HOMEBREW Digest #2569 Fri 28 November 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

  yeast, cows and PDA (Daniel S McConnell)
  Malting (Keith Menefy)
  Craft Brewers Method Bood ("Harold R. Wood")
  Press Release: MCAB Announces Qualifying Styles ("Louis K. Bonham")
  Mashing in a cooler? ("Ellery.Samuels")
  Clinitest,Sake tour ("David R. Burley")
  [Fwd: Re: microscopes; plus thoughts and questions on yeast.] (Clifton Moore)
  Subject: re: O2 requirement? (Clifton Moore)
  Foamy Matters (Rob Kienle)
  Slick Alarm Thermometer for the Gadgeteers (like me) (Jim Anderson)
  Boddingtons Pub Ale clone? (Sean Mick)
  cost justification (Mark Tumarkin)
  Pitching Rates ("David Johnson")
  A prayer (Jonathan Hare)
  beer data (ensmingr)
  Jethro on S.O. Approval/ WST/ 3 (4) Books/Bottle da BW/Pellets vs ("Rob Moline")
  Water Softeners, starch and low CO2 in kegs (Chasman)
  Re: kegging (Ritter, Sharon/Dan )
  Mint Chocolate Stout Update (John Penn)
  Glucose/Cidery Flavors ("Patrick E. Humphrey")
  Kegging vs. Bottling ("Kensler, Paul")
  Cleaning AL kettles ("Kensler, Paul")
  Suggested temp profile for American Wheat? (Dan Cole)
  yeast propagation (SocialKing)

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, 25 Nov 1997 15:37:25 -0500 From: danmcc at umich.edu (Daniel S McConnell) Subject: yeast, cows and PDA From: ajdel at mindspring.com (AJ) > >Scott Murman asked what kind of microscope setup is required to identify >the different strains of yeast. Such a system requires a special substage >condenser (phase contrast), special objectives (phase contrast), ordinary >oculars, ordinary eyeballs and a brain like Dan McConnell's. Actually, it would take a brain far better than his to correctly identify a particular strain with out any other information. Misquoted or misunderstood? I don't know, but I read it. In any case, it's an amusing comment and I should expect a bit of flack from this group. If AJ only knew the state of that particular brain lately....... Having said that, one *can* see characteristic *differences* between the strains. American ale tends to be rounder, W306 and W68 tend to be more elongated ovals, Brett. tends to be elongated and less oval. But to look at a slide of yeast, not knowing the growth conditions or having a clue what strain it might be, no way. I would never bet on whether a strain is a lager or an ale. Well, I would bet on Brettanomyces, but only with a gram stain and 1000 x oil imersion. It still is not 100% sure. >I suppose it is like a farmer being able to recognize his individual >cows (but yeast don't have those tags in their ears). My experience with cows is that they are easy to tell apart unless you are really far away and then some have been mistaken as deer. >So given that you can't practically identify strains with a microscope, how >do you do it? Microbiologists have sophisticated techniques based on what >the organism will or will not grow on, what metabaolites they produce, the >appearance of colonies what "antibiotics" suppress growth and so on which >they use to differentiate organisms. Right. Even Wallerstein Nutirient Agar (one of the simplier methods) which will show very distinct differences between strains with respect to the uptake of dye is not specific enough to identify a strain by eye. It is useful if you are a brewery and plate the same strain day after day and one day you see a different looking colony appear. - ------------- >From: Luke.L.Morris at woodside.com.au >So I approached a microbiological lab supply company. They are able to >supply me with prepared 5ml slopes at a cost of A$9.60 (about US$7.10) >for a box of 10. The slopes are guaranteed sterile. They are purpose >made for yeast culturing and are prepared with potato dextrose agar >which has been acidified slightly to discourage bacterial growth. Sounds like a good deal to me. You might be better off if they could provide you with Yeast Maltose Agar (YMA) instead of PDA. DanMcC (about five miles southeast of Jeff Renner) (__) (oo) U /-------\/ /---V / | || * |--| . * ||----|| ^^ ^^ Cow at 10,000 meters Cow at 1 meter. Cow at 100 meters. or Yeast at 0.001 meter. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 10:15:50 +1300 From: Keith Menefy <kmenefy at ihug.co.nz> Subject: Malting G'day A question for the maltsters Is the drying phase of malting barley absolutely necessary? Would it be possible to germinate the barley to the required stage and then go straight to the brewery for mashing. It seems to me that the drying is only required for the storage of the barley or does some other process happen? The reason I am asking this is I've only just started partial grain brews and have malted the barley myself. The tricky bit is drying the grain. If I could short circuit the system by deleting the drying bit it would make it so much easier. Cheers Keith Menefy Hukerenui New Zealand Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 07:47:52 +1100 From: "Harold R. Wood" <thewoods at netpci.com> Subject: Craft Brewers Method Bood Hello all, I have just ordered the Craft Brewers Method Book published by the ASBC. The book is to be published in December and costs around $60. It looks to be a comprehensive method book for small brewers and might be of interest to advanced homebrewers as well as professional craft brewers. Following are the main headings from the Table of Contents from the Craft Brewers Methods Book. (I would be happy to send the complete TOC to all who request and will submit the entire TOC to the HBD if there is interest.) Contents (Main Headings) Malt Methods Hops Methods Wort Methods Beer Methods Microbiology Methods Filter Aids Methods Sensory Analysis Methods Appendixes The book can be ordered from ASBS. (I am a humble member of the ASBC, but am not an employee or oficer and have no financial interest.) Rick Wood (Brewing in Paradise) Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 13:21:21 -0600 From: "Louis K. Bonham" <lkbonham at phoenix.net> Subject: Press Release: MCAB Announces Qualifying Styles November 25, 1997 For immediate release MCAB Announces Qualifying Styles The MCAB is pleased to announce the eighteen styles that will be featured at the first MCAB. These styles will be featured at each Qualifying Event, and first place winners in each Qualifying Style at each Qualifying Event will be invited to compete in that style at the MCAB. In keeping with its stated purpose of having a small, high quality national competition, the MCAB Steering Committee has decided to go with one substyle from each of BJCP categories 1-18. The committee expects that the substyles will rotate year-to-year within each category. The 1999 MCAB Qualifying Styles are: 1. Pre-Prohibition Lager (BJCP Category #1(d)). 2. Munich Helles (BJCP Category #2(e)). 3. American Wheat (BJCP Category #3(b)). 4. Ordinary Bitter (BJCP Category #4(a)). 5. Scottish Export 80 (BJCP Category #5(c)) 6. American Pale Ale (BJCP Category #6(b)). 7. India Pale Ale (BJCP Category #7) 8. Dusseldorfer Altbier (BJCP Category #8(a)). 9. Oktoberfest/Maerzen (BJCP Category #9(a)). 10. American Brown (BJCP Category #10(d)). 11. Barleywine (BJCP Category #11(d)). 12. Munich Dunkel (BJCP Category #12(a)). 13. Doppelbock (BJCP Category #13(c)). 14. Robust Porter (BJCP Category #14(a)). 15. Dry Stout (BJCP Category #15(a)). 16. Bavarian Weizen (BJCP Category #16(a)). 17. Tripel (BJCP Category #17(b)). 18. pLambic (BJCP Category #18(b)). At present, the following competitions have formally accepted the MCAB's invitation: Boston Homebrew Competition Bidal Society Competition BURP Spirit of Free Beer BUZZ-Off Dixie Cup So, start your kettles! The first QE's will be the Boston Homebrew Competition (and, if they accept, the Kansas City Brew Meister's Competition) on February 20-21. A complete list of QE's and contact persons for each, calendar of MCAB events, list of Qualifying Styles and the text of the BJCP Style Guides for each will soon be available at the MCAB website: hbd.org/mcab Questions or comments regarding the MCAB can be directed to Louis K. Bonham at lkbonham at phoenix.net Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 97 14:42:08 EDT From: "Ellery.Samuels" <esamuel at mvsb.nycenet.edu> Subject: Mashing in a cooler? I'm a partial-mash brewer who has been mashing on the stove and sparging in a bottling bucket. I need to improve this system and was thinking of using either a Gott/Igloo type cooler, an ez masher, or a combination Phil's sprger/lauter tun. Anyone have any feelings as to which is the best way to go. Not having any of these available to look at/ test etc. I rely on the homerbrew collective to help me out. If I go the way of the cooler do I then have to build a manifold with copper tubing and insert a false bottom to hold the grains? Is this difficult to do? Are there any references out there for me to check out ie. magaizines, web sites etc...? If possible private e-mail your response as I do not have much of a chance to check out this site on a regular basis. Ellery Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 10:36:10 -0500 From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: Clinitest,Sake tour Brewsters: Mark Tumarkin says: >I have a batch of porter that seems to be stuck at about 1.021. I didn't= >think it was quite done but wanted to be sure. It has been at that gravi= ty >for 7-10 days. So I thought this might be a good time to try using the >Clinitest. Yep, this is the perfect time when you don't know from experience what the FG should be or it looks flukey. >I found your instructions - you mentioned using 10 drops of beer and the= n >in a later post said oops, and that it should have been 5 drops. You als= o >said using 10 drops would be more exact but to divide the results by 2. = If >I understand this, you meant that if the test then showed 1%, it would >really be at 1/2 %. Is that correct? Yes, but the only real advantage to this is to average out the drop size a little better, so stick with the instructions. One thing you can do is use this technique to get a better feeling for in-between results by doubling the sample size and reading chart at twice the level. Say if you got 3/4%. = Repeating the test at double the amount should give you a reading at about 1.5%. Sometimes this may be useful. = >Using 5 drops, my reading comes out at 1%. Make sure you used the chart for 5 drops and not for 2 drops. > So it still needs to ferment >more. Since it has not changed even though I brought it into the house f= or >a warmer temp, and also swirled it a bit, I am thinking of adding more >yeast. Is this what you would suggest? = This is common problem this time of year when fermentation temperatures with ale yeasts fall below the mid-sixties, particularly near the end of the fermentation - but Florida?? Get the temperature of the beer to 70F, off the floor at least = a few inches. Prepare a re-starter from about a cup of beer and yeast siphoned from the bottom of the fermenter and from about a tablespoon of malt extract which has been = dissolved in a minimal amount of water, boiled and cooled. Add fermenting starter with the acclimated yeast back to your beer. > Also you had mentioned the >alternative of bottling with a higher remaining percentage of fermentabl= e >sugars and modifying the amount of sugar added for priming. Would you >please give me a little guidance on how to figure this as well? Depending on where you live, altitude wise and the kind of beer, typically most priming sugar is about 1%. You can use this test to modify the amount of sugar you add by reducing the priming sugar in accordance with what is in there already as detected by Clinitest. However, I only do this with bottling when I have a real time constraint as I like to get a major amount of the yeast out of the beer in the secondary. OTOH when I am lagering in Cornies under pressure, I do this all the time and the fermenting beer is racked into the Corni= e at around 1% sugar. Since I am going to filter with at least a 5u filter and properly adjust the carbonation before serving, this is the = best way to avoid oxidation of the beer during the transfer from the primary. = >There has been some talk in the digest recently concerning bottling vers= us >fermenting strains of yeast, especially in some of the Belgian ales. Is= >this usually done when the beer is filtered? I'll let AlK respond to Belgian ale techniques, but the most obvious = one few suspect are the wheat beers of Germany. = In their export versions, I have read they often filter all the beer = to make Kristal and then add back lager yeast in the case of bottle conditioned beer and in case of artificial carbonation they may just add back trub to give it that cloudy appearance. I don't think this is the case for non-export, but I don't know and I am sure it depends on the brewer. I am sure that hefeweiss contains yeast, but it may be dead due to pasteurization on export varieties and that cloudiness may be mostly trub. ( Which to the average German means cloudiness - but we know what it means) > In my case, I am thinking of >doing this because my yeast seem to be partied out. It is also possible that your yeast is partyed out because = the stout was too low in FANs due to an excessive amount of sugar put in there by the extract manufacturer ( if you are using extract). I had this happen to me once when I made a John Bull Stout for a brewing class I was teaching. If you can't re-start your fermentation easily, I suspect you will have to add some yeast nutrients which can provide the necessary materials for the yeast to function and finish out. = Scott Rohlf also wonders if his Barleywine is finished at 1.026. I suggest you try the Clinitest Tablet Test Kit and then you will know for sure. With Clinitest you can tell if you have finished the fermentation or not and then find out what kind of problem you may have, if any. You could not do this with just a hydrometer. - ----------------------------------------------------- Chris Smith says: >(now here's a stab in the dark:) >I headed for Kyoto, Japan next month for vacation >and I'd like to tour a sake brewery, preferably one >that has English- or Korean-speaking guides. = >Anybody have any suggestions on breweries or how >to go about finding one? Thanks. Chris, I suggest you contact my friend Mutsuo Hoshido at hoshido at gman.rme.sony.co.jp He is an avid home = sake brewer and is a member of a Japan-wide homebrewed sake network and has a friend who is a professional sake brewer of renown in Japan. = Chances are good he will set you up. Please say "Hi" for me, but don't mention Samsung ! {8^). - ---------------------------------------- = Keep on brewin' Dave Burley Kinnelon, NJ 07405 103164.3202 at compuserve.com Dave_Burley at compuserve.com = Voice e-mail OK = Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 13:31:20 -0900 From: Clifton Moore <cmoore at gi.alaska.edu> Subject: [Fwd: Re: microscopes; plus thoughts and questions on yeast.] This didn't make it at my first try at posting, so I will thy again. Seems there is enough interest in yeast ranching out there to risk a double post. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 14:05:27 -0900 From: Clifton Moore <cmoore at gi.alaska.edu> Subject: Subject: re: O2 requirement? >Maybe some of the mycologists could explain the oxygen requirement of >yeast in lay terms. I keep hearing O2 is needed to form cell walls, but >isn't most of the cell division occurring during fermentation, when O2 >is not required? Do the cells only divide during the time O2 is present >in "high" levels in wort? How much oxygen is really necessary and when >does the shift from respiration to fermentation occur? It is my >understanding that O2 actually represses the generation of ETOH and CO2 >in brewers yeast. I would really like to see some peer-reviewed >references on this confusing (to me) subject I'm not a mycologist, but I play one in my basement. These are all good questions as is evidenced by the level of controversy generated whenever a fellow brewer makes assertions as to what is 'really taking place'. I have a cartoon view of yeast growth that comes from my ancient education, current reading, and hours spent watching starters grow from slant scrapings. I am one who comes down on the side of yeast using O2 for the purpose of cell division. A case in point is the observation that a well aerated starter will generate little CO2 yet there looks to be very high reproductive rates in the starter. The O2 levels seem to crash rather quickly and the broth becomes foamy, and laden with CO2. Addition of more O2 seems to suppress fermentation, and effort presumably returns to cell division. Other limiting factors will likely influence the indefinite continuation of this relation. Eventually some critical lipid, or other required cellular building block, will be in short supply and the results are indeterminate. It may be that this is where weak cells start to result. Many of the anecdotal records made by brewers, try to fit undesirable yeast behavior into a simple box. One thing I am confident of, "there is nothing simple about yeast." As for looking to science to answer the question, I wouldn't be too optimistic. I believe the answer is to find what works for you and strive to incrementally improve results. I try to keep my cartoon views flexible. I will presently be flexing into the use of nutrients in my starters to see if I can keep cell division going for a longer time, while producing viable yeast volumes. The problem is that even estimating quantities of yeast produced is not easy. Just how thick is that gob of yeast on the bottom of my quart canning jar? How many are in suspension? If I can come up with an experiment that has a hope of even suggesting a useful quantitative result, I will run it. Otherwise we are left to act in a manner not unlike those who have been successful before us. This is what is known as a craft. Good brewing, and keep those cartoons coming. Clif Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 10:10:23 -0600 From: Rob Kienle <rkienle at interaccess.com> Subject: Foamy Matters - --------------FFB00139A45BC4DE173F7EF1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Andrew notes in HBD 2566... > While boiling, the foamy gunk that pops up is hot break, this too should be > skimmed off as it forms. > Hmm. I thought the hot break was the crud that collects on the bottom of the kettle (and that collects moreso with the addition of Irish Moss) just *after* the boil (during that time that we, or I anyway, spend waiting for everything to settle down before starting the transfer). Are you talking about the foam that forms on the top of the wort at the start of the boil? Same stuff? I've always wondered if I oughta skim that off. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong in assuming you're suggesting to do so. - -- Cheers4beers, Rob Kienle Chicago, IL rkienle at interaccess.com - --------------FFB00139A45BC4DE173F7EF1 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit <HTML> &nbsp;Andrew notes in HBD 2566... <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE> <PRE>While boiling, the foamy gunk that pops up is hot break, this too should be skimmed off as it forms.</PRE> </BLOCKQUOTE> &nbsp; <BR>Hmm. I thought the hot break was the crud that collects on the bottom of the kettle (and that collects moreso with the addition of Irish Moss) just *after* the boil (during that time that we, or I anyway, spend waiting for everything to settle down before starting the transfer). Are you talking about the foam that forms on the top of the wort at the start of the boil? Same stuff? I've always wondered if I oughta skim that off. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong in assuming you're suggesting to do so.&nbsp; <P>-- <BR>Cheers4beers, <BR>Rob Kienle <BR>Chicago, IL <BR>rkienle at interaccess.com <BR>&nbsp;</HTML> - --------------FFB00139A45BC4DE173F7EF1-- Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 18:44:44 -0700 From: Jim Anderson <jander at xmission.com> Subject: Slick Alarm Thermometer for the Gadgeteers (like me) I'm guessing that three posts within a month pretty much destroys my lurker status, but I've just gotta share this .... I recently ordered and received one of the new Polder thermometers -- it's a combination digital timer/thermometer (separate functions) with a user-setable (?) temperature alarm. You simply set the target temperature and it will begin beeping when it reaches that temperature. The REALLY nice feature is that the probe is attached to a 42" cord. You can use it for brewing, deep-frying or as a meat-probe inside the oven. Another nice feature is its magnetic mount. I put mine on my range vent and use a clothespin to hold the probe in my brewkettle or deepfry pot positioned so that the probe doesn't touch metal. The range is ?-390F. Sure beats the hell out of dipping a standard thermometer every coupla minutes. The timer operates independently of the thermometer. It uses one AAA battery. This gadget runs $30 (give or take) and I've seen it advertised in two different places: The Chef's Catalog and the Williams-Sonoma catalog. I'd guess that it's also available elsewhere. FWIW, it is also featured in the latest Consumer Reports. STANDARD DISCLAIMER: no affiliation, blah, blah, blah .... this is just one of the handiest gizmos I've ever come across (and yes, I'm a gadget freak), and it won't wind up in the closet fer sure .... - Jim Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 18:13:42 -0800 (PST) From: homebrew at dcn.davis.ca.us (Sean Mick) Subject: Boddingtons Pub Ale clone? Greetings: Has anyone out there produced a close replica of Boddington's Pub Ale that they could share with me? I have a customer that wants to reproduce it, and I have some ideas, but nothing from any of the literature on my bookshelves. If you have book references, such as tasting/brewery notes, I'd appreciate it greatly! Private email is ok. I know we can't replicate the nitrogen/widget effect, but I want to get as close as possible otherwise. Thanks. Sean Mick Mick's Homebrew Supplies http://www.dcn.davis.ca.us/~homebrew Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 21:23:23 -0500 From: Mark Tumarkin <tumarkin at mindspring.com> Subject: cost justification On this 'cost justification-spousal approval' thread - I quess I'm very lucky. My wife doesn't drink beer, but I never have to 'justify' brewing costs or time to her. In fact, this evening she came home with a vacuum sealer for me. I had mentioned a while back about wanting one for better hops storage. She found one at a second hand store (but amazingly, it had never been used) and bought it for me. Now all I need are the oxygen barrier bags. Damn, another expense...does it ever end? Mark Tumarkin The Brewery in the Jungle Gainesville, FL Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 20:29:44 -0600 From: "David Johnson" <dmjalj at inwave.com> Subject: Pitching Rates Yeast Lovers! The recent debate about pitching rates raises some questions for me. I know that you should pitch more yeast for a lager. I think I can get some yeast at the local brewery. It makes a variety of decent lagers so it's yeast must be fairly versatile. It uses a yeast from a brewery from PA that I believe is no more (Walters?). I plan to use it for a Dunkel and a Pre-Prohibition Pils. Would this yeast be appropriate? Would a quart of slurry be too much? What bad effects can result? Dave in Monroe, WI Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 21:41:49 -0500 (EST) From: bl190 at freenet.carleton.ca (Jonathan Hare) Subject: A prayer Our lager which art in barrels hallowed be thy drink. Thy will be done, I will be drunk at home as I am in pubs. Give us this day our foamy head, and forgive us our spillages, as we forgive those who spill against us. Lead us not into incarceration, but deliver us from hangovers. For thine is the king-batch, the pint and the barley, For bitter and lager, Barmen Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 00:05:39 -0500 From: ensmingr at npac.syr.edu Subject: beer data Dear HBDers, I have a web site which gives the alcohol level, calorie content, and additional relevant information for many commercially available beers. Look at the URL: http://www.npac.syr.edu/users/ensmingr/beer/beerdata.html I have included beer from large, regional, and micro-breweries, but not beer from brewpubs. All information comes directly from the breweries, in particular their web sites or personal communications. At present, I have not included data from secondary sources (e.g., Michael Jackson's _Pocket Guide to Beer_), but may in the future. Obviously, my table is far from complete, so YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS ARE MOST WELCOME! Please also provide me with your source, such as a URL, a copy of an email from the brewery, etc.. Happy Turkey Day, Peter A. Ensminger ensmingr at npac.syr.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 97 01:15:54 PST From: "Rob Moline" <brewer at ames.net> Subject: Jethro on S.O. Approval/ WST/ 3 (4) Books/Bottle da BW/Pellets vs The Jethro Gump Report >From: katecone at ime.net (Kate Cone) >Subject: Spousal Approval > If your SO doesn't have any hobbies, >and wants to spend every waking minute with you, my sympathies. But I think >having to do all those dances of "I'll do chores if you "let" me brew" are >ridiculous. Amen, and thanks for a woman to state the obvious. Guarantee ya, if a man had said it, he would have received the infamous, "It's people like you that give HB'ing a bad name and keep it a male dominated hobby!" Yup, guarantee ya. WST... Learned a simple tip from John Anshutz, the original brewer at the Blind Tiger in Topeka. He had a box of sterile plastic test tubes, with screw on caps, that came individually sealed in a cello type wrapper. He would take 2 or 3 samples, I believe all of his came from the fermenter, pre-pitching, and sit them on a shelf for a few days to test his bacterial influences. I'm not aware of the cost, but he felt that it was cheaper (per unit and labor) to buy these and throw them away after use, than to buy an auto-clave or spend the time with other methods. YMMV. >From: "Raymond Estrella" >Subject: Brewing tomes, >..... what three brewing >related books we would pick if that was all that we could have. Ray Daniels, "DGB's," Graham Wheeler's, "Homebrewing, The Camra Guide," and G. & L. Fix's "Analysis of Brewing Techniques." If I could have 4, I also like "The Practical Brewer," Master Brewer's Association of America, Obviously I think highly of these, but truly wish I had GW's book earlier in my brewing life.... like the first book. IMO, it's the best for newbies. >From: scotty at enaila.nidlink.com >Subject: Bottling the Barleywine > I have come up with three alternatives: >1. Add priming sugar and bottle (hope that there is enough yeast in > solution). >2. Add more yeast and sugar and bottle (probably a qt starter) >3. Keg, force carbonate, and bottle Pick Door Number 3. Just my .02, but it worked for me. >From: "Aaron Spurlock" <spurlock at azlink.com> >Subject: How to use Hop Pellets? > Once that was done, I stirred the wort in a >circle to get all the "gunk" into the center of the pot, wrapped my siphon >uptake tube in my fine mesh bag, and started the siphon in the bottom corner >of the pot. Well, the hop "slime" soon coated the entire bag, stopping any >further flow through it and my siphon died. In my commercial practice, whirlpool was for 20/60, and then followed a 20/60 rest to allow the 'gunk' (trub) to settle. Then the wort was allowed out of the kettle through a valve at the circumference, 'ideally' above and away from the trub that had settled to the center of the kettle. Factors that influence success in this are size and design of kettle, inclusive of 'hop-gates,' if any, and the amount of hop pellets used. Try it again, and allow a rest for settling, and you might want to start the siphon tube just below the surface of the wort and lower it, as required. >Is it better to siphon out of the boiler? I like the idea of using the >"inline aerator" so siphoning seems attractive. There's nothing wrong with siphoning out of the kettle, but just make sure your 'in-line aerator' is used post chilling. I can't tell how you plan to aerate by your text. >From: brian_dixon at om.cv.hp.com >Subject: Re: fermenter CO2 to carboy >....., and wished to heck that >Williams or someone sold a simple trigger-type device for spraying CO2 >into carboys, bottling buckets etc. Any ideas on that one anyone? I use a plain old 'cobra-head' beer valve, like the kind you get on the end of a 'pony-pump' when you rent a keg. Attach to the hose coming off a CO2 regulator, and adjust your pressure to suit. You could even shove a piece of suitable diameter copper tubing up the spout, and extend it down to the bottom of the carboy, and 'fill'er up.' The valve action is nice, as you can open it at will, or open it all the way and leave it for a continuous gas flow. It's cheap, too. Russian Brewery Death... I missed it, but was told that a brewery manager in Russia was shot to death recently. Hell, I didn't know he had moved to Russia! (Take it as you see fit.) Jack Schmidling's No Chill... I have learned a lot from JS, but as for 'no chill?' Not for my beer. I try to reduce opportunity for infection. I want it down to pitching temp 'now,' so I can get those yeasties going. YMMV. >From: "Neal Parker" <Neal.Parker.nsparker at nt.com> >Subject: air filter for aquarium pump >Where could I buy ... Check for 'transducer protectors' for the medical field. In your line of work, I'm sure you could find them. >From: "Michel J. Brown" <homemade at spiritone.com> >Subject: Rock Bottom Brewery (was GABF sort of...) >I would like to give thanks to Mr. Mark Youngquist, Owner and Head Brewer of >Rock Bottom Breweries (RBB). Mark is one of the leaders in the industry, and I am happy that he has worked with you on your complaints. this is only fitting. Now, if one could only persuade Mr. Youngquist that not all the people that send their beers to GABF, WB Cup, and WB Champs are, "... lazy, uninspired marketeers who lack creative juice! " Cheers! Jethro Gump Rob Moline Brewer At Large brewer at ames.net Ames, Iowa "The More I Know About Beer, The More I Realize I Need To Know More About Beer!" Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 00:09:42 -0800 From: Chasman <cwhudak at gemini.adnc.com> Subject: Water Softeners, starch and low CO2 in kegs Jeff asks about water softeners: > but I need to know if anyone out >there knows what a water softener does to the water? The >house that I'm renting has one of those installed, and I >know absolutely nothing about it. Well, traditional water softeners exchange the Ca and Mg ions with Na ions which eliminates the hard water deposits which would otherwise form in your water heater, plumbing and leave that white film on your shower door. You probably don't want to brew with this high sodium water. Many doctors suggest not drinking it either especially if you are on a sodium restricted diet. Joe asks about oats: >Okay, now I'm worried. Whats wrong with unmalted adjuncts? I am >biting my fingernails waiting for my oatmeal stout to finish >conditioning. If the grain is geletanized (as I assume the flaking >process does, as per Papazian) and added as an adjunct before the >wort is boiled (and removed when it does), why is there risk for >infection? And why would someone worry much about haze in a stout? > Yes, oats are gelatinized which means that the starches are now soluble in warm (read mash temp) water instead of needing to be boiled. This is not the issue though. The oats will contribute starch, not sugar to the finished beer. Starch won't ferment by the yeast but some wild yeasts and certainly bacteria will find this food source very appealing. The presence of starch in your finished beer will cause some stability probs. If you plan on drinking it quickly, it may not be a problem; certainly in a stout, haze will not be a problem like it would be in a paler beer. >As for starchy beer not being very good, I assumed that it was just >the starch content that gave an outmeal stout its characteristic >mouth feel. Is this incorrect? This is my second batch brewed, so >bear with me if my questions display my ignorance. Nah, I make my oatmeal stouts with a full mash so there aren't any starches in them. Most of the mouthfeel is from the proteins and dextrines which the oats contribute. Kevin asks about kegging carbonation probs: >I have Kegged a few batches now and I just haven't been real happy with the >result. I just don't seem to get the mouth feel carbonation that I got >from bottle conditioning. I get plenty of foam but the beer just seems to >have little if any carbonation. I just do the standard kegging procedure, >35psi, cold shake, and leave it with presure at 35psi, Co2 bottle on, for a >couple of days and drink. I despence at about 4-5 psi. Well, I'll bet that the carbonation is ok for a while and then things get kinda flat? This is the problem with using a low dispense pressure. The CO2 will equilibrate in the head space at the lower pressure once you start dispensing and the effective carbonation will be as if you only carbonated it with 4-5 psi. There are several solutions: 1) Turn up the dispense pressure. 10-12 psi will keep the beer closer to the original carbonation level. If you have foaming probs you can do several things. Remember to open the tap *all the way* when you pour. The tendency is to just crack it open which increases foaming through turbulence. You can also try using a longer run of tap hose. The pressure drop in 3/16" hose is on the order of several psi per foot (I can give you exact numbers if you like, I just don't have my Foxx catalog handy) so if you use a five foot line, you will have the effective pressure at the tap of about 4-5 psi. 2) Learn to like cask style beer!! I love my beers (mostly well hopped ales) with light carbonation. When the carbonation drops off, I can drink more faster ;) C-- Charles Hudak in San Diego, California (Living large in Ocean Beach!!) cwhudak at adnc.com ICQ# 4253902 "If God had intended for us to drink beer, he would have given us stomachs." - --David Daye Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 06:09:07 -0700 From: ritter at bitterroot.net (Ritter, Sharon/Dan ) Subject: Re: kegging Kevin Aylor writes: >My question is; Is this just the way kegging beer in soda kegs is? If >not, how do I get those tiny boubbles like in botttled beer? Any >suggestions would be helpful. Be patient. Proper conditioning of force carbonation beers takes time. The shake and dispense method works OK if you are in a hurry but I have found that the fine bubbles and creamy head happen only after the beer has been hooked up to the CO2 tank for at least two weeks. Unless you are in a hurry, try hooking up the keg to the CO2 at the proper psi and waiting two weeks before tapping. Dan Ritter <ritter at bitterroot.net> Ritter's MAMMOTH Brewery - Hamilton, Montana Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 09:33:50 -0500 From: John Penn <john_penn at spacemail.jhuapl.edu> Subject: Mint Chocolate Stout Update Subject: Time:10:12 AM OFFICE MEMO Mint Chocolate Stout Update Date:11/26/97 An update on that mint chocolate stout recipe posted this past summer. Initially the chocolate flavor was predominant but seems to be mellowing. There is a flavor that I associate with the mint but can't describe well, maybe sharp or refreshing is close. At any rate, I think I would modify my previous comments on the mint used based on its current mellowing taste. I think I am getting some mint flavor so I might increase the mint in the boil say 50% next time instead of 100%. For aroma I will still double the amount of mint--there was almost no mint aroma. I had used 1.5oz of mint in the boil and in the secondary for aroma. My leaves were slightly wet--rained on brew day--so my weight measurements might be off. I think I'll try maybe 2oz in the boil and 3-4oz in the secondary (vodka soak as before) the next time I brew. See previous HBD for recipe if you are interested. John Penn (Eldersburg, MD) Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 08:45:46 -0600 (CDT) From: "Patrick E. Humphrey" <HUMPHREY.PATRICK at Igate.Abbott.Com> Subject: Glucose/Cidery Flavors Hi All, In HBD #2566 George De Piro wrote: >Bruce asks about using corn sugar instead of corn to >lighten the taste of his beer to make it more palatable to >his unenlightened friends. Corn sugar, as has been >recently discussed here, will lighten the beer's body >and flavor, but will make it cidery if used in >excess. It will contribute no corn flavor. It may be a matter of semantics here but, I was under the impression that *cane sugar*, ie. sucrose, was the sugar that was responsible for the development of cidery flavors. Corn sugar is glucose, ie. dextrose, sucrose is a disaccharide of glucose and fructose. Isn't dextrose added to some British ales? These don't seem to have the "cidery" flavor attributed to the addition of sugar. I have never added more than a half pound of glucose to any of my homebrews so I may have never encounted cidery flavors using it. Then again, I throw this out to the group from Bob Devine's summary of sugars at http://realbeer.com/brewery/library/SugarSumm.html - ---- Sucrose / table sugar / cane sugar : Sucrose is a disaccharide composed of one molecule of glucose and one of fructose. More precisely, it is dextrose plus dextrorotary fructose. It must be broken apart before the yeasts can use it. When heated in an acidic solution (such as wort) the sugar is inverted to make D-(+)-glucose and D-(-)-fructose. Yeasts will invert the sucrose if it is not already in that form before using by using invertase. <snip> A complaint in the early days of modern homebrewing was that using table sugar in beer-making resulted in a "cidery" beer. The symptoms were that a beer made with table sugar that was added to the boil produced a cidery flavor that faded after several weeks in the bottle. Therefore the rule of thumb became 'avoid all table sugar'. While this is still a good idea when using malt extract, this old-(ale)wives tale is misleading. That defect most likely came from poor yeast due to a too low pitch, insufficient free-available-nitrogen, or a lack of other necessary yeast building materials in the wort. Table sugar can be used in small amounts with no harm and it is certainly cheaper to use for priming. This simple colorless sugar will lighten the body of a beer since it can be completely fermented. It also lightens the beer color (hmm, negative lovibond rating? :-) - ---- Low pitch rate?! Insufficient nutrients?! Uh oh, I may have started something.. ;-) Pat Humphrey Lindenhurst, IL Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 08:05:34 -0700 From: "Kensler, Paul" <PKensler at itcmedia.com> Subject: Kegging vs. Bottling Kevin said: "I just don't seem to get the mouth feel carbonation [from force-carbonated kegs] that I got from bottle conditioning." Kevin, Although I know a LOT of people who are happy with the results from forced carbonation, (sticking my neck out here, so no flames!) I don't like the results myself and always do final conditioning in the keg. I prime the keg with corn sugar, just use less - about 1/3 cup for a 5-gallon keg (you can play with this amount to achieve specific carbonation rates). One thing is important to remember - purge the headspace of air, and put about 30 psi pressure on the keg when you seal it. This will insure that your keg is sealed properly while the yeast produce the CO2. The keg seems to condition faster than bottled beer does, so it is usually ready to drink in 7-10 days. I don't mind the wait, since I really prefer the results from keg-conditioned brews. I get maybe a half-glass of yeasty ale, then the rest is clear (I always make sure the beer has dropped clear in the secondary before racking to the keg). FWIW, I think the "extra" time involved in keg conditioning also helps produce a better carbonation. That is, force-carbonating the keg then leaving it sit for a week or two would help. Hope this helps, Paul Kensler Brewing in Plano, TX Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 08:17:02 -0700 From: "Kensler, Paul" <PKensler at itcmedia.com> Subject: Cleaning AL kettles Regarding Aluminum kettles, Bob said: "I bought a fantastic restaurant grade 15 gal Al pot (snip). My question is, is there an easy way to clean the inside of this pot?" Bob, I brew in Aluminum too, and from what I've learned, you MUST leave that grungy-looking stain alone - it is apparently some sort of oxide-layer that develops in all Aluminum cooking vessels, and will contribute no problems to the brew. Of course, I am talking about the brownish-gray looking stains IN the aluminum, not any sort of organic gunk ON the aluminum... I soak my kettle in TSP for 30 - 60 minutes, then wipe it clean with a plain old sponge. The TSP (B-brite or any other detergent would work too) does all the hard work, I just make sure all the organics are wiped off. I have never had any off-flavors from this pot (It's made plenty of batches, and I have earned a few ribbons from those batches), so my results have been great by doing this. Anyone have other input? Have fun, Paul Kensler Brewing in Aluminum in Plano, TX Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 10:20:25 -0500 From: Dan Cole <dcole at roanoke.infi.net> Subject: Suggested temp profile for American Wheat? This weekend I am going to attempt a 50-75% flaked wheat beer (the balance being some american 2-row, my HB store in town does not regularly carry 6-row). I've heard recently here and on the HBD that a 122F rest is detrimental to the head, so now I have questions on what step profile to follow for that amount of wheat. Also, I have heard from others to use malted wheat and not flaked wheat to aid conversion. I only have flaked wheat right now, but since it is already flaked shouldn't it be mostly converted already. Plus the addition of the 2-row should help right? Any suggestions? TIA, Dan Cole dcole at roanoke.infi.net.nospam <remove .nospam from address to reply> Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 10:18:57 -0500 (EST) From: SocialKing at aol.com Subject: yeast propagation does anyone have any suggestions on collecting the yeast from a carboy(used as a primary fermenter)? I would like to save/culture the yeast from the carboy but i'm affraid that it won't pour out easily and i can't find a utensil long and thin enough to reach down in there to collect ittt. any suggestionns would be greatly appreciated! Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 11/28/97, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96