HOMEBREW Digest #2442 Tue 17 June 1997

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

		Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org
		Many thanks to the Observer & Eccentric Newspapers of 
		Livonia, Michigan for sponsoring the Homebrew Digest.
				URL: http://www.oeonline.com

  Truth in Advertising (Jack Schmidling)
  Brew It Yerself Joints (Hal Davis)
  Scottish Vs. Scotch Wrap Up (John Goldthwaite)
  Corona Mill (Torque)
  Belgain White questions (Steven Biggins)
  Easy Masher with an enamel pot? (Doug Otto)
  flaked maize (Charles Epp)
  Batch Sparging (KennyEddy)
  New Zealand Hops (Bruce Baker)
  CO2 release (korz)
  Scottish Ales (korz)
  Hops in New Zealand (Murray Mulholland)
  Preparing malts (Jorge Blasig - IQ)
  Re: Possibble idophor off tastes (Rick Olivo)

NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS: hbd.org Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew at hbd.org (Articles are published in the order they are received.) If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!! To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to homebrew-request@hbd.org. **SUBSCRIBE AND UNSUBSCRIBE REQUESTS MUST BE SENT FROM THE E-MAIL **ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!! IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, the autoresponder and the SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE commands will fail! For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to lutzen at alpha.rollanet.org Homebrew Digest Information on the Web: http://hbd.org Requests for back issues will be ignored. Back issues are available via: Anonymous ftp from... hbd.org /pub/hbd ftp.stanford.edu /pub/clubs/homebrew/beer E-mail... ftpmail at gatekeeper.dec.com (send a one-line e-mail message with the word help for instructions.) AFS users can find it under... /afs/ir.stanford.edu/ftp/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 21:28:51 -0700 From: Jack Schmidling <arf at mc.net> Subject: Truth in Advertising From: Rob Kienle <rkienle at interaccess.com> "At about $70 less than the Malt Mill, and lacking any *quantitative*evidence to imply that its performance is equally discounted, the Valley Mill appears to be a great deal." I won't quibble about your enthusiasm for the mill of your choice but the last time I looked at their web page, the delivered price was $130.50. The last time I looked at our price list, the delivered price of a standard MALTMILL was $120 and the last time I looked at Zymurgy I saw dealers selling them for $99. Not sure what quantative evidence you are looking for but I would think hollow rollers and plastic bearings would be a place to start the search and then I would wonder why so many people prefer a mill that does not have to be adjusted and then I would take a look at all the options that are available on the MM, the lifetime warranty and then, well I guess that's enough for now. js - -- Visit our WEB pages: Beer Stuff.........http://ays.net/jsp Astronomy.......http://user.mc.net/arf ASTROPHOTO OF THE WEEK..... New Every Monday Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 07:45:51 -0500 From: Hal Davis <davis at planolaw.com> Subject: Brew It Yerself Joints S Murman writes of his friend's experience at a brew it yerself joint. As far as I know there are none anywhere near Dallas, Texas, but I made it a point to visit one in March when I visited Portland, OR. I don't know if it's common practice, but this place had "mixers" once a month or so. They had 8 kettles, and I think each batch made about 6 cases of beer, so they'd have parties of 8 or 16 sign up (sign up with a friend or meet friends there). They'd make 8 <bold><italic>different</italic></bold> batches of beer, and everybody would come back to bottle. At the end, each person would take home a case or so of each of 8 different kinds of beer. Great way to make friends, learn about brewing, and hone your tastes on what kind of beer you wanted to brew. Hal Davis Safety Brewery Plano, Texas Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 08:50:51 -0400 (EDT) From: ir358 at cleveland.Freenet.Edu (John Goldthwaite) Subject: Scottish Vs. Scotch Wrap Up Ah, now that's what we needed! Thanx Ian for setting us/me straight on the differences. I knew I was only lukewarm with my assessment. I hope you didn't get the impression that I was sniping or flaming, that was NOT the intent. It's just that poor Sam asked twice and I didn't think he got the answer he was after. I agree with everything you said regarding the HBD, particularly FUN and the interjection of humour. So, even though I'm half English can we still be friends? I hope so. Gotta go and set up my surveillance cameras to keep the FBI yahoos from snoopin' around MY brewery! Thanx again for the info Ian, and DO post the recipe when you get it tweaked just right. The JohnCat. So whaddya think of McAndrew's Scottish Ale? I've had a few and thought it was pretty darn good. And now back to FUN WITH BEER. - -- "Gonna drink all day, gonna rock all night, The law come to getcha if you don't walk right..."[Garcia/Hunter] Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 11:58:23 -0700 From: Torque <wieleba at pce.net> Subject: Corona Mill Just a bit of info I'd like to pass on to other Brewers stuck wiht a Corona mill. I was sick of taking an hour or more to crush malt , so i shortened the handle, drilled and tapped (#7 drill , 1/4 20 tap) put a piece of threaded rod into it and made a hanle out of 3/4 al. round stock with a 5/16 hole through it. I just crushed 20 lbs in 20 minutes!!! Dan - -- http://www.pce.net/wieleba/beerlink.htm Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 13:17:35 -0400 From: sy73308 at vantage.fmr.com (Steven Biggins) Subject: Belgain White questions Hello, I'm planning on making a Belgain white this weekend and I have a few questions: 1) Which is better to use 2-Row or 6-Row, and why? 2) Is it better to do a decoction mash ? Any, other tips or info. would be great. Thanks, Stevie B. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 10:39:55 -0700 From: otto at alldata.com (Doug Otto) Subject: Easy Masher with an enamel pot? Has anyone tried installing an easy masher in an enamel on steel pot? If so was chipping the enamel while drilling a problem? I recently made move from 50/50 grain/extract to full mash and am finding that I miss not having the spigot on my new brew pot... Thanks in advance. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Doug Otto otto at alldata.com Alldata Corporation dotto at calweb.com Technical Manager, Database Development (800) 829-8727 ext. 3137 Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 13:15:53 -0500 From: Charles Epp <chuckepp at ukans.edu> Subject: flaked maize Hello felow brewers, a quick question: What's the flavor contribution, if any, of flaked maize? I've read in some places that flaked maize imparts a subtle sweetness; I've read in other places that it contributes no flavor, and is useful primarily to lighten the body of a beer. Apparently Fuller's in London uses flaked maize in their ESB. Is the maize one of the contributing sources of the sweetness of Fuller's ESB? Any clarification of this would be most appreciated. Chuck in Lawrence, KS Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 14:33:34 -0400 (EDT) From: KennyEddy at aol.com Subject: Batch Sparging A few HBD's ago someone posted about "batch sparging". I think the topic was more about the rate of sparging & not having to monitor it, but it got me thinking about how much wort is or isn't lost with this "compromise" between no-sparge and full-sparge techniques. The results, at least on paper, were interesting (see way below). Perhaps a confirmed batch-sparger among us could verify the results? First, some background. In all-grain brewing, the "usual" way to remove the wort from the grain is to drain slowly while adding more clear water to the top of the grain bed, rinsing the sugar from the grain as completely as possible into the kettle. In the "no-sparge" variation (see HBD's from late December of 1996), wort is only drained and not rinsed. This "wastes" some wort, that which is absorbed by the grain, but that amount is often small enough that simply adding more grain to compensate is not a problem. "Batch" sparging involves draining without rinsing, then adding hot water and again draining without rinsing. Much of the sugar left behind in no-sparging is thereby recovered. The advantage of batch-sparging for many would seem to be that no means for trickling sparge water onto the mash is necessary, and not having to balance sparge water input rate versus wort output rate. This simplifies both equipment and process issues. The key to getting good extraction in both no-sparge and batch-sparge brewing is in allowing the grain to drain as fully as pratical; this could add more time to brewing but again that's perhaps offset by the other advantages above. This can be a big plus for a kitchen-boud brewer, since no fancy pumps or gravity-feed sparging system needs to be rigged. Partial-mashers not interested in creating full-blown brewing rigs can use this technique too. Set the brewpot on a chair, drain the mash tun into the pot, dump more hot water into the mash tun, recirculate, then drain again. Once the drain rate is established you can go watch TV or change baby's diapers for the next half-hour or so; the sparge becomes semi-automatic.. We've seen from no-sparge reports in the past that "efficiencies" of as poor as 60% and worse are possible, menaing that quite a bit of extra grain is required to achieve a given gravity. "Efficiency" in this case referes to the percentage of wort collected versus what would have been collected with full-sparging; actual conversion efficiency is assumed to have been taken into account during recipe formulation. Since there *is* sort of a rinse process involved in batch-sparging, we would expect the "efficiency" to be higher. According to my back-of-the-envelope doodlings, I figure a good batch-sparge can be almost as efficient as a full-sparge. If you mash relatively thin and allow enough time for full drainage, you could be as good as 95% as efficient as full-sparging. Even with thicker mashes and poor draining, efficiencies of 85%+ should be obtainable, still quite an improvement over even the best no-sparge figures. The "formula" I derived for efficiency is as follows: Eff = 1 - B^2 / (A + B)^2 (times 100%) (e-mail me if you want to see my derivation) where A is the gallons per pound drained in both the initial and the batch-sparge runoffs. B is the gallons per pound absorbed by the grain. The assumption was that one strikes in with (A + B) gallons per pound, drains off A gallons per pound, then adds A gallons per pound for the "rinse" and drains that fully. Total brewpot volumes is then 2*A. Also assumed is that all the wort held back in the first runoff will blend with the "rinse" water for the second runoff. In real life, the efficency will probably be a bit lower than predicted by the equation. Note that the formula is valid for any units of A & B as long as the same units are used throughout (i.e., liters per kg can be used). Typical values for A and B: A can be anything from 0.25 to 0.5, with 0.33 being a common figure (1.33 qt/lb). My experiments show B to be about 0.13 (0.52 qt/lb) but I've seen figures as low as 0.08 (0.32 qt/lb). With typical values of A = 0.33 and B = 0.13, efficiency is a decent 92% of a fully-sparged wort. For the metrically-inclined, 1 gal per pound = 8.35 litres per kg. Batch-sparge efficiency is improved by long, complete drainage of both runoffs (minimizes the value of B) as well as thinner mashes (higher values of A). ***** Ken Schwartz El Paso, TX KennyEddy at aol.com http://members.aol.com/kennyeddy Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 09:10:36 +1200 From: Bruce Baker <Bruce.E.Baker at tsy.treasury.govt.nz> Subject: New Zealand Hops G'day y'all, Graham Wheeler wrote: Andy Walsh's (do I detect a hint of old-colonial flaming here?) input on Aussie hops seems to confirm my major point: that if you happen to live the wrong side of that magical 35 degree line, whether in the northern or southern hemisphere, you are going to have difficulty growing hops. Andy mentions that the best hops in his region are grown in N.Z. I don't know, but I would guess that the hop growing region in NZ would be the southernmost part of the south island -- well into the high 40s latitude. Graham, for what it's worth, the main hop growing region is around Nelson on the north end of the South Island. The lattitude is about the same as Wellington, 42 degrees south. Nelson is also a fine wine-growing region. Cheers, Bruce Baker Wellington, NZ "So many beers, so little time" Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 17:04:03 -0500 (CDT) From: korz at xnet.com Subject: CO2 release Dave writes: >Per the CO2 toxicity thread and the use of various >solids for nucleation (trub, silica gel, DE, etc), >one should remember that there is mixing induced by >the resulting bubbles. Ever seen the big clumps of >yeast that rise and fall during the active ferments? >This mixing helps attenuation, as posted by DD and >others. Personally, I am physically (ha) more >comfortable with the contributions of mixing versus >any CO2 toxicity. Just a small consideration.... Are you sure that's not cold break rising and diving? I know that in my fermentations, when there are big clumps moving around in the fermenter, they are break and not yeast. Al. Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL korz at xnet.com Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 17:27:28 -0500 (CDT) From: korz at xnet.com Subject: Scottish Ales Ian writes: >Scottish Ales tend to have a good bit more residual sugar in them than = >a bitter. There is >considerably more mouth feel from unfermented dextrins, though not nearly= > as much as a >barleywine. Stouts are usually characterized by roasted flavours on the = >edges, whereas Scottish >Ale should be smooth with caramelly notes and a well balanced floral or = >fruity hop bitterness >rather than a rough one. <snip> >Uprising. My family is Clan Gunn, from Caithness and Sutherland, in the = >very northeastern part >of Scotland. Either there is a vast difference between Scottish Ales from northern and southern Scotland or you have been away from home far too long. I tasted perhaps two dozen ales brewed in Scotland (primarily in the southern half) when I visited there in the summer of 1995, and I really didn't notice them to be that different from English Bitters. According to the AHA guidelines they aren't supposed to have hop aromas, but *most* did... they aren't supposed to be as bitter as English Bitters, but *most* were... they aren't supposed to be balanced more towards bitterness rather than maltiness, but *most* were... and the hops used were all English varieties, not Continental ones. Overall, there really wasn't that much difference between them and English Bitters. In fact, one or two beers brewed by McEwan's and sold in Scotland with shilling designations (i.e. 60/-, 70/-, etc.) are also sold in northern England simply relabeled "Younger's" beers with English beer names (IPA, Bitter, etc.). The next time I visit, I will definitely make a strong effort to seek out Scottish Ales brewed in the northern half. If indeed the southern Scottish Ales have been "Anglified" then, that's a real shame. Al. Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL korz at xnet.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 12:14:11 +1200 From: Murray Mulholland <MurrayM at WAIRC.GOVT.NZ> Subject: Hops in New Zealand Graham Wheeler writes in HBD #2441: >Andy Walsh's (do I detect a hint of old-colonial flaming here?) input on >Aussie hops seems to confirm my major point: that if you happen to live the >wrong side of that magical 35 degree line, whether in the northern or >southern hemisphere, you are going to have difficulty growing hops. Andy >mentions that the best hops in his region are grown in N.Z. I don't know, >but I would guess that the hop growing region in NZ would be the >southernmost part of the south island -- well into the high 40s latitude. Most commercial hops grown in New Zealand are grown in the Nelson area at the top of the South Island (latitude 41 degrees South approx). Murray Mulholland Hamilton New Zealand Regards Murray Mulholland Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 21:17:05 -0300 (GMT-0300) From: Jorge Blasig - IQ <gisalb at elmer.fing.edu.uy> Subject: Preparing malts Dear friends, I ask form information about preparing different kind of malts using pale or pilsner malt. I received a couple of answer indicating that I can prepare these malts by roasting my pilsner or pale malt. I was also informed that I can prepare crystals by kilning my malt after soaking it and using aluminum foil ( kind of a mashing in the oven ). However, I still have a question. When I prepare munich or amber as an example, using my pilsner or pale malt, should I soak it first or just roast it in the oven directly? I am a little confused about it. Thanks for your replies. Jorge Blasig Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 22:14:16 -0500 From: Rick Olivo <ashpress at win.bright.net> Subject: Re: Possibble idophor off tastes Eric: I would not use Idophor on plastic. I ruined two batches of brown ale in a row from it. I believe it gets into the plastic. The smell persisted until I soaked the plastic with oxygen bleach (Purex) for a couple of days. Now I use chlorine bleach (1 tbl per gallon of water) and rinse thoroughly. No problems with infection from the tap water. I believe this problem is vastly overrated. I suspect many "contaminated beers" are merely beers that haven't been aged enough, and get tossed down the drain for no good reason. In my 25 years of brewing I have NEVER had a batch ruined by infection. I am careful with sanitation, but not a fanatic about it. On the up side, I was still able to drink the "iodine beer" and actually developed a taste for it... Kinda like shrimp flavor... I do use idophor for glass and stainless steel, but never for plastic. Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 06/17/97, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96