---

	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:
  Re: Weizen Volcanoes (Jim Wallace)
  No Boil Kits;  debunking HBD (AKGOURMET)
  Last word on the AHA mess (AlannnnT)
  decoction confusion (Paul Mahoney)
  Caramel vs. crystal (Al Korzonas)
  ale vs. lager yeast (Al Korzonas)
  brewferm info continued (Tom Alaerts)
  AHA / sour mash- gripe (MicahM1269)
  TPB (MicahM1269)
  AHA Nationals ("Henckler, Andrew")
  Brewing with fresh Sage (Bill_Rehm)
  Brewferm and kits (Brad McMahon)
  Yeast swirling and oxygenation ("Jeffrey M. Kenton")
  Attenuation / Hot Motors / Debunking Sarcasm (Kyle Druey)
  La Chouffe yeast (Spencer W Thomas)
  words, Wort Processors, judges, open fermentation (Samuel Mize)
  AHA problems/NHBC (ThE GrEaT BrEwHoLiO)
  RE: ...IBUs verified? (Competition comments) ("Riedel, Dave")
  brewing Luddites (Steve Zabarnick)
  Re: De-bunk that funk ("Ludwig's")
  Measuring IBUs and scoresheet quality (Jeremy Bergsman)
  Connecticut Beer Places (Mike Froehlich)
  Homebrew Digest #2732 (KESimmonds)
  160 bottles of beer on the wall (Jason Henning)
  HopsDirect (Al Korzonas)
  more on storing hops (Al Korzonas)
  open vs. closed fermentation (Al Korzonas)


BUZZ's Buzz-Off competition is June 27-28. Information is available at
www.voicenet.com/~rpmattie/buzzoff or via R. Mattie at
rpmattie at voicenet.com. 


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: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 17:41:35 -0500
From: Jim Wallace <jwallace at crocker.com>
Subject: Re: Weizen Volcanoes

>>Is it just me or have any of you noticed that the recently bought
German hefeweizens are WAY MORE carbonated than I've <<
 .... thats's why your good weissen glasses have that huge area above the
 .5L mark. A good fresh heffe weissen should have lots of carb..a huge
head..and a bunch of bannanas sitting on top (and maybe a little schnittzle
on the side ) ... 


___________________________________________
    JIM WALLACE ... jwallace at crocker.com
      http://www.crocker.com/~jwallace  
___________________________________________


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 20:00:01 EDT
From: AKGOURMET at aol.com
Subject: No Boil Kits;  debunking HBD

Tom Alaerts writes about Brewferm kits: 
"... whether it was necessary to boil their kits (as you so often read in
articles regarding kit brewing). They stated that the contents of their cans
are sterile and if you really want to boil something, then boil the water
BEFORE you add the contents of the can, to drive off the chlorine and kill any
bacteria that might be in your tap water ..... He doesn't recommend boiling
the kit because caramelisation will take place if you boil for a long time
which will result in taste changes.  But there's another reason that's
especially important for their wheat, grand cru and jubilee kits: since these
contain herbs, you will lose the delicate aroma they bring to the kit. "
- --------------------------
I sent an email to Morgans Brewing Co. a while back asking some similar
questions, like why do the instructions on the extract kits say to just add
warm water and sugar, stir and pitch the yeast when the accepted procedure
here in the U.S. is to boil and add more malt and no sugar.  An employee with
the company wrote back and made a number of points:  1) their kits are pre-
boiled, so the hot break has already occured, 2) additional boiling will
darken the beer and drive off the fresh hop aroma they strive to put in their
kits, and finally, 3) they market their kits to people all around the world
who, for the most part, want cheap, easy beer.  That's why they say to add
sugar OR malt.  The U.S. market is more focused on quality and will go to
greater lengths and expense to achieve microbrew-quality beer.  In other
countries, economics is the reason for homebrewing and sugar is cheaper than
another can of malt.  That's a generalization, or course, but it does explain
the reasoning behind the instructions included with extract kits.  

After receiving that reply, I decided to try the no-boil method with some
Morgans extract.  Although I'm sure it works for others, it failed for me.  It
was the only batch of beer out of close to a hundred batches that has ever
stuck on me.  I ended up with a sweet (F.G. 1.030), dark beer that I kegged
drank anyway.  Prior to that, I had made award winning extract brews by
boiling 2 cans of a particular kit for 20-30 minutes, maybe adding some
adjunct grains, and always adding about an ounce of fresh hops for the last 5
minutes.  Anyway, just my one-time experience with the no-boil method.  

Now on to the next subject:

From: Paul Niebergall <pnieb at burnsmcd.com>
Subject: De-bunk that funk

"A lot of the stuff I see on the HBD is bunk and methinks more than a few
of the most prolific HBD contributors have a bad case of "the emperor's
new cloths syndrome" when it comes to brewing technique.  In other
words they are tasting, seeing, or just plain imagining things in there beer
that only they are "special" enough to detect."   ..... and on and on ......
- ------------------------------------
That's just plain ridiculous.  If you're making wonderful beer now with your
current methods, then why even read the HBD?  I make great beer, too, but I
want it to be better and I find the HBD to be a great source of up-to-date
information.  Of course, I don't necessarily believe everything written here,
but I can usually tell when something is feasible and if I try it and it
works, then that's not bunk.  My brewing has definitely improved with the
information I've gleened from the HBD and I appreciate and respect everyone's
input.

Bill Wright 
Gourmet Alaska - The Quality Kitchenware Store & Homebrew Supply
Juneau, Alaska
akgourmet at aol.com


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 22:00:29 EDT
From: AlannnnT at aol.com
Subject: Last word on the AHA mess

To all,
I am humbled by the overwhelming evidence against the AHA, and by the calm,
rational arguments sent to me by HBDers. 

My first post, knocking the Boston Wort Processors, was, without question,
terribly wrong.

I allowed myself to be mislead by Brian Rezac's comments. I believed what he
had to say about the Worts. Other people I spoke to, who were pro-AHA, backed
Brian up. I choose to believe them as well. I made a big mistake.

I will endevour to keep my mouth shut in the future, opening it only long
enough to switch feet.

Sincerely begging the Wort Processor's forgiveness,
Alan Talman



 


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 22:32:34 -0400
From: Paul Mahoney <pmmaho at roanoke.infi.net>
Subject: decoction confusion

Scott was discussing decoctions in HBD #2730, and I am still confused!
Here is an excerpt from the post, and my questions (I am planning on my
first single decoction, using a 5 gallon Gott, and a 5 gallon stainless
boiling pot):

> 2) Using the single decoction mentioned above, and assuming that I
> rest the decoction at sacc. temps for 15 mins and then boil for 15
> mins, that means that the main mash will be at 135ish for 45 minutes
> (figuring a 15 minute initial rest). Isn't this way too long?

If you're not using a significant amount of wheat, the I'd say you
probably want to re-think your mash step.  There are many games you
can play, depending on the style you're brewing.  If you want to rest
at 135F for extended periods, then I would suggest parking at 160F for
your sacc. rest.  Dextrins can give good head just as proteins do
(better?).

   Decoction recipes I have seen suggest starting at 105F, then raising to
122F, then pulling 40% thick mash out to decoct.  Should I be "parking" at
135F instead?  So I pull 40% of the thick mash out to decoct.  The remainder
is "parking" while I sacc. rest the decoct amount (15 minutes), then boil for
15 minutes, then I add the boiled decoct back to the main mash.  So the main
mash has parked at 135F (No, it has lost some temperature I would guess:
while I pull out the 40%, then while I do all the decoction activities.
Would the temp. loss be 10-15 degrees?) for a long time, at least 45 minutes
as suggested above.  So what other game can I play?

   If I start at 105F, the remainder (the main mash) will probably drop to
90F; if I start at 122F, it will probably drop to 105F; if I start at 135F,
it will probably drop to 120F; all of this over a 45 minute period.

You could also try decocting 105 -> sacc. temp., or 105 -protein
rest -> add boiling water to first sacc. rest, etc.   Like I said,
there are many games you can play.  Too much time within the 115-135
range without a large amount of medium and large molecular weight
proteins is probably going to lead to problems though.  Remember, your
enzymes are sitting in that pool doing there work, not in the useless
junk you're boiling (scorching) the crap out of.

   When you suggest adding boiling water to the first sacc. rest, do you mean
adding boiling water to the decoct 40% or the mash left after removing the
decoct (the main mash)?
   Sorry to be dense, but I am confused about the effect on the remaining
mash (or as I call it, the main mash, as opposed to the deccoct amount).  It
seems that no matter which temperature I start at, it will be at least 45
minutes at that temp. or lower.  The enzyme pool may well be exhausted at
those lower temps, before I can raise the temp up to other beneficial temp.
ranges by the addition of the boiled decoct amount.
   What simple explanation am I missing here?

Paul Mahoney
Roanoke, Va.



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 23:14:50 -0500 (CDT)
From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com>
Subject: Caramel vs. crystal

Steve writes:
>I would suggest that a careful sampling of caramel malt and crystal malt
>will show a big difference. The trick is to find some real crystal malt
>which I think is only made in Britian. The North American maltsters make
>a caramel malt, but call it crystal.

That's a good suggestion.  In fact, I've done it... with *every* "caramel"
and "crystal" malt that was available in the US in 1997.  I stand behind
my statement that in modern malts, the terms "caramel" and "crystal" are
used by maltsters interchangably.  One malt that is made somewhat differently
and indeed is almost as difficult to chew as unpopped popcorn, is Briess
Dextrine malt.  Then again, it throws a starch haze unless it is mashed...
so it is quite a bit different in terms of conversion too.


Al.

Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz at xnet.com
http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 23:35:21 -0500 (CDT)
From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com>
Subject: ale vs. lager yeast

There has been some discussion regarding yeast taxonomy.  I read about
the renaming a while ago and double-checked with Dan McConnell last
summer.  Sure enough, the taxonomists have recategorised the yeasts
so that ale (top-fermenting) yeast is now classified as Saccharomyces
cerevisiae and lager (bottom-fermenting) yeast is now classified as
Saccharomyces cerevisiae var. uvarum.


Al.

Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz at xnet.com
http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 09:53:20 +0200 
From: Tom Alaerts <TomA at BUT.BE>
Subject: brewferm info continued


	I've heard that with hopped extract, you boil for 15 minutes to
ensure sanitation AND to get the hot and cold break.
	Did you ask him about getting hot and cold break?  I know that
some kits are just malt extract.  However, I've seen at least one that
says you don't have to boil, "we've done it for you."  Is that Brewferm?
Well, I didn't ask explicitely about the breaks. But I'm sure the
extract was boiled, and therefore is sterile. Anyway, I have never
boiled these kits and never got nasty surprises. I'm also thinking of
putting up a web page with my reviews of the brewferm kits. My 2
preferred ones are the tripel and the wheat.
One thing: the supplied yeast is only so-so and all the kits you make
with it will taste the same. So go for wyeast etc for real world-class
results.

	> But there's another reason that's especially important for
their wheat,
	> grand cru and jubilee kits: since these contain herbs, you
will lose the
	> delicate aroma they bring to the kit.

	They've got herbs in their wheat beer?
Oh yes. It produces a belgian style wheat beer, far from the
"reinheitsgebot", so you can count on it having coriander, curacao,
perhaps sweet orange peels too. Actually the real mixture is secret, but
those are the typical ingredients. So it's evident you shouldn't boil
this kit for a long time. And I know for sure there's also oat in it. My
dealer also told me that some ginger was used in the jubilee, but most
sparingly.
I would like to share my simple but very succesful belgian white recipe:
 -	1 can brewferm wheat beer kit
 -	1 kg dry wheat/malt extract (instead of the sugar they recommend
in the manual)
 -	some honey (first time I used 200 gr, 2nd time 500gr)
 -	wyeast belgian white
As stated before, don't boil the liquid. Just make sure everything is in
solution. Add water till you have some 18litres.

	> Greetings from Belgium,
	> Tom Alaerts

	That's right, rub it in.  :-)
Well, at the moment I am enjoying a HEAVENLY FRESH bottle of Chouffe.
Nyeh, nyeh... :-)
But otoh, aint'it funny that I have to buy usa-produced yeast (wyeast)
to make the beers of my own country?
And I still haven't tasted the supposedly excellent anchor steam beer
(unfortunately unavailable here). If any of you will visit Belgium,
please bring along a bottle for me!

Tom Alaerts


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 07:21:04 EDT
From: MicahM1269 at aol.com
Subject: AHA / sour mash- gripe

Per the many recent posts complaining about the AHAs handling of their
national competition. I agree with most that the performance and execution is
lacking. Even worse than the general bungling is the lack of good prizes. It
is difficult to justify the high cost of  an entry with no returns. Remember
the old days with the 'win a trip' prizes? THey are long gone. I have several
national ribbons and they are the 'el cheapo' type, many local competitions
have better. Sounds shallow eh ?, thats me.

I no longer enter the AHA nationals and have not since '92 ( due to the mead
maker of the year debacule ) I suggest that if you do not care your the way
the competition is run, then boycott it. But do not be silent about it.
Complain loud and long and something may get done.

Next grip. This is in regard to sour mash brewing. This topic comes up over
and over again. Sour mash brewing is not a way to make psuedo-lambic. It is a
legitimet brewing technique that is often used to produce beers with a very
soft and full mouth feel. Quite the oppposite of a lambic. 
How many out there in HBD land have actually tasted a pale or amber ale that
is sour mash?
Likely a small percentage, I am certain.

Just for the record, A SOURED MASH OR SOURED WORT WILL NOT YEILD A  SOURED
BEER ( assuming that the wort is boiled at some point after souring )

I blame CP for starting this falsehood and will bitch slap him when next I see
him.

micah millspaw - brewer at large


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 07:50:43 EDT
From: MicahM1269 at aol.com
Subject: TPB

Would someone please send me the address for the MBAA, The Practical Brewer
site. I like the idea of putting this reference onto a CD. Very handy that way

micah millspaw - brewer at large


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 08:43:49 -0400
From: "Henckler, Andrew" <ahenckler at findsvp.com>
Subject: AHA Nationals

In light of all that has been said here, I would very much like to
withdraw any/all aspersions I may have cast on the Boston Wort
Processors in my earlier post.  As a matter of fact, my hat is off to
Ken Jucks and the rest of the Worts.

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

BTW, all that I have heard here has pushed me even more firmly into
agreement with Jim Lidil (I am sure I' mis-spelling this) and Bill
Giffin.  At least now I know why the Baltimore GABF was so crowd-free!
Down with the AHA!


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 08:20:26 -0600
From: Bill_Rehm at DeluxeData.com
Subject: Brewing with fresh Sage

We have some sage growing in the garden and the wife wants to use some in a
batch.  Has anyone ever used sage in beer, and how do I know how much to
use/when to use it?  Any advice is greatly appreciated.

TIA
Bill Rehm
Riverwest, Milwaukee




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 23:16:25 +1100
From: Brad McMahon <brad at sa.apana.org.au>
Subject: Brewferm and kits

> > [Brewferm] stated that the contents of their cans are sterile and if you
> > really want to boil something, then boil the water BEFORE you add the
> > contents of the can,
> 
> I've heard that with hopped extract, you boil for 15 minutes to ensure
> sanitation AND to get the hot and cold break.

Hmm, I have done this in the past and got no noticable
break. But what you do is drive off some of the aroma.
If I use a kit (rarely) I boil for 5 minutes, to be absolutely
sure that it is sanitised. I still boil my unhopped extract
for at least 15 minutes to get the break.

> Did you ask him about getting hot and cold break?  I know that some
> kits are just malt extract. 

Which ones?
You should be using known high quality kits from Europe or 
Australia. These kits are made properly.

> I suppose it's possible, if they are actually PRODUCING the extract
> (not just packaging it), that they might boil it first.

I haven't heard of a manufacturer that DOESN'T boil their kit
during manufacturer. It still is the best way of bittering.
 
> Or, they may be saying that you can make OK beer without boiling.
> 
> Ahoy the collective: how much difference does boiling make?  Is it just
> important for making high-quality, competition-level beer, or is it
> critical for making decent beer at all?

I can still pick them, especially those made with dextrose, or those
cheap kits which have barley sugars in them.

> They've got herbs in their wheat beer?

I'd guess coriander and curacao orange ?


- --
Brad McMahon        Adelaide, South Australia         
brad at sa.apana.org.au   
PGP



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 08:51:02 -0500
From: "Jeffrey M. Kenton" <jkenton at iastate.edu>
Subject: Yeast swirling and oxygenation

Howdy folks, let me slip a few questions in here about yeast
culturing/swirling and oxygenation, won't you?

I was able, thanks to my new job, to obtain three very old magnetic
stirring plates, and to borrow an autoclaved teflon magnet stir bar. I want
to use these to increase my proficiency at stepping up yeast from single
cell cultures. First, will stirring the starter solution have ANY effect on
the yeast's growth. Second, I know that providing oxygen to the little guys
will make them 'big and strong and ready to reproduce,' but how much, how
often, and most importantly how? I am using a malt extract wort that was
pressure canned as the starter liquid, and the vessel of choice is a 1000
ml Erlenmeyer flask. Of course, if you have information you want to share,
please remember that if I don't find a good use for the stir plate(s) I
will have to get rid of them (wife mandate), so if there is even a slight
chance that swirling the starter is a good thing, tell me.

Thanks for the help, everyone.

Jeff

Jeffrey M. Kenton    jkenton at iastate.edu
Ames, Iowa           brewer at iastate.edu




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 19:17:50 -0700
From: Kyle Druey <druey at ibm.net>
Subject: Attenuation / Hot Motors / Debunking Sarcasm

>I've been using 1968 as my standard ale yeast for several years.
>Checking over the past 4 beers I made with this yeast, I got the
>following attenuation percentages: 77, 75, 74, 74.

Appararent attentuation is determined by a multitude of factors, but
mainly the maltose/dextrin ratio of the wort, and yeast vitality.  Yes,
I have data to prove this.  No, I did not read it from a book.

Peter writes:
>One more thing, a old-timer once told me how the experts tell if a
>motor is at the right temp.  If, when you put your hand on it, the
>first instinct is to yank it back but, if you try, you can keep it
>on the motor; it is at an acceptable running temp.  (I adopted the
>same rule for integrated circuits--seems to work.)

Thanks for this rule of thumb, it seems to work.  If my pump gets too
hot to the touch I turn on an attached muffin fan to cool it down.  Too
hot to touch is greater than 140 F.

Regarding debunking momilies and liars.  It seems that a post will come
down everyone once in a while that is onl intended to stir up the HBD
pot.  If you are not wise to the HBD SOP, then you take the bait and run
with it.  Better to just ignore these type of posts than to get involved
in the fray.  Then, after a fire storm results, there always seems to be
those who want to defend the individual who made the original post.  I
am sure the original poster can represent themself just fine if inclined
to do so.

Then there are posts where people are being sarcastic, and others take
them way too seriously.  Again, a firestorm results.  A recent example
is Fouch's "burger flipper" comment.  I am sure all of our HBD food
service technicians were offended by this comment.


Kyle Druey 
Bakersfield, CA, former Burger Flipper & Emporer Caddy
Eric Fouch Sensitivy Training Valedictorian 

Lastest revision: Utah in 5.


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 10:06:08 -0400
From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer at engin.umich.edu>
Subject: La Chouffe yeast

The Yeast Culture Kit Company stocks this yeast:
	yckco at aol.com
	http://oeonline.com/~pbabcock/yckco/
	(313) 761-5914 fax/voice 
	(800) 742-2110 fax/voice 

I made a wonderful beer with this yeast a few years back.
Unfortunately it's all gone now. :-(

The owner is a friend, but I don't get kickbacks.  :-)

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


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 09:26:59 -0500 (CDT)
From: Samuel Mize <smize at prime.imagin.net>
Subject: words, Wort Processors, judges, open fermentation

Greetings to all.

Mark, your dictionary disagrees with the Merriam Webster 9th New
Collegiate and at least two online dictionaries.

 - - - - -
To all who defend the Boston Wort Processors, greetings, I come in peace.
I have a question.  Almost all of you have pointed out, as Ken Jucks did:

> 7)  The judges in the area were not notified about the call for judges 
> until 2 weeks before the competition.

I honestly don't know.  Were the date and location not announced before
that?  Or was it the case that AHA assumed you'd know you were needed, and
you assumed you'd be notified if you were needed?

Just curious about the exact facts, since it's taken up so much bandwidth.

 - - - - -
Mike Spinelli asks:
> On a related note, ... I WOULD be interested
> in submitting my brew to a recognized judge who would evaluate the
> brew not by comparing it to other examples, but just on its own merit.  
 ...
> I figure a judge who's away from the the madness of  a competition
> and who can quietly sit and focus on just one brew might provide
> some real insight.

You should be able to locate some people through a local club, or maybe
BJCP can help.  There's a list of local clubs at the Brewery web site.

I believe you will have a difficult time locating a qualified judge who
will turn down a couple of free beers.

 - - - - -
Mike also writes:

> I'm still on the fence as to whether this REALLY is an [open ferment].

You're apparently fermenting no more than 20 gallons in a 55-gallon steel
tank, with a loosely-fitting lid.  (Based on 4-5 carboys, and a max of 136
pints.)  This is an open ferment.

People disagree about definitions, even for normal words, but that's
another story...  hmm?  Oh yeah.

People disagree about definitions, and "open ferment" is looser than most.
I'd say an open ferment is one where air is allowed relatively free access
to the fermenting wort, or at least the krausen, as opposed to making an
effort to exclude it.  A loose cover doesn't impede air flow much, it just
keeps dust and critters out.  On the other hand, an air lock is intended
to lock out the air.

The ability to skim the krausen is an additional benefit of most open
fermentation set-ups, but is not critical to the definition.

> The one downside is I feel I have to bottle/keg the whole batch at one
> time.  I feel it might be risky bottling say, 10 gallons one day and the other
> 10 a week or two later.  Maybe due to the possibility of air being sucked
> under the tank lid during the first 10 gallons being drained?  

Open fermentation is mostly done for the primary, on the thesis that the
constant production of CO2 will keep out the dust, critters, and all but a
little air.  Once the primary fermentation is done, the conventional
wisdom is to move the beer to a closed secondary fermenter, or bottle it.

On the other hand, it's also conventional wisdom that fermented beer is a
poor environment for infection organisms.

I'd say you can safely bottle in two runs split by a day or two,
anyway.  I'd feel comfortable with up to a week.  If you want to worry
about the air that gets sucked in during the first bottling run, you
could make a tighter-fitting lid with a filtered air inlet -- look
through old HBDs for the right size filter to use for aeration air.
But, if you're not getting airborne infections with your current
process, I doubt you need to worry.

 - - - - -
Well, back to loading lumber to build de bunk beds for de judges.

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: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 09:42:14 -0500
From: ThE GrEaT BrEwHoLiO <skotrat at wwa.com>
Subject: AHA problems/NHBC

Hey all, 

Recently others and myself have taken a lot of flack for our comments
concerning the AHA, BJCP and the many Homebrew clubs responsible for running
and judging the AHA National comp. I have taken my 5 steps back after
reading all of the email responses that I have gotten good or bad. 

I personally never intended on slamming the BJCP and I retract my comment
that they are an ailing org like the AHA. I also never intended to slam the
judges that did show up. In an email to me from The AL (Al Korz...) He
reminded me that he has only had good experiences with the comp.

There also seems to be a major bunch of name calling going on that is really
taking us away from the real focus point of the AHA NHBC problems. 

Ultimately the only party responsible for the NHBC being a failure and
ill-planned is the AHA itself. As usual though, they seem to be letting us
fight it out amongst ourselves while they just keep quiet and say nothing. 

If I were to run a Homebrew competition that in the end had poor stewarding
and judges with little or no experience I would be the one to be doing all
the answering. Not the homebrew club responsible for stewarding or the
judges that did show up to judge. It would be me and only me. 

Yet we continue to argue amongst ourselves like angry step children. Let's
please stop calling each other names and start making the AHA answer some of
these questions. 

HEY BRIAN REZAC! 

I know you are a rational guy Brian (I have talked to you and I know the
bettering ofHomebrewing is your concern as well as ours) so what can we do
to fix the problems that don't go away with this comp and the AHA in
general? Don't just continue the long standing AHA "quiet treatment". Get up
and put your ideas on the line.

I know that the BJCP guys that have emailed me over the last 2 weeks are
willing to do that and I know that there are several on the AHA stearing
commitee that are also willing to do it. 

Because like I said ultimately the person or org that organized the comp is
responsible for the success or failure of an organized event.


C'Ya!

 -Scott "feeling more rational today" Abene
##############################################################
#                     ThE-HoMe-BrEw-RaT                      #
#                Scott Abene <skotrat at wwa.com>               #
# http://www.wwa.com/~skotrat (the Homebrew "Beer Slut" page)#
#                                                            #
# "The More I know About Beer, The More I Don't Need The AHA"#
##############################################################



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 09:03:53 -0700 
From: "Riedel, Dave" <RiedelD at dfo-mpo.gc.ca>
Subject: RE: ...IBUs verified? (Competition comments)

Mike Spinelli writes:

>On a related note, though I've never entered a competition due to
>1) having to brew to style and 2) hearing horror stories of sccore
>sheets coming back with useless comments. I WOULD be interested
>in submitiing my brew to a recognized judge who would evaluate the
>brew not by comparing it to other examples, but just on its own merit.  
>I'd like to know what off flavors they may detect or anything else that may
>be out of wack.  

Mike, don't be put off by the 'horror stories'.  People always tend to post
about nightmarish experiences.. who wants to read "went to a competition
last week, organization was adequate, judges comments were decent..."?
I'm sure there are dozens of stories of perfectly acceptable competition
results.  I've put beers in 5 competitions.  Each time I learned something
useful and a few times I managed to place a beer in the top three.  
Everyone always says they don't care about the placing, just the comments,
but I assure you, it is more rewarding than you might expect to place
well in a category.  Go ahead and brew anything you like and stick it in
a competition.  With the mind-boggling assortment of categories published
by the AHA and the BJCP, I'm sure you can find somewhere to fit your
beer; don't worry about brewing to style.  In well run competitions, judges
will be faced with a reasonable number of beers to evaluate and they will
make a concerted effort to give you useful feedback.  You mention that you
don't want your beer judged 'by comparing it to other examples'.  It is my
understanding that, apart from best-of-show, beers are judged individually
and then ranked by score.  Besides, at some level, your beer is always
being compared to some other beer - unless the drinker has never had a
beer before.

Summary:  Talk to people, read the HBD and find out which competitions
	near you are well run.  Enter a few beers in the
closest-to-appropriate
	categories.  I'll bet that you'll receive some valuable insight into
your
	beers from thoughtful, dedicated, judges.  You may even win
	something to reward you for that 9-hour triple decoction...  :)

cheers,
Dave Riedel
Victoria, BC, Canada



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 11:24:37 -0400
From: Steve Zabarnick <steve at snake.appl.wpafb.af.mil>
Subject: brewing Luddites

Peter Calinski wrote:

>One more thing, a old-timer once told me how the experts tell if a motor is
>at the right temp.  If, when you put your hand on it, the first instinct is
>to yank it back but, if you try, you can keep it on the motor; it is at an
>acceptable running temp.  (I adopted the same rule for integrated
>circuits--seems to work.)

Isn't this the same criteria that brewing Luddites use to tell if their
mash is at an acceptable saccharification temperature?  :-)

Steve Zabarnick
Dayton, OH




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 12:31:55 -0400
From: "Ludwig's" <dludwig at us.hsanet.net>
Subject: Re: De-bunk that funk 

Paul Niebergall writes:

> A lot of the stuff I see on the HBD is bunk ...
and 
> I have rarely detected many of the
> so-called problems that I was supposed to get because I did (or didn't
> do) X, Y, or Z. 

Well, now we know what your opinion is but you need to be more specific.
What are you doing or not doing and what are the results? I'm sure 
there are many steps in your brewing process that you would never
consider not doing because of potential bad effects. 

Dave Ludwig
Flat Iron Brewery (sortof)
SO MD


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 09:48:43 -0700
From: Jeremy Bergsman <jeremybb at leland.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Measuring IBUs and scoresheet quality

paa3983 at dscp.dla.mil (Mike Spinelli) writes:
 
> Is there a lab out there that could analyze my brew and give 
> me the true IBU level?  And would it cost a fortune?

There used to be a place doing this that advertised in Zymurgy.  I think
it cost $15 or so.

Might I suggest that you simply work on calibrating your utilization
curve to your perception of bitterness, which is the only thing
that matters in the end?  

Strategy:
Make a few beers with only early additions to nail down this number first.
More bitter beers are better.  Stout is a good one.  Once you have a
handle on early additions, you can try to work out the contribution of
late additions with beers that have a lot of them, like IPAs.

You can calibrate your perception of bitterness to IBUs by tasting
commercial beers with known IBU levels for the purpose of communicating
perceived bitterness to other brewers.

> On a related note, though I've never entered a competition due to
> 1) having to brew to style and 2) hearing horror stories of sccore
> sheets coming back with useless comments. I WOULD be interested
> in submitiing my brew to a recognized judge who would evaluate the
> brew not by comparing it to other examples, but just on its own merit.  
> I'd like to know what off flavors they may detect or anything else that may
> be out of wack.  

Anyone who receives such a scoresheet should complain to both the
competition organizer and the BJCP, if the judge is in the BJCP.  The
new BJCP scoresheets have the address right on them following a note
to this effect.  I do not believe that bad scoresheets are the norm at
most competitions these days.  Ask around and find out what competitions
in your area are well run. 

While procuring your own judge is a nice thing to be able to do, I submit
that most judges will give more honest feedback in the competition
setting. It is very hard to give brutally honest feedback to someone's
face, especially since when someone gives you their beer it is always hard
to know just how much they want honest feedback and how much they want a
pat on the back.  The anonymity and competitive nature of the competition
help to insure that judges give their most honest feedback.

If you still want your own judge, I'm a certified judge and I never turn
down a homebrew!
- -- 
Jeremy Bergsman
jeremybb at stanford.edu
http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~jeremybb


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 12:15:33 -0500
From: Mike Froehlich <MFroehlich at microcraft.com>
Subject: Connecticut Beer Places

Hello HBD'rs,

A friend of mine will be traveling to Connecticut in a few weeks and he
was wondering where some great places to drink beer, buy beer, and look
at beer are near Hartford. But as that matter goes, anywhere in Conn. is
close. Private email would probably be better. Thanks!


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 13:37:24 EDT
From: KESimmonds at aol.com
Subject: Homebrew Digest #2732

Subj:	IBU & hop utilisation rates
Mike Spinelli asked about obtaining a professional IBU analysis.
>From the home-brewers, as opposed to the professional brewers, point of view,
is there anything worth much less worrying about than IBU's and hop
utilisation rates?
We obtain some hops, which at one time in their life had an AAU % rate quoted
within a range of up to possibly 4%. We keep them for an indeterminate time in
varying conditions, and end up with even less of an idea of the AAU. We then
boil them in some random boiler, perform some sums, and proclaim the IBU of
the resultant brew as if it were the Holy Grail! Come on, this isn't real! I
may as well take the square root of minus one and add the first number I think
of! If I take your recipe, and use my randomised hops, storage, and boil
conditions, are you telling me that my brew's IBU is the same as yours?
'Course not! I quote from the hop chart given out in Zymurgy's special hop
edition of 1997 (my upper case / capitals):
<<....then multiply by 78 to get an APPROXIMATE I.B.U. FIGURE. Note; Many
factors affect hop utilisation MAKING ANY EFFORTS TO PREDICT BITTERNESS
SOMEWHAT DICEY. However, from batch to batch in YOUR brewery you should get
consistent results. As you taste your beers, adjust your hopping targets up
and down as necessary>> There's scientific for you!
Why bother? I know that I, personally, use approximately 0.5oz hops per
gallon. I know that if I'm making bitter, I'll use goldings, fuggles, or
something similar, if I'm making stout, I'll use target, or something similar.
Different brews, I'll use something else, based on its AAU's, bittering, and
aroma characteristics. I can guessstimate whether I need more or less if I'm
using different hops, and next time, as in Zymurgy, I'll use different
quantities if needed. I don't need to work out some magic number involving all
sorts of variables, and THEN vary the amount of hops I use, I can do that
directly! I reckon all you need is some idea of the AAU of your hops, use
approximately 0.5oz per gallon, taste it, then use that experience in your
next brew, and consign IBU's and hop utilisation rates to the compost heap
along with your spent grain and hops!
You may guess from the hop types mentioned that I'm in the UK, and the gallons
are imperial as opposed to US.
Subj: Open Fermenters
Here I'm fully in agreement with you Mike. Its the norm in the UK to use open
fermenters. I usually pitch my fermenting yeast, aereate the brew with a
paddle, then cover with a loose fitting lid for 4 - 6 hours until the head
gets started. I then take off the lid, and drape a cotton sheet over it to
keep the bugs out, but stop any internal condensation falling onto the yeast
head and raining it into the brew. My quantities are nowhere near as great as
yours though! I often take a skim off the yeast, either to keep for later use
or if a fellow brewer requires some. I've NEVER had any infection problems
with this method.

Hoppy brewing!
Keith


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 17:44:59 GMT
From: huskers at olywa.net (Jason Henning)
Subject: 160 bottles of beer on the wall

Hello-

Mike Spinelli asks 
+ Is there a lab out there that could analyze my brew and give 
+ me the true IBU level?  And would it cost a fortune?

Siebel will do it for $39.  They'll check the pH for $11 and the
specific gravity for $19. Hey JackS, how bout sending in a bottle for a
DMS test($73)?

It would be nice to find somewhere that would do 5 to 10 samples for,
well, free. Ok, cheap. With that many data points, I could make my own
utilization table.

Then Mike asks about getting judges comments. I suggest hb club. Some
clubs are really stocked with judges. I know when I first started
all-grains, some of the comments from a couple of the Kansas City Beir
Meister members got me on track. 

Then in another post (wrt a 55g ss tank),
+ Then I throw the tank on a hand truck and wheel 
+ it  into my dining room where it's placed on cinder blocks and RR ties.
+ 
+ Go back outside, stop the boil, and run the hot wort thru the CF 
chiller to the
+ pump up into a hose going thru my dining room window and into the
+ OF tank.

How's single life treatin' ya? I guess she got the dining room table.

And this 17 gallon comment:
+ So far, my record is 136 pints being bottled in one day.  Took about
+ 6 hours by myself.

Back when I was a yute, I bottled ~160 12 oz.ers one afternoon and a
night. 3 5g batches. My double lever capper tried to die during the last
5g batch. I had to 'adjust' it several times with Channel Locks to get
it to hold the bottle. 

And the last 12, I was sitting on a chair with the bottle on the floor
in front of me. I've got the capper lever in hand and under one foot,
and using Channel Locks with the other hand to make the damn thing work.
Fortunately I had about 100 ounces of coordination enhancing homebrew 
in
me by then.

I really enjoy kegging.

Cheers,
Jason Henning <huskers olywa net>
Big Red Alchemy and Brewing
Lacey, Washington 

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 13:50:29 -0500 (CDT)
From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com>
Subject: HopsDirect

Loren writes:
>I recently purchased a few pounds of various kinds of hops from HopsDirect
>(http://www.hopsdirect.com). I'm generally quite pleased with the product.
>However, I was dismayed to find that they don't packing in nitrogen-barrier
>packaging. I had understood that this was virtually the only acceptable
>standard in the industry. Instead, the hops came packaged in cardboard
>tubes.
>
>I've stored them in in the freezer, but am wondering if I should do more to
>maintain freshness. Should I remove them from the tubes and put them in
>ziplock baggies, or something?      

Yikes!  In this day and age there are still suppliers selling hops
without oxygen-barrier packaging?

Not only should you expect oxygen-barrier packages, but also the packages
should have been purged with nitrogen, CO2 or other inert gas (there is
a tank of argon at Goose Island Brewery... that would work).

Presuming that the hops are still in reasonable shape, I would suggest
getting some oxygen-barrier bags (see if you can buy some from your
local shop; if not, I know you can get them from Freshops (see any of
the magazines)).  Purge with CO2 (I blow up the bag with CO2, squeeze
out as much as I can, repeat a few times) and then heat seal.  Yes,
a Eurosealer (now available at Walgreens for $19.99) will seal and
*reseal* oxygen-barrier bags.

HopsDirect should be ashamed of themselves!


Al.

Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz at xnet.com
http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 13:59:27 -0500 (CDT)
From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com>
Subject: more on storing hops

Ooops... I forgot to mention a few things.

1. you don't have to get oxygen-barrier bags... you can use glass
jars if they have tightly-fitting lids (like mason jars).

2. you should *NOT* use ziplock sandwich or freezer bags... they
are not a whole lot better than a cardboard cylinder... these
bags are made from HDPE which (especially the very thin standard
bags) are horribly oxygen-permeable.  HDPE is 200 times more permeable
than the oxygen-barrier plastic I used to use for my hop bags when I
owned a HB supply shop and the plastic I used was twice as thick as
a standard HDPE bag.  That means one day in HDPE degrades the hops
more than one year in my oxygen-barrier plastic.  The plastic I
used was called Barex and was made by BP.

Al.


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:22:28 -0500 (CDT)
From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com>
Subject: open vs. closed fermentation

Jon writes:
>Eric Warner talks about it in "German wheat beer". He points out that open
>fermented beers exhibited higher amounts of Esters than closed fermented
>beers. He continues to mention that open fermented yeasts stay healthier,
>whilst closed fermented, they must be recultured after 10 re-pitchings..

In my "experiment" with blowoff versus non-blowoff (in quotes to ward
off criticism from the true lab lurkers) which was written-up in Brewing
Techniques (around June 1996, I believe), I found virtually no difference
in esters (and higher alcohols, incidentally) between blowoff (closed)
and non-blowoff (open -- well, open but covered with a plastic sheet)
sub-batches from the same wort.

I also question the statement (which Warner does not reference -- I
just checked) that (in Warner's words), yeast collected from open
fermentations retain "vitality" through hundreds of repitchings
while yeast from closed fermentations must be recultured after 10
uses.  To make such a blanket statement about every strain of yeast,
this simply *cannot* be true.  I know of several breweries using
closed fermenters and are repitching yeast many times Warner's
limit of 10.

Al.

Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz at xnet.com
http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/


Return to table of contents

---