---

	FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
		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


Contents:
  carbonation/mixedstrains (korz)
  lowFG/pHswings/maltstorage/teflon/santiary CO2 (korz)
  Keg Baggage? (Craig Wynn)
  Bulkhead Fittings (Jack Schmidling)
  Homeroasted Malt HBD 2475 ("Grant W. Knechtel")
  Eisbock, Labels (Calvin Perilloux)
  legal definitions - EISBOCK (dbrigham)
  RE: soda taps (Michael J. Beaudette)
  mini batches / plambic derivation (Dave Whitman)
  Dry hopping responses (haafbrau1)
  Eisbock ("Ian Wilson")
  RE: Labels.  Use milk (Brian Pickerill)
  Can it!!! (Brian Deck)
  grapefruit taste and smell? (MCer1235)
  Re: Labels (Guy Garnett)
  Small Batches / Labels / Negra Modelo (KennyEddy)
  Pet peeve (Spencer W Thomas)
  Re: At Wit's End -- Another Recipe (Spencer W Thomas)
  RE: RIMS Idea / Question (LaBorde, Ronald)
  Re: A little more on Blue Moon (Spencer W Thomas)
  pMicrobrew ("Kerr, David")
  First Wort Hopping (Brian_Moore)
  Mini Kegs ("BRIAN F. THUMM")
  starters (Greg Moore - SMCC BOS Hardware Engineering)
  yeast harvesting ("Jay Spies")
  Re: A little more on Blue Moon (Graham Barron)


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: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 19:52:02 -0500 (CDT)
From: korz at xnet.com
Subject: carbonation/mixedstrains

Bryan writes:
>If you prime or krausen, slightly less fermentable  material is necessary due
>to the bulk and (for lack of a more scientific explanation) proportionately
>less head space than the combined space in two and a half cases of
>bottles

No, actually, there can't be any reason that 5 gallons in a keg would
need less priming sugar than 5 gallons in bottles unless you were filling
the bottles so high that the carbonation was inhibited (I still don't
have a scientific reason for this).  Presuming that you are talking about
a 5-gallon keg and 2.5 cases of 12-ounce bottles, the reason you would
need less for the keg is because you have less beer: 2.5 cases of
12-ounce bottles is 5.63 gallons.

>Force carbonation is preferred by some who object to the residual taste
>of priming sugar, and don't have any leftover wort for priming. Chill the
>beer in the keg as cold as you can get it. The solubility of CO2 is much
>higher in cold beer. Once cold, hook up the CO2 and adjust pressure
>to about 30 PSI. Now you have two optoins; either lay the keg on its side
>and gently rock back and forth, or leave it overnight (must be kept cold). If

Firstly, priming sugar is such a small portion of the sugar profile of
wort (which already had contained a much larger percentage of glucose
and sucrose than you get when priming) that it can't cause a noticeable
flavour change.  Next, if you take 50F beer and force-carbonate it to
30psi, you will get foam city.  At 50F, I recommend 8 to 15 psi depending
on how much carbonation you want.

>BTW, once carbonated, use the pressure relief valve on the lid to vent
>headspace and replace it with incoming CO2. This eliminates oxygen 

As Dave said, you need to purge the O2 before you shake the keg.  I don't
go through all the effort Dave does: I simply shoot a little CO2 into
the keg before filling (some CO2 will come out of solution during the
racking and all you really need is to protect the first 12 ounces as
they splash in), then after filling, I put on the lid and pressurise-purge
several times to get the air out of the headspace.

***
Regarding the question of whether CO2 in water is sour or bitter, I
agree with Dave (again?) and say I feel it's very, very slightly sour.
Consider Club Soda versus Tonic Water.  The first is mildly sour, the
second is decidedly bitter.  Note that some mineral waters have a *LOT*
of various minerals in them and some of those I've tasted have been
slightly bitter.  Perhaps that is what Pat is thinking of?

***
Mark writes:
>I prefer the head of the naturally carbonated beer as it 
>seems to be finer and longer-lasting than the forced carbonated.

Another piece of homebrewing "legend."  Can't be true.  CO2 is CO2
(when it comes to carbonation) as long as the source is pure (i.e.
not combustion).
 
***
Doug writes:
>"Many ale yeasts are actually mixtures of two or more strains."
 
>One of the techniques involves taking a sample of beer from a recently
>fermented batch and streaking it on an agar plate.  The idea is to 
>isolate *a single yeast cell* so it can grow into a *pure* colony.
>Am I wrecking my ale yeast sample by doing this??  IS THIS BATCH
>RUINED???

No.  The most famous mixed-strain yeast was the old Whitbread yeast
which was discontinued and a far more bland (IMO) yeast used in its
place.  The first strain was a fast-starter, but had low alcohol
tolerance.  The second was a slow-starter, but finished the job.
The second yeast would not flocculate on its own, so the third yeast
was added simply to help the second flocculate.

*Most* yeasts used commercially are single-strain, but some are multi-strain.

>Anyway, the one ale yeast I have on a slant is Wyeast #1968,
>Special London Ale.  Does anyone know if this is a blend or a
>single strain?

Both of these are single-strain, to the best of my knowledge.  As far
as I know, the only multi-strain yeasts sold by Wyeast are the
Ale Blend, Lager Blend, and Lambic Blend.

Al.

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


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 19:54:19 -0500 (CDT)
From: korz at xnet.com
Subject: lowFG/pHswings/maltstorage/teflon/santiary CO2

Steve writes:
>I checked the specific gravity when it was moved to the secondary and it
>was already about 1.014.  When I dry hopped on 7/24,the specific gravity
>was 1.003!  I have never had a beer ferment so far down.

>The question is, Will the beer carbonate properly with the FG so low?

The priming should not be affected by the FG.  The beer is probably infected,
however, so you may want to taste it before you go through the effort of
bottling.

***
Jim writes:
>I read my tap water pH at ~6.4 but when I
>boil it for about 20 mins to remove chlorine I get areading of ~ 8.8. to
>further confuse me it only takes about 2 ml of 30% phosphoric acid to get it
>back to the 6.5-7 pH range. 

This is not strange.  You have very soft water.  Soft water has no buffers
and therefore its pH will swing easily.  The pH rise you see is due to
CO2 being boiled off.
 
***
>Chris writes:
>thought...what if i just dropped a handful of dry ice (frozen co2) into
>the secondary. <snip> the beer would not get oxidized

There is no guarantee that there aren't wild yeasts or bacteria in your
dry ice.  It can also have oil in it.  See my post above... enought CO2
will be released during transfer that you only have to be concerned about
the first 12 to 24 ounces.

***
Dave writes:
>Lastly, if you need an inexpensive source of CO2, make up a fermenting
>solution in a bottle with cork and hose attached.  Sanitation problems can
>be minimized by passing the  CO2 through acidic metabisulfite and then
>through sterile cotton to minimize aerosols.

Finally, I get to disagree with Dave ;^).  The cotton will probably remove
most of the nasties, but the metabisulphite solution will do nothing.
Bubbling a gas through a sanitising solution (iodophor, bleach, etc.)
will not kill what's *in* the bubbles... it will only kill what's on the
*walls* of the bubbles.  Most of the wild stuff in the gas will pass
right through untouched.  If you are concerned about the sanitation of
your CO2, use an inline 0.2 micron filter.

***
There was a question about yeast nutrient in mead.  Despite the outcome
of the Nationals, I don't pretend to be a mead expert.  I defer all
complicated questions to Dick Dunn, Dan McConnell, and Ken Schram (without
whose help I would not have even made my first mead, let alone won
a competition with one).  This question is easy, I think, so I'll give
it a complicated answer...

Yeast nutrient usually just diammonium phosphate (DAP).  I prefer to use
Yeast Energizer (which is a mixture of many different yeast nutrients).
DAP is all one colour (white) whereas Yeast Energizer is clearly a mixture
of various powders.

So, will I keep you in suspense?  Naaa...

1997 AHA National 1st place Traditional Mead
3 gal water, 11.5# of Linden tree honey, 2 tsp Fermax Yeast *Energizer*,
and a package of Premier Cuvee rehydrated dry yeast.

Boil the water, turn off heat, add honey and Fermax, chill with immersion
chiller, oxygenate for 1 minute with pure O2, pitch.  Ferment at 60-65F
for 7 or 8 months, bottle, enjoy.

Keys: varietal honey and cool fermentation (minimizes higher alcohols).

***
Braam writes:
>Should I store the malts that will have to last 
>long (like Crystal) in the airtight container or should I leave it in 
>the double lining PVC bags.

The darker crystal malts seem to not mind a little humidity, but
the palest crystal malts (CaraPils) gets a clovey/medicinal aroma
and flavour after a few months... not only do I store CaraPils
in a sealed bucket, but I also put in a dessicant.

***
Kirk asks about teflon washers.

I made my own from a sheet of teflon (expen$ive!).

***
I'm off to London for two weeks, so I'll be off-line.  If anyone
is going to the GBBF, I'll be there virtually every session.  I'll
be the 6'3" guy with long brown hair, shaggy black beard, gymshoes,
and a camera bag.  Oh, I'll probably have clothes on too, and definitely
a Cask-Conditioned beer in my hand.

Al.

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


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 23:54:43 GMT
From: cwynn at sawyer.ndak.net (Craig Wynn)
Subject: Keg Baggage?

Can I get on an a US comercial flt.carrying a 5 gal korny?
What's going to be asked if I try and check it in as baggage?
Could I try and carry it on board?

If the answer is yes to any of the above how should I package it?
Do put it in a box?=20
How much internal pressure?
Should I try labels with "This end up"?

I've sent it in the past via UPS. Now I have the chance to visit my
pilot brewery investor and I like to hand carry a partial batch of
K=F6lsch.

craig

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 19:38:49 -0700
From: Jack Schmidling <arf at mc.net>
Subject: Bulkhead Fittings

From: "Kirk Harralson"<kwh at smtpgwy.roadnet.ups.com>



" I'm sure this would work, but I can't imagine using rubber washers 
without affecting the taste of the wort.

I can't imagine how you would taste the amount of rubber that would
leach out into a ten gallon batch but that is a separate issue.

The problem with rubber is you can't make it tight enough and you
have the heat problem.

It has been my experience with thousands of EASYMASHERS (R) installed
in kettles that a metal to metal seal is all that is required.  If
you really want a washer use hard fiber.  We supply one with the
EM but it is really only intended to take up the shoulder where there
are no threads when used on real thin kettles.

Stainless washers against a stainless kettle might not be the best
choice and I would sugest using brass instead.  It will conform under
pressure to the contour of the kettle.

You might also consider er, ah saving yourself all the trouble of
hunting down the parts and just buy something designed for the job.

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: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 23:19:28 -0700
From: "Grant W. Knechtel" <GWK at hartcrowser.com>
Subject: Homeroasted Malt HBD 2475

Ken Schwartz talks about making some home roasted chocolate malt.  I think what
he describes, though, is a classic brown malt.  Should make some great UrPorter.
 Now back to our regularly scheduled botulism thread...
 -Grant
Neue Des Moines Hausbrauerei
Des Moines, Washington

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 06:17:14 -0400
From: Calvin Perilloux <peril at compuserve.com>
Subject: Eisbock, Labels

Eisbock:  At the risk of being pedantic:

>"(a) Conditions on concentration.  A brewer may not employ any
>process of concentration which separates alcohol spirits from any
>fermented substance."

The law says that you can't remove the spirits from the material that has=
 =

been fermented.  It could well be argued that (1) water is not fermented;=

barley malt, sugars, etc are fermented, and (2) you are not removing the =

spirit from that barley malt/sugar/etc. but are instead removing only ice=
,
that is to say, water.  Had the law been worded simply "concentrating =

the alcohol" it would have certainly ruled out Eisbock.  =


This interpretation naturally relies on the judge/jury's acceptance that =

the water and the sugars are separate "substances".  Maybe the =

argument is a bit of a stretch, or maybe it's shows enough of an =

ambiguity to discourage active enforcement against this method
of alcohol concentration.  As JW in Grapevine put it, the chances =

of the BATF bashing down your door for your perhaps contraband =

Eisbock are remote.  I'd say nearly as remote as dying of botulism
from your wort starters.

Labels:  I use regular laser printer paper (either white or colored works=
)
chopped down after printing to label size and stuck on with glue stick.
Of three brands I have tried so far, Uhu Stic is the best; the other two =

were too slimy.  The labels come off in a half minute in hot water, longe=
r
in cold water, and hence they are not much good if you plan to set your =

bottles in a cooler filled with ice water for a picnic.
 =

Calvin Perilloux
Bondi Junction, Australia

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 01 Aug 97 07:37:29 EST
From: dbrigham at nsf.gov
Subject: legal definitions - EISBOCK

(sorry in advance for wasting more digest bandwidth on this, but I couldn't help
myself)

I'm not a lawyer - I don't even play one on TV, but reading that legal 
definition of what form of distillation is not permitted for brewers shows me 
that it *IS LEGAL* to brew an EISBOCK in the traditional method.  I have copied 
in the definition from the original post below.

Is not making an EISBOCK taking an already fermented beverage, bringing the 
temperature to around freezing so the *WATER* freezes and can be removed from 
it?  If so, when is the alcohol being seperated from the "fermented substance"? 
The water being removed is not the "fermented substance".  Someone viciously 
correct me if I am wrong - Dana Brigham (dbrigham at nsf.gov)

********************************************************************************
  According to US law ( 27 CFR part 25 section 25.262 "Restrictions and
conditions on processes of concentration and reconstitution"):

"(a) Conditions on concentration.  A brewer may not employ any
process of concentration which separates alcohol spirits from any
fermented substance."

  And by definition ( 27 CFR part 252 section 252.11 "Meaning of terms"):

"Distilled spirits or spirits.  That substance known as ethyl
alcohol, ethanol, or spirits of wine, in any form (including all
dilutions and mixtures thereof, from whatever source or by whatever
process produced) but not denatured spirits."
********************************************************************************


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 08:15:02 -0600
From: beaudettem at rl.af.mil (Michael J. Beaudette)
Subject: RE: soda taps

Chris Hansen asks about using a soda tapper for beer, but I was unable to
e-mail direct. (Chris?)

Chris,
I aquired a soda dispenser from my homebrew shop that is what you would
see at a deli counter. It had five pull taps, and built in chiller
assembly. The unit was about the size of a large computer monitor. The
compressor and motor were shot, and other parts had already been scavenged
by the soda distributer, but how could I say no for the price of
only...free!

What I did was to use the tap portion only. With the stainless mounting
plate mounted on a picnic color and cold plate inside, I was able to serve
5 styles of homebrew and cider on tap at my wedding party. If your taps are
the same as what I have, the plastic behind the tap is about 1.5" in
diameter (I do this from memory) and 3-4" long. Inside that is a piece that
is shaped similiar to a rocketship nose cone. Remove that. Soda is
dispensed at a higher pressure, and is throttled down at the point on
dispensing for some reason. I used only the tap portion, and when I tried
to dispense homebrew with the "nose cone" installed, I had excessive
foaming. With it removed, normal flow.

I now have my taps installed in my brew 'fridge, and they dispense as well
as my $40 metal taps. For cleaning, I use my favorate cleaner (which ever
one I have enough of) in hot water in my "extra" corny keg. You can never
have too many. I simply dispense the cleaner through the system the way I
would brew, followed by a rinse of water.

The taps I have are simple to disassemble completely, allowing for a
complete cleaning before use as stale soda does not improve the flavor of a
fine pale ale. Chris, go for it a let the digest know what works for you.
Good luck a let me know if I can help further.

Mike

ps- If the unit works for you as is, great, but I suspect you may need
to change the line size if it is as small as mine was. It was under a 1/4"
ID and caused me nothing but trouble.

pps- if the chiller portion works, you should have no problem chilling to
serving temperature as most soda is stored at room temperature and force
chilled
(and often carbonated) and serving.



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 01 Aug 1997 08:22:28
From: Dave Whitman <dwhitman at rohmhaas.com>
Subject: mini batches / plambic derivation

In HBD#2475, Jim Thomas asks:

>Could someone please enlighten me on the placement of the letter "p" in
>front of Belgian style beer names, e.g. pwit, plambic, etc.
>
>Is this some sort of acknowledgement that only REAL Beligian ales are
>brewed in Belgium?

I have always assumed that this convention started with lambics brewed
outside of Belgium ("false lambics"), punning off definition 2 of the the
hacker word "pnambic", and then generalized to other belgian-style beers.
>From the Jargon File:

>pnambic /p*-nam'bik/ 
>
>[Acronym from the scene in the film version of "The Wizard of Oz"
>in which the true nature of the wizard is first discovered: 
>"Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain."] ...
>
>2. Of or pertaining to a process or function whose apparent operations 
>   are wholly or partially falsified...

Also in #2475, Richard Cuff asks for recommendations on making smaller
batches.

I've done this a few times when I was doing experimental brews.  The one
thing that tripped me up was overconcentrating during the boil.  If like
many people, you try for  vigorous boil and run your heat source at full
blast, you'll boil off a certain amount of water per hour, independent of
the batch size.  If you cut the batch size, the tendency is to boil off a
larger percentage of the wort volume than you would on a regular sized
batch unless you adjust the heat down.    

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 08:42:24 -0400
From: haafbrau1 at juno.com
Subject: Dry hopping responses

Due to overwelming response to my inquiry, I wish to thank everyone via
HBD for all of your help.  The advice(s) given are helpful, and all
responses have been saved for future reference.  Hopefully, my
shoulder/arm will recover soon, so I can get back to this wonderful
pasttime.  Since it's still too hot though, I'd have to wait a little
while to try all this new info out anyway.  This means I'll be forced to
buy ready-made beer, as my stockpile is dwindling.  (missed making my
last two batches before the fall).
Once again, thanks to everyone who took the time to write.
Paul Haaf
haafbrau1 at juno.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 06:35:54 -0700
From: "Ian Wilson" <ianw at sosinet.net>
Subject: Eisbock

Jeff McNally points out that the Federal Law states that distillation is
the separation of alcoholspirits from any fermented product.  This is where
the definition becomes too vague to work well.

Some BATF people jave defined the Eisbock process as distillation; some
have defined it as water removal.

There are no current legal precidences that I can find by which an Appeals
Court has rendered a written opinion as to a usable, workable definition to
this problem.  The discussions are moot until: 1) the BATF specifically
states that eisbock production is legal; 2) home production of eisbock is
legal; 3) Congress passes law, which is signed by Mr. P further defining
the distillation process to exclude eisbocks; 4) some poor sap goes and
sets himself up as a test case.

BTW I'm not an attorney, yet, and no, I won't defend you.

Ian Wilson

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 01 Aug 1997 08:40:02 -0500
From: 00bkpickeril at bsuvc.bsu.edu (Brian Pickerill)
Subject: RE: Labels.  Use milk

"Christopher D. Hutton" <bachstar at erols.com> asks:

>What are the best labels to use on bottles?  I'm looking for easy removal.

This has not been covered on the HBD in a long time.  MILK is the best
thing to apply paper labels so long as you aren't going to store them in a
cooler with icewater.  Water will make the labels fall off, otherwise, they
stick like glue.  I find that any milk seems to work fine, (I use skim) and
doesn't smell like you think it might.  (Admit it, you were thinking it
would stink...)

Just soak the labels (laser printed, whatever, plain paper) in some milk
and place them wet on the clean bottles.  Then, wipe them dry from the
center of the label out to the edge.  WORKS GREAT.

Finally, I have not done this, but glue stick is supposed to work well,
too.  I think it might hold the labels on a bit better if they get wet, but
I'm not sure about that.  Milk is great because the WHOLE label sticks
tight to the bottle.

- --Brian Pickerill, Muncie Malt Mashers, Muncie IN



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 08:51:49 -0500
From: deck at pathbox.wustl.edu (Brian Deck)
Subject: Can it!!!

ALL:
        I am getting really sick of this botulism thread, and I know I am
not the only one.  We have firmly established that we cannot agree whether
canning wort should be a "generally acceptable" practice or not.  No one
has done anything more that speculate throughout this whole thread.  Can we
please just allow those who want to can wort to continue, and those who do
not to coninue not doing it?
        If this is going to continue, let's just change the name to "The
Botulism Digest" and those of us who want to unsubscribe can go ahead and
find another homebrew forum; one where beer-making is the primary topic.

Brian Deck





"I drank what?"

              -Socrates



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 10:10:38 -0400 (EDT)
From: MCer1235 at aol.com
Subject: grapefruit taste and smell?

I tried to make a Foreign Stout last winter but  had some problems. I was
wondering if anyone could diagnose my problems and suggest better brewing
practices.  The OG was about 1.070 (estimated).

1)The beer did not carbonate.  I used to appropriate amount of sugar for a
regular ale, but I believe that yeast either flocculated out or died/got
damaged or all of the above.

2) My wife noticed a "rotten" grapefruit smell.  My guess is that I fermented
to warm.  I used about 1/4 quart of slurry from a local brewpub.  I believe
it was a London Ale type of yeast.

Am I correct in my assumptions?

Thanks,  Rene'

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 01 Aug 1997 10:18:21 -0400
From: Guy Garnett <ggarnett at qrc.com>
Subject: Re: Labels

"Christopher D. Hutton" <bachstar at erols.com> asks:
>What are the best labels to use on bottles?  I'm looking for easy removal.

Here's what I do, and I've never had a problem getting them off again.

I have full-color lable artwork that was prepared by an artist I know.  For
really spiffy bottles, I have this copied with a color copier, and I cut
the labels out (for less-spiffy bottles, I copy it in black-and-white).

I stick the labels onto the bottles with an ordinary gluestick (the cheap
kind).  I just run a line of glue along the edges of the label, and stick 
it onto the bottle.  It comes right off in warm water.  I only put labels 
on a few bottles (that I intend to give away, or that will at least be seen 
by other folks).  

For my own use, I have a colored dot on the cap to identify the batch.  I
have a bunch of those colored-dot stickers that you can get at office supply
stores, and I stick a dot to each cap, and write the bottling date on the
dot after the bottles are capped.  I also stick the same color dot to my 
sheet of notes about the batch in my notebook.



Guy Garnett                                                 ggarnett at qrc.com
                                                          (301)-657-3077x125
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Dreams do not vanish, so long as people do not abandon them." - L.Matsumoto

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 10:22:44 -0400 (EDT)
From: KennyEddy at aol.com
Subject: Small Batches / Labels / Negra Modelo

Richard Cuff  writes:

"I'm interested in brewing some 1- or 2-gallon batches of various
beers to add some variety to my homebrew experience and to try out
some recipes and techniques.  As for my experience level, I'm an
extract brewer but use specialty grains and liquid yeast."

Richard, you are in a perfect position to meddle with all-grain brewing.
 Your batch size is small which drastically simplifies your equipment
requirements.  Get a small (say 8-qt) ice chest and modify it to add an
outlet and a filter "manifold".  Drill a 1" diameter hole through the end
wall just high enough to clear the inside bottom.  Using a larger hole saw,
flat blade bit, or even a sharp utility knife, enlarge the hole on the
outside layer only.  Push a 3" - 4" piece of 1/2" ID x 5/8" OD vinyl tubing
through a Fass-Frisch mini-keg bung (see you HB supplier) with the plastic
plug removed so that about 3/4" sticks out the "tapered" side.  Push this
into the cooler hole so that it seals in place.

You might want to drill a couple holes inthe lid and spray in some spray-foam
insulation.

Inside, cut a length of 1/2" copper pipe and press-fit a cap on one end.
 Drill 3/32" holes through the pipe along its length every 1/4", or use a
hacksaw and cut slots across it.  The pipe should be sized so that the open
end slips over the tubing inside, and the pipe lays flat on the cooler bottom
with the open end flush against the bung and the capped end up against the
opposite wall.  This should prevent it from coming off during mashing, though
do be careful when stirring.

Now, on the outside, put a 1/2" hose barb elbow on the free end of the
tubing, and add aonther length of tubing sufficient to reach the bottom of
your brewpot which is on a chair below the countertop (or whatever your
logistics require).    Trim the tubing coming from the bung so that the elbow
just clears the cooler and the tubing won't sag.  A pinch-clamp on the
vertical length of tubing should be adequate for flow control.  Sparge by
scooping hot sparge water from a larger pot on the stove, using a measureing
cup, ad pouring it solwly on the grain bed as needed.  This rig of course
would work with partial-mashing larger batches as well.

*****

Christopher D. Hutton asks:

"What are the best labels to use on bottles?  I'm looking for easy removal."

I use a small bead of "Tacky Glue" (found at craft stores) around the
perimeter of the label.  Sticks quickly and comes off with hot water.

*****

Todd Wilson writes:

"I must say that one of my favorite beers is Negro Modelo and I don't
have a clue as to how one would categorize it other than it is a dark
lager.  Could someone please post some info on this brew?  I would like
to try to brew an all grain clone so if anyone has any interesting
recipes please pass them along."

It's a toss-up between Negra Modelo and Bohemia for my favorite Mexican beer
(though I have yet to try Noche Buena).  These beers are descendents of the
Vienna Lager style once brewed in Europe.  The brewmasters who emigrated to
Mexico and Central Texas towards the beginning of this century brought the
style with them, and it subsequently went extinct in Europe.

There was a Vienna recipe in yesterday's HBD2474, and I'm sure a bunch of
them are at the Cat's Meow at The Brewery (http://brewery.org).

*****

Ken Schwartz
El Paso, TX
KennyEddy at aol.com
http://members.aol.com/kennyeddy


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 01 Aug 1997 10:34:56 -0400
From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer at engin.umich.edu>
Subject: Pet peeve

When you're reading stuff for information, you don't "pour" over it,
unless you accidently spill your beer.  You "pore" over it.

Remember:

pour: To emit in a stream; to cause or allow (a liquid or granular
      substance) to flow out of a vessel or receptacle; to discharge or shed
      copiously; also, to emit (rays of light). Said either of a person, or
      of a thing which discharges a stream

pore: To look at something (usu. a book) with fixed attention, in the
      way of study; to read or study earnestly or with steady application;
      to be absorbed in reading or study.

Thanks for making my day happier.  :-)

=Spencer Thomas in Ann Arbor, MI        (spencer at umich.edu)

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 01 Aug 1997 10:43:23 -0400
From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer at engin.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: At Wit's End -- Another Recipe 

I said:

    Spencer> The only real flaw was a pronounced diacetyl aroma,
    Spencer> because I racked the beer into the keg too soon.

I had some of this beer last night.  Warm, because my keg fridge is
dying, but that's another story.  The diacetyl is gone.  What's left
is a refreshing, citric, slightly tart beer.  Wonderful!   Of course,
there's only a gallon or so left.  Why is that *always* the case?  :-)

=Spencer

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 09:51:15 -0500
From: rlabor at lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald)
Subject: RE: RIMS Idea / Question

From: Darrell <darrell at montrose.net>

   ...So here's my plan.  I use two recirc pumps, one for the sparge
water to
   the heat exchanger, and the other for the mash through the heat
   exchanger.  The sparge recirc would then be controlled by a simple
dial
   thermostat and a thermocouple in the mash.  The thermostat can be set
   for whatever the desired mash temp, and the sparge water would only
be
   recirc'ing (heating) when the mash was below target.  The sparge tank
   could either be heated by a propane burner (original idea), or by an
   electric water heater element with a water heater thermostat (latest
   thought).  In either case, I don't think I'll have to keep too tight
a
   control on the sparge water temp (so long as it's at or above 170F),
   since the controller will only be keying off of the mash temp, and
not
   trying to correlate the two....

This sounds workable Darrell.   When you stop the sparge recirc, the
wort in the chamber will not be overheated thus not killing the enzymes.
 I am using a 5/8 O.D. coil tossed into the sparge tank and recirc the
mash liquor through the coil to control temperatures.  When I have
reached desired temperature, I stop the recirc.  This stops the mash
recirc as well as stopping the temperature boost.  The sparge water
temperature would be too difficult to controll quickly enough to avoid
over shooting the desired boost temp. 

With my method I am not recirculating the mash for the full time, but it
is recirculating during boosts, and this seems to be long enough to
obtain wort clarity and extract efficiency.  Notice I said seems, cause
I haven't done any calculations or comparisons yet with other systems.

   ....1. Eliminates costly electronic controller for heating
element....

Yes, I manually controll the sparge/exchange liquor temperature.  Things
happen more slowly than with the element in a chamber method.

   ....2. Eliminates the possibility of scorching the mash on the
element....

Right-on Darrell.  And I only need to brush my teeth, not a heating
element....

   ....3. Should simplify cleanup (?), since the element is out of the
mash....

Seems plausible.

   ....4. Eliminates one heating element....

Yes, and all three of my tuns are plastic.  Don't need any steenkin
stainless steel. $$$$.  My mash tun is a 10 gallon picnic cooler
(insulated) so I get good heat conservation.

   ....1. Sparge water must be kept hot during entire mash....

No problem, I do this anyhow. 

   ....2. Requires extra recirc pump....

Yup.

   ....3. Longer time required between steps for step mash....

This caused me some consideration (not worry), and what I do is raise
the sparge/exchange liquor to a near boiling temperature to speed up the
stepping.  Seems to work well. 

   ....I'm mainly
   ....considering this idea for a single step infusion mash, but I
think if
   ....the sparge were allowed to boil, there might be enough heat to
make step
   ....mashing possible.  Cold water could then be added to get the
sparge back
   ....down to 170 F....

   ....Whaddaya think?...

Stepping was no problem with my setup.  Probably for two reasons:

1) I heated the sparge/exchange liquor to near boiling at the beginning,
then let the temperatures balance out.

2) I use an insulated cooler for the mash tun.

Darrell, I use two pumps in my setup and I get several advantages that
make it worth the extra expense of a second pump.  One thing, my RIMS is
a three tun setup all on the same level.  No step ladders in this
brewery!.  Also, the system was easily built up on a ready made cart.
It is a chrome wire two shelf cart, ordered from a catalog.  Came with
wheels, easy to keep clean,  and looks spiffy.  I can look into any of
my tuns and enjoy the view without any climbing or ladders.  I use
electric heating elements in the sparge and boiler, so no noisy propane
rockets and this allows me to use the wire shelves and simply set the
tuns on them with no cutting or modifications to the cart.

Happy Brewing

Ron


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 01 Aug 1997 10:54:32 -0400
From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer at engin.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: A little more on Blue Moon 

I find myself in a curious position:  I'm much harsher on "micro"
products than on the "mega" attempts at "craft" beer.  Thus, I tend to
cut A-B, Coors, etc. some slack when they produce a wimpy version of a
classic beer, with the cop-out "At least they're trying."

It is an odd form of reverse discrimination.

=Spencer



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 10:55:26 -0400
From: "Kerr, David" <David.Kerr at ummc.ummed.edu>
Subject: pMicrobrew

Jim Thomas asked:

"Could someone please enlighten me on the placement of the letter "p" in
front of Belgian style beer names, e.g. pwit, plambic, etc.
Is this some sort of acknowledgement that only REAL Beligian ales are
brewed in Belgium?"

"True lambic is only made in the Senne valley outside of Brussels in
Belgium.  Only here has the microflora been found appropriate for the
production of spontaneously-fermented beer." - Lambic Digest FAQ

The designation pLambic (pseudo-Lambic) is used to 'fess up to the fact
that the beer was brewed elsewhere.

The new designation pWit is employed to describe a mildly tangy, spicy,
cloudy, faintly aromatic beer from any brewer with a capacity of more
than 20K barrels.

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 09:57:33 -0500
From: Brian_Moore at amat.com
Subject: First Wort Hopping




Greetings all!

There's been a few mentions of "first wort hopping" lately.    I'm not
familiar with this method, but it sounds like you put hops in right as you
are starting to collect sparge runnings from the mash.  Does anyone know
what this adds to the beer?  I'm guessing just bitterness since the
following boil would tend to drive off all the flavor and aroma (similar to
a bittering hop addition).  When calculating IBU's should I just treat the
FWH like an early (1 hr) hop addition?  I'm putting together a 100 IBU IPA
recipe and I'd hate to end up with only 95 or so!

Brian Moore
Austin TX



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 01 Aug 1997 11:08:46 -0400
From: "BRIAN F. THUMM" <THUMMBF at GWSMTP.NU.COM>
Subject: Mini Kegs

Has anyone ever tried to transfer between mini kegs under pressure?  I know
that I am not supposed to force carbonate in a mini keg.  But, what if I were
to naturally carbonate in one mini keg, and then filter into a second mini keg
under about 10 psi.  Can I do it?  

I don't think I have the room for corny kegs in my fridge, so I have been
looking at mini's, but I don't want to buy a system that won't provide the
benefit I desire....

Brian
Pier 147

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 11:24:42 -0400
From: Greg.Moore at East.Sun.COM (Greg Moore - SMCC BOS Hardware Engineering)
Subject: starters



I hope the collective experience of HBD can help me on this one.

For my last two batches of beer, I've made starters.  Also, for my last
two batches of beer, I've had very cloudy beer.  The beer tastes fine,
and clears after a month or two in the bottle/keg.  Since one of the
batches was a repeat batch, and my actual brewing process has not
changed from before, I feel that I've done something wrong in the
starter process.  I'd like to avoid the 1-2 month settling if possible.

1st starter:

Smacked pack, (yeast 1084) let it expand over two days, nice and puffed up.
Soaked Growler, funnel, airlock in clorine water.  Boiled 1/2 LB light
DME in 1/2 gallon of water for 15 minutes in a SS pan (regular cooking
utensil).  Cooled in an ice bath (wort chiller too big for this pot).
put wort in growler and pitched yeast (wyeast 1028).  Ended up with a little
over a quart of liquid in the growler (little over half full).  Two days 
later, I agitated the growler (to get the yeast cake off the bottom) and
pitched this into the primary.

2nd starter:

Smacked a wyeast 2206 (Bavarian Lager) - after two days, bought a
second and smacked it since the first was rather slow for it's age.
After two more days, both packs were puffed up.  Made two starters, one
for each pack, using the starter process above.  (still wasn't sure I
wanted to use the first one yet). This time, I used Iodopher to
sanatize instead of clorine. At brewing, decanted most of the wort from
the slow starter, used most of the wort from the fast starter and
pitched both into beer.

Anyone see anything glaringly wrong with this process?  Anyone have some
general hints about doing starters?

TIA

 -=G
gmoore at wacko.east.sun.com    So much beer, so little time.  Drink hard.
             \\|// 
             (o o)
=========oOO==(_)==OOo===========   Please sir, may I have some more?
               



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 11:36:13 +0000
From: "Jay Spies" <BantinRJ at mda.state.md.us>
Subject: yeast harvesting

All -

I would like to make a Chimay style clone, preferably one of Chimay 
Grand Reserve/Blue Cap, and I have heard of folks harvesting the 
yeast out of the 750ml bottles and re-using it.  I would like to know 
how this is done, so if anyone has suggestions/instructions, let me 
know.  BTW, does anyone have a good all-grain Chimay Grand Reserve 
clone recipie?  There are a few good ones in the Cat's Meow, but I'd 
like to get a recipie that someone has already tasted and can vouch 
for.  Private e-mails are fine.  Thanks.


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 01 Aug 1997 11:48:27 -0500
From: Graham Barron <gbarron at cq.com>
Subject: Re: A little more on Blue Moon 

Spencer wrote:
>I find myself in a curious position:  I'm much harsher on "micro"
>products than on the "mega" attempts at "craft" beer.  Thus, I tend to
>cut A-B, Coors, etc. some slack when they produce a wimpy version of a
>classic beer, with the cop-out "At least they're trying."

Well, I certainly understand where you're coming from.  I used to do the
same.  I used to be a mega-brewer apologist, but then I took a different
look at what they're trying to do.  I always thought, "Wow, we've really
made some headway here.  Even A-B, etc., are trying to make good beer!"

But then I thought "what are they really trying to do here?"  I saw the
special on Dateline, the ATF complaint against Sam Adams, all the buyouts
of micros, I tried their "microbrews."  And their commercials; on the one
hand they were singing the praises of their new, "rich, but not bitter,
natural and smooth" micros, and the awards they were winning, while on the
other hand they poked fun at the craft brewing industry and claimed their
crap was the only "real beer."  We've probably all seen the TV ad where the
two "real men" walk into a bar and say, "Look Joe-Blow, they have a 'beer
menu' here.  Peach Pale Ale, Hazlenut-Pecan Nut Brown Ale, Double Rich
Coffee Chocolate Stout.  What is this? [They smile at each other knowingly]
 . . . give me an Old Budmilloors."  They'll simply never be satisfied with
less than 100% of the beer market and that's all they're trying to do with
these mega-micros -- get back that 3 or 4% (or whatever the number is) that
micros/brewpubs/homebrewing has taken away from them.

All those mega-micros do is tempt away people who otherwise might be
willing to at least try a real microbrew.  Imagine this scenario.  John Q.
Public is in the grocery store.  His friends have talked about Sierra
Nevada pale ale and Sam Adams Boston Lager and how good they are.  Ok, it's
on the shelf.  "Maybe I'll try it," he thinks to himself.  He reaches for
it . . . but, wait, what's that right next to it?  "Michelob Classic Pale
Ale [substitute any megamicro name here]."  Hmm. . . "I've always like that
Michelob line.  You know what they say . . some days are better than
others."  And look at that great display Michelob has put up.  "Smooth, not
bitter."  Yeah, that's what I like.  And that babe in the bathing suit!
Wow!  Look at the price, too!  Only $4.99.  How much is this Sierra stuff?
$7.99!!!  I'm not made of money.  I'll just get the Michelob.

Walk into the beer section of your main street grocery store Saturday
afternoon and you'll probably (if you could read people's minds) see this
scenario play out more than once. That's why I won't spend one second of my
time defending these guys.  They're not trying to make good beer.  They're
just trying to make more money.  Now I'm an ardent capitalist, and the goal
of almost any business is to make money, so don't get me wrong.  I'm just
saying that we, as homebrewers and craft beer lovers, shouldn't support
their efforts either in word nor voice nor dollar.

I'd love to be convinced that their motivations are otherwise, so other
comments/theories requested.




Graham L. Barron
New Media
Congressional Quarterly
Washington, D.C.
(202) 887-8684

Return to table of contents

---