---

	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:
  Re: Decoction: Pressure cooking is excellent (Jeff Renner)
  Grand Cru (korz)
  Rodenbach and Orval Partnership Announced (David C. Harsh)
  Newbie Questions (Oh, Noooo) (Michael Dransfield)
  Thames Valley Yeast / ? meaningless datapoint ("Nathan L. Kanous II")
  Concensus - Hah! - Decoction Temps vs Grain Bill (Charles Burns)
  Chance To Brew 250 Gallons - Competition Announcement ("Tim M. Dugan")
  RE:  Melanoidin formation in the kettle (George De Piro)
  Better heat transfer using sanke kegs/homebrew diet responses/step mashing temperature increases ("Reed,Randy")
  Question ("Brian Silfies")
  Styrian Goldings ("Graham Wheeler")
  aha/judging (BAYEROSPACE)
  AHA competition (Tom Pope)
  Peated Malt and Porter Yeast (scotty)
  Paging Mr.Tannin & Mr.Maillard (Charlie Scandrett)
  Maillard Part1- Theory (Charlie Scandrett)


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 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 from:
	
	brew.oeonline.com	/pub/hbd	
	ftp.stanford.edu	/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer

  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, 2 Apr 1997 10:03:39 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Decoction: Pressure cooking is excellent

Charles Rich <CharlesR at saros.com> just posted the tantalizing results of
his pressure cooking a decotion fraction (Thanks, Charles, this is a great
topic) and said:
>My conversion temperature kept falling
>from 149F (65C) to 140F (65C). I brought it back to temp and repeated
>this twice more before quitting it in disgust (femto-brewing, Feh!)

Why not put this "femto-mash" in a preheated oven?  I just did that with
the cereal mash for a Classic American Pilsner (and used to do whole mashes
in the oven before I stepped up to RIMS).  I rested 3 lbs. corn grits and 1
lb. malt for 15 minutes at 100F, then 30 minutes at 154F in the oven, then
boiled for 75 minutes (schedule per Henius and Wahl, 1902) and got a fair
amount of darkening.  I added it to the remaining mash of 10 lbs of malt
for 7.75 gallons of CAP.  I'll have to wait to see how it tastes, but the
wort tastes pretty malty.  I may try pressure cooking next time.  Henius
and Wahl mention that as being done with cereal mashes.  I'm a little
concerned with getting too dark a beer for style, but I like the idea of
not using Munich malt, which I have been using at ~10%.

Jeff

 -=-=-=-=-
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan c/o nerenner at umich.edu



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 12:11:22 -0600 (CST)
From: korz at xnet.com
Subject: Grand Cru

Michael asks where to enter a Celis Grand Cru clone.

Well, I hope there's never a competition guideline with a "Grand Cru"
style, simply because it's not a style.  It's simply a designation
put on by the brewer to indicate that this is a *special* beer in some
way.  Celis Grand Cru is similar to Celis White except it is all-malt
(in stead of being made with unmalted wheat as the White is) and
considerably stronger.  Rodenbach Grand Cru differs from their non-Grand
Cru version in that it is all aged approximately two years in huge
oak tuns (the non-Grand Cru version, called "Classic" by the importer,
I believe, is a blend of the two-year-old Rodenbach and a much younger,
lower-OG version).

So, back to the question, I would enter it as a Classic Herb and Spice
beer (22b), where the classic style is Belgian Strong Ale.

Ideally, the AHA guidelines would mention spices in the Belgian Strong Ale
subcategory and you could enter it there.  Alas, despite several discussions
with the AHA over the last 5 years about this oversight, there is still no
mention of spices which can be very common in this style.  I do know that
the AHA is trying to be more receptive, so we could see improvements such
as this soon.

Al.

Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz at xnet.com


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 02 Apr 1997 10:32:10 -0500
From: dharsh at alpha.che.uc.edu (David C. Harsh)
Subject: Rodenbach and Orval Partnership Announced

Note:  One of my secretaries spends lots of time checking out wire service
reports and she came across this the other day.  I thought I'd pass it on
since it seemed interesting.
                Dave

Rodenbach and Notre-Dame d'Orval Announce Joint Marketing Agreement

     Stunning the international brewing community, Abbey Notre-Dame d'Orval
has announced plans to share marketing and distribution facilities with
well known  Belgian brewery Rodenbach.  The combined breweries are expected
to maintain autonomy over their individual breweries and no changes in
current styles are anticipated.
     The decision was announced at a press conference held in front of the
stately d'Orval Abbey, rebuilt in the 1930's after its destruction during
the French revolution.  The current abbot, Dom Eric Dion, stood together
with managing director Jacques Petre and Rodenabach CEO Georges Rodenbach,
great-great grandson of Alexander, who bought the small brewery in 1720
that bears his name to this day.
     "This was not an easy decision for us to make" explains Abbot Dion.
"Abbey d'Orval has a history of brewing since the 11th century when it was
first established.  Any changes in our methods are difficult as we do
believe that our current strategy is successful and produces high quality
products."
     "May you be forgiven for your pride, Father Dion", comments Jacque
Petre, to the amusement of the assembled press.  "I firmly believe that
this will help all of our business endeavors.  We are much smaller than
Rodenbach, and their market experience will assist us in maintaining and
possibly expanding our current sales.  As managing director, I must face
the reality that the order must generate sufficient revenue from their
product sales in order to cover their costs.  Whether this will remain from
our current products or from an expanded product base remains to be seen."
     And what will Rodenbach gain from this arrangement?  "The unique
character of Orval complements our product line nicely", answers Georges
Rodenbach.  "We can now boast two flagship products:  Rodenbach Grand Cru
and Orval, both distinct, yet wonderful.  The attention to detail and
reputation of the Trappist order will ensure success of both current and
new product lines. "
     The mention of new product lines generated intense interest from the
assembled press.  After some prodding, Jacque Petre finally answered the
waiting question:  "Georges has said more than we intended to say at the
present time, but do have specific plans for the introduction of new
products.  The coming year will bring forth the first of these, our new
Orval/Rodenbach popcorn."
     Press reaction was mixed.


&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
&                         Dave Harsh                                 &
&            Bloatarian Brewing League - Cincinnati, OH              &
&                                                                    &
&   "If an infinite number of rednecks riding in an infinite number  &
&  of pickup trucks fire an infinite number of shotgun rounds at an  &
&   infinite number of highway signs, they will eventually produce   &
&         all the world's great literary works in Braille."          &
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
                               O-



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 14:14:56 -0500
From: Michael_Dransfield at usccmail.lehman.com (Michael Dransfield)
Subject: Newbie Questions (Oh, Noooo)

Hello HBD Collective! 

I've been lurking back here for a few months, absorbing as much as I 
can. There's such a wild mix of specialists in here that I'm always 
amazed. Thanks to everyone for the info. Every day, it seems that 
something else makes sense to me. Now brewing is becoming my obsession. 
Does anyone else have this problem? Sorry, that's not the question. 

On to the real questions: I'm about to attempt my third batch. The first 
two were extract batches with "specialty grains" (steeped in at the 
beginning), hops, and dry yeast, and were not-very-pale pale ales. While 
I thought they were pretty decent (considering I made them myself), I'd 
like to make a step forward on the quality. I've printed off the Cats 
Meow extract recipe for Pilsner Urquell. This consists of 

4# can of Alexander's Pale LME
2 1/3# light DME
15 AAU's Saaz hops
Wyeast 2007 Bohemian Pilsner yeast

>From what I've read here on the HBD, the liquid yeast will make quite a 
difference all by itself. I want to try a lager because, first, they make 
for a better lawn mowing follow-up beer and second, because part of the 
lower level of my house is in the right temperature range throughout the 
winter and into the early spring. 

1. What "specialty grains" can I steep in to supplement this recipe, and 
do I cut back on the LME and DME to compensate? 
2. How does one calculate the AAU's (does this work off of the Alpha Acid 
%)? 
3) Is Wyeast 2007 good for lagering at 52 to 55 degrees F.? If not, any 
suggestions? 
4) How long can I expect a given yeast (2007 or other suggested) to 
ferment in primary and secondary?
5) How do you pronounce Wyeast, anyway? 

And one final unrelated question: What books are available that discuss 
construction and usage details for brewing equipment such as RIMS, 
mash/lauter tuns, etc. I'd like to try all-grain brewing soon. 

Thanks in advance for the help. Private email is fine, but please post if 
you think other rookies like myself will benefit. 

Best Regards,
Michael Dransfield
Wall, New Jersey USA 
Michael_Dransfield at usccmail.lehman.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 02 Apr 1997 14:47:04 +0000
From: "Nathan L. Kanous II" <nkanous at tir.com>
Subject: Thames Valley Yeast / ? meaningless datapoint

Previously, Charles Epp and others had requested information
regarding the use of Wyeast Thames Valley #1275.  Unfortunately
I was one who had provided a less than optimal review of this
yeast.  I had fermented two batches (one english pale ale and
one bitter) and was not impressed with the yeast.  It fermented
rather slowly compared to ferments with other yeasts.  Big deal.
The thing that bothered me was a flavor left by the yeast.  To
me it tasted like bleach.  I couldn't get this yeast to floc well
either.  I did ferment at reasonable temps (65-68 degF) but
was unable to "force chill" the beer to cause the yeast to floc
out.

Well, I recently brewed another pale ale, this time using London
Ale #1028.  This yeast has gotten great reviews as a good yeast
for british ales. I fermented at 64 degF.  This yeast also gave
me the same taste.  It hasn't cleared yet either.  Only 5 days
in bottle.

The moral of the story?  Take the reports that you get with a grain
of salt.  I reported bad results, because I didn' like the flavor
of the yeast (at least that is what I suspect it is).  As a result,
you have no good data to support why it is not liked.  The bottom
line for me...if you like your results with 1028, I would suspect 
that you would like 1275.  I will wait this one out to see how it
tastes when the beer clears. (does this make sense?)

Nathan in Frankenmuth, MI

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 2 Apr 97 12:20 PST
From: cburns at egusd.k12.ca.us (Charles Burns)
Subject: Concensus - Hah! - Decoction Temps vs Grain Bill

As has been so aptly demonstrated in the last week (whilst I was away skiing 
with the brother) there really is no concensus (HBD 2380), other than the 
fact that when any of us mentions a mash schedule, we better well make sure 
to reference the grain bill at the same time.

Speaking of the grain bill and modern malts vs the "olden days", how the 
heck are we supposed to find out about our grain? I know, I found that one 
supplier that Steve posted about yesterday with malt stat sheets posted on 
the web, but how do you really know the malt they ship you matches those 
statistics? My local homebrew shops don't provide them and probably dont 
have a clue as to why they should.

I went back to Dave Millers Handbook of Homebrewing this am and started 
rereading some of the very beginner stuff he talks about when describing 
malts and the level of "modification". Is this the real difference between 
older malts and modern malts? Is this the only thing we really need to 
concern ourselves with when deciding what the rest temperatures are going to 
be? And how can we determine these things by physical examination?

I propose to go down to the one homebrew shop in my area that seems to have 
the best (most wide) selection of grains. I plan to purchase a quarter pound 
(or more if needed) of each malt that I'm interested in using for the main 
grist (not specialty grains). I would like to know what simple tests, visual 
or otherwise that I can perform on these malts to figure out in advance what 
the best rest temps really would be. It gets old trying this and that on 5 
gallon batches and waiting a month to find out I used the wrong temp and/or 
the wrong process. I know, half batches could be done, but I really would 
like to know in advance (ie predict) what the results are likely to be with 
a given grain/temp/process before I start. Not just the theoretical results 
based on what the homebrew store "said" he sold me, but what I actually 
ended up with for grain.

Dave Miller says first to look at a kernel that's sliced lengthwise, but 
then says its not really a reliable test (no reason given). Then he says 
chew on it to see if its "steely" or if its "mealy" (there's a poem in there 
somewhere). This seems just a bit less than scientific to me. Any 
suggestions on what would be the best way to examine the malt and then 
decide what temp/process would be best to use?

Perplexed in Northern California
Charley

PS- whoever made the post about the Brew Bros' in Reno was right. Wimpy 
nothing beer, terrible service and food that will make you gag. My brother 
and I have personal experience.


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 14:19:20 -0600
From: "Tim M. Dugan" <tdugan at netins.net>
Subject: Chance To Brew 250 Gallons - Competition Announcement

1997 Land Of The Muddy Waters Homebrew Competition & Festival

Imagine this: you've been brewing five gallon batches of beer at home for a
few years. You're made countless mistakes and attempted to brew many
different styles of beer to improve your brewing skills. Then one day you
enter a competition and, much to everyone's surprise, you win. You're then
asked to name your creation and help brew 250 gallons of it for the local
drinking public to purchase and quaff. And they like it!!

The Mississippi Unquenchable Grail Zymurgists or M.U.G.Z., presents its
third national, AHA style homebrew competition in conjunction with National
Homebrew Day celebration.

COMPETITION: 
* All 24 AHA beer styles (no mead, cider or sake) 
* At least half of judges AHA qualified 
* $5.00 per entry ($3.00 for M.U.G.Z. members) 
* AHA sanctioned competition for judging & national competition points 

AWARDS: 
* Best Of Show: 1st: Brew and name your winning recipe at the Blue Cat Brew
Pub with brewmaster Dan Cleveland. Two 2.5 gallon party pigs of the beer
for the winner. 
* 2nd: $25.00 gift certificate for Koski's Homebrew Fixin's store. 
* 3rd: Your choice of any premium beer kit from Koski's. 
Plus 1st, 2nd and 3rd place ribbons for each category (minimum 25 of 50
points).

WHEN:
THE FESTIVAL: 12 p.m. - 4 p.m., Saturday, April 26, 1997
COMPETITION: 12 p.m. - 4 p.m., Saturday, April 26, 1997

WHERE: 
The Blue Cat Brew Pub, 
113 18th Street 
Rock Island, IL 61201 
TEL: 309-788-8247

ENTRIES: 
Mail or drop off entries (three 12 oz. or 14 oz. brown or green bottles
crown caps only) before April 25, with fee for each entry (checks or money
orders made out to M.U.G.Z.) to:

Koski's Homebrew Fixin's
c/o Tim Koster
1415 5th Ave.
Moline, IL 61265
TEL: 1-800-788-BREW 

Each entry must have be accompanied by an AHA entry form, with the correct
style noted. Each bottle must be labeled with an AHA bottle label form held
with a rubber band. Entries must be received at Koski's not later then 5
p.m., Friday, April 25th.

An entry form can be found at:

	http://www.netins.net/showcase/tdugan/mugz/entry.htm

And a bottle label form can be found at: 

	http://www.netins.net/showcase/tdugan/mugz/bottle.htm

For the sanity of the judges and stewards, NO walk-up registrations the day
of the competition can be accepted.

We still need judges, stewards and volunteers to bring and serve homebrew
for the competition and festival. If you can help with any of these
activities, either give Tim Koster (see above) a call, or email Tim Dugan
at tdugan at netins.net. They will give your name and number to the person
running the activity with which you can help.




Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 15:33:26 -0800
From: George_De_Piro at berlex.com (George De Piro)
Subject: RE:  Melanoidin formation in the kettle

     Hi all,
     
     Al K. asks if sugars and amino acids will form melanoidins in the 
     kettle.  From what I've read, they will, but not to the extent that 
     will happen in an environment with less water.
     
     That is a major difference between the kettle and the decoction 
     portion of the mash.  Darryl Richman mentions this in his great book, 
     _Bock_, but does not go into detail.  Unfortunately, my undergrad 
     organic chem text does not talk about Mailard reactions; didn't the 
     authors realize that they could have made the course MUCH more 
     interesting by talking about the chemistry of brewing?  What college 
     student wouldn't be interested in beer?
     
     Have fun!
     
     George De Piro  (Nyack, NY)

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 16:31:01 -0500
From: "Reed,Randy" <rreed at foxboro.com>
Subject: Better heat transfer using sanke kegs/homebrew diet responses/step mashing temperature increases

Has anyone improved the heat transfer from propane fired converted sanke 
kegs? Since stainless is a poor conductor of heat, I was wondering if 
anyone had wielded another metal to the base of the keg or replaced part of 
the base of their keg.  Would this work or would the existing stainless 
retard the improved heat transfer of the new metal?

On the subject of my recent post asking: What is the recommended diet for 
an overweight person who enjoys his homebrew and craft beer and does not 
want to reduce consumption? Answers were to raise exercise level, reduce 
fat intake, and, if you drink lots of coffee as well, drink more water. 
Thanks to all who responded.

Responses to my question about how fast temperature ramps must be when step 
mashing included that 1 to 1.5 F degrees per minute were considered healthy 
speeds to protect enzymes and reactions. Thanks again for the responses.

n	Randy Reed

===========================================
"Homebrewers are like dogs teaching each other how to
              chase cars." - Ann Reed
=========================================== 
    +-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-+
     + The Local Brewing Company +
      +   ESBITTER at AOL.COM     +
       +         Randy Reed             +
      +   South Shore Brew Club    +
     +  (Boston, MA Area - South)  +
 +-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-+  Visit our web site at:
http://members.aol.com/brewclub/index.htm



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 16:44:56 -0400
From: "Brian Silfies"<Brian_Silfies/ACA/ACC/ARCO at arcochem.com>
Subject: Question





I just subscribed and wanted to know if you could change my email address.

Yes, I did recieve the email, but I'd rather use my personal address
opposed to my work address.

The new address should be BSilfies at actium.com

Please respond if this is a problem.

Thank You
Brian



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 21:44:11 +0100
From: "Graham Wheeler" <Graham.Wheeler at btinternet.com>
Subject: Styrian Goldings


 
 Daniel Juliano in HBD 2388 asked about Styrian Goldings.
 
 Styrian Goldings are in fact the standard English Fuggle. The Styrian
 Golding was introduced into Yugoslavia from England, but the unfortunate
 importer thought he'd got Goldings cuttings or seedlings when in fact he'd
 got Fuggles.
 
 Be careful of names like Styrians and Super Styrians. These are usually
 high-alpha seedlings of Northern Brewer or Brewers' Gold, again grown in
 Yugoslavia. 
 
 Whitbread Golding Variety is again closer to a Fuggle than a Golding. The
 exact parentage of WGV is unknown. It was found growing at a hop farm that
 Whitbread brewery bought from a small grower. Upon testing this mysterious
 hop it was found to have excellent characteristics and to be resistant to
 diseases that the standard Fuggles and Goldings were not. The unfortunate
 grower would have made far more money selling his hop than he made from
 selling his farm.
 
 Graham Wheeler
 
 High Wycombe
 England. 
 

Return to table of contents


Date:     Wed, 2 Apr 1997 18:00 -0600
From: M257876 at sl1001.mdc.com (BAYEROSPACE)
Subject:  aha/judging

collective homebrew conscience:

let me first say that the amount of useful dialogue on this forum has grown
exponentially in the past couple of months.  wow.  do you guys ever notice
how much more attention we pay to malt, and not hops, unless we're talking
about dogs?

bill giffen wrote:

>Yet at the last NHC first
>round I judged I judged 12 pale ales in the morning and 15 barleywines
>in the afternoon.  How well do you think the barleywines were judged
>no matter how hard my partner and I tried?
>Numbers of beers that a judge has to judge, the temperature that the
>beers are presented to the judges, the conditions of the area where the
>judging takes place, these are items that have a great effect on the
>outcome of a competition and many of them have been done incorrectly
>by the AHA NHC.

let me supplement these comments with another "item" :  i recently
stewarded a fairly sizeable competition (400+ entries).  in the
afternoon, i was assigned to the belgian table.  there were 4 judges, who
took the subcategories and split them.  well, the 4 judges spent about 2 hours 
judging roughly 25 or so beers.  after each beer was tasted, if it was a 
potential "medal round" beer, it was placed in the middle of the table.  
by the end of the two hours, six bottles were in the middle, to battle it out 
for the 3 ribbons. 

well, it just so happened that the very first beer my pair of judges judged
was the highest scoring beer on the table.  it was a fantastic beer.  it was
the only beer to score 40 or higher.  

it also had now been sitting on the table for 2 hours, had gotten warm, flat, 
and had lost all the great aroma it had started out with.  it did not medal.  
it was not even close.  my two judges commented how it had degraded since 
they opened it (after the other two judges tasted it).

i strongly believe the brewer of that beer was cheated by circumstance.  while
his beer scored higher than any other beer at the table, and he did receive
glowing comments on the score sheets, he didn't get a well-deserved ribbon for
his beer. 

if judges are expected to judge this many beers, which i believe is about the
maximum any person can be expected to judge (all these guys had judged that
morning, as well), they should at least be able to start with a fresh bottle
for each of the "medal round" beers.

sadly, many competitions only require one first round bottle.  this is why i 
really believe you don't win ribbons without luck playing a factor.  your beer 
has to be good, agreed, but it also has to have a little help.  


one more thing:  i received a letter from the aha inviting me to participate
in some sort of "winners from last year" brew-off competition.  they want us to
brew a batch of beer (which they provide some ingredients for), and then 
keg it, and ship the keg to cleveland.  to offset the shipping cost, they're
offering $20 worth of aha stuff.  how much does it cost to ship a keg half
way across the country?  in the letter, the brewers were encouraged to give 
their beer a "fun" name.  how about "bend me over once again, 9 bucks isn't
quite enough for a back issue, copyright my recipe please, aha" ale? 

************************************** (good idea, dave)
george de piro (note spelling) wrote:
     
>It is commonly said that decoction mashing increases mash efficiency 
>by helping to break up starch that is otherwise inaccessible to the 
>amylases.  In my experience (I stress that this is only my experience!), my 
>extract efficiencies are very similar whether infusion mashing or 
>decocting.

just for my $.02 : i get about a point or maybe 2 points of gravity per pound
per gallon more when i decoction versus step infusion mash.  not significant,
as george states.  i wonder what i would get if i infusion mashed for 4 hours.

>Wouldn't it be wonderful if we could obtain malt analysis specs so 
>that we'd know for sure what we are working with?  Do you small pro 
>brewers get spec sheets?

one good thing about schreier is they give you a malt analysis with the malt
they sell in 50 lb bags.  as far as how accurate it is, who knows, but at
least you're in a ballpark.

btw, i'm moving to lexington park, maryland soon and was wondering if anybody
knows what the water is like down there...............(crickets chirping)....

also, is there a homebrew club in deep southern maryland?


brew hard,

mark bayer

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 16:22:18 -0800
From: popeman at webtv.net (Tom Pope)
Subject: AHA competition

To make myself perfectly clear, I wil unequivocally state the followin
wit respect to the California AHA regionals:  1.  The AHA has been
extremely supportive and generous in assisting my homebrew club to put
on the best regional that we can. 2. The judges decide  which 3 entries
are the best in any category, and they make that decision under
extremely good conditions  (in the Sensory Evaluation Room of the Fresno
State University Enology Department). 3.We do not lose any entries. 4.
The entries are presented at the correct temperature as we have two
separate cooler walk-ins. one kept at lager temperatures and one kept at
ale temperatures. 5. We send entry results back to all  entrants. 6. We
use computers, AHA provides software. It works, I couldn't imagine
running this event without them.7. Local volunteers do all the
organizing. AHA provides  administrative and financial support.. If a
competition is  not run well, it is the fault of the regional
organizers.       Is this clear enough?   I suppose that the best way to
improve a competition is to note what is not working and then volunteer
to help fix it.  Complaining about it  never seems to do  much good. So
my suggestion for Bill G. is to volunteer to help organize and run  the
AHA  regionals in his neck of the woods. That way, he can be certain
that everything  done  in that regional is up to his standards...Tom
Pope

The Pope of Corte Verona

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 17:56:10 +0000
From: scotty at enaila.nidlink.com
Subject: Peated Malt and Porter Yeast

Can anybody give me any personal experiences with peated malt?  I 
have heard some people say that even in small amounts, it gives the 
beer an 'open grave' taste.  I have also heard that there are two 
kinds.  Light and Heavy.  I am looking to use some in a porter.  Any 
recommendations on amount??
Also, I was wondering, which yeast(from the Wyeast stable) would be 
best for a porter?  1028??  Private Email is ok.

Thank You

Scott Rohlf

scotty at nidlink.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 12:09:55 +1000 (EST)
From: Charlie Scandrett <merino at buggs.cynergy.com.au>
Subject: Paging Mr.Tannin & Mr.Maillard

This is an old unposted response that has become relevent again, so old it
is probably from another forum. (I've been away)

Larry Mathews wrote
>>>A-Discussion on HBD over the last few months has featured some
>discussion of No Sparge Mashing. As boiling coagulates the unstable
>proteins in the wort it is aided in this process by the tannins in the
>wort. Thus some tannins that may be pulled from the mashing/sparging
>process are needed to provide complete/sufficient coagulation of these
>unstable proteins. I've never seen any discussion or literature which
>speaks to quantity of tannins needed to provide this assistance. All most
>of us consider is that tannins are bad and thus not wanted in the wort thus
>this most recent thread on HBD.

I have to disagree. Actually denatured protein removes tannoids
(polyphenols) pretty effectively, tannoids have *very little effect* on
protein removal. This "hop tannins aid hot break" is an old homebrewers
furphy, they simply don't have the equipment to measure the minor difference
(<1%).

 You need denatured HMW proteins to bond to the more complex of the tannoids
so they won't stay in your beer and oxidize to real tannins and taste like
Pilsener Urquell does by the time it reaches Australia. BTW, PU has about
the highest tannoid content of any beer measured. 

Because a HWM denatured protein is going to coagulate with carbohydrates,
lipids, other bits of protein, it is going to precipitate anyway. Because
tannoids don't denature in a boil, they stay in solution unless they bond to
denatured proteins, lipids etc. If you want to reduce the potentially
astringent and hazy tannoids (which mainly come from malt husk and pericarp,
the hop polyphenol profile, which is ~1/3 total, is different, note IPA's
with lots of hops aren't hazy or astringent)then I suggest a mashout and/or
"pseudo decoction". Considerable hot break is formed in an <80C x 20 min
mashout which also causes more complete gelatinisation. By recyling the
first runnings you will run the whole wort at least once through a hot break
impregnated grain bed. This classic cake filtration removes most of the
worst type of tannoid. Overall phenolic constituents of wort actually
increase during boiling due to hop input, but the larger polyphenols are
removed. But mashout will release more unconverted starch. Add back a
withheld fraction of the enzymicly active wort, that you havn't mashed out,
to solve this. I call it "pseudo decoction".

Recently, Steve Alexander also wrote,
> The short answer is that the large phenol polymers in malts, like
>tannins, are expected to complex with the proteins coagulated during the
>decoction boil. This is like an early hot break. Also note that decocted
>beers are traditionally subjected to long lager periods during which
>protein tannin complexes may sediment.

and Al Korzonas wrote,

>What's the difference between boiling a decoction and boiling the runnings
>in the kettle when it comes to melanoidin formation?  Is there any?  Wouldn't
>the amino acids and simple sugars go right into the kettle if they didn't
>combine into melanoidins in the mash?

That is pretty spot on Al. Concentrating the first runnings a bit is also
important to achieve a similar concentration of sugars and amino acids found
in an unsparged grain particle. However there is  one important point that
Steve didn't mention which favours kettle Maillard methods over decoction.
*Polyphenol and tannoid extraction increases more than linearly with
increasing Kolbach index*, i.e. increasing modification. So modern highly
modified malts are not suited to vigorous decoction because the >75C
temperatures favour complex polyphenol extraction as well. I think this is
one reason why the Germans are abandoning decoction in droves. You *can*
decoct modern malts with attention to sparge pH, (<5.5) but it is riskier
than with undermodified malts. I suggect extended mashout with pseudo
decoction addback and then kettle Maillard techniques is probably the best
of both worlds. 

and Dave Gannon wrote somewhere else,
>>Caramelization is important in certain styles of beer.  In his book on
>Scotch Ales, Greg Noonan asserts that the flavor characteristic which
>results from kettle caramelization is an essential feature of Scotch Ales
>and Scottish Ales.  He also gives a detailed account of the process by
>which Traquair House Brewery brews their beers, and reports that the wort
>for Traquair House Ale is boiled for four to five hours.

Interesting, after three hours the hot break becomes so denatured it begins
to redissolve!

Steve Grey posted a long time ago,
>I seem to remember reading somewhere that sparging into a warm/hot brew
kettle may >produce the desired affect.  This seems a little dangerous to me
in that  
>it may cause scorching for a 1+ hour sparge.  Is caramelization just a  
>controlled scorch?

Very controlled dehydration at the molecular (not solution) level, best not
left to kettle thermodynamics, and anyway, most "caramelisation" is actually
Maillard browning. For scorching prevention, see the following posts.

George de Piro replies
> I can't remember where I read it (Zymurgy, maybe) but I have a clear
memory of >somebody saying that Noonan boils a small quantity of the wort
down to 
> a syrupy consistency to caramelize it when making Scotch ales.  Even if my
mind is >fabricating this, it seems like a good idea. 

Your mind is fermenting OK George. However extreme care must be taken in
applying heat as different temperatures produce different caramels and the
temperature can reach >300C. (Really Charlie? see following posts!) The main
reaction if wort was used would still be Maillard browning anyway. Vigorous
stirring to prevent scorching is very important-see below.

George then posts
>I try to minimize caramelization of the sugars by stirring the mash
constantly. The >biggest reason to decoct at home is to allow sugars and
amino  acids to form >malty-tasting compounds (melanoidins). 

Controlling Maillard/caramel balance is not that simple and true melanoids
have little taste. The malty tasting compounds are there though.

Chas Peterson recently posted,
>My $.02 is that the malty flavor decoction comes from maillard 
>reactions/carmelization of the mash (BTW, are these two flavor sources one in 
>the same, or should they be considered different?).

They are not the same, but usually simultaneous. They cam be controlled. And
he continues,
>But I think there's something missing here.  Malt complexity

You are very right. Malt roasting and wort process methods give different
maltiness, it is to do with different concentrations, pH, temperatures and O2.
   
However there is still the confusion between Maillard and Caramelization.
These next posts are other old responses I never posted but have become
relevent again.

Charlie (Brisbane, Australia)


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 12:10:06 +1000 (EST)
From: Charlie Scandrett <merino at buggs.cynergy.com.au>
Subject: Maillard Part1- Theory

 ---BROWNING REACTIONS 101---

There are three basic non-enzymic browning reactions,
1/ Pyrolysis
2/ Caramelisation
3/ Maillard reactions.

PYROLYSIS is simply scorching,(from the greek "pyro" - burning) and involves
the total loss of water from the sugar molecule and the breaking of
carbon-carbon linkages, i.e. the *destruction* of the sugar molecule. This
is what happened when your grandmother neglected the "candy" she was making
for toffee apples. The result was a burnt and inedible flavour.

CARAMELISATION is a heat induced *transformation* of reducing sugars alone
in a *concentrated* solution, through so called "anhydro sugars". In this
reaction the simpler sugars *lose water molecules from their structure*
through a process called "1:2 & 2:3-enolisation". This process is influenced
by pH and is a "steering" process for both Caramel and Maillard reactions.
Through many intermediates, and in the pH 2-7 range, D-fructose for example
can give rise to the Furans, Isomaltol and Maltol, well known bread crust
flavour/aromas. No compounds containing nitrogen result.

The commercial production of beer "caramel" is produced by boiling
fermentable *sugars* in the presence of ammonia, so it is really partly a
Maillard reaction ( a bitter one too). Ammonia is a source of nitrogen for
this reaction, because the pure Caramel reaction alone doesn't produce
enough *colour*. The solution is boiled until it thickens and the boiling
point reaches 130C. Further thickening or a rise in temperature is then
avoided until the desired colour/flavour is reached. The pH is about 4-6 and
it is called a "positive" caramel because that is the electric charge of the
resulting molecules. "Negative" caramels are produced at higher temperatures
and form different compounds and can affect clarity of drinks.

MAILLARD browning reactions involve simple sugars and amino acids and simple
peptides. They proceed during the kilning of malt, and during wort boiling.
They begin to occur at lower temperatures and at higher dilutions than
caramelisation. The rate can increase by 2-3 times for each 10C rise in
temperature. However even long term storage of malt extract will
Maillard-brown at room temperature. Prize winning dark beers have been
coloured by this method as they had none of the harshness of some high
temperature Maillard reactions in roasted malts.

Maillard reactions have three basic phases.
 1/The initial reaction is the condensation of an amino acid with a simple
sugar, which  loses a molecule of water to form N-substituted aldosylamine.
This is unstable and      undergoes the famous "Amadori rearrangement" to
form "1-amino-1-deoxy-2-ketoses" (known  as "ketosamines") which can undergo
complex subsequent dehydration, fission and       polymerization reactions. 

   But wait, I here you say! "A sugar loses a water molecule and undergoes
further         dehydration?" Sounds like a Caramelisation reaction? 

   *And it is!* One of the reasons Caramel and Maillard reactions are
confused in           brewing and food processing literature is that one of
the Maillard paths is a        simple Caramel reaction, catalysed by amino
acids. But now in Maillard, there are a     few guys called Schiff, Amadori
and Strecker in your beer!

The ketosamine products of the Amadori rearrangement can then react three
ways in the second phase.
 2/ One is simply further dehydration (loss of two water molecules) into
reductones &    dehydro reductones. These are essentially *caramel* products
and in their reduced   state are powerful antioxidants. Dark beer has about
5 times the reducing potential of  pale  beer.
  A second is the production of short chain hydrolyctic fission products
such as 
 diacetyl, acetol, pyruvaldehyde etc. These then undergo the famous
"Strecker           degradation" with amino acids to aldehydes and by
condensation to aldols. Negative     aromas like 2 & 3-methyl-butanal and
other aldehydes are also formed. This process can  produce in the third
phase, the favourable and important aroma of the Hetrocyclic      compounds;
Furnans, Furanones and Pyrones like Isomaltol and Maltol.(mentioned in
CARAMELISATION above) These can be pleasant caramel/roasted/bread crust
aroma/flavours  or acrid/burnt aroma/flavours. However negative Strecker
aldehydes do not generally    appear in finished beer in concentrations
above their threshold level. Vigorous        boiling and fermentation
eliminate most of the more volatile Strecker aldehydes.
 A third path is the Schiff's base/furfural path. This involves the loss of
3 water     molecules, then a reaction with amino acids and water. These
also undergo aldol        condensation and polymerise further into true
melanoids.

 3/All these products react further with amino acids in the third phase to
form the     brown pigments and flavour active compounds collectively called
"Melanoids". These can  be off flavours (bitter, burnt), off aromas (burnt,
onion, solvent, rancid, sweaty,    cabbage) or  positive flavours (malty,
bread crust-like, caramel, coffee, roasted)     and  positive aromas.
(bready, cracker, fine malt)

The outcome will depend on which amino acids and sugars are available, and
what the pH and temperature aand concentration are.
   a/Dextrose produces a favourable bready flavour at ~5% of sugars. It also
promotes the production of Melanoid reductones, which are oxygen accepting
Maillard products which act as anti-oxidants and improve shelf life.
   b/High levels of amino acids also promote Maillard reactions even though
only a tiny fraction is consumed (a few %), particually Proline. (Really an
Imino Acid). This AA is produced at high levels in malt because it is
germinated in very wet conditions. It has led to over 120 specific
compounds, some with a bready aroma and some with a bitter taste. Proline
does not produce Pyrazines.
   c/ High concentration favours both Caramel and Maillard reactions, but
dilution eliminates caramel reactions.
   d/ Temperatures *over 100C* favour the production of Pyrazines. In
particular the 2,*-dimethylpyrazines are the bready, nutty or caramel notes
in dark Doppelbock beer. (Narziss) However the same Pyrazines in different
types of beers produce significantly different aroma notes. (Thank God)
   e/ High levels of polyphenols favours Strecker degradation. Thus mash and
lauter technique will affect boil Maillard reactions.
   f/ pH. The ideal pH for wort is about 5.0 to 5.4. Higher readings will
affect the outcome of Maillard negatively. For small decoctions of first
runnings, it would be possible to adjust pH for different results.

Charlie (Brisbane, Australia)




Return to table of contents