---

	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:
  pH & Temp/Microscopes/Rolling Rock (AJ)
  SS pizza pan source? (Mike Spinelli)
  Bleach and SS/Lactic acid (Mike Spinelli)
  mead myth (Al Korzonas)
  What are spicy-assed mudbugs? (Mike Spinelli)
  Porter: Brown or Robust (John Varady)
  Dubbel Yeast (Charles Burns)
  Priming (Al Korzonas)
  re:Hops Preven Cancer (Charles Burns)
  hop prices ("Bryan L. Gros")
  Re: Temp Compensating pH meter (David Elm)
  Barleywine Recipe ("Timothy Green")
  Big Brew '98 ("Brian Rezac")
  August Schell pilsner ("Emily & Drew")
  Overmodified (crap) malts :give em to homebrewers. (Jon Bovard)
  Brewer's WorkShop Software (Mearle Gates)
  Jethro Gump on George De Piro ("Rob Moline")
  Motorised Valley mill ("Braam Greyling")
  Pilsen from LA/Well Test (AJ)
  shipping beer with dry ice (Sharon/Dan Ritter)
  Call for Judges NYC Comp (kbjohns)
  re: Protein rests and break material (Jeff)
  Axe Grinding (EFOUCH)
  foam control ("Spies, James")
  Re: Beersummit Report (Randy Lilleston)
  Titletown Open (Matthew Arnold)



Be sure to enter the 7th NYC Spring Regional Competition
3/22/98. Surf to http://www.wp.com/hosi/companno.html for more
information...

NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS:  hbd.org 

Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@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 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 hbd.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...
	ftp://hbd.org/pub/hbd/digests
	ftp://ftp.stanford.edu/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer

  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: Mon, 16 Mar 1998 14:31:07 -0500
From: AJ <ajdel at mindspring.com>
Subject: pH & Temp/Microscopes/Rolling Rock

RE: Temperature and pH.  I can find authors that say pH is always
specified at the temperature of the reaction and other authors that say
it's at room temperature. Readers need to be careful. The issue here is,

of course, the mash where we are focused on the effects of enzymes. I
believe in the enzyme biz the pH is specified at or close to the
temperature at which the enzyme is most active. Steve? As we know that
room temperature specs are sometimes used I agree with Dave that we
should always specify what we mean when writing ourselves.

Dave's post had a couple of interesting data points on the distilled
water pH of mashes and I'll add one. M&BS says 5.8. I find 5.6 - 5.75
for the DWC light malts I've measured (at room temperature... almost
forgot). Dave gets around 5.6. Ken Schwarz (as reported by Dave) got 5.3

but Daves's post said "malt", not what kind. I have to believe it was
crystal or carapils or something higher kilned than the usual base
malts. The significance of all this is that the distilled water pH
depends on the malt (patent will give pH's well under 5). Also
significant is that the rise in pH as wort cools depends on the grist.
DeClerk has some tabulated data (for a particular grist compositions and

water types) which suggest an increase 0.3 over the typical span from
saccharification to room temperature and and that's probably a
reasonable rough number. Just bear in mind that the smaller the
temperature delta, the smaller the increment. Since I started worrying
about this I have been measuring all pH's at room and mash temperature.
I have yet to see a rise of as  much as 0.3 pH; 0.2 pH is more typical
for me.

Dave commented that pH papers and meters work best at room temperature.
I don't see why a pH meter would work any better at room temperature
unless the reference were calomel and we don't use calomel electrodes in

our brewing. Right? Calomel melts at about 55C (if I remember
correctly). For brewing we want a double junction reference (see earlier

in this post). Granted an electrode will last longer if operated at
lower temperature, even if it's spec'ed to 100C. I think it's the
thermal stress on the glass in changing temperatures that shortens life
more than exposure to the high temperature and I don't think mash to
room temperature changes (as opposed to kettle temperature, which
exceed 100C, to room  temperature changes) are that stressful. With
papers  I really don't know what to think except that they rely on dyes
whose colors depend on the degree of dissociation (i.e. the dyes are
acids). As the dissociation constants depend on temperature the response

has got to change with temperature as well. Whether the color change
from this effect is significant or not isn't something this color blind
brewer should be commenting on. In any event, by the time the strip has
been dipped and removed for reading, it will have cooled. Will high
temperature during the dip destroy the dye?

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Ray Estrella asked about microscopes. This is another expensive item
with the major issue being that yeast are hard to see unless they are
stained or a phase contrast microscope (read "extra $") is used. Now Ray

mentioned viability studies in his post. This is done by staining with
methylene blue so if that's to be done one might get along well enough
with a bright field 'scope. Unfortunately it's the dead cells that take
the stain so that those would be the ones that would most easily
examined for morphology. You wouldn't be able to make out the interior
structure of the living cells as well and one does sometimes look at
things like vacuole size to determine how well fed yeast are. Now you
_can_  see interior structure to some extent with bright field. It's
just harder.

For enumeration only bright field is fine. The count is usually done at
low power and there is no question of looking at morphology. This is
also true for viability where one counts total cells distinguishing the
colored from the colorless to compute the viable fraction.

I'd try to find the best microscope I could get used. A microscope is
definitely one of those things where "the bitterness of poor quality
remains long after the sweetness of low price is forgotten". Scopes are
expensive but optics don't wear out no matter how much light you run
through them (though the mechanical parts - focusing mechanism, slide
positioner, etc. do wear). A used 'scope in good condition should be
absolutely as good as a new one.

For enumeration and viability 60X should do. To see morphology  and
check for bacteria in yeast samples 400 - 600X is enough. Higher powers
(real high power - not the "empty magnification" found in cheap
microscopes) usually require oil immersion objectives and you don't want

to have to mess with that if you don't have to. Another big price
swinger is monocular vs. binocular. Binocular is much more comfortable
but it's something you have to pay extra for. Louis Pasteur didn't have
a binocular 'scope (or phase contrast) and you don't need it either.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Jason asked about how to make Rolling Rock. With tongue only partly in
cheek
I advise brewing up a light lager with a hefty percentage of adjunct and

boiling for a fairly short time with the lid on. Do not use a wort
chiller but rather allow the wort to come slowly to pitching
temperature. (I use 'Rock to train BJCP candidates in recognizing DMS).









Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 16 Mar 98 14:27:16 est
From: paa3983 at dscp.dla.mil (Mike Spinelli)
Subject: SS pizza pan source?

HBDers,
Anybody know where I can buy a SS pizza pan like the ones you
see made of aluminum?  I've been using an inverted aluminum
pizza pan as a hop filter on the bottom of my boil tun, but it's starting 
to look all beat up.

Thanks,
Mike Spinelli



Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 16 Mar 98 14:17:40 est
From: paa3983 at dscp.dla.mil (Mike Spinelli)
Subject: Bleach and SS/Lactic acid

HBDers,
Can someone out there (like John Palmer)  tell us the real poop
on how really bad bleach is to SS and other metals?

I know all the "books" say bleach is a no-no, but I've also heard
that bleach is OK when the contact time is kept to a minimum
and the solution is weak.  I've been submersing my copper helical 
coil heat exchanger CF chiller in bleach water for about 5-10 mins. 
prior to use.  Am I wreckin' it?

- ----------------------------------------

Dan Johnson asked in #2660 about the proper use of lactic acid to
adjust sparge water pH.  Don't know if it's proper, but here's what
I do.  Heat sparge water to around 150-160.  Squeeze a bit of lactic
acid in the tank and stir around. Take out a colorpHast test and dunk
it in the tank.  Check the color.  I usually adjust til the strip reads in
the mid 5s.  I've read that water temp. can afffect the reading so
I'm probably wreckin' this too.

Mike Spinelli
Mikey's Monster Brew
Cherry Hill NJ

 



Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 16 Mar 1998 15:10:44 -0600 (CST)
From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com>
Subject: mead myth

Jon writes that boiling makes their meads clear faster.

There is a tradeoff here... boiling also reduces the aroma of the finished
mead.  I do not boil my mead musts at all and, yes, they do take more
than a year to become clear (some never clear at all), but the mead
I made that won in the AHA Nationals was (and still is) rather cloudy.
It's not as pretty as some meads, but it sure smells and tastes good!

Also, just as a datapoint, my winning mead was only five months old
in the first round and around 7 months old for the second round.  I
feel that my rather cool fermentation (around 62 or 63F, I believe)
helped keep the higher alcohol production down, which meant less need
for aging.

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: Mon, 16 Mar 98 16:52:16 est
From: paa3983 at dscp.dla.mil (Mike Spinelli)
Subject: What are spicy-assed mudbugs?

JBDers,
Bodie in #2662 mentions how IPAs and spicy-assed
mudbugs go so well together.

Can you south'nas enlighten me as to what this creature is?

Thanks
Mike



Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 16 Mar 1998 17:10:51 -0500
From: John Varady <rust1d at usa.net>
Subject: Porter: Brown or Robust

Who can tell me major differences between a Robust and a Brown porter?

I posted a couple of months ago about a porter that I brewed using a
Bavarian lager yeast. So far I have entered it in 3 competitions, twice as
a brown and once as a robust. Here are the results and the judges ranks:

** Keystone Hops ****> Entered as a Brown Porter: Second Place
BJCP Certified: 35
BJCP Recognized: 33
BJCP Recognized: 34

** Brooklyn MBAS ****> Entered as a Brown Porter: Second Place
BJCP Recognized: 37
Unknown: 36
BJCP Certified: 34

** Boston HBC *****>  Entered as a Robust Porter: No ribbon
BJCP Master: 40
Experienced: 38
BJCP Certified: 39
BJCP Certified: 33
Honorary Master: 37


So apparently, not even BJCP certified judges can tell the difference
between these two styles. Not one comment to the effect that the beer would
have been better entered as the other type of porter. Are they considering
adding yet another style of porter to the list?

So while I don't know which type of Porter to call it, I know it is a damn
fine beer.

Gulp,

John
John Varady                     * New email address ***> rust1d at usa.net
Glenside, PA



Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 16 Mar 98 14:25 PST
From: cburns at egusd.k12.ca.us (Charles Burns)
Subject: Dubbel Yeast

Gordon Strong <strongg at earthlink.net> asks about Dubbel yeast in hbd#2662:

I am interested in determining what variety of Wyeast is best used for a
Belgian Dubbel.<snip>, so I request comments be
limited to fermenting a classic Trappist-style Dubbel using Wyeast.

Last June I made a Dubbel with Wyeast 3787, Trappist. OG was around 1.080. I 
didn't like the results at first (clovey/spicy) but over time it mellowed 
big time. Yesterday afternoon I consumed the last bottle with 3 friends. I 
hadn't had any in at least 3 or 4 months. I was amazed at how good it had 
become. I have vowed to make the recipe again, bottling it and storing it 
for a year before consumption.

YMMV,

Charley (with no more belgian beer) in N. Cal



Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 16 Mar 1998 17:02:35 -0600 (CST)
From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com>
Subject: Priming

Dave writes:
>To repeat, prepare a priming starter using beer and yeast
>from the secondary.  Add priming sugar and a tablespoon of
>malt extract which have been dissolved in a minimal amount of
>boiling water and the mixture cooled. Allow to come to
>kraeusen in about 12 hours and bottle by adding a fraction of
>this to each bottle to minimize HSA  from bottling . This will
>produce an active yeast acclimated to the sugar and the beer and
>have sufficient FANs ( from the malt extract)  to allow the
>yeast to carry on and carbonate quickly and reliably, unlike
>"less-controversial" methods of adding sugar alone which
>work poorly, slowly or at least unreliably.
> 
>Al, perhaps it is only "controversial" because you have never
>tried it or didn't read it in someone's book.  Before you give
>me the notoriety of making me part of your webpage - try it.

It is controversial because I (as a relatively experienced hombrewer)
can tell just from reading it, that it *can* result in inconsistent
carbonation.  One need not actually try something to know that it
has potential problems if it has obvious flaws "on paper."  I don't
have to try Garetz's hop utilization formulas in practice to know
that they will give me 50 to 75% more bitterness than the formulas
I use now.  I didn't want to get into this, but you have introduced
a new twist and I can always use this text for my webpage.

The reason I feel that this method will result in inconsistent
carbonation is because you cannot really be 100% of how much of
that sugar and malt extract will ferment away during that
"about 12 hours."  My fermentation area and my living space
both fluctuate as much as 15 degres F over the course of a year.
Even 10F is enough to make a *BIG* difference in how much of that
sugar and malt extract ferments away in those "about 12 hours."

I presume that you are doing this because it somewhat imitates
the time-honoured tradition of kraeusening, used by German
brewers.  In a way it does, yet there is a big difference.  The
German brewers are repeatedly making a small number of recipes
which they make consistently (with typical German precision).
They always have a batch of beer fermenting when the time comes
for carbonation on an earlier batch.  What they do is measure
the SG of a fermenting batch and (because they know what the
FG will be) calculate the residual fermentable sugar very
accurately.  They now can prime the finished beer with the
fermenting beer *BUT* they *VARY* the volume of the fermenting
beer (this is the kraeusen) that they add based upon the
residual fermentable sugar.  In your method, this can vary
significantly and therefore carbonation can vary as a result.

Secondly, I have had absolutely rock-solid, predictable carbonation
in all but one of my 200+ batches of beer in which I used standard
batch priming techniques.  In fact, I started using corn sugar for
priming, but changed to malt extract after a year or two.  My beer
took *longer* to carbonate.  There was also a ring of material around
the neck of the bottle at the beer line.  I contend that this was
protein because it disappeared when I went back to corn sugar (and
has not reappeared in the last 7 years of corn sugar priming).
I feel no need to change my priming method if it has worked so
*reliably* for me all these years.  Note that the one batch that
took extremely long to carbonate was a 1.120 OG Imperial Stout
and the issue there was the high alcohol content and not the sugar
or lack of FAN.  In this case, I should have pitched some fresh yeast.

Thirdly, you say that you do this to provide sufficient FAN for the
yeast.  FAN is needed for growth.  The fermentable material we add at
priming time is between 1/35th and 1/100th of that in the primary
ferment.  Presuming that you had sufficient FAN in your original wort
and gave your yeast enough oxygen, they will not need more FAN to
produce carbonation.  There is no need for growth during carbonation
(and, in fact, it is undesirable... I want the minimum amount of yeast
in the bottle, not more growth).

Finally, you say that you add the primings to each bottle to minimize
HSA from botting.  I suspect that you mean oxidation because HSA
is associated with hot wort.  Indeed priming each bottle does eliminate
the need to rack the beer once (from fermenter to the bulk priming
tank), but I feel that the additional work of measuring the primings
into each bottle far outweighs the possible additional oxygen uptake
from the additional transfer *and* depending on how you do it, can
introduce oxygen if the primings splash into the bottle.

I bottled five batches yesterday, so my methodology is very clear in
my head.  I make up a solution of corn sugar (weighed) and water
in an erlenmyer flask and bring it to a boil.  I cover the top with
a square of foil.  I sanitize my priming carboy and purge it with
CO2.  I begin racking wort into it, via siphon.  I delay the addition
of the hot primings until there is a quart or so of beer in the
carboy so that the nearly boiling primings do not crack the carboy.
Beer is quickly running (gently... I keep the plastic bottle filling
tube, minus the valve, on the end of the siphon tube so that the beer
does not splash into the priming carboy) into the carboy, so there
is a positive displacement of the CO2 out as I pour the priming solution
down the outside of the bottle filler tube.  Whatever splashing does
take place is in a mostly-CO2 environment.  Once the racking is finished,
I switch the racking setup around, while removing the orange tip that
keeps the racking cane off the settled yeast and putting the filler
valve on the bottling tube.  I then gently stir the beer and prop up
one side so I can get every drop of beer.  I have a carboy handle on each
carboy, so I attach a rubberband to it to hold the racking cane in place,
both during racking and bottling.  I adjust the rate of filling by
varying the height of the bottle relative to the level of the beer in
the priming carboy (I start out high so the beer does not splash into
the bottle and then lower it to speed up the rate).

As a testament to my bottling technique (and the lack of HSA earlier
in production) I had a 1.035 OG English Dark Mild that made it to
the 2nd round of the AHA Nationals *18 months* after bottling!

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: Mon, 16 Mar 98 16:00 PST
From: cburns at egusd.k12.ca.us (Charles Burns)
Subject: re:Hops Preven Cancer

Our Janitor remarks:

>Did any one else read of the preliminary Oregon State U study showing 
>that a component of hops in beer may prevent cancer? YES! There _IS_ a 
>God! And he _IS_ a brewer!

My wife heard it on TV news and told me about it. She often gets these news 
stories a bit scrambled so even though it sounded far fetched, I said "thats 
the best news we've had in weeks!" and promptly poured her a pint of well 
hopped 2-tub Russian Imperial Stout. And she drank it! This is great....

Charley (working on cancer prevention) in N. Cal



Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 16 Mar 1998 16:20:59 -0800
From: "Bryan L. Gros" <gros at bigfoot.com>
Subject: hop prices

Michel Brown writes:
>This just in from the local University extension office:
>
>"A worldwide glut of hops has driven prices so low that soome Northwest
>growers say they might not string up their vines this year. "We've got a
>poor market, and acxres are going to come out this year, that is for sure'"

If this is true, howcome prices on hops haven't fallen any for consumers?

If they have, why aren't beer prices lower?

  - Bryan

Bryan Gros	gros at bigfoot.com
Oakland, CA
Visit the new Draught Board homebrew website:
http://www.valhallabrewing.com/~thor/dboard/index.htm

Q. In your opinion, what is the single most common error
           that I am likely to make, as a taxpayer?

   A. In our opinion, that would be having ``light'' beer in your
refrigerator.
                                          - Dave Barry



Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 16 Mar 1998 18:20:15 -0700
From: David Elm <delm at cadvision.com>
Subject: Re: Temp Compensating pH meter


For a temperature compensating pH meter that has a range of 0-100C and
pH accuracy of .01 check Hanna #8424.  Retail $230 in USA.
Info at http://www.hannainst.com/products/phmeter/8424.htm
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Elm  delm at cadvision.com  (403)932-1626 888-660-6035 fax:(403)932-7405
   Box 7, Site 16, RR 2, Glendale Rd., Cochrane, Alberta, T0L 0W0, Canada



Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 16 Mar 1998 20:51:24 -0500
From: "Timothy Green" <TimGreen at ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Barleywine Recipe

Is there anyone out there in the collective who can supply me with an
all-grain recipe or two for Barleywine?

It would be most appreciated!!

Thanks...

Tim Green



Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 16 Mar 1998 20:56:02 -0700
From: "Brian Rezac" <brian at aob.org>
Subject: Big Brew '98

This year, the American Homebrewers Association celebrates its 20th
Anniversary as well as the 10th Anniversary of National Homebrew Day, the
only national holiday that celebrates beer and brewing.  We felt that to
properly celebrate these significant occurrences, we needed an equally
momentous event.  What we came up with is Big Brew '98.

Big Brew '98 is the record-setting attempt of the simultaneous brewing of
many small homebrew batches of the same beer recipe by homebrewers 
across the nation.  Big Brew '98 will take place on National Homebrew Day,
Saturday, May 2, 1998.  The plan is to have homebrew shops, clubs or even 
individual brewers host and oversee each brewing site across the country.  
Then, on the day of the event, homebrewers would brew at these registered 
sites.  We will gather information, such as, total number of participating
brewers, total number of gallons brewed, total amount of hops and total
malt 
used, etc.

Currently, I have a proposal in front of the Records Committee of Guinness
Media, the publishers of Guinness Book of Records for them to include this
homebrewing record in the 1999 version of their book.  However, we do not
have a guaranteed commitment from them that this record attempt will be 
included in their book.  Yet!

The recipe that we will be brewing, "Big 10/20", is based on Little Apple
Brewing Company's "Big 12" Barley Wine, created and brewed by Rob Moline
and winner of the Gold Medal in the Barley Wine category at the 1996 Great
American Beer Festival.  We will have two versions of this recipe, an all
grain and an extract/steeped grain version.  We will be flying Rob out to
Boulder to have him available to homebrewers via an online chat room on the
day of the brewing.

Big Brew '98 is being sponsored by Lallemand Inc., Briess Malting Company
and Schreier Malting Company.  Because of their support, there's is no cost
to homebrewers to participate in Big Brew '98.  We truly hope this event
will encourage homebrewing at all levels by any and all homebrewers
throughout the country.

In addition, let me say that often in groups or forums, we homebrewers
discuss differences in brewing levels, techniques and opinions.  It's time
we come together to celebrate our similarities and simply homebrew a batch
together.  I invite and encourage all of you to participate.

For a more information on Big Brew '98, including the "Rules &
Regulations", send an email to me at brian at aob.org with "Big Brew '98
Rules" in the subject line.

E Pluribus (Br)Unum!
{From Many, One (Brew)!}

Brian M. Rezac
Administrator
American Homebrewers Association





Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 16 Mar 98 23:05:15 PST
From: "Emily & Drew" <eneufeld at michianatoday.com>
Subject: August Schell pilsner


I have only had it a few times but really enjoyed the August Schell 
Pilsner.  I would appreciate any recipes or ideas on how to brew this great 
beer. Unfortunately, it is nearly impossible to find in South Bend.

Drew Buscareno


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 16:08:41 +1000 (EST)
From: Jon Bovard <j.bovard at student.qut.edu.au>
Subject: Overmodified (crap) malts :give em to homebrewers.


George de Piro says:

"Maybe I'm too much of a cynical paranoid lunatic, but while I search
     for answers I can't help but think, "They dump the bad batches of
malt
     overseas and on the homebrew market."

Well I cant speak from Marris Otter experience but I can speak at great
length about the poor service and quality that we receive from the big
maltsters here in Australia.

Over the 2 years I have been brewing I have yet (until recentlly) received
ANY malt that would qualify as high-grade professional quality.
I have used malt from Adelaide (The Coopers maltsters) and from Joe White
maltings in both Ballarat-Victoria and Redbank-Queensland.

On one occasion did I manage to obtain an analisys, whilst on all others
did they effectively tell me to GET STUFFED. When I did get an analisys
from Joe white in Queensland, the malt was so highly modified (Kolbach 53)
that most brewing journals cited this in the region of "cattle feed".
Needless to say the malt created the worst beers possible, with little
malt flavour and poor conversion. I KNOW this was reject malt. I spoke to
the former head brewer at Castlemaine Perkins, who assures me that an
acceptable malt would have kolbach around 41 or so.....

Now on to Adelaide maltsters Inc....
The malt that my brew-club purchased was oridinary to say the least.
Size may as well varied from pin-heads to tennis balls. The bags were
marked with "VIETNAM" and needless to say, we get these bags because the
Asian customers rejected them on the basis of crap sieve assortment.

On the various occassions that i have contacted Joe white in pusuit of any
help of technical feedback, the moment that find out Im not from Carlton
United breweries Australia, they dont want to know me. END OF STORY.

Ive heard that our friends in New Zealand, HAVE TO import malts for Micro
beers, as the big maltsters are not permitted to sell them any by the big
brewers. SO MUCH FOR FOSTERING COMPETITION POLICY!!!

Anyway its obvious that as homebrewers we are at the lowest point on the
pile. I firmly agree with you George.
Unless you want to purchase several million tonnes a year from them you
are a NOBODY.
If I ever win the lottery I will open a brewery and go to great lengths to
get my malt from anybody, but Joe White.
Vent Your spleens at the big boys on the HBD today!!!!

Jon Bovard
Brisbane Australia
"I hate Joe White, all of the Carlton United Fascicsts and their
subsidiaries"




Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 16 Mar 1998 23:00:55 -0800
From: Mearle Gates <mearle at orcalink.com>
Subject: Brewer's WorkShop Software

Fellow Home Brew Digesters:

Specifically those who use Brewer's workshop (and probably other
brewing software as
well), you will want to be aware that many style definitions are now
changed in the 1998
AHA style gidelines. For example Marzen/Octoberfest now has an upper
gravity of 1.056 -
down from 1.059, new styles are added like Oatmeal Stout (but still no
rye beer!), and
style descriptions are more lenient toward chill haze, while many many
hop level
descriptions are revised. Keep in mind I am comparing to Brewer's
Workshop 4.04 specs. One
should either tediously edit the style info in your software,
disregard it entirely and
keep a Spring 1998 issue of Zymurgy at hand when preparing recipes, or
bug the software
manufacturer for a revised copy.
Beer judges had better review those AHA style descriptions again also!

Mearle Gates
Tumwater,WA
http://www.gototem.com/Beer.html



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 00:45:51 -0600
From: "Rob Moline" <brewer at ames.net>
Subject: Jethro Gump on George De Piro

George De Piro....
    I will confess to being way behind in my HBD reading of late, but was up
late here and pulled down and opened the latest...
    I was appalled to see a  comment on my friend George, claiming that his
experience is insufficient to comment on a subject...
    Nothing could be further from the truth....in fact, while we were  at 
Siebel together, I will allow that he and I were certainly the most
interruptive of the lessons with our questions....I even asked Mr. Siebel
about this...should one keep questions for the end of each session, such to
minimize distractions, or just ask when the question occurs...I was told,
"We are here to serve you, ask whenever you feel the need," and we did....
    To the extent that one lecturer, who has spent decades in the business,
both domestically and internationally, in a lecture on beer styles was
questioned by George regarding the differences between Northern and Southern
styles of English Brown Ales. George felt that the notes that the lecturer
had passed out and was referring to were in fact reversed, i.e., that the
notations for Southern ales belonged to the northern ales and vice
versa.....
    The lecturer took this in good spirits  at  first, but stated that George
was wrong.....
    George then rephrased his comment, and it was easy to see, irritated the
lecturer with his closing comment on the subject that he (George) must be
mistaken, and he would look it up  at  break, but he had learned that such was
so....
     at  the beginning of the next class with that lecturer, the instructor
asked us to open our notes to the relevant pages and correct his mistake,
and that indeed George was correct after all.

"STANDARD DISCLAIMER....(.Insert Here.)...I make no money off George, and
don't even buy his products...."  I had never met him prior to the 2 weeks
we spent together  at  Siebel .......

    George De P is among the most talented and knowledgeable amateur brewers
I have ever met....if I only had a fraction of his knowledge!.....why he is
not brewing professionally is beyond me....
    Indeed tonight, I sent him a question to ponder regarding my current
situation regarding the water I brew with, prior to reviewing todays HBD.
    Shoot from the hip, if you will...but if you are shooting  at  George,
you'd best know your stuff.......'cos George does.......
    I will remind folks that George has a Gold Medal from the Nationals, to
attest to his 'practical application' of his abilities. This being, IMHO,
the "cream on the pavlova" that separates the chaff, from the grist........
Jethro (Pretty Damned Annoyed) Gump

Rob Moline
Court Avenue Brewing Company,
Des Moines, Iowa.
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: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 10:49:05 +200
From: "Braam Greyling" <braam.greyling at azona.com>
Subject: Motorised Valley mill

Hi all,

I have a Valley mill with which I crush my grains. I want to motorise 
it.
How strong must the electrical motor be and what  is the optimum rpm 
speed to which I can let the rollers run ?
With optimum I dont mean necessarily the fastest, I still want to 
obtain a good consistent crush.

Thanks !

Braam Greyling


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 08:34:19 -0400
From: AJ <ajdel at mindspring.com>
Subject: Pilsen from LA/Well Test

This is a little old. The local POP pooped over the weekend and I had no
desire to go into work.

John Palmer asked about synthesis of Pilsen water from Sparklets and
gave the following for Sparklets. Bicarbonate 5.8, Alkalinity 4.0, Ca
0.7, Mg 0.8, Hardness 5.1, SO4 3.4 presumably all mg/L as the ion except
for the hardness and alkalinity which would be "as CaCO3". There is a
problem with the alkalinity number. Pure water has an alkalinity of
about 2.5 ppm as CaCO3 so that there is only 1.5 ppm carbonate
alkalinity and that corresponds to 1.8 mg/L whereas if we assume that
all the alkalinity is from bicarbonate we would have 4.8 mg/L carbonate.
Neither of these numbers agrees with the reported number and this is not
atypical. I arbitrarily decided to accept the bicarbonate number rather
than the alkalinity number.

I have three profiles for Pilsen on hand. Two don't "balance" very well
and so I chose the third. I can't calculate balance for John's profile
because there is no sodium or chloride data. I calculate the following
when 11 mg/L calcium chloride dihydrate, 7.5 mg/L epsom salts and 6 mg/L
calcium carbonate are added to each liter of Sparklets:

Ion        AJ Profile      Result        John's Profile

Ca                7               6.1                  10
Mg                2               1.5                    3
Na                2                  0                    -
HCO3          15              12.7                   3
SO4              5                6.4                   4
Cl                 5                5.3                   -

A little CO2 would be required to dissolve the chalk and set the pH to a
reasonable value.

I doubt that it would matter very much to the final beer whether one
made the mineral additions as calculated above to the Sparklets water or
just added 25 mg/L calcium chloride which would get the calcium to 7.5
mg/L and the chloride to 12 mg/L plus whatever was already in the water.
The residual alkalinity is so low (0.08 mg/L) that even 6 mg/L calcium
is enough to neutralize it. A change of 10 ppm Ca amounts to a change of
0.14 mEq/L neutralizing capacity which moves pH only about 0.01 pH. Thus
it doesn't  really matter whether you add any calcium or not. Mashes
with this water are effectively distilled water mashes. Mash pH will be
set by the crystal/caramel malt component of the grist.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Randy Reed asked about the results of his post softener well water test.
By all means have the water tested before it enters the softener. We
can't say much about what went into the softener based on a post
softener test, at least about cations. Anions are undisturbed by the
softener and so we can observe that the chloride level is very high at
130 mg/L to the point where one might suspect leakage of brine into the
output stream but if you live in an arid area this might not be that
high a number at all. Nevertheless, beers made with this water are
probably going to taste salty dependent on how much sodium and potassium
are in the input water. Sulfate is very modest at 13.2 mg/L, low enough
that soft lagers (Helles, for example) could easily be brewed with this
water.

We can make a rough guess as to what the hardness of the well water
might be by assuming that all chloride ion came from sodium chloride.
The report shows 4.5 mEq/L sodium at the output of the softener and 3.67
mEq/L chloride. This would  leave 0.89 mEq/L sodium exchanged
corresponding to a hardenss of about 45 ppm as CaCO3.

A couple of other comments:
  -the pH is at the USEPA recommended limit for pH i.e. 6.5
  -iron at 0.08 mg/L is well below the USEPA secondary limit of 0.3 mg/L
but dangerously close to the brewer's desired limit of 0.1 mg/L
especially as this is at the output of the softener. There well may be a
iron problem with this well. Iron can be removed by agitating the water
to let CO2 out and let oxygen in. The combined effect will be to  raise
the pH causing ferric hydroxide to precipitate.
  -there doesn't seem to be a USEPA limit for sodium though the WHO has
a guideline that it be under 200 mg/L and you are well under that.



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 17 Mar 98 05:40:14 MST5EDT
From: Sharon/Dan Ritter <ritter at bitterroot.net>
Subject: shipping beer with dry ice

Those of us that will be entering beer in AHA's Nat'l HB Competition will
once again face the daunting task of shipping temperature sensitive beer
across the country IN JULY! Someday I hope AHA will heed the call and move
the competition dates earlier in the calendar year.

Until then I have been wondering if it is possible and effective to ship
beer with dry ice. I ship my beer in a foam lined shipping carton designed
specifically for beer (from the Case Place). There are usually one or two
empty beer slots where dry ice could be wrapped in plastic and secured.
They would be insulated from contact with the adjacent bottles yet might
provide enough cooling to keep the beer from reaching the boiling point as
it passes through Lubbock, Texas when the afternoon high is 105F. (My
apologies in advance for those that live in or near Lubbock for
stereotyping your weather. I have no idea about the weather there but you
get my point. And yes, I know the NHC finals are in Portland this year but
brewers in Austin will have this problem!)

Has anyone tried this? If so, what quantities of dry ice did you use? Is it
effective and what are the possible drawbacks (aside from the cost of dry
ice)?

Dan Ritter <ritter at bitterroot.net>
Ritter's MAMMOTH Brewery - Hamilton, Montana





Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 08:50:27 -0500
From: kbjohns at peakaccess.net
Subject: Call for Judges NYC Comp

We can still use judges for the NYC Spring Regional Competition, sunday
3/22. Anyone intereseted please email me.

Complete info, judge can be found at the HOSI page URL http://www.wp.com/hosi/
Ken Johnsen


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 09:10:37 -0500
From: mcnallyg at gam83.npt.nuwc.navy.mil (Jeff)
Subject: re: Protein rests and break material


Hi All,

  George wrote:
>Al K. talks about getting copious amounts of break material when
>single step mashing DWC malt.  When he uses a protein rest, he gets
>less break.

  Al K. had mentioned using a short 135F rest to reduce break material.

>This, of course, makes sense.  The larger proteins are broken up in
>the mash, and therefore do not get coagulated in the kettle.  There is 
>a problem with this, though:
>
>You want the proteins to get removed, not just get broken up and
>passed on to the wort.

  Would'nt the smaller proteins that get "passed on to the wort" help
to increase mouthfeel and head retention in addition to reducing the
amount of break material?  This would be a good thing in some styles.

                                           Hoppy brewing,

                                           Jeff

============================================================================

Geoffrey A. McNally                  Phone:  (401) 841-7210 x21390
Mechanical Engineer                  Fax:    (401) 841-7250
Launcher Technology and              email: mcnallyg at gam83.npt.nuwc.navy.mil
    Analysis Branch
Naval Undersea Warfare Center
Code 8322; Bldg. 1246/2
Newport, RI  02841-1708


Return to table of contents


Date: 17 Mar 1998 09:24:33 -0500
From: EFOUCH at steelcase.com
Subject: Axe Grinding


HBD-
Know what really BUGS me?  When Bob Vila gets on nationally syndicated TV
hawkin' Craftsman wrenches, and says they can withstand 300 pounds of
pressure!  300 pounds is NOT A PRESSURE!

Then, as if that's not bad enough, this journal does nothing to address this
travesty!  Have we become no more than a bunch of electronically linked
anthropomorphised ostriches with our collective heads in the virtual sand?!?

Don't even get me started on the fact that ol' Bob shows insensitivity by not
offering the wrenches rating in kilograms!

We all to need to take a good hard long look in the mirror.

I'm starting with me.

Eric Fouch
Bent Dick YoctoBrewery
Kentwood MI

"We have nothing against ideas.  We're against people spreading them"
 -General Augusto Pinochet of Chile


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 09:40:18 -0500
From: "Spies, James" <Jams at mlis.state.md.us>
Subject: foam control

All -

I noticed with interest the recent mini-thread about the use of the
"foam control" stuff available throug HopTech.  I used to regularly use
this in my beers, especially the big ones, to control the amount of mess
that I made with foam spewage through the airlock (I now use blow-off
tubing).  Anyway, the long and short of it is that, unless you've got a
really small beer (OG ~ 1.035 or less), the effects of this stuff will
be long gone by the time you drink it.  I've also noticed that on some
bigger beers (Belgian dubbel OG 1.087), the effects of the foam control
seem to peter out after the gravity drops into the .040's, and the
kraeusen springs up again.  I've never had a problem with head retention
using this, even on mid-level 1.040 beers, and it's useful especially if
you have a smaller carboy.  However, I would instead opt for the use of
blow-off tubing.  One final note - if you oxygenate using a stone, USE
THIS STUFF.  Adding it to the wort beforehand allows you to literally
blast the hell out of the beer with O2 for as long as you want without
having foam mountains rise out of the wort.  As always, no affiliation,
blah blah.

Hope this helps,
Jay Spies
Wishful Thinking Basement Brewery
Baltimore, MD


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 12:01:51 -0600
From: Randy Lilleston <rlilleston at cq.com>
Subject: Re: Beersummit Report

Jeffrey Kenton writes:


>One note: If EVER you find yourself in Washington DC with any amount of
>time to kill, think first of the Brickskellar. (850 beers in bottle, need I
>say more) It is located very near the intersection of 22nd and P, across
>the street from a statue of a man named Schevchenko.  If you come from the
>Dupont Circle and pass the classical architecture of the Amoco station on
>22nd, you have gone too far.

The Brickskeller is a great place - I work a block away and go there
probably 3-4 times a month. It's been there since the 1950s and also has
great bar munchies at a very reasonable price. It's the only bar in town
where I can get a Sam Smith's Taddy Porter, too. Just a point of
clarification: In the above directions, look for the Mobil station, not an
Amoco.


>So, instead of boring all of you with the details, I will make a webpage,
>repleat with photos and so forth within a week or so and repost when it is
>ready.
>

Looking forward to it!




Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 17:11:40 GMT
From: marnold at netnet.net (Matthew Arnold)
Subject: Titletown Open

The Green Bay Rackers Homebrewers' Club is proud to announce the fourth annual
Titletown Open Homebrewing Competition. The competition is set to take place on
Saturday, May 23, at Titletown Brewing Company in Green Bay, Wisconsin. Three
categories will be judged: Pale (<10 SRM), Amber (10-20 SRM), and Dark (>20
SRM). The Davidson Homebrew Color Guide will be used as the color standard.
Sorry, no mead, cider, or sake will be judged. The Titletown Open is an
AHA-sanctioned competition.

The Best of Show winner will have his or her recipe scaled up with Greg Nash,
brewmaster at Egan Brewing Company of DePere, WI, and will be served on tap at
Egan and Titletown!

For more information, see http://www.rackers.org/openrules.html To get an entry
form, send your snail-mail address to our Contest Chairman, Mike Conard, at
mconard at itol.com Attention BJCP judges! If you are interested in helping us
out, send email to Mike! We will be using the preliminary round of judging to
help educate and train potential BJCP judges. An accredited BJCP judge will
evaluate all entries.

Get Brewing!
  Matt
- -----
Webmaster, Green Bay Rackers Homebrewers' Club
http://www.rackers.org        info at rackers.org


Return to table of contents

---