HOMEBREW Digest #2400 Fri 18 April 1997

[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]

		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

  wooden casks, selection of wood (rjlee)
  Bathroom scales (Rick Olivo)
  Minnesota Brews (erikvan)
  Re: Steeping versus Partial-Mash (Mark Riley)
  Re: Accessibility ("Moyer, Douglas E")
  Care and Feeding of a Cajun Cooker (MaltyDog)
  Got Beer? (Rust1d)
  Cloudy keg beer (Curt)
  Accessability (Steven Lichtenberg)
  Coolers / Mech Stirring / JOE (DAVE BRADLEY IC742 6-7932)
  clarification - ph and minerals (BAYEROSPACE)
  The Krausen that would not die... or, It came from the local brewpub... (Charles Burns)
  Clearing time (korz)
  RE: Accessibility (Steve Snyder)
  Re: N2 Nyyyyyaaaaaagggggghhhhhhh (pbabcock.ford)
  Enzyme location, husk tannin, that woody taste ("David R. Burley")
  Thermometers- The Results ("Craig Rode")
  temperature contoller help ("Bryan L. Gros")
  140F Rest (Nicholas Dahl)
  Wow! (pablo)
  Rims Questions (Mark & Marya)
  stuck ferment? (James Moncsko)
  Dishwasher detergent ("David Root")

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: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 07:48:03 -0500 From: rjlee at mmm.com Subject: wooden casks, selection of wood I was just reading (I think) Michael Jackson who opined that the oak in the US is not of the right sort (?). Something like too many tannins or some such thing, unlike the English Oak. (or the European). I am assuming that there is more than just English chauvinism at work here. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 20:16:45 -0500 From: Rick Olivo <ashpress at win.bright.net> Subject: Bathroom scales Just so everyone knows, I am NOT an enemy of entrepreneurial capitalism. I do not advocate shutting down homebrew stores for being a few grains shy on their measure. Certainly, the first step is to discuss shortages in grain caused by inaccurate scaling with the merchant in question. My point is that if someone is going to be in business, they owe it to their customers to provide accurate measurement of grain, hops etc. This is NOT asking too much; it is in fact a moral as well as legal obligation that any commercial operation bears to their customer. A certified scale or at the very least, a scale that is checked with a reference weight frequently is, in my view, a cost of doing business, not an option. Accurate measure protects the fair-dealing merchant from preditory operators as much as it does consumers. It is in everyone's best interests to play by the rules; that is the reason for fair weights and measures regulation, not to stifle the God-given right to turn an honest buck. I do not believe there are hordes of unscrupulous barley mongers out there waiting to entrap the unwary. I fully recognize that most homebrew shops (at least the ones I have seen) will bend over backwards to please their customers. I also recognize that with as much effort as I invest in my beer, I want to as careful with getting the correct amount of grain as I am with sanitation. That's why certified scales give me a warm fuzzy feeling. It's one less variable for me to worry about. Strange Brewer aka Rick Olivo ashpress at win.bright.net Vita sine cerevisiae suget!!! (Life without beer sucks!!!) (With apologies to Cicero) Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 22:45:38 -0500 (CDT) From: erikvan at ix.netcom.com Subject: Minnesota Brews Andy Kligerman wrote in #2398 >Just a quick note, I will be visiting Minneapolis next week and would like to >know of any good homebrew, brewpub, brewery, etc. related sites that should >be tried. Please respond by e-mail to save digest space. Forget saving space, everyone should know about Sherlock's Home, in Minnetonka. At least 7 ales and lagers, in traditional english style, from the malt, to the cask conditioning, and not to mention hand pulled from the beer engines. They also have great food, too. No affiliation, just a great place to visit. I plan on going back in June AND August! And I live in CA... Erik Vanthilt The Virtual Brewery Http://www.netcom.com/~erikvan/brewery.html News, recipes, hints, games, a free newsletter, and more... Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 00:03:52 -0700 From: Mark Riley <mriley at netcom.com> Subject: Re: Steeping versus Partial-Mash Sorry I'm a little tardy with this followup but here goes: Dave Riedel writes in HBD #2395: >John Sullivan <sullvan at anet-stl.com> writes that he feels steeping specialty >grains is "not a sound method for a brewer looking to advance his technique" >because "Steeping grains is: > >> Limiting (i.e. you cannot steep all types of grains) >> A crapshoot (you do not know how much extract you will get) >> Potentially Problematic (unconverted starch)" > >I don't agree with this. Understanding the benefits of moving to steeping as >a method requires that you keep in mind that the brewer is likely coming from >'kit-brewing'. Steeping allows much greater control over the brewing process >than does kit brewing. I think it's the natural step in improving brewing >technique and understanding. True, you cannot steep all types of grains, but >crystal, chocolate, roasted barley and black patent offer the improving >brewer with a myriad of recipe possibilities. [snip] >Unconverted starch is only a problem if 'mash- >only' malts are steeped. In an informal steeping experiment using chocolate malt and roasted barley I wasn't able to detect any starch with an iodine test. However, when I performed a test with crystal malt, I got a distinctly positive result. There *was* starch released by the steeped crystal malt. Whether or not a little starch is acceptable in beer, I can not say for sure (anyone care to comment?) but I wouldn't consider it a flavour enhancer and the starch is a likely food source for some unwanted microorganisms. When I used to do extract batches, I'd use the Papazian method of pouring the hot wort into the a carboy full of cold tap water (big time HSA, I know). There could easily have been a bunch of starch-loving-beer-ruining bugs in that tap water. I think the starch introduced by steeping may have been responsible for some of my extract batches getting gassier and developing off flavors over time. The partial mash recipes I did using similar sanitizing procedures did not suffer these same symptoms. Of course, YMMV. >>It is a simple move from steeping to partial mashing. Partial mashing > >Perhaps this is true in retrospect to an all-grainer, but I beg to differ. >Steeping takes little more than 30 mins to accomplish. Perhaps there is some middle ground here. What about a 45 minute no-sparge partial mash? Mash some 2-row pale with the rest of the specialty grains at 155F for 45 minutes (1.5 qt./lb.). Add some 175F water to dilute and remove the grains. You'll get the color and flavor extraction like steeping, perhaps a little sugar and (hopefully) no starch. This would typically take 15 minutes longer than steeping, you'd get to use additional types of grain, and the novice homebrewer would be more familiar with mashing when it comes time to do a partial mash proper or move to all-grain. Mark Riley Sacramento, CA http://alpha.rollanet.org/recipator Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 8:28:06 -0400 From: "Moyer, Douglas E" <moyer-de at salem.ge.com> Subject: Re: Accessibility Amused, I passed on Patrick G. Babcock's tirade about Joe Six-pack and "better beer accessibility". Her responded: "Remember that Joe may not agree that micro beer IS "better" once he gets access to it, and that we might not like Joe hanging out in the same brewpub we're in because Joe might be a very annoying person..." More food, more thoughts... Doug Moyer Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 08:43:03 -0400 (EDT) From: MaltyDog at aol.com Subject: Care and Feeding of a Cajun Cooker Now that the weather's starting to get nice (sort of, anyway), I'm thinking about brewing outside, and I am considering getting a Cajun Cooker for outdoor brewing. A friend of mine, who is a very good brewer, told me that he had a lot of problems with cooking with them, though, especially with soot, and scorching beneath the cooker. Is this a common difficulty with these devices? Is there anything special you have to do with them to avoid this? Are there any particular models that are more highly recommended? I would be very interested in the collective wisdom on these matters. Thanks in advance. Bill Coleman MaltyDog at aol.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 08:20:38 -0500 From: Rust1d <rust1d at usa.net> Subject: Got Beer? Pat ponders, >What will it take to make better beer accessible to more people? I was just thinking last night about how the mirco industry needs to form a coalition much like the dairy industry. We could then be entertained by cute commercials about running out of beer at the least opportune moment. Consumers should be aware of just what 'beer' is and can be. It would be cool to see 30 seconds spots on tv about different beer styles. This was spurned by a coors ad which had two guys walk into a bar. One says something like 'Hey this place has a beer menu.' in a sarcastic voice and proceeds to read off words like honey, espresso, wheat, fruit, blah, blah, blah while his partner orders two coors. He slide one across the bar and says 'Know what this beer has in it? Beer.' and I scream 'and Rice!'. This stuff preys upon the ignorance of the masses. John Varady http://www.netaxs.com/~vectorsys/varady Boneyard Brewing The HomeBrew Recipe Calculating Program Lafayette Hill, PA * New email address ***> rust1d at usa.net Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 10:32:42 -0400 From: Curt <curtcip at interstat.net> Subject: Cloudy keg beer Hi I just kegged my first batch of beer (a Palesener--Pilsner with Ale yeast) about 2 weeks ago. I primed with 3/4 cup DME and let it sit for 1 week at at 62 degrees. Monday, I put it into my fridge ( at 35-40 degrees) and added some CO2 to bring it to proper CO2 drinking levels. It tastes great, it's properly fizzy, however, it's very cloudy (did a protein rest at 122, then brought temp to 140 and decocted to get to 158. Forgot Irish Moss, though). I'm having a party this weekend, and would love to have clear beer to serve. Would it be feasible (sp?) to de-pressurize the keg, remove the top, and add isinglass(sp?) and/or gelatin? Private e-mail preferred. I'll post results. Thanks, Curt "When I was seventeen, I drank some very good beer, I drank some very good beer that I purchased, with a fake ID, My name was Brian Magee, I stayed up listening to Queen, When I was seventeen." -Homer Simpson Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 10:39:20 -0400 From: Steven Lichtenberg <slichten at mnsinc.com> Subject: Accessability Pat Babcock wrote: =20 Joe's thirst for good beer could spawn corner brewpubs where once = =20 stood corner bars. Joe could redirect the efforts of mainstream = =20 brewers across the country. Joe is a very powerful individual. = =20 This just ain't going to happen. We have educated ourselves to beer = because we like it and we have become beer geeks because it is fun. The = average person on the street could care less. Education may help in = time but will never fully make the transition. As long as the big boys are making the beer that drives the market, you = will not be able to change the perceptions of the general public. That = plus the fact that Budweiser sells an unbelievable amount of beer should = tell you something. I offer two anecdotes to support the case that the "public" will not = change. My wife and I got into a discussion a while ago about brewpubs etc. She = was incredulous over the fact that people would go to a brewpub and = order Miller Lite. She refused to believe that such a thing would = occur. She later ate her words when we were at the local brewpub for = lunch. There were many people ordering Miller Lite, Coors, Bud etc. = Here in a place where good beer was not only available and accessible = but maybe even a little cheaper. When I was at the brewery last week to get some yeast, I was talking to = the brewer about this and he told me he will regularly go through 25-30 = cases of Bud and 15-20 cases of Lite on any given weekend. That is = still a lot of standard commercial Light American Lager. Of course, = this is on top of 15-20 kegs of house brew a week. There are a lot of = people that want the good stuff but just as many that want the tried and = true. The second story came from my dad. I was over his house last week = helping him with his computer. He has just put his house on the market = and is trying to clean out the basement. He insisted I take a six pack = of Sam Adams he had in his card room. This sixer was left over from my = sisters wedding and when I checked the date (at least SA is dated) it = said Sept 1994! I told him the beer was way out of date and would = probably not be nearly as good as it was when fresh. his response was = "hey its wet. should be fine. Beer lasts forever anyway.". How can you = argue with your dad over something like that. not for me. I then asked = him why he didn't serve the SA to his poker buddies. I figured, free = they couldn't turn that down. his response was "Oh they only like = 'beer' . The plain old regular stuff." While I am not of this mindset and have become knowledgeable, the truth = is we all are the exception, not the rule. We will never be able to = convert all the unwashed masses. Fortunately there s room for both. I = will enjoy my hobby and my good beer. The rest of the world can enjoy = whatever they want. I'll leave you alone, you leave me alone and we = will all get along fine. Just an opinion (mine....) **** ---- "There's always time for a Homebrew!" ---- **** O| | -------------- Steven Lichtenberg ---------------- | = |O \__/ ------------ slichten at mnsinc.com ------------- = \__/ ----------- Programmer at Large ------------ ---------- Lichtenberg Consulting ---------- ----------- Gaithersburg, MD ------------- ----------- BJCP Recognized ------------ --------------------------------------------- ENJOY LIFE -- THIS IS NOT A REHEARSAL Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 14:09:40 +0000 (GMT) From: DAVE BRADLEY IC742 6-7932 <BRADLEY_DAVID_A at LILLY.COM> Subject: Coolers / Mech Stirring / JOE A couple of HBD issues for comment: IGLOO vs GOTT I have 2 10gal coolers, one orange Gott and one brown Rubbermaid sold expressly for coffee use. Inner linings of both warped substantially within months from exposure to mashes/sparge water. The temp of liquids never exceeded 185F. As with most things, YMMV. STIRRED CHILLING I use a small propeller/motor with my immersion chiller, primarily to cool more rapidly, but also to keep the bitter wort covered and to provide a good cold break. My propeller turns at 180rpm, and with the small blades (1.25"x3 blades), the liquor surface is fairly smooth. That is important because a vigorous whirlpool would introduce oxygen to the wort. Balance the cooling efficiency of a faster stir with the need to prevent oxidation of hot/warm wort. JOE'S FREEDOM OF CHOICE Pat, you clearly miss your all-grain brewing. Convert some more JOE'S into brew-O-phytes, and in a couple months, they won't mind the cost of real beer. And you'll be back home, brewing away! Seriously, the volume to cost ratio is far from uniform. The only time this clearly changes is when a Micro is "invested" in by a Macro, and we see things like Celis or Red Hook for $5-6. It is certainly more expensive to brew these than X-lite. The Macros have spent there time being the best they can be at efficiency, upping profits. The 'beer' has suffered. These same 'brewers' then offer Micro-esque products at sub-Micro $, effectively using profits from X-lite to subsidize the processing of Micro-esque. Market share, ya know. Good beer costs more to make, and X-lite is optimized to give 'that taste' at the lowest COPS. Heck why don't you just brew enough homebrew to give away to all JOE'S? They'd switch then, by golly;) Dave in Indy Home of the 3-B Brewery, (v.) Ltd. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 09:52 -0600 From: M257876 at sl1001.mdc.com (BAYEROSPACE) Subject: clarification - ph and minerals collective homebrew conscience: yesterday, i wrote: >mineral content is more important than ph for mashing. this could be taken out of the context i was intending. what i mean is, the mineral content of your water supply is more important than the ph of your water supply, for mashing. really, for brewing in general. this is why it's a very good idea to get a water analysis, if one is available. ph is crucial, once you've mashed in the grains. brew hard, mark bayer Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 97 08:51 PDT From: cburns at egusd.k12.ca.us (Charles Burns) Subject: The Krausen that would not die... or, It came from the local brewpub... I pitched 12 oz of 5th Generation 1056 from the local brew pub into an American Brown last Saturday afternoon. Bubbled within 45 minutes. Fireworks under 2 hours. Four inch Krausen the next day. Well its been well over 4 days now and this morning I still have a 4 inch krausen that refuses to fall. The bubbles have backed off to about 1 every 45 seconds and I assume this evening it'll be down to less than 1 per minute. But the head on this thing will not fall! Am I going to have great head or is the beer just acting weird? Anyone see this before? I did have 4 lbs of crystal malts along with lots of munich and pale in only a 5 gallon batch. Would that account for this anomaly? Charley (not relaxed and worrying now about this brown in N. Cal.) - --------------------------------------------------------------- Charles Burns, Director, Information Systems Elk Grove Unified School District cburns at egusd.k12.ca.us, http://www.egusd.k12.ca.us 916-686-7710 (voice), 916-686-4451 (fax) Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 12:38:48 -0500 (CDT) From: korz at xnet.com Subject: Clearing time Jethro writes: >>From: Chris Storey <cstorey at knet.flemingc.on.ca> >>The problem is that both batches are very >>cloudy. The first is 1 week old and is not clearing at all. My second >>batch is the same way. What did I do wrong? >Patience, mate, patience. The fastest clearing times I've seen is at least >a week in secondary at 38 degrees F., and this is with Isinglass, and >gelatin in secondary, then 48 hours in pressurized serving with another >dose of Isinglas. (This is a generalization, many factors, including but >not limited to Yeast strain, grist bill, etc, will influence this.) <snip> You forgot a big one, Jethro: fermenter depth. I've seen yeast clear in 2 days (Windsor dry yeast from Lavlin) at 65F! This was with a 12" beer depth... in your commercial-sized fermenters/bright beer tanks the depth must be at least four or five feet, no? That will take four or five times longer (less with chilling and Isinglass, of course). I agree that yeast strain is the #1 factor (and if your yeast simply won't clear in a month, you probably got a wild yeast in there). Jeff Frane pointed out a year or two ago that Irish Moss can help decrease yeast settling time. I was skeptical, but he was right. My experiments showed that that no Irish Moss took longer to clear than the right amount. Incidentally, "too much" was worse than the "right amount," but better than none at all. Sorry, I don't recall the numbers, but I posted them before, so they are in the archives. Let's also not forget the other sources of permanent haze: iron, tin, oxalate (from insufficient calcium), starch (from too-short mash time, balled starch, too-hot sparge, unsufficient recirculation...), and permanent protein-polyphenol haze. This last one I read about last night in MBS and Pollack. Both texts said that oxidized polyphenols can complex with proteins to form chill- and *permanent* haze! MBS went so far as to say that research seems to be pointing to oxidation of polyphenols to be *required* to actually form these protein-polyphenol hazes. In other words, if you don't oxidize your beer, you may have significant protein and significant polyphenol content, but still have crystal clear beer. Astringency from the polyphenols may still be a problem, but I've read elsewhere that unoxidized polyphenols can give beer a "fresh" flavour and that it's the oxidized polyphenols that give harshness. I think this was still far from proven as fact, but it's an intersting concept anyway. Finally, just food for thought: MBS said that decoction mashes were higher in oxidisable (i.e. unoxidized) polyphenols and that infusion mashes were higher in oxidized polyphenols. Remember someone here in HBD was speculating that perhaps the maltiness of the no-sparge mashes was due to less tannins (a.k.a. polyphenols) which perhaps were "covering up" the maltiness? Hmmm... Al. Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL korz at xnet.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 10:46:03 -0700 From: Steve.Snyder at wwireless.com (Steve Snyder) Subject: RE: Accessibility Pat wrote: >Accessibility. What about beer? Is there a "right" to good beer? >Recently, a friend of mine summed up something that has bothered me >about brewpubs and microbrews for quite a while: they are not >accessible. Sure, you and I - the readers of this publication - buy >micros and patronize brewpubs, but we're not the ones that need to be >"converted". And what do those of us without the means to do so give >up in order to have better beer? Is it right for those that have >learned to appreciate good beer to push our snoots into the air and >snobbishly think that Joe Six-pack couldn't possibly do the same? It's the same as with the food and wine industries. It's about snob appeal. Although beer is considered a working man's drink, many brewpubs and microbreweries know where the money is and will appeal to those people. A classic example of how pricing effects sales: In the late 1980's Borland used to sell their software at unbelievably low prices, while IBM and Microsoft continued to sell their software at higher prices. Guess who sold more software? Not Borland. Even though they were widely considered to have a superior product. Microsoft and IBM were perceived to have a better product because of their pricing strategy. This is the same thing with Microbrews. There are some really bad microbrews out there, but because of a higher price, the snob appeal kicks in an people are will to pay it. At a Redhook or Sam Adams level they should be able to lower their prices, but they won't. They should be able to make their beer more accessible, but they won't. But if they did lower prices, you can bet that we would see more "Joe-Six-Pack" drinking them. They are appealing to the snob in all of us. Just the same as what is happening in wine industry. Expensive wine is very, very profitable. Until the major breweries start making better, cheaper beer, Joe-Six-Pack won't drink them because he can't afford them. I know more than a couple of people that can't afford to drink Micros, even though they prefer them, they are just too expensive. Steve Snyder steve.snyder at wwireless.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 15:03:53 EDT From: pbabcock.ford at e-mail.com Subject: Re: N2 Nyyyyyaaaaaagggggghhhhhhh Pat Babcock Internet: pbabcock.ford at e-mail.com VO Body Launch Specialist- PN150/1 EAP ****>>>> PLEASE USE PF5 WHEN REPLYING TO THIS NOTE!!!! <<<<**** Subject: Re: N2 Nyyyyyaaaaaagggggghhhhhhh "There are several theories as to why bubbles form in the first place. In a pure static fluid such as blood in a beaker that undergoes sudden decompression, bubbles don't form. Why they form in people (and animals) may have something to do with excess nitrogen entering gas nuclei, sub-microscopic pockets of gas that are said to exist naturally. There are other theories, all too complex to bother with here. Whatever the exact mechanism of bubble formation, the following statements reflect current understanding of decompression sickness." This was swiped from http://www.acci.com/scuba/sectiong.htm Note the comment on the static fluid and the "gas nuclei". So, again: will nitrogen dissolve in beer? Any takers on the experiment? Best regards, Patrick G. Babcock PN150/1 Launch - Edison Assembly Plant (908)632-5930 x5501 Route 1 South, Edison, NJ 08818-3018 Fax (908)632-4546 Page 800-SKY-PAGE PIN: 544-9187 Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 15:10:33 -0400 From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: Enzyme location, husk tannin, that woody taste Brewsters: AlK says: >, but my concern >Really was in the "location" of the alpha and beta amylase. My understanding >Is that all the soluble enzymes (if they're not soluble, how can they >Be involved in the reactions?) are in the liquid part of the mash and that >The thickest part of the mash contains a small fraction of the enzymes >Of the liquid part (the enzymes would simply be in the liquid that is >*between* the insoluble bits in the thick part of the mash). Right? >Am I missing something? Remember that the liquid part of the mash is INSIDE the grains as well. Based on my estimate a few weeks ago here in the HBD, at least 30% of the enzymes are in the malt grain, since 30% of the mash liquor is in the grains. Given the potential for enzyme/substrate complex formation and trapped liquid in the malt which would increase the enzyme content of the grain, I peg it at more like 50% of the enzymes are in the grain portion and not hopelessly floating around in the liquid where they are useless by-in-large. - ---------------------------------------- In response to tannin in the wort after sparging, AlK says: >1. You don't. You are extracting some tannins throughout the sparge. >At the beginning of the sparge, your mash still has some buffering >Ability and the pH is hopefully above 5.5. I'm sure you mean BELOW Ph 5.5. >2. Polyphenol extraction is a necessary evil. Charlie Scandrett suggests >Crushing less and making do with poorer yield to minimise polyphenol and >Silicate extraction. I was puzzled by Charlie's comment on this. Surely the size of the husk could have no effect on the extraction of phenols since the husk is so thin. I have noticed that when I give a second pass through the mill that many crushed malt particles are released from the husk. This could expose more of the husk to fluid from both sides, but I still think it is a stretch. - ----------------------------- On the subject of wooden casks and beer, there is apparently a HUGE misunderstanding about how wood casks were employed. The beer did not INTENTIONALLY touch the wood. The barrels were lined with pitch and later with synthetic coatings and even occasionally rubber liners until plastic came along according to De Clerk. All were abandoned in favor of stainless steel. Even though it was substantially more expensive, it gave a more stable and predictable product. >Wooden casks can lend flavors unobtainable in glass or stainless, but they >Are a bunch of work.. I'll agree, but they aren't necessarily flavors we would like in our beer. >Ballantine burton Ale is said to have been aged in wood, and when amounts >Were drawn off for bottling, the next batch was then transferred to the >Remainder of the beer in the wood. Sort of a continual process. I'm told >That once they were bought out and the new owners got rid of the wood in >Favor of stainless, the thing that made the beer great was lost forever! Maybe it was the pitch coating on the inside of the cask no longer lending that superior flavor to the Ballantines! Maybe it was nostalgia. >This is the result of the activity of bacteria in the >Wood that can get air through the wood. It is the bacteria in the cracks between the staves not in the wood. Bacteria cannot pass through the wood in a cask. The oak in wine casks allows water and air to pass through but not bacteria. Many brewers relined their casks with pitch after each use because the rough handling of the barrels broke the lining at the stave line and opened the beer up for attack from bacteria residing there. This pitch was melted with a hot air stream, usually, followed by a re-lining spray of hot pitch which helped sterilize the surface. At least. > My understanding is that American >Oak imparts a harsher 'wood' note than the preferred French Oak You're confusing wine barrels with beer barrels. Wine barrels are not pitch lined (although paraffin lining is available for show barrels and white wines)but lightly toasted with a direct oak fired flame so they can impart a flavor of tannin and vanillin to the wine, while allowing the wine to undergo a controlled oxidation. Wine staves are MUCH thinner than beer barrel staves and are not pressure tight, just water tight. I doubt they could stand the pressure. Sorry, forget using wine barrels for beer barrels. > I have been told that the McCormick (sp?) Distillery of >Westin, Missouri, Whiskey barrels are completely unusable as is - for wine, especially. These barrels are used only once by the distilleries and is the reason you see them cut in half and used as flower planters. During a recent trip to Jack Daniel's distillery I learned that some wineries are recently re-using these whiskey barrels as a cheap way to aerate their wine as a part of aging. They have to take the barrel apart, plane off the inner layer of burned wood from which all tannin, vanillin and color have been extracted by the whiskey and re-assemble. To get that oakey taste in their wine they add oak chips. If you add oak chips to beer you will get a severe lactobacillus infection unless the chips are boiled or preferably pressure cooked . What's the difference? Lacto can't easily start at the alcohol content of wine - no problem in beer and Lacto city.. > sells their casks after use for 15 to 20 $ each, but that >You have to wash out the charcoal This "charcoal" is the barrel which has had its insides burned and won't wash out. The highly roasted wood is largely what gives whiskey its color and taste. The much touted charcoal used by whiskey producers like JD is a separate operation to remove the fusel oils by passing the whiskey over a column of charcoal before kegging and storage. - ----------------------------------------------- Keep on brewin' Dave Burley Kinnelon, NJ 07405 103164.3202 at compuserve.com Dave_Burley at compuserve.com Voice e-mail OK Return to table of contents
Date: 17 Apr 1997 15:27:08 +0600 From: "Craig Rode" <craig.rode at qmcin4.sdrc.com> Subject: Thermometers- The Results A few days ago, I posted about two thermometers that didn't agree. As a result of this, I have recieved many e-mails with suggestions. However, I'm going to keep brewing anyway. But seriously... There is no consensus, but many feel the glass thermometers are more accurate over a wider range than the bimetal dial type. The dial thermometers, it's suggested, should be calibrated for use over a narrow range, say 150-170. Some people suggested that both kinds are cheap and therefore inaccurate, and suggested purchasing a laboratory quality thermometer. Others reported excellent results with bimetal types, but indications are there are "cheap, lousy" bimetals, and "better quality" ones. I had numerous suggestions of calibration using freezing and boiling water, and several suggesting using a medical thermometer to compare. I presume an oral one. Advantages to glass thermometers: More linear Can be more accuarate Advantages to Bimetal: Much faster Unbreakable Thanks for the feedback, hope this is interesting to you all. Now about my two hydrometers..... Craig Rode (aka Milwaukee Brewer) Still waiting for spring on the shore of Lake Michigan 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: temperature contoller help I recently bought a temperature controller to use with my chest freezer. This is a Johnson Controls model A19, Grainger part number 4E047. ($37) Unfortunately, the thing doesn't come with a cord. Another Johnson controller comes with a "piggy back" cord, but it is a heater controller (switch only thrown when it gets too cold). I can't find anyplace that has one of these piggy-back cords. I think I can hook it up without much trouble, but I don't want to bet my compressor on it. Does this sound reasonable to anyone: Get a three pronged extension cord, strip it in the middle. I leave the ground and common wires intact and cut the hot wire. Then I hook the ends of the hot wire to the controller terminals. I plug it in the wall and plug the freezer into the other end of the cord. When the temperature rises, the switch is thrown and the circuit is connected and the freezer comes on. Will this work? I'll test it on a lamp first. Thanks. - Bryan grosbl at ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu Nashville, TN Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 16:15:20 -0500 From: Nicholas Dahl <ndd3 at psu.edu> Subject: 140F Rest Does anyone use a 140F rest when brewing ales to break the big proteins into medium-sized proteins, to improve mouthfeel and reduce cold break volume? If so, how long of a rest is sufficient, before raising the mash temperature to the upper 150s? Truth in brewing, Nick Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 16:55:10 -0500 (CDT) From: pablo <pjm at milliways.uark.edu> Subject: Wow! Fellow "bier" aficionados, I just want to thank publicly those kind HBD'ers that took the time out to answer my query regarding beer in Germany. The responses _far_ exceeded my expectations; I was (am) impressed! I learned much in preparation for my trip, for which I am grateful. Not surprisingly, it turns out that beer-wise, it's hard to go wrong in Germany. I appreciate the tips and suggestions of those who've "been there." FWIW, the Klosterbraueri Andechs (slightly south & west of the Munich city centre) was much lauded by several respondents; it sounded good to my wife and has been added to the itinerary! Again, a hearty thanks to all who answered my questions; Hombrew Digest subscribers are the best! Prost! -Paul Morstad Fayetteville, AR Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 16:17:09 -0700 From: Mark & Marya <mbolyana at slonet.org> Subject: Rims Questions This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - --------------5F5C70D46FAB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi brewers, Here are some questions that my internet impaired friend has. Murdoc - --------------5F5C70D46FAB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="Q1.TXT" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="Q1.TXT" Hello Peoples: I'm in the process of building a three tier 1/2 barrel home brewery with RIMS. Now that most of the major obstacles have been hurdled I have a few questions. After boiling the wort I plan to pump it through a counter- flow chiller and back into the mash-tun that doubles as a floation tank. My first question has to do with hot break removal; I'm thinking the best way to remove the wortr without the break material is to have my drain tube from my boiller bent away from the center and to whrilpool the wort, prior to pumping, I'm afraid though whirlpooling might cause hot side aeration. Any suggestions? After cooling the wort I plan on aerating with clean compressed air, pitching my yeast and then tranferring to fermentors. This is where a number of questions arise. I think it would be best to aerate in-line, as opposed to using a diffussion stone, but I also want to add the yeast to the floation tank before I start pumping the wort into it so that when I transfer the wort into carboys the yeast concentration will be homogenous between the two car- boys. I think this will be beneficial, in that the escaping gases will move the yeast around, but I also wonder if the gases will carry the yeast out of suspension and into the foam along with the cold break. I also have another 1/2 barrel keg that I could use as a primary fer- menter, but I'm not sure how to clean it. The kegs I'm using for brewing vessels had a lot of gunk in the inside. I've also been looking to get an upright freezer that I could attach an external thremostat to for cold storage and lagering, but all the used ones I've looked at have the cooling line directly underneath the shelves. Is there any way to modify these to work (i.e. bending the cooling lines against the back)? An early thanks, Wes Jacobs - --------------5F5C70D46FAB-- Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 20:48:07 -0700 From: James Moncsko <jimsbrew at bellsouth.net> Subject: stuck ferment? Hey! A friend brewed a BIG STOUT last weekend, but seems his ferment has stuck. what can he do? Hi sent me this to post on the HBD: I checked over my notes last night. My initial specific gravity was 1.064. When I transferred to my glass carboy the specific gravity was 1.031. FYI- I started out with the regular stout kit, 6.6 lbs extract & specialty grains. I added 1 lb. of powdered dark malt extract & 8 oz of malto dextrin (sp?). I brewed the batch Thursday 4-10, but I pitched a packet of liquid Scottish style yeast when my wort was about 89 degrees. The next afternoon I didn't see much action so I added a packet of dry yeast. Saturday I had plenty of bubbles, about 17 in 15 seconds. Monday 4-15, I transferred the beer to my glass carboy. At that time there was one bubble every 34 seconds. I have not seen any bubbles since Tuesday, as a matter of fact, I haven't even seen the water level shift in my tri-bubble air lock. As I stated yesterday, I am worried that the action stopped so suddenly. I do not think the alcohol may have killed the yeast because as of Monday, the alcohol content was only 4.3%. So anybody please help this guy, if you have any idea. Please email me at the above address. Thanks for your help in advance! Jim Moncsko, alive & well in Morrisville, N.C. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 21:02:37 -0400 From: "David Root" <droot at concentric.net> Subject: Dishwasher detergent I have read a few times that dishwasher detergent (for electric dishwashers) is good to use as a cleaner for brewing equipment. I am tired of paying $2 for 4 or 8 ounces of homebrew cleaner. The automatic dishwasher detergent cleans great. I use a generous amount and everything seems to clean right up. Am I hurting anything by using this stuff? Its $2 for 3 pounds. The side of the box says 8.7% Phosphorous. The ingrediants are Sodium carbonate,sodium silicate, neutral inorganic salts,sodium dichloroisocyanurate, and sodium tripolyphosphate. Is this safe to use on my brewing equipment?? Does it have any sanitising power? Is my beer ruined? Private Email and I will post a summary if anyone responds Thanks to all in advance David Root Droot at concentric.net Lockport NY Return to table of contents