HOMEBREW Digest #2545 Fri 31 October 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

  Re: Coffee Stout ("Scott W. Nowicki")
  Innovative Beer Dispensing System ("Kirk Johnson")
  Wort caramelization? (S&R Moed)
  Rootbeer, sparging, etc. (Chasman)
  Re: Huh? (Steve Scott)
  It's not all methane ! (Luke.L.Morris)
  Hydrometer blues (Miguel de Salas)
  Jethro on Wine Yeast in B-W's ("Rob Moline")
  Natural or LP clarification (Steve Scott)
  Re: Root beer (emccormick)
  filter size (SClaus4688)
  Malt Advocate (MicahM1269)
  freezing propane (Dave Whitman)
  Hops rhizomes ("Braam Greyling")
  multiple racking ("Paul A. Baker")
  Re:  A cry for help regarding HSA (George De Piro)
  WYeast 2112 (Tim.Watkins)
  how many glass carboys does it take. . . ("Paul A. Baker")
  E.S.B. Wyeast 1968 (michael rose)
  siphon woes, no more (John_E_Schnupp)
  Adding Adjuncts post boil? ("Grant W. Knechtel")
  good extract beers? ("Bryan L. Gros")
  Murphy's Stout (John Wilkinson)
  Results of 2nd Annual Music City Brew-Off (Steve Johnson)
  HSA (Al Korzonas)
  Re: ODD. . . ("Paul A. Hausman")
  Belgian White Recipe (Al Korzonas)
  propane tank freeze? (Edward J. Basgall)
  Re: Will a propane tank freeze? (emccormick)
  Re: Instructional videotapes (emccormick)
  Re: Odd... (emccormick)

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 brewery at realbeer.com 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: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 18:53:29 -0500 From: "Scott W. Nowicki" <nowicki at voicenet.com> Subject: Re: Coffee Stout >I have an oatmeal stout that will be bottled next weekend. My question to >the knowledgable collective is this: I would like to add some coffee >flavor to a few bottles at bottling time. What would be the best way to >do this? I'm not at all sure if I would like it so, I will do only around >4 12 oz bottles. I posed a similar question to the collective about a year ago, so if you have the time, check the HBD archives. I created a Coffee Porter based on my "research," and it turned out real well (I'd be happy to share the recipe if anyone is interested). Basically though, I added coffee grains (in a steeping bag) to the wort after the boil (at 200F), and allowed it to steep for about 15 minutes, keeping the temperature above 180F. I'm not sure how well adding coffee to the beer AFTER fermentation will work, although I did get one suggestion to actually pour some in your glass before adding your beer. I would say if you add the brewed coffee before bottling, just be sure it has had adequate pasteurization, and be careful it hasn't had any chance for infection. Cool the brewed coffee as you would wort. Good luck! Scott Scott W. Nowicki Holland, Pennsylvania USA nowicki at voicenet.com http://www.voicenet.com/~nowicki/ Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 16:54:33 -0700 From: "Kirk Johnson" <johnson at primenet.com> Subject: Innovative Beer Dispensing System I picked this up off the newswire today ... very interesting = reading=20 ... can anyone substantiate? =20 =20 Anheuser-Busch Test Marketing Innovative Beer Dispensing System =20 ST. PAUL, Minn., Oct. 28 /Newswire/ -- Anheuser-Busch (AB) = (NYSE:BUD)=20 announced an innovative beer dispensing system that will = fundamentally=20 change the way beer is distributed today. "We have developed a=20 Beermix system for cooling and dispensing beer in which carbonated=20 water is mixed with beer syrup in the tap," John Kelly, Vice = President=20 Anheuser-Busch, announced. "Anheuser-Busch has advanced beer = quality=20 and freshness to a higher level. Our customers get the highest=20 quality brewery fresh beer "born" just minutes after ordering. =20 Consumers will benefit from lower cost per sale, and retailers will = realize up to 30% larger profit over bottled or canned products and = 15% over kegged products." AB is test marketing the system in=20 selected Midwest cities with their best selling Budweiser and Bud=20 Light brands. =20 Industry leaders have been critical of the Beermix system. "This is = not a new idea," says Peter Berman, Consolidated Beverages, "the = soft=20 drink industry has been using fountain drink dispensers for nearly = a=20 decade. What's new is the process of converting fermented beer = into=20 syrup. Our biggest concern is beer quality. I fear AB will force = our=20 industry along the same path as the fast food industry, sacrificing = product quality for increased volume and profit." =20 =20 In response, AB stated they have conducted exhaustive blind taste=20 tests over the last several months, using beer professionals and=20 consumers. Panel results have shown no discernible taste = difference=20 between the Beermix product and bottled, canned or kegged products. = =20 In fact, many consumers preferred the Beermix dispensed beer citing = it=20 was smoother and easier to drink. AB believes industry reaction is = just sour grapes. At a recent shareholders meeting, John Kelly=20 stated, "as a leader in the brewing industry and the first to = market=20 with this technology, AB believes we will be able to expand our=20 dominant market position." =20 The Beermix syrup is distributed in five-gallon containers = pressurized=20 with carbon dioxide. Regular tap water passes through a filter and = into the saturator (carbonator) where it is carbonated. It then=20 passes through the cooling pipes ending with a Beermix dispensing = tap.=20 One five-gallon syrup container will dispense an amount sufficient = for about 310 twelve-ounce servings, equivalent to about 13 cases = or=20 four kegs of beer. The practical effect is that 24 gallons of water = need not be transported. Industry observers predict this = technology=20 will ease the burden on retailers and make beer more accessible to = the=20 consumer. As one observer put it, "it's only a matter of time = before=20 the other major breweries are forced to adopt similar technology to = compete in today's better, faster, cheaper marketplace." - Source:=20 Yougotta B. Kiddingme Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 19:18:00 -0500 (EST) From: S&R Moed <bina at idirect.com> Subject: Wort caramelization? Greetings all, I have been reading the HB Digest for a few years on and off, and I'm usually in lurker mode, but after all the inspiration this forum provides, I've decided to change from 20 years of extract brewing to "all grain". Now the reason for breaking the silence: The only thing holding me back from going all grain is having to boil the wort. This has been a problem for me in the past. Any time I have boiled a wort from extract I always end up with a bitter/sweet taste which I attribute to caramelization. It is not overpowering but it is strong enough to cause me to throw a few batches out. I have been boiling 4 pounds of extract in 2.5 gallons of water, then topping up to 5 gallons. I tried everything from changing; fermentation temps., changing yeast types, different hops, eliminating dextrose, and using different kits, always with the same result. When I eliminate the boil & dry hop, I eliminate the bitter/sweet taste. I currently use an old enamel canning pot in good shape on my electric stove. Here are my questions: 1.Could I be scorching the wort because of the heat or because the pot is to thin.? 2. Should I use a heavier pot? 3. Could it be because the wort is to concentrated? 4. should I go for a gentle boil? 5.Should I use a propane burner? 6. Do any of you have caramelization problems? I don't think it is my proceedures as I have read alot of the books. If it's not caramelization what could it be? Any help or experience would be greatly appreciated. Brewing in the Great White North ehhh! Rob Moed Oakville, Ontario, Canada. bina at idirect.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 16:29:24 -0800 From: Chasman <cwhudak at gemini.adnc.com> Subject: Rootbeer, sparging, etc. Dave writes: >Subject: root beer <snip> > Made some from extract this summer. Was >nervous about putting yeast in that much sugar water and capping it up. >Only used 1/2 tsp. of dry ale yeast and mixed it up and bottled. > Waited <snip> > When we sampled there was NO carbonation at all. Never >developed any over 4 months the stuff was arround. Still made fairly >good root beer floats. >Now I want to try this again WITH carbonation. So will someone tell me >how to bottle condition this without blowing up the basement? How much >yeast can I / should I use? What kind? Why doesn't it blow up? I've done this and used any regular beer or wine yeast (didn't matter). You've got to add plenty of yeast though. I used some soda extracts (check your homebrew store) and they had guidelines for how much yeast to add per gallon of soda. Basically, I think that since their is no nutrients in the mixture, only sucrose, the medium doesn't really support significant yeast growth, only enough to get a good carbonation. Bottling in 2L bottles helps because you can monitor the firmness of the bottle and vent a little if you're inclined to worry. I've done it just as the recipes (on the extract bottles) suggested and bottled in glass and had no problems. Dennis asked about sparging: >With the exception of getting more of the sugars present in the mash, >what other benefits are there to sparging? Well, none that I can think. Course you'll have to dilute those first runnings to get your gravity down. More of a matter of thrift. Brewers have always tended to be frugal and sparging was a way to maximize sugar extraction without deleterious effects (such as oversparging will cause). > >Or if spending a few extra dollars for a few extra pounds of grain is >not a problem what elements of beer are being missed by not sparging? Yeah, and many brewers do just this when making high gravity beers. Using extra grain to get the S.G. of the first runnings up and blowing off sparging altogether. Course the thrifty folks like myself are thinking "hmmm, bet I could make a great mild with the second runnings...." C-- Charles Hudak cwhudak at adnc.com "If God had intended for us to drink beer, he would have given us stomachs." - --Unknown Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 19:45:39 -0500 From: sscott at lightlink.com (Steve Scott) Subject: Re: Huh? On Tue, 28 Oct 1997 09:46:40 -0500 (EST), you wrote: >>>First off, I know what comes out of my LP tank, but what do you call >>>"natural gas"? > >>Actually they're both the same thing - methane. > >Um, no. LP =3D Liquid Propane. Natural gas =3D methane. Propane <> = methane.=20 >C3H8<>CH4... Actually, I meant what I said but I wasn't very clear. The original author wrote: >First off, I know what comes out of my LP tank, but what do you call >"natural gas"? (and don't say "a fart" -- I mean the stuff you cook >with!) I was responding to:=20 >"natural gas"? (and don't say "a fart" -- I mean the stuff you cook >with!) Both natural gas and the fart are methane. Not at all clear though. Sorry for the confusion. >The main problem in converting the two is the DELIVERY PRESSURE of the=20 >gasses. Natural gas requires a smaller orifice than LP because the=20 >delivery pressure is lower (or so it was once explained to me). As for=20 >the flame going out, it's the same concern as with most kitchen stoves:=20 >The device to turn the gas off should the flame go out is li'l ol' you.=20 >The difference is in the location of the valve handle.=20 Methane requires a larger orifice. It has a delivery pressure of about 7" WC while propane is about 11" WC. You're right about the stove but there is a heck of a difference in magnitude. A range burner is about 7,000 btu while your King Kooker type may be up around 170,000 btu. So one minute of a no flame situation with the King Kooker is equal to about 25 minutes of the range. Now let's say you're away for maybe 2 or 3 minutes. If letting your kitchen stove spew unburnt gas for an hour or so doesn't bother then go right ahead. :) ** The problem with the average family today is that it's=20 impossible to support it and the government on one income. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 97 08:56:19 +0800 From: Luke.L.Morris at woodside.com.au Subject: It's not all methane ! Someone wrote (Re: Gas -- Natural vs. Propane): >>First off, I know what comes out of my LP tank, but what do you call >>"natural gas"? (and don't say "a fart" -- I mean the stuff you cook >>with!) >Actually they're both the same thing - methane. Sorry, this is simply wrong. Natural Gas (NG) is methane and/or ethane. LP gas (LPG) is propane and/or butane. NG is lighter than air, LPG is heavier than air. NG cannot be compressed into a liquid in an LPG tank at ambient temparature (as LPG can). Burning characteristics (upper and lower limits of flammability; energy of combustion) are totally different for these gases. Don not confuse the two. They are not interchangeable, let alone the same. >>I know this next question has been answered before, but I always get >>confused. I've got my cajun cooker -- or some compatible propane >>cooking device. If I want to have a natural gas line dropped down into >>my basement to use this puppy, what conversions are in order? >><snip> >>cost of converting a (paid for) LP cooker end up being more than buying >>a natural gas cooker? Where does one find natural gas cookers of this >>type. >The major problem with converting a cooker such as this or finding a >methane cooker is that they're both designed to be used outdoors. >Neither has any means of shutting down the gas flow if the main burner >goes out. What about a NG (or even LPG) stovetop ? Not all of these have flame-failure devices. It is generally accepted that LPG should not be used in places where it can "pool" (being heavier than air), and then ignite when an ignition source becomes available. eg. basements and confined spaces with poor ventilation. <snip> >Find a burner that will shut down >the gas valve if the flame goes out if you're planning on brewing >indoors. Not that important, really. If you're brewing you will be standing next to your brewpot most of the time. Therefore the brewer acts as flame-failure device. Sorry for wasting HBD-space with info that most people probably know - but there may be someone out there who would have taken this as truth ! Regards, Luke Morris Brewing in Perth, Western Australia (and, until 5 years ago, working as an engineer for an LPG company). Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 12:27:13 -1000 From: Miguel de Salas <mm_de at postoffice.utas.edu.au> Subject: Hydrometer blues Harlan Bauer wrote: >After reading "How to Get the Most out of Your Measuring Instruments" in the >most recent issue of Brewing Techniques, I decided to check the accuracy of >my "trusty" hydrometer. It was a real eye-opener! First, I checked it in >distilled water, something I had done before: 1.000, just like it should be. >Then, following the instructions in the article, I measured 50-g NaCl into >my 1000-mL volumetric flask (Class A). The gravity should have read 1.050, >but instead read at 1.035. Not even close. Distilled water should indeed measure 1.000 if it's at the correct temperature (in my hydrometer 20 C, in most others 16) The problem with your reasoning is that you are assuming that a 1 litre solution of 50g of salt on water should have a gravity of 1.050, and that is wrong. If you added 50g of salt to 1 litre of water, and the VOLUME didn't change, ie. it was still 1 litre, then you would have a solution of gravity 1.050. However the problem lies in the fact that on adding the 50g of salt, some of the water is displaced. This is the reason why you add the solute first, then the solvent up to the mark. This volume of displaced water, in your case, I would bet would weigh close to 15g, which would make up for the missing gravity. You see, a solution of gravity 1.050 is one that weighs 1.050 grams per litre. As the salt added takes up volume, your 1 litre of solution will not in fact weigh 1.050 grams, because it does not include BOTH 1 litre of water AND 50 grams of salt. Hence the difference. I'd tend to trust hydrometers more than that. I think small variations within hydrometers are unavoidable, but your big difference is explainable in other terms. Hope it helps/ - ----- Miguel de Salas, in Hobart, Tasmania, Australia. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 97 23:33:01 PST From: "Rob Moline" <brewer at ames.net> Subject: Jethro on Wine Yeast in B-W's Wine Yeast and Barleywines.... Dave Burley sez... > For those sparkling barleywine makers and mead makers. S Bayanus ( Red >Star Premiere Cuvee or aka Prisse de Mousse and Lalvin 1118) will ferment >to about 18% alcohol and not give this smell. = This has not been my experience, though it was my intent when I made the 4th batch of Big 12 Barleywine. (No, it didn't go down the drain!) Being not quite the bright spark that I thought I was, my attempt to improve the B-W, or at least engage in experimentation, proved disappointing. This was the one I hit with the champagne yeast first, then the ale yeast.....turned out to be a respectable Strong Ale , but I had to do a lot of tweaking to get the gravity down, it stopped at 14 Plato. To get the ale yeast going and finish it off required a new pitch of ale yeast, with a dose of O2, and that never really got going strong, just trickled along....Then I hit it with 2 batches of ale yeast, that had been going through lag phase for 8 or 9 hours in 5 gallons of wort, a new dose of O2, and then it took off again like a champ. I called it "If It Ain't Broke, Don't Fix It" Ale, which was changed later to "Flint Hills Strong Ale.' Almost Belgian Strong Ale in characteristics, I had it entered for this year GABF for Strong Ales. I spoke with Gordon Specht and Clayton Cone of Lallemand about this situation, and Mr. Cone was the one who informed me that the champagne yeast, EC-1118, was not able to eat all the various sugars that the ale yeast could, and while it was able to eat a few of the sugars that the ale yeast couldn't, at the end of ale yeast fermentation, and thus 'polish' (my un-scientific terminology) the B-W off, it was unsuitable for my intended purpose. I have heard of brewers, anecdotally, that have used wine yeasts to ferment out B-W's, but have never met one personally, and while I can't state that it won't work, I know it didn't for me. Rob Moline Brewer At Large brewer at ames.net "The More I Know About Beer, The More I Realize I Need To Know More About Beer!" Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 00:34:32 -0500 From: sscott at lightlink.com (Steve Scott) Subject: Natural or LP clarification I posted a response to a question a couple of days that seems to have really started a firestorm. The question was: >First off, I know what comes out of my LP tank, but what do you call >"natural gas"? (and don't say "a fart" -- I mean the stuff you cook >with!) And my response: >Actually they're both the same thing - methane. I didn't mean that propane and natural gas were the same although it sure looks like that's what I was saying. I meant that natural gas and a fart are the same. Both methane. Sorry for the confusion on this. Steve ** The problem with the average family today is that it's=20 impossible to support it and the government on one income. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 00:52:31 -0500 From: emccormick <emccormick at usa.net> Subject: Re: Root beer I generally use 1 packet of Red Star pasteure champagne yeast for a four gallon batch of pop using the Rainbow Flavors extracts at one bottle extract to eight cups of sugar as per the recipe included with the extract. Sarsparilla and birch beer I have problems with carbonating. Ginger beer is usually pretty reliable. Passion fruit has sent shards of bottles all over the house (we are still finding stray bits three months later) and it tastes like perfume to me anyway. Strawberry also over carbonated and the cherry just tastes like cough syrup to me. We haven't tried the root beer. Hope that helps. - -- <Ed McCormick - e-mail: emccormick at usa.net> Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 02:44:44 -0500 (EST) From: SClaus4688 at aol.com Subject: filter size A couple days ago, Ian Smith asked about the best micron size for filtering. This question has come up in the past here and on RCB, but I have refrained from responding, even though I've been using filters for several years (and even though I often didn't agree with others' responses to the question). The simple reason is that I was busy muddling through just about every mistake you can make with a filter and didn't feel I had enough data to give a satisfactory answer. However, my years of muddling have finally paid off. After using every type and micron size of cartridge filter readily available to homebrewers, in my opinion the unit to use is the 5 micron absolute rated pleated polypropelene 10" cartridge filter. It offers the best compromise between clarity, longevity and body/flavor/color retention. The 1 micron and 0.5 micron absolute rated pleated filters will get your beer brilliantly clear but will strip an unacceptable amount of body and flavor from all but the lightest beers. Also, because they take more out of your beer than the 5 micron, they will wear out faster (i.e., clog and become generally useless even after backflushing), which is an important consideration given that they cost about 35 bucks. The spun polypropelene and spun cotton filters that are commonly available at hardware stores are, at best, about 70 percent efficient at their stated micron rating (compared to 95 plus percent for the pleated filters). For that reason, they are really not that useful for filtering anything but stouts (where you won't be able to tell that the beer is still cloudy!). They are also less cleanable than the pleated filters. In my opinion, the only worthwhile use for a filter in homebrewing is to speed the removal of yeast from finished beer. The 5 micron absolute rated pleated polypro does that. If you still have haze problems after using the 5 micron, you will be better served to look to other parts of your beer making process (e.g., mash schedule, malt selection, sanitation ....) than to move to a finer filter. Two final quick notes: 1) ALWAYS flush all O2 from the filter housing before filtering; and 2) NEVER soak a polypro filter in bleach, because the polypro will permanently swell and leave you with 35 bucks worth of useless junk (e-mail me if you need detailed info on use and cleaning of a cartridge filter - this is another area where I've muddled through every possible mistake). -Steve Claussen in PDX PS - Check out Al K's brewery tours on his web site, they're REALLY great. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 07:38:22 -0500 (EST) From: MicahM1269 at aol.com Subject: Malt Advocate Does anyone out there in HBD land know how to contact the Malt Advocate magazine? A phone number or e-mail address would be great. respond via e-mail to micahm1269 at aol.com TIA micah millspaw - brewer at large Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 07:48:35 -0500 From: Dave Whitman <dwhitman at rohmhaas.com> Subject: freezing propane In HBD#2543, Alan McKay worries about freezing his propane tank if stored outdoors at temperatures as low as -35C. According to CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, you don't need to worry about freezing the propane, although you're coming very close to liquifying it. The melting point is -190C, boiling point is -41C. The pressure in the tank will go down dramatically as you cool it, which might make it hard to get a good flame on your burner. - --- Dave Whitman dwhitman at rohmhaas.com "Opinions expressed are those of the author, and not Rohm and Haas Company" Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 17:37:36 +200 From: "Braam Greyling" <braam.greyling at azona.com> Subject: Hops rhizomes Hi all, Where can I get some Saaz, fuggles and other aromatic hops rhizomes? I am willing to import from the States,Europe or any other country. Please let me know if you can help. Thanks Braam Greyling I.C. Design Engineer Azona(Pty)Ltd tel +27 12 6641910 fax +27 12 6641393 You can taste a good beer with one sip, but it is better to make thoroughly sure. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 10:54:47 -0600 From: "Paul A. Baker" <pbaker at facstaff.wisc.edu> Subject: multiple racking While my recent batch of "Thames River Bitter" was fermenting, the Irish moss did a very good job of clarifying the beer and creating a thick trub. So good, in fact, that I yielded to the temptation to rack my 5-gallon batch not once, but twice, before bottling. I was careful while siphoning to avoid splashes and bubbles. Still, just a few days after bottling, each bottle has a healthy sediment. Is it necessary to rack more than once? Does it help? Paul Baker pbaker at facstaff.wisc.edu (608) 263-8814 Wisconsin Center for Education Research http://www.wcer.wisc.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 12:03:52 -0800 From: George_De_Piro at berlex.com (George De Piro) Subject: Re: A cry for help regarding HSA Hi all, Greg is confused about HSA (hot side aeration). He cries out for help from Obi-Wan (but will accept it from Al or George). Did you mean me, or George Fix? You must be specific... The reason you need not worry about aerating hot sparge water is that oxygen will not stay in solution for long in 170F (77C) water. "But wait!" you may say. "Then why must I worry about it during the boil? Surely the oxygen isn't going to stay in boiling wort." You need to avoid aerating hot wort because the oxygen will oxidize wort material very quickly. It need not stay in solution long to do its damage. Sparge water, on the other hand, has nothing of consequence in it to oxidize, so you need not be as careful. By the time the water makes its way to the oxidizable wort, it will have lost its gaseous components. Have fun! George De Piro (Nyack, NY) Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 97 11:19:58 EST From: Tim.Watkins at analog.com Subject: WYeast 2112 >From: "John Robinson" <robinson at novalis.ca> >Subject: Wyeast 2112 > >Has anyone tried fermenting with Wyeast 2112 at around 50 F? I've >read the sheet they put out on their yeasts and it seems to indicate >that 58 F is about the minimum temperature. I made a Classic American Pilsner using this yeast. I found that it didn't ferment very well at 50F. I waited a 3weeks to a month at that temperature, and it was still only about half way done. I increased the temperature to about 58F, which is the low end of the range published for this yeast. Once the temp got up there, the yeast worked fine. Regards, Tim Lowell, MA Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 12:53:44 -0600 From: "Paul A. Baker" <pbaker at facstaff.wisc.edu> Subject: how many glass carboys does it take. . . Fellow chemists: I'm taking an informal survey. Please E-mail me at pbaker at facstaff.wisc.edu and tell me: how many glass carboys do you use? After six months of homebrewing I'm finding that just one probably ain't gonna cut it. Thanks. . Paul Baker pbaker at facstaff.wisc.edu (608) 263-8814 Wisconsin Center for Education Research http://www.wcer.wisc.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 10:26:05 -0800 From: michael rose <mrose at ucr.campus.mci.net> Subject: E.S.B. Wyeast 1968 I want to brew an E.S.B. using wyeast 1968(London ESB) Most of the info I've seen on this yeast states that it needs aeration and agitation during fermentation in order to perform well. Does the following sound correct? 1) I O2 for ten minutes at low pressure before pitching, and then O2 for 1 minute every hour until airlock activity peaks? I hoping that remaining CO2 scrubs out remaining O2. 2)As far as agitation goes, can I just swirl fermenting bucket around or do I need to pop lid and stir it with a spoon every hour(sanatation headach) P.S. As far as this Stein beir thread is concerned, I thought JOKINGLY to myself; why not dump extract and let it carmelize on the bottom of the boiling kettle, then ferment in the same kettle? This would save building the wooden vessel, collecting tons of exploding rocks, removeing the roof so that the crane can get into the kitchen, etc. Thanks, Mike Rose Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 10:00:00 -0800 From: John_E_Schnupp at amat.com Subject: siphon woes, no more Thanks to all who sent me their opinions a while back concerning my siphoning problems. I've just finished brewing a Honey Wheat and I must say for the first time in a long time I didn't have any problems getting all of the wort from the brewpot to the carboy. By far the most suggested answer was to drill more holes in my copper loop. Someone also suggested using the SS braid from a reinforced washing machine hose. I did both. I used to have to start my boil with about 7 gallons and that would usually give be not much more that 4.5 gallons in the carboy, not today. I got 5.5 gallons. Looks like I'll need to adjust the volume of wort at the beginning of the boil. I was left with just a big pile of hops at the bottom of the brew pot (not even one little hop leaf made it to the fermentor, as far as I can tell). A substantial amount of break material was also left behind in the brew pot. Just wanted to say thanks, John Schnupp, N3CNL Colchester, VT 95 XLH 1200 Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 11:28:23 -0700 From: "Grant W. Knechtel" <GWK at hartcrowser.com> Subject: Adding Adjuncts post boil? Bill H. posted this follow up (in part) to the Brew & Views bulletin board at the Brewery site, and I would like to pose it to the collective: > My brew shop instructs (for us novice brewers) to bring the water to >a boil, take off the burner, add the extract, stir to dissolve, add the >boiling hops, return to burner and boil for an hour. Then take off the >heat, add finishing hops and finishing grains at this point (water no >longer boiling). let sit for 15 minutes then move boiling pot to an ice >water bath to cool. I have let it cool there for roughly 15 minutes before >pouring into my primary by pouring through a sanitized colander, then >adding water up to the 5 gallon level, then pitching the yeast. >I have had literally perfect success using this technique on four >batches for modestly simple ales using Wyeast 1028 (London). <snip> >Now, my beer is tastes relatively nasty when bottled for only one >week, but from two weeks on it has been very tasty (once carbonated, >I have had a little trouble in this arena). >Question for everyone, what is wrong with my technique if anything? It >seems to me a more idiot proof process than having to make sure I get >my grains out of the water before it boils and I have never yet used a >thermometer or hydrometer (I am not looking to enter contests, just drink >tasty brew). The question for the collective is this, I've not heard of steeping adjuncts post boil. I imagine this would affect hop utilization but what else? Proteins/ hot/cold break? Tannins? Is this technique used elsewhere? Why or why not? The HSA question was already being discussed. -Grant Neue Des Moines Hausbrauerei Des Moines, Washington Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 12:23:00 From: "Bryan L. Gros" <gros at bigfoot.com> Subject: good extract beers? Seems to me that the two most difficult things to achieve with extract beers are 1) very pale beers and 2) malty beers or beers with a lot of body. The challenge for extract brewers is knowing their malts. With experience, I'm sure you can pick and choose the right malts to get the beer you want. That's what sets an advanced brewer apart from a beginning brewer. And that's essentially what Pat Babcock wrote. - Bryan gros at bigfoot.com Oakland, CA Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 97 13:48:42 CST From: jwilkins at imtn.tpd.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson) Subject: Murphy's Stout Vince Mitchell asked about a recipe to mimic Murphy's Stout. There is one in the book Brew Classic European Beers At Home by Wheeler and Protz. I got the book from Brewer's Resource (800) 827-3983. It is also available through All About Beer magazine but I don't have that number. The book has several interesting recipes I plan to try and is well written, as are the other Wheeler/Protz books I have read. The most enjoyable brewing books I have read yet. I haven't tried the Murphy's recipe yet but tried their recipe for Guinness from Brew Your Own Real Ale At Home and like it a lot. It is not really like Guinness but an excellent stout nonetheless. They say in the book that exact duplication of any commercial beer is unlikely. I have certainly found that to be the case with all the attempts I have made with various beers. I have never managed to duplicate a commercial beer but have brewed a lot of beers I like, some better than the originals (in my opinion). John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins at imtn.dsccc.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 13:51:54 -0600 (CST) From: Steve Johnson <JOHNSOSM at ctrvax.Vanderbilt.Edu> Subject: Results of 2nd Annual Music City Brew-Off Here are the results of the 2nd Annual Music City Brew-Off, Oct. 25, in Nashville, TN BOS: George Fix, Arlington TX for "Yellow Rose" in American Lager /Cream Ale category TN Homebrewer of the Year: John & Doran Moranville, Memphis TN Best of Ales: Chuck & Patty Bernard, Nashville Best of Lagers: Douglas McCullough, Birmingham AL Legislators' Choice: John & Doran Moranville, Memphis TN Style Category Winners Hometown American Pale Ales John/Doran Moranville, Memphis 2. Jeff York, Knoxville, TN 3. Thomas Vista, Nashville Belgian Ales 1. John MacDougall, Nashville 2. Robert Lewis, Memphis 3. John/Doran Moranville, Memphis Brown/Mild/Scottish 1. Steve Johnson, Nashville 2. John/Doran Moranville, Memphis 3. John/Doran Moranville, Memphis Dark Lagers 1. John/Doran Moranville, Memphis 2. John LaVoy, Huntsville, AL 3. Bryan/Lisa Gros, Oakland, CA English Pale Ales 1. Chuck/Patty Bernard, Nashville, TN 2. George Fix, Arlington, TX 3. John/Doran Moranville, Memphis Hybrids 1. Kenny McDonald/Andy Humphries, Memphis TN 2. John/Doran Moranville, Memphis 3. John/Keli Hinson, Athens GA Stouts/Porters 1. Pete Knobbe, St. Louis, MO 2. Mike Hamman, Huntsville, AL 3. Pat Rohrbacher, Memphis TN Wheat Beers 1. Chuck/Patty Bernard, Nashville 2. Mike Fitzpatrick, Fenton MO 3. Steve Johnson, Nashville Strong/Old/Barley Wine 1. John/Doran Moranville, Memphis 2. Bryan/Lisa Gros, Oakland CA 3. Mike Lee, Memphis Pale Lagers 1. George Fix, Arlington TX 2. Linus Hall, Nashville 3. Jeff Kohl, Nashville Vienna/Marzen/Oktoberfest1. Douglas McCullough, Birmingham AL 2. Jim Arbuckle, Franklin TN 3. Ed Morris, St. Louis, MO Specialty 1. John/Doran Moranville, Memphis 2. Linus Hall, Brentwood, TN 3. Bill Harpole/Paul Thompson, Nashville Meads/Ciders 1. Kenny McDonald, Memphis 2. Kenny McDonald, Memphis 3. Robert Lewis, Memphis Thanks to all who judged (26 total judges) stewarded, and entered (148 entries), along with all our sponsors giving $1800 prizes and merchandise! Thanks for the bandwidth, HBD Steve Johnson, President Music City Brewers Nashville, TN Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 14:07:31 -0600 (CST) From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com> Subject: HSA Greg asks about aeration in the mash. I believe that HSA *is* a real concern regarding the mash. Check those archives for HSA and Scandrett or "Scandrett and mash and aeration." Charlie posted in 1996 or 1997 that aeration during the mash could very well be *much worse* than aeration of even hot wort. Older breweries indeed introduce quite a bit of HSA and their beer suffers for it. Modern German breweres are designed to be virtually oxygen-free until the wort is cooled. This comes from George Fix's posts. I believe that some breweries even go so far as to deaerate the strike and sparge water! I do believe that sprinkling hot sparge water is not nearly as bad as it may look in a commercial brewery... recall that the mash is steaming quite a bit and the sparge water is too. If you keep the doors closed on the laeuter tun, much of the oxygen will be purged from the tun by the steam. This is the same reason that vigorous boils don't result in aeration. So, the bottom line is that you should indeed try to minimize aeration of the mash. Al. Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL korz at xnet.com My new website (still under construction, but up-and-running): http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/ Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 10:10:22 -0500 From: "Paul A. Hausman" <lion!paul at saturn.planet.net> Subject: Re: ODD. . . In HBD #2543, stargazer wrote: Slightly off topic and trolling for amusement: So why is it we've cigar affectionadoes (sp?), wine connoisseurs, and beer snobs? Is this a class thing? Connoisser is actually correct; expert on/lover of taste, but doesn't quite sit as nicely as beer snob. I'd say that's simple; Beer snobs are unpretentious. Wine connoisseurs and cigar aficionados (although I prefer your spelling and its implication of affection/affectation) want to believe that they have something special that the unwashed masses are incapable of even comprehending. So they use the biggest words they can find. We're willing to admit that we have something special that perhaps the rest of the world just may not want or care about. Or maybe we just don't know enough big words. Anyone care to suggest an appropriate big word to throw back at the connoisseurs, aficionados, esthetes, and refined percipients of other enjoyments? Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 15:34:36 -0600 (CST) From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com> Subject: Belgian White Recipe Bob posted a Belgian White recipe that worked for him. It included 1# of wheat malt, 1# of carapils and the orange peel was identified as "Navel Orange." His procedures: >Put the grains in 3 qts water, bring to a boil, and steep for one hour. The beer was cloudy, right? The "real thing" is cloudy too, but it's from proteins. What we have here is starch haze and it can lead to bigger problems. Since the grains were boiled, the enzymes in the wheat were denatured and the starch extracted could not be convered to sugars. >Sparge the grains in enough water to bring total volume to 2.5 gallons. >Add gypsum, malt, and sugar and boil for 15 minutes. Add hops and boil for >1 hour. Add Irish Moss last 15 minutes. Remove from heat, add finish >hops, corriander, orange peel, and let stand for 10 minutes. Pour wort >over a layer of ice in fermenting bucket (cooling technique is optional). This is a recipe for hot-side aeration. It will result in premature staling and a sherrylike aroma. At first, before I had a wort chiller, I used to put sanitary ice cubes (froze some pre-boiled water) directly into my boiling wort in the kettle. The improvement in my beer (over pouring hot wort into cold water) was amazing. I built a wort chiller the very next week. >Bring volume to 5 gals. Corriander and orange peel are left in the wort >during primary fermentation. Pitched yeast at 70 F. Speaking of which, the oranges used in real Wits are "Belgian Sweet Orange" and "Curacao Orange." Neither of these are anything like "Navel Oranges," which, as a matter of fact, will give your beer a "hamlike" aroma. Finally, although this would not be possible without at least a partial mash, Wits are actually brewed with *unmalted* barley, which is said to give a "different flavour" (Pierre Celis' words, not mine) than malted wheat. It's also partly why Witbiers are cloudy -- it's all the proteins from the unmalted wheat. Bob's beer may have been delicious, but I just wanted to point out that it was different from traditional Witbier recipes in more than just the brown sugar and original gravity. Al. Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL korz at xnet.com My new website (still under construction, but up-and-running): http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/ Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 17:53:07 -0500 From: ejb11 at psu.edu (Edward J. Basgall) Subject: propane tank freeze? >I don't like the idea of storing my propane tanks (regular BBQ sized) >inside the house, but I'm wondering if the things are going to freeze outside. Alan, I doubt it. I keep mine on my BBQ grill out all winter and use it often. Remote homes use big tanks of propane for heating and cooking with little problems. OK, occassionally the valve might freeze up from condensation but the freezing point of propane gas itself is -189.7C (-309.4F) that is just above that of liquid nitrogen at -196C (CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics). cheers ed basgall SCUM State College Underground Maltsters State College, PA Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 23:10:24 -0500 From: emccormick <emccormick at usa.net> Subject: Re: Will a propane tank freeze? I wouldn't worry about it. The tanks will not freeze and burst on you. But I definately wouldn't store them inside under any conditions. If the tank leaked, you may not notice it before your home (or garage) became matchwood. While it normally doesn't get that cold here (lowest maybe -35 at WORST), we have actually used the BBQ during some rather terrible weather to smoke a turkey for Thanksgiving or ham for Xmas. The cold weather doesn't seem to bother the propane to any extent we can notice. If you want to keep them out of the weather, anything to keep the snow and junk off will do just fine outside. Pop them in a garbage bag and tie it shut well. They'll be just fine. - -- <Ed McCormick - e-mail: emccormick at usa.net> Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 23:28:21 -0500 From: emccormick <emccormick at usa.net> Subject: Re: Instructional videotapes Paul A. Baker asked about instructional videotapes on brewing. I found one in the Lake Superior Brewing Co. catalog. Order # CV100 at $49.95. Phone 1-800-345-CORK. The VERY brief reference states "Video guide on home brewing" and thats it. I do not have the video, so have no idea how helpful it would be. Though I have no connection with this company beyond being a customer, I've had good service from them and will not hesitate to order from them again. They also have a CYBEER CD-ROM which boasts a video presentation of home brewing and recipes. 486/33, WIN95, 8 meg ram, 2x or faster CD-ROM drive and 10 meg hard drive space required. Order # CV-200 at $29.95. Might check with the local library to see if they have anything, not to mention the local brew club. Perhaps they shot an instructional video for new members (not a bad idea folks). Actually a brew club shooting such a video might be a real boon to new brewers and if you can provide even minimal editing, you may have a marketable product! At the very least it can be a loaner for newbies in the group. - -- <Ed McCormick - e-mail: emccormick at usa.net> Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 00:46:11 -0500 From: emccormick <emccormick at usa.net> Subject: Re: Odd... Personally, I suspect the "beer snobs" label probably spread from a drunken party where someone actually had the guts to ask if they had any imports available instead of just laying down under the pony keg to catch the overflow before it hit the floor. - -- <Ed McCormick - e-mail: emccormick at usa.net> Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 10/31/97, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96