---

	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:  Dave's stuck ferment ("George De Piro")
  cleaning system (Michael Rose)
  HBD contest winners ("Jim & Shelly Wagner")
  Challenger Hops ("David Johnson")
  Contests/ Conical Fermenters (Mike Spinelli)
  Free Refrigerator ("Erik Vanthilt")
  Results of the 14th Dutch Open Championship for Homebrewers (Wim Hielkema)
  RE: Competitions and Categories +( Judges and MCAB) (Lee Menegoni)
  dextrins and head retention / single decoction schedule for modern malts ("Hubert Hanghofer")
  Help - Film on my brew! ("Andrew M. Hartig")
  Using a Keg as a brew pot?? ("Eric Bonney")
  Re:3068 - a mixture of two species? (Jim Wallace)
  Culture Tubes (Kyle Druey)
  Will that foam ever go away? ("Hans E. Hansen")
  Christopher Tkach, where are you? ("Hans E. Hansen")
  Refrigerator temperature controls ("Andrew J. Londo")
  Concord, California HBDers (Mike Spinelli)
  AOB/AHA rant:  page down now if you are tired of the topic ("George De Piro")
  Spice Beers ("David Johnson")
  re: AHA Bashing ("Henckler, Andrew")
  AHA and stuff (Alan Folsom)
  re: AHA bashing (Bill Giffin)
  Re: Not so sour? (Charles Hudak)
  Whahhhhhh, Whahhhhhhhh ("Raymond Johnson")
  Critters/cellar temp (Tim Burkhart)
  Book review request (Domenick Venezia)
  RE:Response to MCAB Complaint (John Murphy)


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: Tue, 09 Jun 98 14:15:26 PDT
From: "George De Piro" <gdepiro at fcc.net>
Subject: RE:  Dave's stuck ferment

Hi all,

Dave asks (quite recently) if he is correct in assuming that he should 
not oxygenate the half-fermented
beer when re-pitching fresh yeast.  He also asks if it is necessary to 
rack the beer back into a carboy
to contain the Kraeusen.

Dave is correct on the first point: do not add O2 to the young beer!  
That will oxidize the heck out of it.
I don't care what they do at Sam Smiths!  Their bottled product in the 
US is kind of indicative of what
aerating the ferment can do.

Do feed the starter oxygen, though, to ensure that the cells you pitch 
are strong and ready to finish the
job that their comrades did not.

In my *limited* experience with repitching to jump start a fermentation, 
I don't think you will get as big a
Kraeusen when repitching.  The ferment never seems to get going that 
strongly.  Perhaps the lack of
O2?  I guess if you added a really large amount of of yeast, it would get
 going strongly again.

Each time you rack the beer you risk oxidation and contamination, so I 
would just remove
one of the popets and afix a blow-off tube to the stem with a hose clamp.
  Put the other end of the
hose in water or whatever, and let 'er rip.

Have fun!

George De Piro  (I wish the room would stop spinning here in Nyack, NY)


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 11:30:37 -0700
From: Michael Rose <mrose at ucr.campus.mci.net>
Subject: cleaning system

I'm just about done building my 2 tier system. Unfortunatly, the wort
will come in contact with SS, brass, copper, plastic(pump housing) and a
small amount of steel(welders fault). I want to do a thorough cleaning
before my first use. What cleaning chemicals does the collective
recommend. Acid? Caustic? What strength?   Thanks 

	Michael Rose  Riverside, CA   mrose at ucr.campus.mci.net


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 9 Jun 98 13:27:14 -0500
From: gjfix at utamat.uta.edu (George J Fix)

Subject: DMS

Jack Schmidling writes:

>Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com> says:

>>" When you stop the boil, but while the wort is still hot (Fix says 
>>158F), SMM is still being converted to DMS, but it is *not* boiling 
>>off.  Slow cooling *CAN* result in excessive DMS.

[snip]

>Can't help but wonder what happens at these magic dogmatic temps.
>Obviously, it's a curve of some sort and someone had to make a 
>judgement at to when it gets "excessive".  But leaving the number
>aside, the word excessive becomes the "controlling legal authority'
>er, ah.... the issue.

I must respectively disagree with JS on this point. AlK is absolutely
right about slow cooling being an important cause of nonmicrobial
DMS. Moreover, the terms used by Al are well defined in the general
brewing literature. In the widely used Milgaard system "excessive"
means over two flavor units, i.e., concentrations in excess of two 
times the flavor threshold. In addition, DMS evolution closely follows
first order kinetics, and if you work out the math associated with
that you will arrive at the cited temperature range.

It is true that different people have different tolerances for DMS.
I grew up on traditional lager beer (continental and domestic), and
until I married Laurie (who can not stand DMS) I generally
felt that lagers with subthreshold  levels were insipid. She had
me do several things to get DMS levels down. Ironically, one of the most
effective was a 15 min. open simmer at 90-95C after the boil (although
this effect may depend on the type of brewing equipment used).
I feel overall the beers had a cleaner finish than previous brews, 
although they were a tad less complex.

The reduction of DMS levels in lagers seems to be an international trend.
Even a cursory review of the German literature shows that almost universally
they see levels above one Milgaard flavor unit as being a flaw. In recent
years I have have been involved in four commercial startups (one micro
and three brewpubs), and in each of these consumer acceptance of pilot
brews consistently went up as  DMS went down (at least with ~80% of the 
population in the tests). 

As amateur brewers we of course can do whatever we want to do including
increasing DMS levels (something I do on those occasions when Laurie is
not supervising the brewing session!). However, those who are 
primarily ale fans who make lagers only on occasions may want to consider
measures for lowering DMS levels and see what results from such a change.
Bamforth in his new book uses the term "cat urine" as a descriptor
for DMS. I am not sure I totally agree with this term, however it
does give a vivid description of how  ale brewers tend to react to DMS!

Cheers.

George Fix


P.S. Congratulations to George De Piro for picking up the BOS at the
recent BURP competition. But George I am terribly confused. Why is
a nice, self-respecting hop adverse person such as yourself brewing
IPAs, and winning  Gold Metals to boot? What is the world coming to?
The next thing you know Schmidling will start donating all the profits
from his equipment company to charity.



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 15:05:50 -0400
From: "Jim & Shelly Wagner" <wagner at toad.net>
Subject: HBD contest winners

Just a quick congradulations to the HBD subscribers who placed in the 1998
Spirit of Free Beer Homebrew contest, especially to George De Prio and
George Fix for taking 1st and 3rd respectively in BOS...there were 439
entries....good job guys!!!

P.S. Gary Nazelrod....if you are out there, forgive me....I've just never
seen a post from you.

<<<<<<Stoney Creek Brewing>>>>>>
**********Pasadena, Maryland********
              Established-1994
              ~~~~~~~~~~~~
    



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 14:34:01 -0500
From: "David Johnson" <dmjalj at inwave.com>
Subject: Challenger Hops

Brewers,
	I have a barleywine just started and had planned on dry-hopping with
Columbus hops.  I have already used columbus as bittering and flavor hops
in this brew came up a little short and ordered more. My supplier sent
Challenger by accident. What is the experience on using this hop as dry
hop?
	Dave


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 09 Jun 98 15:48:48 est
From: paa3983 at dscp.dla.mil (Mike Spinelli)
Subject: Contests/ Conical Fermenters

HBDers,
Thanks to all youses advice, I'll be entering my >100 IBU IPA
(thanks A.J.) and a smoked ale into the 5th annual BUZZ OFF
in Downingtown, PA.  Should be interesting.

Re:  Conical fermenters, I heard from my local HB shop a while ago
that they found a company in Philly that could roll a SS cone and  food-
grade weld it to a keg or other tank.  I would think that's gotta be cheaper
than the $2K for a  turn-key unit.  If anyone's interested, I might be able to
get more info. about this company.  

Mike Spinelli
Cherry Hill NJ  



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 13:16:01 -0700
From: "Erik Vanthilt" <vanthilt at inetworld.net>
Subject: Free Refrigerator

To any and all in the San Diego area...
Just bought a house, the refrigerator that
came with it was not worth keeping. It maintains
perfect temp, side by side design, not the most attractive 
though, a couple of seals are being held together by duct tape.
Free to good home. 
(Or maybe trade for a couple bottles of homebrew :) )

Also, the house came with one of those halogen/profile type
cook tops. No Gas! Anyone out there brew on one of these?
Unfortunately this is all I have until I get the brew room 
with the gas burners going....

TIA,

Erik Vanthilt
vanthilt at inetworld.net

The Virtual Brewery has moved!
Check out the new site and update your links...
Http://www.inetworld.net/vanthilt/index.html




Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 21:45:53 +0200
From: Wim Hielkema <betonh at xs4all.nl>
Subject: Results of the 14th Dutch Open Championship for Homebrewers

Fellow Brewers,

For those of you who are interested the results of the 14th Dutch Open
Championship for Homebrewers, held july 6 in Hoofddorp (near Schiphol
Airport), can be found at
<http://www.xs4all.nl/~betonh/tww/ONK98/ONK98_uitslag.html>

All entries are in the Dutch language, so this is not for the faint of
heart. :-)

For your information, entries are devided up into 4 classes, namely:

Class A =  "Licht Smalbier", Color < 30 EBC and O.G. < 1.060
Class B = "Donker Smalbier", Color > 30 EBC and O.G. < 1.060
Class C =   "Licht Dikbier", Color < 30 EBC and O.G. > 1.060
Class D =  "Donker Dikbier", Color > 30 EBC and O.G. > 1.060

This is mainly done for logistical purposes, within each class the beer is
judged according to the style as which it was entered.

Enjoy, Wim.

- --
Wim Hielkema, Homebrewer & WebWizard, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
betonh at xs4all.nl, http://www.xs4all.nl/~betonh/beer/beer.html

"Give me beer OR give me death" - Al Bundy




Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 17:45:42 -0400
From: Lee Menegoni <Lee.Menegoni at digital.com>
Subject: RE: Competitions and Categories +( Judges and MCAB)

John Murphy makes a compelling argument about why he should be in MCAB.

> the BHC entry form stated that:
>"Winners in 18 subcategories will qualify to enter in the MCAB national
championship round."
> Dry stout is one the 18 subcategories. If you notice from the winner's
list, the BHC qualified
>the 3rd place beer in the stout category as the dry stout for MCAB.
According to the BHC, 
>my beer didn't qualify for MCAB because they decided to qualify beers
from the first round of judging.

We must remember that his beer went through three rounds of judging. 
That involves three different bottles and three different sets of
judges.

Beers were judged at the Subcategory level. 
Some number of top scoring beers were advanced to the Category Round. 
Category winners were advanced to Best of Show round.
The Winner of the SUBCATEGORY ROUND was the MCAB winner as the entry
documents indicate.  

Either through the subjective nature of judging or the differences that
can occur between bottles of homebrew John's beer was not found to be
the best Dry Stout in the Sub Category round and hence did not advance
to MCAB.  Just as the entry form stated the winner of  this round went
to MCAB.

Setting a world record in the qualifying heat at the Olympics doesn't
earn you a medal. 

Lee Menegoni
email: Lee.Menegoni at Digital.Com



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 00:24:47 +0200
From: "Hubert Hanghofer" <hhanghof at netbeer.co.at>
Subject: dextrins and head retention / single decoction schedule for modern malts

Scott writes in HBD2730 that dextrins can contribute to head retention. 
Like Al, I don't think and never read that this would be the case 
 ...but parking at 160F (71C) for the sacc. rest - as Scott suggests - 
will do other good things to aid in head retention. If you stay there 
for extended periods - say 40 mins or more - glycoproteids (protein 
carbohydrate complexes) will be released from the malt. These are not 
further degraded and thus get into the beer.

~~~~~

In HBD2730 and 2734 Scott further outlines the wide range of possible 
mashing schedules involving a single decoction. - Great survey but I'd 
like to add a note:

Normal or *even thick* decoctions to the mashout range *are* possible 
and quite usual if using single and double decoction schedules. 
"Hochkurzmaischen", a modern German decoction schedule for well 
modified malts is a good example:

mash in  at 62C (no protein rest at all)
1st thick decoction to 70C
2nd normal decoction to 75C
total time 2 hours.

My favorite single decoction schedules are:

A) Involving short protein rest:
mash in  at 57C/135F for 15 mins
step up with infusion water to 64C/147F, hold for 20-30mins
thick decoct to 75C/167F

B) And the simple one without protein rest:
mash in  at 63C/145F, hold for 20-30mins
thick decoct to 75C/167F

It must be noted, that in this case usually *not* the upper limit of 
the mash out range (78C/172F) is strived for! 75C/167F is a safe target 
temp for your calculations. In any case you should be sure to stay 
below 78C/172F since a-Amylase is inactivated rapidly at 80C/176F. If 
you are not quite sure about your system yet, you can try my Excel 
brewplanner.

http://www.netbeer.co.at/beer/bin/brewtabs.zip

If you run through the calibration procedure and don't make sloppy 
volume/weight measurements I can assure you that you'll hit target temp 
within +-1C. (...Physics is an exact science!)

I've posted an example of this simple approach last year in HBD2449. 
The reason why thick decoctions to mashout are still a no-no for 
(US)homebrewers is clear for me now: Your standard homebrewing 
literature doesn't allow it because of the danger of getting 
unconverted starch into the mash! That in turn - because all diastatic 
enzymes are inactivated immediately at mashout (an erroneous 
assumption!) will stay unconverted, cause starch haze, infections ...! 
As far as I understand it, all interpretations / derivations are based 
on the classic (old) triple decoction schedule (4-5 hours!), where 
thin/lauter decoctions to mashout were used and thus some 
transition/generalization -errors may have occured.

a-Amylase is indeed degraded gradually at mashout, but by far not at 
such a high rate, that it isn't able to finish conversion of a non 
cereal mash!

To back my story up I can refer to any German literature. Believe me - 
it's not just a tricky technique - it's commonly applied technology.


If you decide to try single decoction, some ideas on why you should 
choose a (thick) decoction to mashout:

* It leads to very simple -easy- decoction schedules (see above).

* It's a schedule with total control over protein degradation (exactly 
defined and timed rests of the *whole mash* below 135F).

* Because there's no need to add much infusion water, you have 2 
advantages if using a cooler-mashtun:

1) Use schedules with a broader temp range (eg. mash in  at 40C/104F to 
produce ferulic acid or degrade glucans)

2) You can keep the mash rather thick. - In other words you can put 
more malt in your mashtun, do a high gravity boil, adjust OG with pre 
boiled water and thusly: make *more beer* with your given equipment 
(and not to forget - hit target gravity every time).

 ...I'm sure I've forgotten something...

CHEERS &
sehr zum Wohle

Hubert,
brewing in Salzburg, Austria


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 16:03:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Andrew M. Hartig" <andrew at ccs.ucsb.edu>
Subject: Help - Film on my brew!


HBDers:

I am seeking advice for a "problem" I have recently detected with my 
brew.  It is in the secondary and has a kind of "film" on top of it.

I am a bit of a "newbie" so please bear with.

Despite breaking almost all of the "rules" I have seen on the HBD, I 
brewed an all-grain brew as follows:

8 lb. 2-row grain
1.5 lb. honey
2 oz. Cascade hops

I did this with several infusion mashes to yield 5 gallons of wort, which 
was then gently boiled (yes - full wort boil) for about 60 minutes.  
Honey was added in the last 20 minutes -- long enough for sterilization.  
Hops added at start of boil.  Wort then allowed to sit (covered) 
overnight to cool, and was then poured into a sanitized plastic primary, 
aerated by shaking it like the dickens, then pitched with Dry Edme Ale 
yeast.  There was no airlock activity for 56 hours(!), after which there 
was non-stop activity for 24.  Then everything grinded to a halt.  
Fearing "stuck-fermentation" I took a hydrometer reading which was 1.028 
(OG was 1.060).  I shook the fermenter for about a week to keep yeast in 
solution, an airlock activity continued about every 1-2 minutes.

After about 2 1/2 weeks after the first pitching, I racked to a glass 
secondary and took another reading = 1.026.  The beer tasted good, with a 
bit of sweetness, but I decided not to worry about the "stuck" fermentation.

Now, after sitting in the secondary for a little over a week, I have 
noticed a kind of thin "film" on the top of the beer.  There is also some 
small groupings of bubbles here and there (which I believe is from the 
yeast).  This film was not noticeable in the primary.  Should this be 
something to worry about?  Any ideas what it is?  IMBR? :(

I am considering siphoning out the beer between the trub and this film in 
hopes that what's there might be okay.  I have not opened the airlock to 
take a whiff/taste.  I would really like to know what this is first.  
[Hopefully not botulism ;) ]

This is also the second batch I've had this happen to (and it's only my 
second ever batch!)  I dumped the first batch because it also had a green 
moldy patch on the top (I believe this was due to a failed attempt at 
fining with gelatin).  I am doubly frustrated by this second attempt 
because I have taken every precaution to keep things very sterile - using 
bleach and boiling water for sterilising everything (not to mention 
excluding the "gelatin treatment").

I have attempted to comb through past digests looking for similar 
problems, but have come up with very little.  I would appreciate any help 
that anyone can give (aside from comments that I've broken every other 
HBD rule).  Does anyone know what's floating on my beer???

(Personal email welcome)
TIA,
 -A: <andrew at ccs.ucsb.edu>


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 22:14:04 -0400
From: "Eric Bonney" <ebonney at fuse.net>
Subject: Using a Keg as a brew pot??

Well I was just giving a Keg from a friend after his party.  I thought I read
people using these things as brew pots and wanted to find out equipment I would
need to get and what I would need to do to the keg to use it as such.

    Any information is appreciated.

Thanks,
 -Eric Bonney
ebonney at fuse.net
Check out my home page at:
http://home.fuse.net/ebonney/
Prejudice is a learned trait, SO WHAT are YOU teaching YOUR children?!



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 18:49:31 -0500
From: Jim Wallace <jwallace at crocker.com>
Subject: Re:3068 - a mixture of two species?

From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker at welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>
<<Robert Dittmar writes concerning the idea that Wyeast 3068 may actually be
a mixture of two different yeasts...>>
<<.....Funny you should mention this. I was just talking with a fellow at the
GABF On The Road here in Baltimore and he was making the same claim - that
3068 is a mixture of an ale yeast and delbrueckii and that, therefore, one
might see changes in character when re-using the yeast cake from one batch
to make a new one. Specifically, he was claiming the clove-like esters
come from one species while the banana-like esters come from the other. >>

 ......after brewing with this yeast I questioned Dan at WYeast on it this
spring.... I thought my weissen had a certain sourness to it ... he said no
Delbrueckii .. and I am almost certain he claims a single strain (not 100%
sure though.. can't find his actual reply)... he did say that sourness can
be a problem with this style due to low hopping of this style of wheat beer
leaving the door open for minor infections.  

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


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 10:23:04 -0700
From: Kyle Druey <druey at ibm.net>
Subject: Culture Tubes

Just picked up 48 16mm X 150mm borosilicate glass culuture tubes that
included the threaded cap.  The cost was $5.35 for a 12 pack from a
company called Aquatic Ecosystems, 800 422 3939, catalog no. LTT17.  I
am the company's majority stock holder so please buy several cases :). 
I have seen this item from the usual homebrew suppliers for $16.95 per
12 and for $1.00 each.  Just wanted to pass along a good deal to the
collective.  

Kyle Druey
Bakersfield, CA


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 22:09:17 -0700
From: "Hans E. Hansen" <hansh at teleport.com>
Subject: Will that foam ever go away?

Hi all.

This is merely the ravings of a 1st time all grain
batch.  My All Grain Dry Stout (it deserves Caps) just
got xfered to the secondary.  Brewer's Workshop calculated
1.042, I got 1.041!!! (Probably beginner's luck.) Taste is
about what I hoped for.

My only (slight) bitch is in the subject line.  I used
some flaked barley in the mash. The trouble is that I tried
to get a S.G. measure, and the foam won't go away.  I poured
from glass to glass about 10 times or so to dissipate CO2,
but 1/8" of foam persists.  There is nothing I can do to get
rid of it.  I tried skimming and just about everything else.
Very small, minor bitch.  Oh well!

Hans E. Hansen
hansh at teleport.com


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 22:58:15 -0700
From: "Hans E. Hansen" <hansh at teleport.com>
Subject: Christopher Tkach, where are you?

Sorry for the wasted space.

Christopher Tkach: your e-mail address seems incorrect.  I would
like a copy of your new-and-improved beer carbohydrate program.
Please let me know.

Hans E. Hansen
hansh at teleport.com

P.S.  Al K. - speaks of being "put on permanent dump bucket duty".
    Where do I apply?  (WAAAYYYY too much beer speaking here.)


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 05:35:34 -0400
From: "Andrew J. Londo" <ajlondo at mtu.edu>
Subject: Refrigerator temperature controls

Hello all.  Does anyone know where I can cheaply get a temperature controler
for a refrigerator?  I"m looking into getting a fridg for lagering.

Thanks.


Andy Londo



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Jun 98 08:32:35 est
From: paa3983 at dscp.dla.mil (Mike Spinelli)
Subject: Concord, California HBDers

HBDers,

My brother is moving to Concord CA this month.  Any HBDers out there
who live there and can give my bro' advice on places to live, etc.?
He's looking to rent.

Thanks
Mike Spinelli
Cherry Hill NJ



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Jun 98 09:01:42 PDT
From: "George De Piro" <gdepiro at fcc.net>
Subject: AOB/AHA rant:  page down now if you are tired of the topic

Hi all,

Ray writes about the AOB/AHA:

"In other words, quit bitchin' about the little things, and be thankful 
for
what you have and what's been done for you.  Christ!!!  Give 'em an inch,
and they'll take a mile every time."

I was going to stay out of this whole AHA/NHC North East debacle, but 
Rays comments
have put me over the edge.  I am one of the poor slobs who wasted money 
entering the NHC
this year, so I think Im allowed a brief rant.

The AHA screwed up in a huge way.  They have shown that they can no 
longer run their own
contest.  I do not blame Brian Rezac or any individual at the AHA.  The 
problems there go
back further than the folks that are there now (with the notable 
exception of globe trotter Charlie P.)

Ray implies that because the AOB/AHA have done such a service for the 
craft brewing/home brewing
industries, we should be thankful and stop whining.  The problem with 
such logic is that they still
collect membership fees, but they dont seem to be doing anything for 
us!  No individual or organization
can rest on its laurels if they want to stay alive.

As of now, there are still over 220 entries from the northeast that have 
not been evaluated.  The AHA has said NOTHING about this situation; I 
only know this stuff because me and my companions are likely to be pressed 
into service evaluating them with great haste at the last minute, and 
have been talking with the non-AHA employee is is trying to organize it all.
   Im sure the feedback to the entrants will be of the highest 
caliber...

The recent GABF Roadshow was less than a stellar success, which 
illustrates that the AOB can also no longer perform one of its most basic 
functions.  It really is sad that the AOB/AHA is in a flat spin, plummeting 
toward the earth at fantastic speed.  They DID important work, and the task 
will never be done.  The craft brewing industry needs a voice.  It is 
quite a shame that the AOB/AHA can no longer serve its most basic functions.

Perhaps if the emperor would stay at home long enough to notice whats 
going on, something could change.

George de Piro  (Nyack, NY)


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 08:10:29 -0500
From: "David Johnson" <dmjalj at inwave.com>
Subject: Spice Beers

Brewers,
	Having brewed a few spied beers, I was interested in "probably the best
spiced beer I have ever evaluated." as observed by George De Piro. My
comment would be that we could request that the recipe  should be shared
with all of us especially with that kind of praise having been heaped on
it. Although I may never brew a curry beer, I am interested in how Brian
might have used his spices. In fact, I am interested in learning how to
used spices better and read posts on this subject closely here and on the
Mead Lovers Digest. I must thank the collective for the guidance that
enabled me to have a spiced Belgian Strong Ale advance at the much maligned
NHC. (By the way, Spencer, only 6 pods of freshly ground cardamom seeds).
	Dave


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 09:29:00 -0400
From: "Henckler, Andrew" <ahenckler at findsvp.com>
Subject: re: AHA Bashing


Greetings to all, especially:

Raymond Johnson

I know that the AHA has, in its existence, done many things for the
hobby.  However, that organization's activities and performance over the
last few years have been largely shameless with respect to member
service and advancing the hobby.  The major reason I have become
strongly anti-AHA is that the organization has outlived its usefulness,
as far as I can tell, and all attempts to get it on the straight and
narrow path have failed.  If Brian Rezac (who, by all accounts, is a
good guy) or anyone else succeeds in reviving this albatross on the
hobby into something useful, I'd be happy to support the AHA again.
However, I am extremely sceptical.  I intend to support the BJCP, MCAB
and local clubs rather than the AHA.




Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 08:58:58 -0500 (CDT)
From: folsom at ix.netcom.com (Alan Folsom)
Subject: AHA and stuff

Jethro writes:

>	In his role of Administrator of the AHA, he has never had the 
>authority to act on his vision of the best interest's of the 
>membership....he has only apparently had the good fortune to be in the 
>hot seat when the dung heap had to fall on someone.....
>
>	Finally, I would hope that he be allowed to state his own 
>position on the current situation....as I have previously posted, he 
>is on vacation....and rather than even sending a voice mail to his AHA 
>phone (which he does monitor)...I would rather not disturb what I hope 
>to be a relaxing time for he and his family...
>
>	Gotta tell you, Jethro's quite sick with this whole affair...I > 
know what's hat...and what's not...and Brian does not deserve this...
>
>Jethro Gump

Bravo!  While I have been no great fan of the AHA in the past, I 
believe it is clear that it has improved in the last year or two, and 
that can only be attributed to Brian and others like him who have tried 
to be what we have asked for -- homebrewers actually interested in the 
hobby.  Can anyone deny the AHA is much more responsive than it was 
back in 1995?  Yes, there is much that needs to be better, and much 
that I still don't like or approve of, but it's getting better.

While there are certainly problems (I know, it cost me $70 to send 
beers to the New England Regional), we can either continually grumble 
and gripe, or work to support those who are trying to make improvements 
in the organization.  As Jethro says, Brian is one of the good guys. 
While I have read a lot of stuff from people complaining about him, I 
have seen no counter accusations from him, and I am sure there is 
plenty of blame to go around.  That alone says something about the 
character of the folks involved in the discussion.

Al Folsom








Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 10:13:05 -0400
From: Bill Giffin <billg at ctel.net>
Subject: re: AHA bashing

Top of the morning to yea all,

Rob Moline talking about Brian Rezac said:

>>In his role of Administrator of the AHA, he has never had the authority to
act on his vision of the best interest's of the membership....he has only
apparently had the good fortune to be in the hot seat when the dung heap had
to fall on someone.....<<

Here Rob has hit upon the real problem with the AHA.  Brian made a mistake
apparently, yet did he?  We have to remember who has the ultimate power in
the AOB/AHA.  Remember the AHA is only a part of the AOB.  Charlie Papazian
is the only one to have the power.  Is Charlie the puppet master who
controls everything in the AHA while remaining in the dark? Was it Charlie
pulling the strings that had Karen Barela break the AHA ties with the BJCP?
 How many more things that would have improved the AHA for the membership
has Charlie killed in the dark behind the folks who have to pass on the
pronouncements to the membership?

Raymond Johnson in his post "AHA bashing" said:

>>With that said, I dare say that few, if any of us would be discussing 
anything related to beer without this organization.  If you have a problem 
with the AHA, then write to those responsible for bad decisions, and 
policies.  Words like; "Down with the AHA", are irrational, and just plain 
rediculous.<<

I am so tired of the politically correct people labeling honest and
constructive criticism as bashing.  Considering that homebrewing has been
going on for 5-6,000 years I don't think that the AHA has nor will have
much impact on brewing in the long term.  Whatever place Zymurgy had in the
homebrewing community has been taken away and occupied by Brewing
Techniques and other homebrewing magazines.  I don't think that we have to
worry about the "Down with the AHA" bit, as the AHA seems intent on
self-destruction.  Membership is on the decline.  A couple of years ago
Karen Barela bragged about having 25,000 members.  The AHA is now at
20,000.  Wonder if those 5,000 quit brewing or perhaps they just got
Brewing Techniques.  

Membership in the AHA is over priced and over rated at   $33 per year.  For
$25 per year as a member of Good Sam I receive 12 magazines a year as well
as discounts of 10% on campsites in many locations and discounts on
insurance and publications.  I get two yachting magazines each with 12
issues per year for far less then $33 per year and they are far better
written with more pages.  The major benefit as I see it of joining the AHA
is the opportunity to pay too much for anything that you receive from them.

Bill




Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 07:24:20 -0700
From: Charles Hudak <cwhudak at adnc.com>
Subject: Re: Not so sour?

Joel wrote:
>You write:
>>I'd be happy to provide anyone great instructions...tried and true, for
>>souring a mash...
>
>   If it's not too large, post the instructions to the HBD.
>I did a sour mash once for a pseudo-BerlinerWeiss style beer,
>and I'd like to compare my seat-of-the-pants method to yours.

After responding to several people privately, I will go ahead and reiterate
what I sent to them (after some minor modifications ) to you folks on the
digest:

Ok, here's what I do. YMMV. It is not an exact science and ingredients are
a big factor (some grain has a larger population of lactobacillus). It is
actually better to undershoot on sourness than overshoot. You can't always
bring it back from the brink with CaC03.

Mash in as normal but withhold ~5-10% of your malt load (try to use all
2-row); should be 0.5-1p. After your normal mash rest, add ice to bring
temp down to 115-120F. Stir in the remaining grain. Cover with aluminum
foil; the foil should sit in contact with the mash. This helps to keep air
out...lactic acid bacteria are anaerobic. Let sit for 12-18 hrs. The longer
it sits, the more sour it will be. Fifteen hours had worked for me in the
past. After it has suitably soured, add an infusion of boiling water to
bring the mash up to 150-160F. It helps if you start with a fairly thick
mash so this infusion doesn't thin things out too much. You'll have to do a
calculation to determine how much water to add, depending on the quantity
of your mash (how much water and grain) and the heat capacity of your mash
tun. I have a calculator that I wrote in excel that is very helpful for this.

Once you've gotten your mash back up to sacchrafication temp, let sit 30-60
minutes and then begin sparging as normal (remember, you added back some
starch that we want to get converted).  Collect your wort and proceed as
usual.  This whole mess will usually smell pretty awful; very musty and
rank, like my gym locker in high school. Trust me, it will turn out fine.
Most of the musty character will be driven off during the boil, the rest
during fermentation.

I've never tried doing this with a small quantity to add back into the main
batch. It is much harder to sour fermented beer and who wants to make a one
gallon batch to add to the main batch? It is risky though. As I stated in
my post, a 250 gallon batch I made that I let sit a couple of hours longer
than normal (the previous batch hadn't been as sour as I wanted) was too
sour to drink. If you like Gueze, imagine the sourest you've had and
multiply by 10. On the other hand, a batch of dry stout that I made with
this method got rave reviews at a St Paddys Day party last year and my
friend Pete A'Hearn, the brewmaster at a local micro, used this method to
make a great Marion Berry P-Lambic that he served at the Southern
California Homebrewers Festival. If it does turn out too sour, you can
always blend it with an unsoured batch to make it drinkable.

Hope this helps. Good luck with the experimentation. If you have any more
questions, don't hestitate to ask.

Seeya

Charles



Charles Hudak
cwhudak at adnc.com
Living large on the left coast.......



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 11:28:30 -0400
From: "Raymond Johnson" <JOHNSONR2 at state.mi.us>
Subject: Whahhhhhh, Whahhhhhhhh

Whah, whah.

Ok, let me see if I've got this straight.  My comments have put George De 
Piro "over the edge"?  I think George was itchin' to get into the mix 
anyway, or perhaps George's wounds are still a too fresh.  Either way, I 
think I've brought out the beast in him, and probably done him a favor.  
It's good to vent George--isn't it?  Sinse we've named names... 
My beef is with those who sling reckless comments calling for heads to 
roll, and "down with the AHA".  George states that the AOB/AHA is no 
longer providing the basic services to its membership, yet still collecting
 dues.  Ever read Zymurgy?  Ever go to www.beertown.org?  I'll wager a 
big, fat YES on both accounts.

Guess what else cry babies.  My favorite mail-order homebrew supply shop, 
St. Patricks of Texas, gives ALL AHA mebers 5% off ALL purchases.  I could 
pay for my dues three-fold every year with this bonus alone--if my wife 
would let me!  And, they aren't the only supply shop to offer such 
discounts. These are just three examples of services that the AHA/AOB has 
done for you lately.

Please understand, I know full well how frustrating it is to enter beers 
in a poorly run competition; I simpathize with you there.  I also know 
that those in charge did not set out to ruin my life and felt worse about 
the farse than anyone.  This doesn't mean that the next one will be run 
poorly.

When I see people bithchin' about the quality of the prizes awarde for the 
AHC, for crying out loud, I just laugh, then I shake my head, then I get 
pissed, then I get defensive.  I mean, come on. How childish can one be?

I guess if all you care about is how your beer does in a competition, then 
maybe the AHA/AOB has failed YOU--this time.  Nobody said life was fare.  
My mebership dues go a lot further than just sposoring the great National 
Homebrew pissing Contests(punn intended). And, I will continue to support  
the AOB/AHA.  As far as I know, nobody is forced to pay dues to the AHA.  
Nuff said!

Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 13:21:34 -0500
From: Tim Burkhart <tburkhart at dridesign.com>
Subject: Critters/cellar temp

First a light hearted comment on the open fermentation thread. 
Last evening I trundled into the basement, er, beer cellar to see if my
wheat had dropped bright yet. Upon close examination, I noticed something
floating in the air lock (trumpet type). Lo and behold, it was a quite dead
wolf spider. That little bugger had crawled his way up the carboy into the
air lock and drowned to get to my homebrew. I had to really shake the air
lock to dislodge his bloated corpse. Into the sink, not the beer, of course.
I guess If I try an open fermentation technique in my basement, I'll have to
create a formidable barrier to keep the buggers out :^)

***
Second, Is 68/f too warm for extended (more than two months) cellaring
bottle conditioned ales at 1050 gravity? I bottled a 1056g porter a month
ago and am concerned about storing it (and other ales) at this temp until I
get room in the fridge or fall comes around. My basement has been constant
at this temp for the spring months, and I hope it will remain the same into
the summer.
Thanks in advance.

Tim Burkhart,
Kansas City


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 11:51:14 -0700 (PDT)
From: Domenick Venezia <demonick at zgi.com>
Subject: Book review request


In the 14 May issue of the journal Nature, page 129, is a review of a new
book by Charles Bamforth, deputy director of the UK Brewing Research
International, formerly, the Brewing Industry Research
Foundation at Nutfield in Surrey, titled, "Beer: Tap into the Art and
Science of Brewing".

The reviewer is John Postgate emeritus professor of Mircobiology
at the U. of Sussex, and the review is quite positive.

>From the review it appears that the book has an industrial slant, and I
was wondering whether any homebrewer(s) had seen and read this
book and would be willing to review it here.

Thanks in advance,

Domenick Venezia   demonick at zgi dot com



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 15:20:54 -0500
From: John Murphy <jbm at ll.mit.edu>
Subject: RE:Response to MCAB Complaint

Louis Bonham (lkbonham at phoenix.net) writes:
>John Murphy takes umbrage with the MCAB selection process used at the
>Boston Wort Processors competition last February.  This is, of course, not
>news to either me or Ken Jucks (honcho of the BHC), as we have both
>exchanged voluminous

I can sincerely assure you that my post was not intended as a complaint of
any sort. I did note that I had inquired (complain, if that's how Louis sees
fit to describe it) with the BHC and MCAB. I assumed from my description
that one could gather that I had already exchanged views with both and that
a decision had been made to do nothing.
The purpose of the post was to pose the simple question: if a dry stout is
judged to be the best overall stout in a competition, is it not also the
best (and winning) dry stout at that competition? In this case, my
contention is that if your answer to the question is no, then you're stating
the following: that one dry stout can be deemed a better stout than another
dry stout, yet, at the same time, considered inferior when compared as a
dry stout. This, to me, sounds ridiculous.  Louis has stated he does not
agree
with this argument. He turns to the discrepancies in competition judging as
reasoning for such a view. IMO, this only leaves the whole judging process
(and competition) suspect.

>The BHC decided, in advance of the competition, to use the "QS only
>preliminary round" method.  Let me assure everyone that this *was* decided
>in advance -- Ken Jucks and I discussed it well before the competition.

My argument here is that the BHC, according to their entry form, decided to
select "Winners in 18 subcategories" to qualify beers for MCAB. This was
done well in advance of any decision to use the "QS only preliminary round"
method. No special method was described to entrants for qualifying beers
other than winning the subcategory. Qualifying beers that are not "winners"
is wrong.

>decision of the QE's.  It is 100% up to the QE's how they certify MCAB
>qualifiers.

If MCAB truly wants to be a "champions championship," then they need to
guarantee that the best beers are qualified.

>(4) As I have repeatedly asked Mr. Murphy, what does he want?  Does he want
>an apology from the MCAB?  From the BHC?  Or does he really want the MCAB
>to bend the strict rules and make an exception so that he can enter?  I've
>told Mr.

As I have told Louis, I would like the BHC to do the right thing and honor
their entry form, which is qualify the winning dry stout of the '98BHC. When
they refuse to do so I felt it was important to make Louis aware of my
opinion and the disservice done to MCAB if this was allowed. I regret that
he sees this as complaining and a request for some special exception. In
addition, I made it perfectly clear to Louis that if he and Ken decide to
do nothing, then so be it. But that doesn't mean I will agree with that
decision and not voice my opinion.
I might add that some of these "strict" rules were not posted at the MCAB
website until AFTER I had contacted Louis.

>Murphy that if he's asking for the last thing, he need only ask and I'll
>put it in front of the steering committee for a vote, although I
>personally >would strongly argue to the Steering Committee that we should
>not be
>granting any "exception invitations".  (By way of response, he's not asked
>me to put it to a vote.)

Again, the only thing I ever asked was to qualify the winning dry stout of
'98BHC. I refuse to tell the BHC or MCAB how to fix their problems, but I
will suggest that they do fix them.
I have been contacted by at least one MCAB Steering Committee member who
feels this is "beaurocractic nonsense" and that "next year is too late to
correct this year's mistakes." I couldn't agree more.
Cheers

- --
John Murphy
jbm at ll.mit.edu




Return to table of contents

---