HOMEBREW Digest #2726 Fri 29 May 1998

[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: RIMS Ideas (Kenneth B Johnsen <NADB>)
  homemade stir-plate (Scott Murman)
  Just starting. (John D Lichtenberger)
  mash/sparge one day, boil the next (Randy Ricchi)
  polyclar and dead musicians (AlannnnT)
  yeast reuse (Alex Gonzales)
  Weissheimer malt (Stephen Cavan)
  beer engine? ("George Techentine")
  The Practical Brewer is NOT Handbook of Brewing (Andy Walsh)
  Correction ("Houseman, David L")
  spam; buying sensory beers; time; Big Brew; pressure (Samuel Mize)
  Help with all grain requested ("Tom Struzik")
  Re:  pressure cooking a batch, wedding brews (Mark T A Nesdoly)
  Style series books (Michael Rose)
  Update on Safale dry yeast (Paul Ward)
  A plastic vs. glass datapoint ("Dave Draper")
  Rhubarb Beer, AHA, Alaska (Ken Schramm)
  Secondary/Shipping/Yeast/Cybil Gump/Contests (John Varady)
  cheap propane burners (JPullum127)
  Altbier/Crystal vs. Caramel malts (Al Korzonas)
  classic beer styles series (Dan Szemenyei)" <iamelvis at esu.edu>
  Shucks! (Some Guy)
  Bitter/Sweet Help Needed ("Frederick L. Pauly")
  Re: Spent Grain Brain (irajay)
  Some Stuff (Kyle Druey)
  yeast (Andy Walsh)
  Water Ponters and Fermentation Temps Vs Esters (Ken Schroeder)

BURP's Spirit of Free Beer competition is June 6-7 and entry information is available by contacting Jay Adams (adams at burp.org). 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: Wed, 27 May 1998 17:50:52 -0400 From: kbjohns at peakaccess.net (Kenneth B Johnsen <NADB>) Subject: Re: RIMS Ideas In a previous issue, Louis Bonham sugests a seperate, small glycol filled, heating chamber, filled with glycol to replace the RIMS heating chamber. He then compares this system to a heating coil in an HLT and feels the advantage of the heating chamber would be a quicker response than trying to change HLT temps. He's correct in that the HLT temp can not be changed quickly but what he misses is that the temp of the HLT has a fairly wide temperature range 160-175 with a properly designed coil Also from my point of view you would have to control both the flow of the wort and the liquid temp in the chamber, making a more complicated system. With a coil in the HLT you only have to monitor flow rate via a valve. The other advantage of the coil in HLT is the speed with which temp increases can be done. 8.5 min from 120F to 150F with 17 Lbs of grain and 1.3qt/lb of water. Bob Precision Brewing Systems URL http://www.pbsbeer.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 16:04:04 -0700 (PDT) From: Scott Murman <smurman at best.com> Subject: homemade stir-plate I'm going to try putting together a homemade stir plate. I simply can't get fast enough growth when stepping up my starters from a petri dish. I know someone recently posted their success with this project, but the damn search engine at the Brewery site sucks, and Spencer Thomas' page doesn't seem to exist any longer, so I couldn't find the post. I was planning on getting a small DC motor, a power source, some type of power control (a rheostat?), a drive magnet, and a teflon-coated stir magnet or two. Then build it into some type of thin wooden shell. How big of a drive magnet is required? Is there a source for them other than over-priced scientific supply houses? Maybe old stereo speakers? Also, is there any preference on the radius arm that the drive magnet is attached to or the RPM? Any other advice is welcome. SM Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 19:40:20 EDT From: jlich at juno.com (John D Lichtenberger) Subject: Just starting. Hello everyone. I am new to this hobby, I just finished enjoying my first batch of beer made with Mr. Beer. Where do I go from here. Should I stick with Mr. Beer until my skills progress, or jump into this without looking into the pool first? I thank you all for any help I might receive. John _____________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 21:55:59 -0400 From: Randy Ricchi <rricchi at ccisd.k12.mi.us> Subject: mash/sparge one day, boil the next Danie de Villiers asked about mashing/sparging one night, and boiling the next. For years, I have done just that, except I never bothered to boil for 10 minutes after sparging. I simply sparged until I collected the amount of wort I wanted, then I covered the wort and let it sit until the next day (sometimes until 4:00 p.m., when I get home from work). I never had problems with this technique, and it's a great way to brew if you feel that a regular all-grain brew day is too long from start to finish. I posted this technique to the Homebrew Digest once or twice in the past, and saw a few responses, always critical, guessing at problems like hot-side aeration (NOT), bacterial infection (NOT). Good guesses, but no one ever posted they had actually tried the method and had bad results. Evidently, no one ever tried it. I see a lot of people post to the HBD with seemingly life or death questions about whether they should try something or not. Now, I guess if you brew once a year and it seems like a huge amount of work, you might be afraid to try something that didn't come with a rock-solid guarantee; but I brew on the average, 26 batches a year, and I take it in stride if now and then one of my experiments turns out to be less stellar than I had hoped for. The results are never horrible, and I gain another datapoint of personal experience that is more valuable to me than anything I can read in a book. Not that I'm against reading to improve your brewing, mind you. I read a lot, and I love reading all the theory that is available, both on this forum and in the printed media. The problem is, if you're really interested in brewing, you'll be really inquisitive. And if you're really inquisitive, you'll have questions that you can't always readily find answers to. At that point, I say give it a whirl, take good notes, and think about what you tried to do when you are tasting the results of your efforts, and learn by and for yourself something about brewing. If you feel the probability of failure is fairly high, brew a fairly small batch so you won't have too much of a not-so-good thing on hand when your experiment is through. Now that I'm done ranting, I noticed that Danie asks about the long contact with copper. I always had mine in stainless. Anyone out there with a comment on long copper contact? I also never added the hops the night before, preferring to wait until I was into the boil the next day, adding my first (bittering) hops with 60 minutes left in the boil. I can't comment on such an extended "first wort hopping". My gut instinct scares me away from it. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 22:12:16 EDT From: AlannnnT at aol.com Subject: polyclar and dead musicians Eric Fouch posted, "Don't let a lack of qualificatins[sic] stop you from pursuing your career goals. I was never qualified for any of the positions I acheived." -Sonny Bono, an excerpt from "I'm Living Proof You Can Have The American Dream" Perhaps had Sonny been a qualified skier... On the polyclar front, personal and possibly irrelevant opinion only; Adding plastic, even microfine plastic to my beer is more objectionable than having a little haze. When fining in the keg some will be in your glass. The FDA is on the fence about the addition of polyclar. The Williams catalogue sort of mumbles a disclaimer about decanting your brew before drinking. When bottling, assum some polyclar will make it's way into your bottles, and if your beer is slightly stirred up before decanting you will wind up drinking some plastic. [Then again, plastic is better than weevils.] In filtered brew polyclar doesn't matter, but not many of us filter. Gelatine is possibly less objectionable, except for us radically non-meat eaters. I have always found that an extended stay at 32 deg F clears my beer pretty well. At least enough for non-competition brews. Best Brewing, Alan Talman [Soon to take Eric Fouch's sensitivity class, as soon as scholarship funds become available.] Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 19:41:12 -0700 (PDT) From: Alex Gonzales <brewingismylife at yahoo.com> Subject: yeast reuse I just wanted to reply to Mark Hillman's inquiry about reusing yeast. Wyeast's web site has very detailed information about "washing" yeast for reuse. Alex Gonzales Salt Lake City, Utah _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free at yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 20:59:12 -0600 (CST) From: Stephen Cavan <cavanst at duke.usask.ca> Subject: Weissheimer malt Someone had asked for the specifications on Weissheimer malts. While there will some variance with lots, this is what Weissheimer says is a "Typical Malt Specification" for Pilsener malt: Extract % db 80.7% Moisture 3.8% Extract Diff, db 1.8 Color SRM 1.73 Hartong index 35.8 Protein max 10.5% Kolbach index 39.2 I hope that helps, Steve Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 04:39:17 -0500 From: "George Techentine" <gtechen1 at tuelectric.com> Subject: beer engine? Hello All, I was at my local water store lately and saw a hand pump that mounts on top of the water carboys' opening. The handpump then can be used to pump water out of a 'faucet' on the pump. Can I use this as a poor - mans beer engine? Have you seen these before? They cost about $22 (us). Will my beer be ruined? George Techentine Baker Street Brew Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 15:42:30 -0700 From: Andy Walsh <awalsh at ventrassist.com> Subject: The Practical Brewer is NOT Handbook of Brewing Handbook of Brewing and Practical Brewer are definitely not the same book. The former is very recent and the latter is much older. Neither is of much use to homebrewers IMHO. The Handbook of Brewing should still be available. Andy. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 08:54:44 -0400 From: "Houseman, David L" <David.Houseman at unisys.com> Subject: Correction "There will also be a BJCP exam offered on Friday night which will make you eligible to judge if you are not already a BJCP judge. people interested in taking the exam should contact Dave Houseman at dhousema+AEA-cccbi.chester.pa.us ." Chuck's mailer must have done something funky with the "AT" sign, " at ", in case this one does the same in my email address above. The +AEA- string is really the at sign. dhousema at cccbi.chester.pa.us is the email address to use in case you want to take/retake the BJCP exam in Downingtown on June 26th, 7pm, and you haven't already contacted me. Dave Houseman Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 08:25:34 -0500 (CDT) From: Samuel Mize <smize at prime.imagin.net> Subject: spam; buying sensory beers; time; Big Brew; pressure Lo, in HBD #2725 "Jeffrey M. Kenton" saith unto us: > Subject: AAHHHH Summer! (Low Bandwidth time) > > Howdy folks. I saw a couple of ads in recent HBDs,... > the janitors are spending their time doing something > worthwhile (not shackled to the server). ... > Keep up the good work, I love the result every day. I concur fully. I don't want us to hold up publication of the HBD until a janitor can check it for ads. Does the HBD allow non-subscribers to post to it? Has this been discussed before? Some mailing lists prevent this to reduce spammage, others allow it. I WOULD vote that such spam be removed in the HBD archives. Behold, "Jeffrey M. Kenton" saith further: > Is there a good resource out there for sensory evaluation that includes > commercial beers that I don't need to spike? Al Korzonas' book has a list in it, if you have that. - - - - - - - - - - Unto us from "Richard Cox" cometh this plaintive cry: > I recently bottled a high-gravity amber ale that (due to scheduling > conflicts) sat in the primary for nearly 2 weeks, and then in the secondary > for another two weeks. This is the first time in my brewing career that > I've let a beer sit around that long, Well, you lazy bugger. Good grief, many people consider those MINIMUM times. > Tonight I did my usual one-week taste test and cracked open a bottle. Not > flat, but practically. There's a hint of carbonation, but not enough. ... > Am I worrying needlessly? Yes. Let it sit another couple of weeks. After a two-week secondary fermentation, I wouldn't EXPECT it to carbonate in a week. Again, this is absolutely on target for many brewers. - - - - - - - - - - Further is granted unto us this wisdom from the Brewing Book of Numbers: > From: "Jethro Gump" <brewer at ames.net> > Subject: Big Brew '98 Stats-Abridged ... > More than 1000 brewers at 105 sites......more than 1350 gallons of Big > 10/20 (14,400 12 oz bottles equivalent,) This is just a hundred times gross, man... - - - - - - - - - - Then spake unto us "jim booth", who saith: > Subject: pressure cooking as thermal loading ... > the big boy brewers are experimenting with pressure cooking wort to save > energy but are finding detrimental flavors impacts. > > I didn't care for my last batch of pressure cooked wort bohemian pilsner > but attributed the problem to my over enthusiastic use of soured mash. My recollection of the thread on pressure cooking from a few months (year or two?) ago was that it gives a nice malty flavor when you p-cook a part of your wort, but p-cooking all of it gives an excessive, syrupy taste. - - - - - - - - - - Well, back to reading the bible. Best, Sam Mize - -- Samuel Mize -- smize at imagin.net (home email) -- Team Ada Fight Spam - see http://www.cauce.org/ Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 11:04:18 -0400 From: "Tom Struzik" <tom at struzik.com> Subject: Help with all grain requested Hello all - I have been lurking for quite a while now & have learned a great deal. I was recently inspired to go all grain. I believe that the beer that I am making now is in many ways the best that I have brewed. I have brewed about 4 all grain batches within the last 2 months. They are all from the 7 Barrel Brewery handbook. The taste & clarity have been impressive. I am having a problem, however in hitting my target OG. In my latest batch, an IPA with a target OG of 1056 I came up around 1046. I have had similar problems with the other batches. This was my procedure: 10# English Pale 2 Row 1/2# Carapils 3/4# Crystal 1/4# Flaked Barley Mashed into 165F strike water to end up at 151F for 75 minutes with 4 1/4G liquor Sparged to fill kettle with 6 1/2 G of wort. My original pH of the strike water was 6.44~6.62 First runoff the was pH 5.51 and final was pH 5.59 Boiled for 90 minutes and ended up with about 5 G of wort. I mash, sparge & boil in one kettle. It is a 10 G stainless steel with a SS false bottom. The volume between the false bottom and the actual bottom is about 1G. The above recipe includes an added 1G of water to compensate for this. I also added an extra # of pale malt. Any ideas to improve my procedures? I just began Noonan's NBLB... Thanks alot! - Tom Return to table of contents
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by mail.usask.ca From: Mark T A Nesdoly <mtn290 at mail.usask.ca> Subject: Re: pressure cooking a batch, wedding brews Jim Booth asks in HBD #2725 if anyone who has pressure cooked part of a batch has subsequently entered it in a competition, and if so, how did it do? The first time I ever did a decoction, I did a triple decoction weizen. At the time, there was a discussion on rcb about pressure cooking the last thin decoction, so I decided to try it. It worked fairly well (there was so much break material, I was afraid that the release valve on my pressure cooker would clog and...boom!). However, due to the added effort, I haven't done it since. That beer was entered in CABA's 1997 All About Ales competition, and it took 2nd in the German Ales category. Since that time, I've switched to doing a single, big decoction to save valuable time on brew day. I haven't noticed any taste differences between my triple, double, and now single decoctions. Basically what I now do is mash in at 110F for an acid rest, then do a big decoction to bring the mash up to sacch temperatures, then mash out with an infusion of boiling water. Like I said before, it saves a lot of time over a true triple decoction, and I still get the same flavours. Good enough for me. *** BTW, while traffic is low, I want to thank the HBD for the very helpful hints and informative discussions since I began reading it about a year ago. Thanks to quite a bit of what I've learned here, I now brew better beer. As a matter of fact, I brewed pretty much all of the beer that I served at my wedding. I had 10 coke kegs' worth, and a few commercial beer for those that aren't inclined to drink homebrew. Three kegs were completely drained, and another three were half drained at the end of the night. Only about 3 dozen commercial beer went! There were about 200 people at the reception. I've never had so many compliments on my beer before. I can heartily recommend to any brewer who is about to get married to brew at least some of your own for the wedding--it's a big hit. - -- Mark Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 08:28:06 -0700 From: Michael Rose <mrose at ucr.campus.mci.net> Subject: Style series books If anybody living in Ames, IA could post or e-mail the phone # for the bookstore (Waldenbooks ?) that has the discounted style series books, I'd appreciate it. ATT gave me two bad phone numbers. I'm taking a long shot and hoping that they ship to Riverside CA. Tomorrow, lets all scramble the letters in the city in our tag line. We'll ruin all the sourdough bread in Ann Arbor MI. Michael Rose Ivrdrsiee, AC :^) mrose at ucr.campus.mci.net Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 11:31:51 -0400 (EDT) From: Paul Ward <paulw at doc.state.vt.us> Subject: Update on Safale dry yeast This post is for the sake of others who require the convenience of dry yeast. I had posted previously about a new (to me anyway) dry yeast I was trying from the United Kingdom called Safale. I bottled a 1.044 bitter yesterday. This had been sitting in primary for 16 days. This Safale is rather impressive stuff! 1.044 O.G. down to 1.008. Crystal clear beer. There was spooge stuck on the bottom of my airlock and the inside of the 7 gallon primary lid, so I know the fermentation was quite strong (although not as strong as Wyeast Irish Ale - I still shudder over that one). The yeast had flocced amazingly tight. I was able to tip the fermentor to get virtually all the beer off the yeast cake without stirring up anything. This beer dropped so bright I'm concerned about having enough yeast to prime (I know, should be plenty). As I bottled, I was getting whiffs of green apple aroma, but this didn't come through in tasting. There was almost no 'ale' taste. Very clean tasting - the hops really came through nicely (I just love East Kent Goldings for flavoring). I wish I had used more that 1/2 pound of crystal though, attenuation was more than I hoped for and the beer is a little dry. Even though there's a dry profile, the sample left a very smooth feeling on the tounge, so the body is there. A little buttery or butterscothery flavor would do wonders here. So far I would have to rate this product right up there with my current favorite dry yeast (Nottingham). So far I can report: - strong fermentation - high attenutation - solid flocculation - neutral flavor. Of course it may all taste like crap after conditioning, but I kind of doubt that. I'll post a followup in a couple of weeks. Paul in Vermont paulw at doc.state.vt.us - -- According to government height/weight charts, I'm seven and a half feet tall. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 11:32:45 -6 From: "Dave Draper" <ddraper at utdallas.edu> Subject: A plastic vs. glass datapoint Dear Friends, Some weeks back, the perennial discussion regarding the relative merits of plastic vs. glass fermentors came our way on the HBD again. During this, Glyn Crossno mentioned he routinely split batches between a plastic and glass fermentor, and when I emailed to ask for some input on his experience, he very kindly responded by sending me a pair of bottles of a bock he had made that was split in this way. This past weekend I had the chance to sample these bottles with my partner in mayhem Eric Schoville. The beer was brewed back in late Feb or early March (I received the bottles at the end of March), and various schedule conflicts conspired to prevent us from sampling till now, so the beer was nicely aged. I don't know the details of Glyn's recipe or procedures other than that everything was identical except the fermentors. Both Eric and I could detect no difference between these two beers. One of them was poured rather more energetically than the other, and there was a vanishingly subtle difference in mouthfeel between the one that had a lot more foaming and the one that did not, but there were no flavor differences whatsoever. The beer is a fine, clean example of the bock style, one I would drink many glasses of quite happily (and after a few I would no doubt be happy indeed... the beer is fairly strong). I fully recognize that this is not a systematic or rigorous experimental study, and merely a single report, but since it is the only one that has come forward in direct comparison I thought it would be worth reporting. Cheers, Dave in Dallas - --- ***************************************************************************** Dave Draper, Dept Geosciences, U. Texas at Dallas, Richardson TX 75083 ddraper at utdallas.edu (commercial email unwelcome) WWW: hbd.org/~ddraper Beer page: http://hbd.org/~ddraper/beer.html I can't be bought for a mere $3.50. ---Jeff Renner Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 13:16:32 -0400 From: Ken Schramm <SchramK at wcresa.k12.mi.us> Subject: Rhubarb Beer, AHA, Alaska Compliments from Jim Liddil over the HBD are guaranteed to brighten one's day. For the AHA in Nw-Ahlins, Dan and I made a 55 gallon batch of 1.052 cream ale in the Pico Brewing System 55 gallon pilot brewery. The idea was one big batch of identical base beer with 5 lbs of various fruits in separate secondary fermentations, so as to compare the fruits. We also did some w/ 5 lbs of raspberries in primary, one with 10 lbs rasps in secondary and one cherry with a belgian yeast. We served the base and the variations in a "start vertical and end horizontal" tasting. We did a single stage infusion with a high strike temp (158 F I think). I can't really remember the grain bill (HELP ME DAN!) but it was mostly Briess 2 row with a bit of crystal and some 10L specialty, I think...maybe Munich? At any rate, we did 20 IBU's of Kent Goldings (none at the finish) and fermented with YCKC A-51 yeast at about 62 F in a jacketed cylindro-conical fermenter. The batch was then dosed onto the fruit in stainless steel kegs for secondary fermenters. We used 5 lbs of frozen rhubarb chunks and secondary beer (wort?) to fill the cornelius keg. The beer was racked off the fruit after 14 days and we used the manufacturers recommended dose of pectinase per 5 gallons. The rhubarb was probably the most distinctive and (I think) the most refreshing of all of them. Tart, good mouthfeel. Balance of fruit to malt/beer was pretty much on the money, unlike some of the other fruits. Someone pester McConnell for details. The whole thing finished up around 4:00 am, and he was doing the documentation while I was scrubbing tuns (That's clearly an exaggeration, but Dan does have the notes). As far as the thread on the AHA NHC, I'd like to know if anyone else out there has any misgivings about the notion of competitions in general. I often wonder if competitions are a truly rewarding expenditure of our collective time and effort. Trout Unlimited goes about its NPO way, promoting that hobby quite nicely without holding competitions. I really like their concentration on activities that improve the hobby and the overall body of knowledge available to their members. I also like their structure, with local chapters that work in concert with the Nat'l organization. Thoughts? Comments? Anyone see anything there we could co-opt to help the AHA become more valuable? Don't get me wrong: I have worked hard on competitions in Michigan, but.... Comments re: "Babcock is doing a great job" are right on. 'Til you done it, you gotta button it.... How much do you get paid to do all that work, Pat? I, for one, really appreciate it. You too, Dick Dunn, if you're listening. If anybody else out there has suggestions on how to have good time in Late June in Alaska, I'd love to hear 'em. Ken Schramm Troy, Michigan "When the going gets tough, the tough have a Schramm's" Mike Schramm, 1989 Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 09:50:51 -0700 From: John Varady <rust1d at usa.net> Subject: Secondary/Shipping/Yeast/Cybil Gump/Contests Richard asks about an ale he had in the primary for 2 weeks and then in the secondary for 2 weeks and wonders about it carbonating properly. I recently bottled 20 gallons of ale that had been in the secondary for over 2 months that took about 1 month to carbonate, so to answer your question, your beer will carbonate fine in time. Darren asks about free shipping from mail order hb shops and says he needs to order 350# of malt. Most mail order hb shops exclude carboys and malt from the free shipping due to the bulk and weight, so you will probably be better off making a drive to the nearest local shop. Dirk says that both ale and lager yeast are now classified as Saccharomyces Cerevisiae. Actually I believe that lager yeast is once again going under the alias Saccharomyces Carlsbergensis, not S. Uvarum, and have not heard of any re-classification of bottom fermenters as S. Cerevisiae. >From the sig line on yesterdays posts to the digest, it would seem that our beloved friend Rob Moline is no longer and Jethro Gump has assumed complete control! Jethro, I want to talk to Rob now...can I talk to Rob? Is he in there with you? Somebody mentioned entering two beers into the same category of the same contest recently. Isn't this a no-no? or contest dependant? Also, do most contests required you to use the entry forms & labels they provide, or will any generic form do? I ask because I added a feature to my software to print Entry/Recipe forms and Labels, but I called Jay Adams in regards to the upcoming BURP contest and he said I had to use the forms/labels supplied. I didn't ask why, I just used tier forms. Thanks to those that supplied the volumetric formulas I was too lazy to find myself. Based on the calcs (15" radius, 24" height), my copper tub should hold over 70 gallons! I think I should actually measure the thing, since I certainly don't look like it could hold that much. Ok, that enough.... Peace! John John Varady http://www.netaxs.com/~vectorsys/varady Boneyard Brewing The HomeBrew Recipe Calculating Program Glenside, PA rust1d at usa.net Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 13:57:47 EDT From: JPullum127 at aol.com Subject: cheap propane burners I just made a batch last night using the brinkman $43.00 on sale at menards burner. I really liked it. it took about 25 minutes to get 5 1/2 gallons of wort to full boil, the stand was nice and sturdy,easily adjustable flame regulator,and has a built in windscreen,even though its rated at 200,000 btu's it didn't seem to use much propane from the tank. no affiliation,blah,blah, i just liked the thing and thought it was a good piece of equipment at a good price. I have also seen the same burner at home depot,but priced a little higher. still cheaper than the king cookers though. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 14:17:31 -0500 (CDT) From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com> Subject: Altbier/Crystal vs. Caramel malts Art writes: >I've been reading the new Altbier book, which I >find a very good read. When reading the section on >ingredients, the author mentions crystal/caramel >malt together, not making a distinction. In the >recipe section however, one of them uses both >crystal 60L and caramel. Does someone know the >difference between crystal and caramel ? <snip> First about the Altbier book. I don't have this book yet but I was very concerned about its quality when I read an article about Altbiers written by the same author. In this article, the author showed that he is completely confused about protein rests, their use and what temperatures do what things to the final beer. Then I read where Art says that crystal and caramel malts are included in a recipe for Altbier. I spoke to the brewmaster at Zum Uerige in Dusseldorf for a good two hours about their recipe and production methods. He said that they use mostly Munich malt with a tiny amount of very dark malt (I presumed this to be something like Weyermann Carafa which is like Chocolate malt). There is no crystal malt (from what I could understand) in Zum Uerige. I have also made several Altbiers which compare favourably to Zum Uerige and they were made from 90% Munich malt and 10% DeWolf-Cosyns Aromatic (a sort of Munich on steroids). I plan to send letters asking about crystal malts and about attenuation (another topic which is a bit unclear regarding Altbiers) to the brewmasters at the breweries in Duesseldorf I visited to clear this up, but for now, I fear the worst for the accuracy of "Altbier." *** Crystal versus Caramel malts. I've read that in the past they were made differently, but in recent years (certainly everything we get now) the two terms are interchangeable. That is not to say that Durst 60L crystal is going to taste just like Weyermann's Cara-Munch II or like DeWolf-Cosyns CaraMunich... No... each malststers crystal/caramel malts will taste slightly different, but they are all made using pretty much the same process. Briess used to make only 6-row crystal malts, but lately they have been making some colours from 2-row also. I feel the Briess 6-row crystal malts are very tasty and distinctive... they all have a nice "milk chocolate" flavour. The 2-row are equally nice, but quite different in flavour. If you turn your nose up at 6-row malts, all you need to do is to taste the beers made by Goose Island Brewing Co. (brewpub and micro)... they use mostly 6-row malts and their beers are world class. Al. Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL korz at xnet.com http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/ Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 15:49:43 -0400 (EDT) From: "Aanakin Skywalker (Dan Szemenyei)" <iamelvis at esu.edu> Subject: classic beer styles series Hi, I originally posted this to (jkenton at iastate.edu) regarding his querie in the HBD on 5/28/98. After writing, I figured I might post it to the HBD in case anyone can get me what *I'm* looking for. Per usual, all disclaimers apply, I'm just a wee-grad student trying to help, and to build my Star Wars collection. Thanks all (sorry about the length)! > I got #1-8 all at my Waldenbooks for $3.99, and they still have all of those numbers. I've yet to see any of the higher numbers, so I assume we'll have to shell out the big bucks to order them, or not. I also got a beer brewers dictionary (may be a sub-book in the C.B.S. series) also for $3.99. I've also seen the brewing chemistry book by Dr. Fix for the same price, but since I failed a 5 credit Chem course as an undergrad, I think I'll skip that book. If you want any of these books, but can't get them near you, I'll be glad to pick them up and ship them off to you, provided you send me the bucks. Or, a trade could be involved. My Waldenbooks had the published scripts for Star Wars trilogy. I picked up Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi, but they didn't have the one for "Star Wars" (the first one from '77). If your Waldenbooks has it (i found mine in the bargain section for $2.99 each), we could trade book for book, then figure out the difference. Sound OK? Let me know via e-mail, and we can work out a deal. > Dan Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 18:13:16 -0400 (EDT) From: Some Guy <pbabcock at oeonline.com> Subject: Shucks! Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager... Thanks to one and all for the praise lately heaped on the Janitors of the Digest. I do want to ensure that the more important (if somewhat less vocal) half of the HBD show gets the recognition: he deserves far more of the recent praise than do I. If it wasn't for Karl's mastery of the code, the moderation function flat out wouldn't be there for ANYBODY to do a good job with! Thanks, Karl! You're doing a fantastic job! See ya! Pat Babcock in SE Michigan pbabcock at oeonline.com Home Brew Digest Janitor janitor@hbd.org HBD Web Site http://hbd.org The Home Brew Page http://oeonline.com/~pbabcock/brew.html "Just a cyber-shadow of his former brewing self..." Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 18:17:49 -0400 From: "Frederick L. Pauly" <flp2m at avery.med.virginia.edu> Subject: Bitter/Sweet Help Needed There is a beer brewed locally that is just wonderfull called Tuppers Hop Pockets by Domminion Brewing in Virginia. It is more bitter than SNPA or Anchor Liberty and yet it has a very distinct sweet component behind the bitterness and hop flavor. My question to the great collective is, How do they do that? Thanks Rick Pauly NucMed Tech Charlottesville,VA Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 17:31:21 +0000 From: irajay at ix.netcom.com Subject: Re: Spent Grain Brain I am not sure how to access the HBD2549 area which has the spent grain bread recipe but I do have an awful lot of spent grain. Could someone be so kind as to tell me how to go about it? Thanks Ira Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 06:00:19 -0700 From: Kyle Druey <druey at ibm.net> Subject: Some Stuff Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 09:16:11 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: Butt Lube What, is this the homo brew digest??? Did I land at the right server... Ooops! I hope that nobody was offended, perhaps I should enroll in one of Fouch's sensitivy training classes. Now on to hom*e* brewing.... (another data point, I have been using the heterosexual keg lube (KY jelly) with good success, no deteriorated o-rings). Just a little more on the beer fridge thread, I have had good results with my side-by-side fridge. I use a temp controller to keep the freezer side at about 34 F and I lager 2 kegs there. The fridge side stays at about 42-44 F which is fine for serving temps, and I can store 6 kegs there. Right now I have 7, 5 gal soda kegs in the beer fridge. Thanks to all who helped me debug my 240V boiling setup. I am happy to report no scorching or carmelization when boiling 6 gallons of wort with a 240V 3500W electric heating element. The hardest part was getting the courage to drill a 1.25" hole in the side of my 10 gallon aluminum pot. How much of the thickest part of the mash should one pull for a single decoction? In Burley's absence... KEEP ON BREWIN' (BTW, where is that old fart? Did he keel over on the 19 tee or something?) Kyle Druey Bakersfield, CA Utah in 6 over the Bulls, you read it here first... Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 12:20:14 -0700 From: Andy Walsh <awalsh at ventrassist.com> Subject: yeast Hi. I've had a few requests to clarify some of my recent monlologues...sorry for the bandwidth... > For example, Charlie says that yeast grow until they reach a certain > concentration in the wort, and then begin fermenting. If Charlie says that, he is wrong. If yeast is deficient in membrane sterols when first pitched, it absorbs O2,unsaturated fatty acids and sterols from the wort as a first process. Yeast grown anaerobically, without fatty acid/sterol supplementation, typically has about 0.1% sterol in its cell membrane at the end of growth. It cannot reproduce with this level of sterol, if subsequently pitched into fresh wort. It must first build this up before it can start reproducing. (to a maximum of 1%: each division lowers sterol levels). If you pitch yeast directly from the end of a primary fermentation, it will have about 0.1% sterol. This is why we oxygenate wort. Most yeast will have low cellular sterols when first pitched. The O2 enables the yeast to build up its sterol reserves. George de Piro has covered this well recently on the HBD. (Yeast grown aerobically, or with fat/sterol supplementation, or which has been aerated *vigourously* prior to pitching, behaves quite differently, and has high sterol levels when pitched. It has no need for oxygen or fatty acids or sterols for reproduction to commence. It has no "oxygen demand", and hence wort does not require aeration when pitched with such yeast. However, you must be certain you pitch a sufficient amount of yeast if relying solely on this.) (Aside: contrary to popular HBD wisdom, if anything, highly oxygenated worts have a longer lag phase than unaerated worts: the lag phase is the sterol synthesis phase) Reproduction is yeast's primary goal. It doesn't care about alcohol. Alcohol is a necessary byproduct for the reproductive process to continue (this involves a very complex explanation I won't go into, involving the balance of NAD/NADH inside the cell). As yeast begins to reproduce (once its sterol levels are high enough), it ferments. This is called the log phase. You can see this happen... this is occurring all the way until gas evolution slows and the foam head subsides. > Your post seems > to indicate that yeast growth is occurring (or may even start up > again?) and is important AFTER primary fermentation is complete! No. I didn't mean this. Yeast growth and fermentation go hand in hand. Fermentation occurs about 30 times more rapidly when yeast is growing than when it is not. Yeast does not grow after fermentation is over. I was trying to indicate that yeast at the end of fermentation is high in gycogen and low in sterols. If you are to repitch such yeast (low sterol) in fresh wort, it *must* be aerated (or be given fat/sterol supplements) to allow it to subsequently grow and ferment. > If you can, please put this in the context of pitching > rates, aeration, attenuation. I can't really do this. Basically I am saying that even an overpitched wort will probably underattenuate if not sufficently aerated, and if there are insufficient fats/sterols. Trub has very high levels of the latter. I think homebrewers can often get away with underaeration because their worts are usually very high in trub. Trub supplies the basic fatty acids and sterols needed without the necessity of using oxygen to build them up instead. Trub also serves to act as "nucleation sites" for CO2 evolution. CO2 acts as a suppressant to yeast growth, so by lowering CO2 levels (by providing nucleation sites) we can also hasten growth, and hence fermentation. > For example, why not aerate yeast in the > fermentor repeatedly over several hours to get LOTS of yeast growth. Because your beer will be nasty! I am not saying that more growth is good, it is not (and somewhat paradoxically also results in *less* ethanol, because the wort sugars end up in yeast biomass rather than ethanol). There is a fine balance between growth, attenuation and flavour that needs to be reached. This is why we have recommended pitching rates, trub levels and wort oxygen content. If you want to play around with these, go ahead, but you run a risk! > I know this is asking a lot and will not be offended if you must > ignore my questions. Perhaps you would like to post your reply along > with my questions to the HBD. I'm not offended. I realise my post must have been confusing to many, so maybe I will post this to the HBD as well. Andy. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 20:23:19 -0700 From: Ken Schroeder <knj at concentric.net> Subject: Water Ponters and Fermentation Temps Vs Esters Brent wrote: >The tests performed were pretty poor, but these were the results: >Hardness: 53.4 ppm >>pH: 6.8 >Manganese: 0.2 ppm >Fe: Trace amounts What's so bad about this? I wish my water was this good. The hardness has some weight but isn't really that bad. Boil and decant though this has mediocer results. Brent further wrote : > Lead 0.015 ppm > Copper 1.3 ppm > Sulfate 14 ppm > Chloride 68 ppm > Sodium 5 ppm Lookin' good again, but the chloride is a little high. Depending on what, if anything, the chloride is bonded with, just letting the brew water sit overnight should reduce this. Boiling for a few minutes accomplishes the same thing but cost gas or electricity. Brent, the clue to your "husky" taste is most likely found with the "brown stains in the toilet and dishwasher". This could be many things but I would take a look at iron. What are the pipes made of, from the well all the way to the tap? Iron can give a brown or rust color to the water as well as stain porcelin. Since your water is from a well, you might want to check out what kind of rocks are around your place. You brown stains and "husky" taste could also be from the rock formations your water is "filtered" by. Of course you may solve your problems by installing a water filter but this is probably an investment not warranted for a place you rent (unless your beer is sacred to you). I installed a resin filter and the carbonate level went from about 130ppm to 20ppm. This will drop further as the pipes shed the caked carbonate. Unfortunatelly these tend to be expensive, like well over $1500. A simple carbon filter would help, especially with the chloride but may not solve your husky problem. And just to add my two cents to the esters and fermentation temps discussion. I like to use the Fullers like yeast from the local breweries around here. Both Burlingame Station and Boulder Creek Brewing use it. The yeast is very similar to Wyeast 1968 but not quite as fruity. At any rate, I and the brewers of both of these establishments have noticed that if fermentation is below 65F, there is some off flavors very much like an ester. It is a hard to describe flavor not bannana, ect..Accepting that higher fermentation temps produce more esters, here is an example of ester being produced a lower temperature. I think the wild card in the equation is the perceived impact of an ester. You can have esters in you beer and have little off flavors. But if you have one ester which is "potent" you get a lot of off flavor. And the concentration may not even be that high. So my statement is : it not how many esters, but which esters you have. Counterpoint? Ken Schroeder Sequoia Brewing Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 05/29/98, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96