the freshness and quality of this beer (I hate to say it, it was tasty),
I'm thinking that this beer is going to give some micros breweries a hard
time, particlarly if AB undercuts the current $6-$7 per sixpack price
structure.
Anyone else tried this beer? Know of any other efforts by AB to meet head on
with micros?
Chas Peterson
Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 12:58:40 +0000
From: hbd at brew.oeonline.com
Subject: RE: Fermenting in 10gal Corny?
John Wilkinson wrote:
>vinyl tubing was still soft. At any rate, I have had only moderate
>luck with the device so far. I would like to use some type of clamp
>around the tubing where the stone is inserted to help hold it on but I
>don't think I have seen any clamps that small (~1/4"). Any
>suggestions?
John, try one of those little plastic "zip ties" -- ya know, the kind
that have little teeth over their length, and will only go one way --
Ziiiip! They come in lots of different sizes.
- --Kris Jacobs
Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 12:05 -0600
From: M257876 at sl1001.mdc.com (BAYEROSPACE)
Subject: different yeast strains/lambic question
collective homebrew conscience:
greg porter wrote:
>After cooling the boil and letting the pot settle for a while, I went to
>siphon into the fermenter but found Tons of Trub!<snip> Still wound up with
>about 3" of trub in the bottom of a 5 gallon carboy after settling
>overnight. What can cause this?
>Mashed 2 lbs of Great Western 2-row malt with 1/2 lb crystal and 1/4 lb
>carapils at 152 degrees for 1hour. After sparging into brewpot,<snip>
right here, did you recirculate (vorlauf) the mash until it cleared, before
sparging? i have noticed that when i don't get my first wort to clear well,
it results in more trub production.
> added re-hydrated Irish
>moss with 20 in. left in the 1 hour boil.
how much irish moss? i have used anywhere from 1/4 tsp. to 1.5 tsp. per
5 gallon batch, and it seems that greater amounts of irish moss produce
significantly more material in the bottom of the kettle at the end of the
boil. interestingly, lately i've been using 1/4 tsp. per 5 gallon batch,
and i see less break, but am not suffering from any kind of haze or flavor
problems. it seems like i get equally good beer and less "stuff" in the
bottom of the kettle by using less irish moss. so i wonder if all that extra
stuff was mostly irish moss.
>I don't understand the books that say to whirlpool the wort and draw off
>the clear stuff from the sides. There is very little clear stuff, and
>whirlpooling does nothing. Choreboy strainers or other devices clog up
i have never had great success with whirlpooling. there is always trub that
covers the entire bottom of my kettle. maybe there's a little more in the
middle, but i generally transfer all the wort/trub through a strainer, **which
does not strain out the trub, it merely passes through and reforms in the
fermenter**, and then rack off the trub some hours later. if i had a tap on
my kettle, i would do things differently.
also, my decoction mashes produce noticeably less trub than the infusion
mashes. the "protein sludge" at the top of the lauter tun is evidence of
potential break material being left behind.
mark johnson wrote:
>Thanks, i know this isn't brew-related, but it is still beer related.
>But on a brew-related comment, what exactly is a Lambic, anyway?
briefly, lambic beers are beers fermented spontaneously in the area of
belgium southwest of brussels. the spontaneous fermentation (which uses
the naturally occuring microflora of the region) is the major prerequisite
for a beer to be a true lambic. they also do weird (germanically speaking)
things like use unmalted wheat and old, aged hops.
i believe sam adams cranberry "lambic" is a misnomer.
speaking of lambic, i had a question on when to blend a new lambic with an
old one. during primary? secondary? after fermentation is nearly over (i.e.,
at packaging) ? help.
smurman wrote:
>I just got the latest copy of Zymurgy, <snip>
check out the "kudos" listing. it's shameless, i know...
somebody had a question about why breweries use different yeasts to ferment
and bottle condition. i think there are some breweries that do this because
their primary fermentation yeast does not flocculate well, or doesn't have
good stability characteristics in the bottle under uncertain handling
conditions. so, they substitute a strain that flocculates well and/or holds
up better (in terms of autolysis).
brew hard,
mark bayer
Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 13:46:03 -0600
From: Bill Giffin <billgiffin at maine.com>
Subject: Rice is nice
Top of the morning to ye all,
In 1840 Johann Wagner brought in the yeast, bottom fermenting from
Munich, and American brewing as we know it began.
Barley grown here is not the same as it is in Europe. Barley here now
as when Wagner came here had more protein and husk then its
counterpart in Europe. Because of this it was found that if you used
corn or rice with the malt then the resulting beer was more what was
brewed in the old country.
Heres a recipe that maybe could have been brewed in the 1850's. I like
it a lot.
Ordinal gravity 1.056
Terminal gravity 1.010
Big isn't it touch over 6% v/v alcohol
5.5 lbs 2 row Briess brewers malt
3.0 lbs rice
35 ibu's of noble hops
I have used Saaz, and many others.
Wyeast 2042 with a liter starter and then repitched about 4 times.
Take 1# of the crushed malt , the rice and 6 quarts of water and put it
in a twelve quart cooker and raise the temp. to 150 hold for about 15
min. then bring to a boil and boil it till it thickens and looks like gruel.
The boil will take about 15 min. Through out the process this should
be stirred once in a while so it doesn't stick.
At the same time dough in the remaining 4.5# of malt with 5.6 quarts of
cold water, 58F, and then raise the temp. on the heat to 95F and hold
for 25 min. Raise the temp. after the rest to 122F and maintain that
temp. until the rice mixture is done cooking. It should be about 25-30
min.
Dough in the hot rice mixture into the main mash slowly, rice hold a lot
of heat and it is very easy to overshoot the mark on the main mash of
150F.
Hold the main mash at 150 for 90 minutes and then raise the temp. to
168F for 5 min. then sparge with 5 gal. of180F water that has been
acidified to 5.7 pH.
Boil for 90 min. with either FWH of 25 gms of hops and the rest at 60
min. before knockout or use a 50% at 60min , 25% at 30 min. and 25%
at 2 min. Either way it works just fine.
Chill the hot wort to 59F rack and pitch the yeast. Ferment at 50F for
about a week in primary, give it a week in secondary longer if you don't
filter, filter the beer, condition in a keg and enjoy.
Bill
Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 14:34:44 -0500
From: rlarsen at pyrotechnics.com (Rich Larsen)
Subject: Recipe - Root Beer
Someone always asks for a "scratch" root beer recipe. Thought I'd forward
this on.
>Root Beer
>Makes about 1 gallon
>
>5 quarts water
>1/4 ounce hops
>1/2 ounce dried burdock root
>1/2 ounce dried yellow dock root
>1/2 ounce dried sarsaparilla root
>1/2 ounce dried sassafras root
>1/2 ounce dried spikenard root
>1 1/2 cups sugar
>1/8 tsp granulated yeast
>
>Simmer herbs in water for 30 minutes. Add sugar, stir to dissolve,
>and strain into a crock. Cool to lukewarm, add yeast, and stir well.
>Cover crock and leave to ferment for about an hour. Funnel into
>sterilized bottles (old beer bottles will do), and cap tightly. Metal
>caps applied with a crimping tool, or wire-hinged caps are best. If
>you cork your bottles, tie or wire the corks down firmly and store
>bottles on their side to encourage sealing. Use only sturdy,
>returnable-type beer bottles or champagne bottles; those with
>twist-top caps are not strong enough.
>
=> Rich <rlarsen at pyrotechnics.com> http://www.pyrotechnics.com/~rlarsen
________________________________________________________________________
Rich Larsen, Midlothian, IL. "Spice is the Variety of Life"
Want to learn how to Brew Beer at Home? Check out
Homebrew University BBS at (847) 970-9778
________________________________________________________________________
Legal Notice : Under no circumstances is my e-mail address to be sold,
traded, given away, or used in any way without my prior consent.
Return to table of contents
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by ctrvax.Vanderbilt.Edu
From: "Bryan L. Gros" <grosbl at ctrvax.Vanderbilt.Edu>
Subject: mulitple kegs
Scott (scotty at enaila.nidlink.com) writes:
>Hello all. I have recently upgraded to 2 corny kegs in my beer
>fridge. I would like to know the best way for splitting the CO2 from
>my regulator to service both kegs. I actually would like 3 outputs.
>(2 kegs and CPBF). I have seen plastic or brass 'Y' s for the gas
>line. Is there another option? Can I replace the single output on
>my regulator with a multiple outlet set up which will operate the
>lines independantly? I know the entire system will have to be at the
>same pressure. I would like to be able to shut each line off if
>needed.
I haven't done this, so I can't give you details, but you can get low
pressure regulators pretty cheap. You can make a manifold where
you run the CO2 line into each regulator (via a T or Y) and then
each regulator goes to a different keg. This way you can keep
each keg at a different pressure if desired.
Another option is to get a Y connector from your regulator
with a check valve on each side. One side of the Y goes to
the fridge with an additional Y to split the line for each keg.
The other side of the first Y (with the other check valve) can
be connected to your CPBF.
Just be sure to check each connection for leaks if you
want to keep your tank on at all times.
- Bryan
grosbl at ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu
Nashville, TN
Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 15:56:55 -0600 (CST)
From: korz at xnet.com
Subject: Re: yeast starters
Chris writes:
>this is just a thought, not a stone-set truth. if no-one else has a
>better explanation, try just using a simple sugar starter medium with your
>next batch and seeing what happens.
If when you say "simple sugar," you mean glucose/fructose/sucrose,
then I would advise against it. Yeast that have been started in media
that doesn't have maltose and other malt sugars in it later have
diffculty in fermenting these "bigger" sugars. It's all related
to the fact that yeast need to make certain enzymes to handle these
sugars. If they don't see them for a while, they "forget" to make
them and you can have not only longer lag times, but also stuck
fermentations in extreme cases.
In addition, you don't have many nutrients that yeast need in a simple
sugar starter.
Bottom line: use malt-based wort for starters.
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz at xnet.com
Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 16:14:22 -0600 (CST)
From: korz at xnet.com
Subject: Re: Trub
Greg writes:
>Mashed 2 lbs of Great Western 2-row malt with 1/2 lb crystal and 1/4 lb
>carapils at 152 degrees for 1hour. After sparging into brewpot, added 6
>lbs pale liquid extract and water to make about 4 gallons (in my 5 gal pot,
>not a full batch boil). I used whole hops, and added re-hydrated Irish
>moss with 20 in. left in the 1 hour boil. Cooled in a sink full of ice
>water and let settle for an hour or so. Got tons of trub.
I'll bet it's not your fault. I haven't used GW malt, but I get something
very similar with DeWolf-Cosyns Pale Ale and Pils. Tons of trub!
The solution: protein rest. The break is mostly protein. If you add
a protein rest, you will reduce the volume of your hot and cold break.
I suggest 15 minutes at 135-140F. Others will say rest at 122F, but I bet
they can't justify why it would be better than a protein rest at 135-140F.
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz at xnet.com
Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 16:54:08 -0600 (CST)
From: korz at xnet.com
Subject: Re: Hop Age
Jay writes:
>Data for hop AA loss is usually specified as a loss percentage
>over a six (6) month period stored at 20C (68F). Does anyone
>have any data as to approximately how much of a reduction in
>this "loss percentage" occurs when the hops are stored below
>0C (32 F)?
First, a word of warning.
There was an article on this in Brewing Techniques a few years
ago by Mark Garetz and similar information in his book, Using
Hops. However, if you read carefully, while I believe that he
said he actually tested the %AA loss in hops stored in *purged*
oxygen-barrier bags (although the losses seemed extremely high...
almost as if some of the %AA of the hops was lost *pre-packaging*)
he did not test the losses in *unpurged* oxygen-barrier bags and
simply took an average of the other two loss rates (see the
small print associated with the table on the last page). This
is *highly* suspect: what is the point of oxygen-barrier packaging
if there is *already* oxygen in the package to spoil the hops?
What I'm trying to say here is that because of the many places
in his article and book that Garetz makes some rather generous
assumptions, I'm very skeptical of these "hop aging" formulae.
Regarding your question, I have used three-year-old hop pellets
that were stored in heat-sealed, CO2-purged, oxygen-barrier bags
stored at 40F, assumed *no* loss of %AA and got very close to
the expected bitterness using Jackie Rager's utilization formulae
from the Hops Special Issue of Zymurgy, although I added 10% to
compensate for the hop bags is used.
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz at xnet.com
Return to table of contents