HOMEBREW Digest #2745 Sat 20 June 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

  Styrofoam working tip. ("Dr. Pivo")
  Re: Why Candi sugar in Belgian brews ("Matthew J. Harper")
  Eisbock's ("Philip J Wilcox")
  Re:candi sugar/Why not aerate stuck ferment/sour fruit beer (George_De_Piro)
  Overnight mashing revisited / candi sugar substitute ("Jay Spies")
  Bitchin, Study Hard (John Varady)
  Wort Aeration ("Gregg Soh")
  stuck fermentation (Domenick Venezia)
  Mill roller spacings (montgomery_john)
  Really Really Big Batches and stuff (ThE GrEaT BrEwHoLiO)
  RE: Why candi sugar in Belgian brews? (Robert Arguello)
  Re: Dextrins and head retention (Al Korzonas)
  belittling (Paul Niebergall)
  An Open Letter to Brian Rezac of the AHA (Samuel Mize)
  attitudes and The Man Who Knew Too Much (Samuel Mize)
  HBD (Al Korzonas)
  Wyeast 1968 (ricjohnson)
  attitude (ricjohnson)
  sour brew/AOB bashing (Al Korzonas)
  Decoction: a summary of responses (Matthew Arnold)
  Mashing and laeutering in separate tuns (Al Korzonas)
  mashfest '98 ("Ted Hull")
  Attitudes (Jim Herter)

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, 18 Jun 1998 12:47:26 +0000 From: "Dr. Pivo" <irv at wireworks.se> Subject: Styrofoam working tip. Have seen a lot of chatter about building insulated fermenters, cold boxes and the like of late. I haven't followed it closely, so at the risk of repeating, I'll pass on a "tip" that made life easier for me. I am very fond of Styrofoam (polystyrene, cellplast, frigolit, etc.) as an insulating material. The biggest problem with working with it, is joining it to stuff. Regular glues of all sorts just melt it. The special glue made for it is messy, horribly expensive, and likely pretty toxic. I learned this trick from a builder, and am forever grateful.... The stuff that you lay tile on (and here I don't know the English word... it's not "grout", but the goop you make a furrowed pattern in to actually "glue" the tile to the intended surface.... ok we'll call it "tile goop") works great! I've done the walls of my cellar in one of my fermentation rooms, was pretty liberal with it at first, but it turns out you just need a "patch" for each corner of the intended sheet (slap it there with a putty knife), press it in place, and it stays there! It fills uneven surfaces, works on wood as well (a la cellar door), is a snap to work with and doesn't cost much. On roofs, it's probably good to have some support until it dries, but on walls, it is viscous enough to just slap the sheet up, and your done! I did that room a year ago and it's still sitting solid as a rock despite the (quite heavy, and sometimes unsteady) traffic. Dr. Pivo (gawd, I like things that work.) Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 09:18:39 -0400 From: "Matthew J. Harper" <matth at progress.com> Subject: Re: Why Candi sugar in Belgian brews Mike Spinelli queries the use of Candi Sugar in Belgian ales rather than more malt. Mike, you have part of one of the reasons already, from your own post. To bump up the gravity. Other reasons: 1. Impart a darker color to the beer (if you use dark candi sugar...) 2. Raise the gravity *without* increasing the malt flavor significantly as part of the process 3. Use of the candi sugar *does* ever so slightly affect the flavor profile, both in a sherry-like fashion as well as in a hard-for-me-to-desribe (I'm not beer judge) profile similar to the sugar itself. (Perhaps it's just psychological... I tasted the sugar before I added it... :-) Best source of info on the is the Belgian Ale book in The Classic series. Best Belgian brews in the world come from Grimbergen. But you'll have hell of a time finding one in the states. :-( -Matth Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 09:38:19 -0400 From: "Philip J Wilcox"<pjwilcox at cmsenergy.com> Subject: Eisbock's From: Philip J Wilcox at CMS on 06/18/98 09:38 AM Well, after polling my local collective I still haven't found anyone who has actually made an Eisbock themselves. So I will look to the great collective for advice. In Feb. I made a nice malty Doppelbock to initiate my new half barrel system. My Initiator Doppelbock came out at 1080. Its been lagering since mid-march at as low as my borrowed fridge would go. ~30F. So I asked a club member If I could use his old chest/beer freezer. He said sure but he didn't know how cold it went. (Sorry Forest, I have no idea what model it is) When I arrived with my 4.5 gal of Doppelbock in my 5 gal coke keg (extra head space on purpose), I discovered it was indeed and OLD freezer. But it did have a manual adjustment for coldness. We dropped the keg in and agreed that a slow temp drop was better. So 3 deg's a day till we bottomed out the Controller. Then he took the controller off and waited to see what happened. Well, it may be old, but it still works!!! I checked my keg yesterday and found a 5 gal beercicle! Frozen solid! -20F!!!!!!! Ouch. So now what do I do? I look at it 2 ways. 1. Let it partially melt and rack off 3 gal of Eisbock. 2. Let it fully melt, and start over, trying not to freeze it entirely this time. 1 is definitely easier. But, if the keg froze from the outside towards the center then the concentrated higher alcohol is in the center of the keg. This will melt last. And is what I am trying to remove. So by letting it partially melt I may not achieve what I wish too. Now I see a #3 possibility 3. Let it partially melt and rack off 2 gal of melting's and call the rest Eisbock. Suggestions? Advice? Comments? Has anyone else tried this process? Phil Wilcox Sec/$er/Editor/Webguy of the Prison City Brewers http://hbd.org/prisoner PS. To those who wish to bash the AHA or the HBD "Mavens" Knock-it-off! Stop biting the hand that feeds you. You ungrateful slugs! We wouldn't be here if it weren't for their efforts. So to Brian Rezac, Al Korz, Dave Burley, and the other "mavens" a sincere Thank You for all you efforts Past Present and Future! Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 09:58:18 -0700 From: George_De_Piro at berlex.com Subject: Re:candi sugar/Why not aerate stuck ferment/sour fruit beer Hi all, First, let me apologize to those who are offended by those of us who take the time to answer people's questions. The world would be a much better place if people just kept knowledge to themselves, and we wouldn't have this digest cluttering our mailboxes. I wish I could get over this sick desire to help others. Those 5 years as a Bronx zoo volunteer were such a waste! Sorry, sorry... Mike S. asks why the Belgians (and others) bother to use sugar to boost the gravity of a beer. Why not use more malt? The reason a Belgian-style Tripel can be relatively light and quaffable, despite its extreme alcohol content, is because of the use of candi sugar. The sugar ferments completely, producing alcohol but contributing no body or malt flavor. The reason the beers are not insipid is because a large amount of malt is used (unlike old-time beginner homebrew that may get 50% of its fermentables from corn sugar). Compare a the body and "quaffability" of a 6-7% ABV Hellerbock with that of a 9-10% ABV Tripel (like Westmalle or Eau Benite). That's the best way to answer your question! ----------------------------------- "Hutch" asks why the semi-fermented beer discussed in last week's digest should not be aerated. He raises the issues of yeast health, and postulates that the yeast would quickly take up the O2, thus minimizing damage to the beer. The partially fermented beer contains many chemicals that the wort does not. Some of these (like the various alcohols) will oxidize readily and give the beer a stale taste in very little time. The yeast may not remove the O2 before damage is done. Check out Scott Bickham's article about stale flavors in beer in the recent issue of _Brewing Techniques_. Another problem with oxidizing the fermenting beer is that it will inhibit the yeast's ability to reduce diacetyl. A buttery LaChouffe-style beer would not be, um, to style. The shelf life of the resulting oxygenated beer will be greatly reduced. While the advice to drink it quickly may appeal to some, it doesn't appeal to all. A high alcohol beer like this will likely benefit from some aging, so it needs to have a decent shelf life. If you don't believe me (and there is no reason for you to), go out and buy a bottle of Sam Smiths (the pale ale is a good one to try this with). Smell it. Taste it. The butter. The cardboardy staleness. The metallic finish. It's all there. Why does it travel so poorly? Because they aerate the ferment to rouse the yeast in the Yorkshire squares! It is a beer that needs to be drunk fresh, not 4 months after it was brewed. Of course, some people will say that these flavors don't exist at all, because their impeccable palates cannot detect them. I guess that the flavor training I went through at Siebel was actually a scam. What a racket they have going! As far as yeast health and growth go: yes, that can be an issue when repitching a stuck ferment (as I and others said last week). The yeast can be grown up with lots of O2, though, so that they are very healthy and viable at the time of pitching. Andy Walsh once wrote some interesting stuff about a pitching technique where the yeast are oxygenated prior to pitching, rather than oxygenating the wort. If I remember correctly, this kind of stuff involves yeast viability and O2 monitoring beyond the reach of most of us, so it may be better to stick with procedures that you know produce good results for you. Of course, being courageous can pay off...or not. --------------------------------- A quick note: Tom A. wrote, referring to his fruit beer and potential sourness: "I received a mail by a real brewer..." What are the rest of us? The last time I checked, I was quite real. I take up space, people notice my presence, and I can move objects. Oh, yes, and I brew! I guess I could just be a part of the mind of some vast alien intelligence, but let's assume I'm not...I think that I'm as real a brewer as any! All kidding aside, I would not proclaim that your beer WILL be sour. It may be a good guess, but YOU are there to taste it; none of us are. Stop wondering and take a sample! Such an act will replace your worry with happiness or upset, but either is better than uncertainty! Have fun! George De Piro (Nyack, NY) Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 09:56:22 +0000 From: "Jay Spies" <spiesjl at mda.state.md.us> Subject: Overnight mashing revisited / candi sugar substitute All - A follow-up thread to my Big Brew Big Halt post of late . . . After finishing the sparge on the Big 10, I still had quite a high gravity reading on the leftovers, but stopped the sparge b/c I had reached 6.5 gallons. However, having gotten a late start to the brewday, I finished the sparge about 8:30 pm. I assumed that I had enough runnings left in the 10 gallon Igloo to do a small beer with them, but alas, I had no time, and work was calling in about 9 hours. (BTW, 22 lbs of grain is about the *limit* in a 10-gallon cooler). So, being the adventurous type, I decided to experiment with sour mashing by letting the mash sit from 8:30 pm until 5:30 pm the next day. I covered the Igloo with blankets, and went about my business. When I got home at 5:30. I opened the Igloo, and *WOW* -- sour as hell. The temp had fallen to 142 dF, and I decided what the hell, it's either sparge and see what happens, or throw the mash away. So, I opened the valve, and ran out the mashtun while ladling ~145 dF kitchen sink water over the top of the grainbed (I can actually *feel* some of you cringing). OG in the fermenter was a ridiculous 1.038, and I added a rehydrated Edme pack that I had had lying around for about 3 months (how many brewing conventions can we break at once?) Fermentation went fine for 1 day, and then stopped. FG was 1.014. Taste? POW!! Does a lemon pLambic sound good to you? My question is, what can I, or should I, add to the beer to sweeten it up, so it is at least *minimally* palatable, and vaguely reminiscent of a sour mash-type beer? Sucrose (non-fermentable) sounds good, but how much? Advice would help. Also, along the sugar vein, does anyone know what I could substitute in a Trippel for clear candi sugar? The stuff is ungodly expensive, and there has to be a cheaper way to do it and still get *whatever it is* that candi sugar contributes to Belgian beers. Again, advice would help. TIA, Jay Spies Wishful Thinking Basement Brewery Baltimore, MD Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 10:06:00 -0700 From: John Varady <rust1d at usa.net> Subject: Bitchin, Study Hard If the only contribution one can make to this forum is to gripe about this or complain about that, I would ask that you hold your (virtual) tongue. The tireless efforts of the few have indeed helped the many. If it wasn't for some topics being repeated ad-nauseam, I would have never picked up on them. Even long before I had any interest in what was happening in my tun at 109F, my reading about it here again and again over the years, caused the seeds of knowledge to be planted in my brain. When I did begin to yearn to understand the finer points of brewing, I had a leg up on the game due to the people here who "knew more about a subject then they should" or as some would put it, the Zen brewers of our forum. Knowing as much as possible about something does not make you a deviant and should not be classified as "strange behavior" (implying it does strikes me as strange, not refreshing). With all due respect however, I will not be trying CliniTest anytime soon (but I know the option exists)... Talking about ad-nauseam, strange behavior, and the BJCP exam: I have come up with a novel way of studying the myriad styles defined by the BJCP (69!). I produced .wav files of each style's OG, IBUs, Color, description and commercial examples and then burned them onto a CD. Now I can listen to them in my car, at my desk, and anytime I can't spend actually studying. (To maintain my sanity, I electronically altered my voice so it does not sound like I am talking to myself). Thanks to all who fill these pages with useful information. 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, 18 Jun 1998 07:31:26 PDT From: "Gregg Soh" <greggos at hotmail.com> Subject: Wort Aeration Hi, it's been awhile since I last posted, so here's a contribution to the digest where homebrewers learn something new everyday(well, for newbies like me). Here's my experience with wort aeration: I bought a wort aeration pump, sintered SS stone and 0.22 micron air filter setup from Brewers' Resource and got to try it out on my most recent batch. I used to get looong lag times like 2 - 3 days from splashing my cooled wort from a height and bucket-to-bucket pouring (I used pint sized starters). This time I aerated for 1 hr prior to pitching (quart sized starter here) and 1 hr post-pitching and the airlock started chugging 2 hours after aeration. I firmly believe that aeration works, at least for my setup. Why shouldn't it? That's just how yeasts work. Two hours as opposed to two days - best money I've spent for my setup. My 2 cents. Regards, Greg Soh ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 07:51:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Domenick Venezia <demonick at zgi.com> Subject: stuck fermentation Hutch <kahlua at intrepid.net> asks about the response in HBD #2737 >What's the difference in aerating now as opposed to the aeration during >the initial pitching (maybe 4 or 5 days)? The new yeast, if healthy >should absorb all the O2 during its respiration phase. Basically your >just working with a wort that's at a gravity of 1.029 or whatever. The difference is that there is alcohol and lots of other "finished" beer products in the wort now. Various and sundry of these compounds will not take well to the presence of oxygen. They will oxidize and trash the brew. Off flavors will result. Shelf-life will be nil. Domenick Venezia demonick at zgi dot com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 98 10:03:19 -0600 From: montgomery_john at ccmail.ncsc.navy.mil Subject: Mill roller spacings I'm using a malt mill with adjustable rollers. The rollers are stainless steel with longitudinal grooves...standard stuff. What are the recommended spacings of the rollers for various types of grains? jbm Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 10:13:29 -0500 From: ThE GrEaT BrEwHoLiO <skotrat at wwa.com> Subject: Really Really Big Batches and stuff Hi All, I have recently started experimenting with large batch sizes. Say 30-40 gallons at a time. I am wondering if any other Homebrewers that read the HBD are doing anything like this and if they have pics of their monster rigs floating around the www somewhere. I am also interested in the setups they are using equipment wise. What burners? What Chillers? Natural gas? LP? Mash Screens? Fermenters? Pump setups? Rims? What kind of extraction rates are you getting? Average Grain Bill? Average Hop amounts? Recipes? and all other aspects of this craziness I have gotten myself into... Has anyone taken one of these 1 barrel systems and opened up a small scale Brew Pub with them? If so, what size Pub and what was the success rate? I have pics of my Keg and 55 gallon drum conversions living on a www site that is here: http://beatles.andinator.com/~skotrat/equipment if anybody is interested. There are also some images of the new 55 gallon Boiler in action. This post doesn't have to become a thread in the HBD and private email is always welcome. I just have to know if I am the only moron Homebrewer out there trying to do this sort of thing. I also would like to thank Jim Busch and "The AL" (Al K.) for answering my questions a while back concerning my journey into the insane "Bigger Batch, Bigger Brewing Equipment" ordeal. As usual they both had some great insight and ideas as to how I should go about my quest for more. And on a side note... When exactly can a beer skunk? Directly after the boil is chilled or only after fermentation has taken place? I realize this is probably a novice question but I can not seem to find a good answer in my brewing library anywhere. My guess is only after fermentation has completed but I really have nothing to back that up... C'YA! -Scott "Bigger is Better especially if'n it is dressed in PLAID" 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: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 08:38:04 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Arguello <robertac at calweb.com> Subject: RE: Why candi sugar in Belgian brews? Mike Spinelli asked about the use of candi sugar: >If candi sugar ferments completely as does dextrose, sucrose, etc, >then what's the purpose of it? To up the gravity? Or to impart a winey taste >to the brew? >Is this one of those things that's just "tradition" and that's why we still do >it today? I mean if the candi sugar imparts a flavor unobtainable with malt tha >n I could see using it, but if it's just to bump up the gravity then why not >just use more malt? In my experience, candi sugar adds color without adding other flavors that other "dark sugars" would contribute.... molasses for instance. Also, the fact that candi sugar is virtually 100% fermentable, you can up the OG and alchohol content of the brew without increasing the "body" or malt profile. "All In A Day's Wort" Robert Arguello <robertac at calweb.com> CORNY KEGS FOR SALE! $12.00 each http://www.calweb.com/~robertac/keg.htm ProMash Brewers' Software - http://www/calweb.com/~robertac/promash Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 11:09:32 -0500 (CDT) From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com> Subject: Re: Dextrins and head retention Scott writes: >Al Korzonas writes: >>The sugars typically used by Belgian brewers=20 >>are "candi sucre" which is really virtually 100% sucrose.=20 >>Since sucrose is 100% fermentable, there would be nothing >>left to contribute to head retention and, in fact, sucrose=20 >>(as well as other simple sugars) are foam negative and=20 >>*reduce* body and mouthfeel.=20 > >Your points regarding Belgian ales are well taken. However, I still = >believe there is something unique about Belgian ales, aside from their = >high gravity, that produce their thick and creamy head. =20 Perhaps... however, consider that Duvel (red/black label), for example, is about 1.080 OG (the green label is about 1.070). Even with 10 to 15% sucrose, that's an awful lot of malt and lots of head retaining proteins. It's also carbonated to more than 3 volumes of CO2. Similarly with Saison Dupont, Chimay (all of them), Westmalle, Leffe Blonde, Grimbergen (all of them), Straffe Hendrik... all are at least 1.060 OG. Orval is listed at only 1.055 OG, but has 13.5% Caravienne in the grain bill (which is a LOT) and I suspect that the 1.055 doesn't include the candi sucre in the kettle and the invert syrup at bottling because after bottle-conditioning Orval is 7.1%ABV! Take a look at http://www.dma.be/p/bier/1_11_uk.htm and consider the OG's of these beers. For all malt beers, roughly every 10 gravity points is 1% ABV (so 1.060 is roughly 6.0%ABV). For beers with sugars added, perhaps 10 gravity points give 1.1 or 1.2% ABV. Note that the beers with 5%ABV typically have unremarkable head retention except those which are made with a substantial amount of wheat (like the Wits/ Tarwebiers). >Candi sucre is *virtually* 100% sucrose, but sucrose itself, as a = >disaccharide, is not directly fermentable. It is broken down into glucose = >and fructose where are 100% fermentable. However, they are not fermented = >100%. They most certainly are! Yes, I'm well aware that yeast exudes invertase which breaks sucrose into its component glucose and fructose, but they are indeed fermented 100%. Also, not all disaccharides are unable to be directly fermented... maltose is a disaccharide and is indeed directly fermented. >There are two related comments to this discussion in "Belgian Ale" by = >Pierre Rajotte. First, he claims Candi Sucre is fermented 95%. Second, he = >states, "It is claimed that candi contributes to good head retention in a = >high-gravity, lightly hopped beer." Perhaps dark candi sucre is only 95% fermentable, but Orval and Duvel use white, which is something like 99.9% sucrose and therefore for all practical purposes is completely fermentable. As for dark candi sucre adding to head retention, see below. >I believe the data that we are missing to draw a conclusion would be which = >dextrins interact with the mid-weight proteins to produce the claimed = >benefit to head retention. I agree... I don't agree however that candi sucre provides significant amounts of dextrins. Dark candi sucre certainly provide some caramels... perhaps they interact with the mid-weight proteins? >I also don't believe that the fermentable sugars left in beer reduce = >mouth-feel. They do not enhance mouth-feel, but they do not reduce it. Fermentable sugars don't remain in beer.. they are fermented. What I said was that fermentable sugars (sucrose, dextrose, fructose) added to an otherwise all-malt beer will thin the body... if they didn't Duvel would have the mouthfeel of St. Jakobus Blonder Bock (thick!)... or some other all-pale malt 1.080 beer. Mouthfeel and body are primarily from protein, but dextrins add some. Sucrose and other fermentable sugars add no protein or dextrins and they are fermented into alcohol which is lighter in body than even water. As a result beers into which fermentable sugars have been added will be lighter-bodied than all-malt beers. It is one of the reasons that modern homebrewers have been so adverse to adding corn sugar (dextrose) to their beer. Please note that I've been using glucose and dextrose interchangably above. >Al Korzonas Continues: >>Finally, an "adjunct" is defined as a non-enzymatic starch source=20 >>(like flaked wheat, pearled barley, potatoes or steel-cut oats).=20 > >The Practical Brewer defines an adjunct as "non-malt carbohydrate = >materials of suitable composition and properties which beneficially = >complement or supplement the principal brewing material." I think sugar, = >as used in Belgian ales, qualifies for this definition. This is a much wider definition than I have read elsewhere. Under that definition, indeed sugar would be an "adjunct." Al. Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL korz at xnet.com http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/ Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 12:10:38 -0500 From: Paul Niebergall <pnieb at burnsmcd.com> Subject: belittling Al K writes: >The fact of the matter is that while I was off in the hospital, 20 or >30 questions went unanswered. If you would have gotten off your >high horse and answered a few questions, perhaps I would not have >had to. I don't feel that answering HBD questions is my sole >responsibility in life, but rather it is *all* our responsibility as a >homebrewing community. It's just that I take that responsibility more >seriously than you do, obviously. I as well as many others answered these questions via private e-mail. The reason this is happening is that people with good opinions are being driven off-line for fear of impending head bashing. How many times have you seen a post that begins: *Gee, I*ve been lurking for a long time - I usually don*t post....* Or *Sorry if this is wasting bandwidth, but I have a question, please don*t hurt me......* Or *With the permission of the gods of home brew, I come to you on my knees to humbly ask my ignorant question.....* Why is this happening? It*s like people are scared to post to the HBD. I care about homebrew more than anyone and all I am trying to do is get people to lighten up a little. If you think it is your responsibility to take the poor, huddled masses of homebrew newbies and lead them from darkness, then that*s just fine. But, if you are as serious as I am about my commitment to help the home brew community, I suggest that we all try a little harder to keep this forum from becoming an elitist club of egomaniacs. The more people that contributing their experience and opinions, the better. >You are the person with the attitude problem, so stop wasting bandwidth >and belittling the work of others >I suggest heckling some soup kitchen >or sandbagging volunteers in stead... there you can't hide behind your >terminal. Time for a reality check here. I hardly think home brewing is on par with feeding homeless people or protecting river towns from the ravages of spring floods. Another clue - this is the Internet, we are all hiding behind our terminals! I am not belittling anyones work. I think that the technical issues discussed here are excellent and your contributions in particular have been no less than stellar on a few rare occasions. What I am belittling is the level of arrogance that permeates the HBD. There*s that bandwidth thing again. Can somebody please explain to me why it is that when someone doesn*t like what you are saying, they accuse you of *wasting bandwidth*. Is bandwidth a commodity or something? I have never quite understood this. I guess I could respond to this by saying *PAGE DOWN PLEASE*. Later, Paul Niebergall Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 12:05:18 -0500 (CDT) From: Samuel Mize <smize at ns1.imagin.net> Subject: An Open Letter to Brian Rezac of the AHA Greetings, I'd like to thank Brian Rezac for being man enough to admit what he said about the Boston Wort Processors, and to admit further that he was wrong. Best, Sam Mize - -- Samuel Mize -- smize at imagin.net (home email) -- Team Ada Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 12:45:47 -0500 (CDT) From: Samuel Mize <smize at ns1.imagin.net> Subject: attitudes and The Man Who Knew Too Much > From: irajay at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re:Attitudes > > ...usually a sea of pedantry on HBD. > ... the humbug which makes up so much of this list ... > ... I have some trouble with the self appointed mavens and wish that > some people could lighten up. Speaking of being heavy: don't lead with insults. You'll get less "tongue clicking." Define what you mean without using loaded words. What behavior exactly do you consider inappropriate or excessive? Can you give concrete examples of postings that have shown that behavior? > I attended a homebrew weekend in Woodland a few months ago and ... > One of the instructors [said HBD] was comprised of a group of > people who knew more about a subject than they should. Now > you can look at that anyway you want. I look at it as wanting a kindergarten brewer's resource: one that will tell him what HE wants to know right now, and nothing more. It won't annoy him with more advanced details or discussions, or with other peoples' interests, so he won't ever have to page down. He certainly won't have to evaluate what he reads, or actually think for himself. HBD is more like a one-room schoolhouse. The beginners get help from the more advanced students, and also overhear them studying and talking about harder topics. Even the kids who don't plan to study a heavy subject like Latin get exposed to the oral exercises -- some decide it's interesting after all. We don't have a teacher, so we all try to help the beginners and to figure out the hard answers. We certainly don't all agree, even on some of the basics, and we all express and defend our opinions. This makes it one heck of a good learning and research environment. If his opinion of HBD is so low, I'd certainly invite him to invest his time on better resources. For instance, there's, uh, well... Never mind. If, for some bizarre reason, you really feel a need to criticize how folks post on HBD -- and if you give a rat's *ss whether or not they listen -- try a little courtesy, and try making a constructive suggestion instead of just nebulously rapping other people. I mean, "lighten up"? You're the one bad-mouthing us for the way we try to HELP other folks. You lighten up. I'm tired of nimrods telling us what jerks we are, then saying WE need to lighten up if we don't like it. We've been having a good time here. We're light. You're the one with the complaint. Lighten up. This is absolutely, positively my last post on this subject. Unless somebody pisses me off again. 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, 18 Jun 1998 13:07:52 -0500 (CDT) From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com> Subject: HBD Ira writes: >As always, I find the opinions of Paul Niebergal to be refreshing in >what is usually a sea of pedantry on HBD. As I recall, his post added nothing positive to the HBD. Ira's post at least was polite and pointed out that there are a variety of levels of interest in the complexity of brewing. Ira continues: >I attended a homebrew weekend in Woodland a few months ago and was >impressed and also shocked at the incredible sophistication some >people had brought to the (I thought) simple skill of homebrewing. >But I also found something refreshing there as well. One of the >instructors talked about HBD. He said it was comprised of a group of >people who knew more about a subject than they should. <snip> To *best* answer a question on apple aroma in a beer, it does help to know the process by which acetaldehyde is produced, the factors in the recipe and process that increase the production of acetaldehyde, the process of reabsorption of acetaldehyde, the factors in the process that incrase the reabsorption of it and the fact that ethyl hexanoate (an ester) also lends an apple aroma and that acetaldehyde, therefore, may not be at fault. Is this knowing more than necessary? If it helps someone solve their beer's problem, then I contend it isn't. If you think the HBD is too pedantic, there are a thousand other discussions going on over the Internet this very moment. You could join into one of them. It doesn't take long to notice that "does anyone have a recipe for Samuel Adams Boston Lager?" and "My beer is cloudy and overcarbonated... what went wrong?" posts alternate with people trying to use induction to heat wort or discuss which molecular weight proteins contribute to haze and which contribute to head retention. I think that HBD would be a very boring place if we didn't have both types of posts and everything in between. I think that the greatest thing about homebrewing is that there is something for many different levels of interest. A friend of mine brews nothing but the Coopers Real Ale kit (corn sugar and all). The same beer every time. He has no intention of learning about the Crabtree Effect or calculating the thermal efficiency of several different wort chiller designs. There are others who love to build equipment. Others love to learn about the biochemistry of the yeast. There are probably another 50 categories of homebrewers. Yes, there are many HBD members who know more about brewing than a large number of brewpub and micro brewmasters. Is that a bad thing? Is my beer ruined? Al. Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL korz at xnet.com http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/ Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 14:19:23 -0400 From: ricjohnson at SURRY.NET Subject: Wyeast 1968 Jeff York wrote of Wyeast 1968: Flavors are metallic and sour/lactic - similar to a young plambic exposed to untreated steel. Blech! This is really annoying because now I've got 10 gallons of the stuff. Any advise, similar experiences, etc? I too experienced a sour flavor in an ESB when using this yeast, but my fermentation temps spiked to 76 degrees during the primary and I assumed this was the reason. Now I have another that has been fermenting for almost 3 weeks and is still bubbling about every 10 seconds. This time my temps have been a constant 68 degrees. It tasted fine when racked to the secondary but SG was still 1.024. Richard Johnson Mt. Airy, NC Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 14:19:25 -0400 From: ricjohnson at SURRY.NET Subject: attitude Give 'em hell Al!!!. I look forward to yours and "these people's" comments everyday. Thanks. Richard Johnson Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 13:58:02 -0500 (CDT) From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com> Subject: sour brew/AOB bashing Tom writes: >However: one question remains: I received a mail by a real brewer who >claimed that he resulting beer would be way too sour. He referred me to >http://hbd.org/brewery/library/SugAcid.html ><http://hbd.org/brewery/library/SugAcid.html> . Some other info: I >already steeped some 150-200gr of crystal malt while making the wort, >because this would enhance the sweetness, since I expected that the >resulting brew would be somewhat sour, but not that it would be >extremely sour. >I admit, I am getting a bit nervous about it (it is also my most >expensive batch till now). Can anyone give me advice? Perhaps I can add >something while priming? I feel a little guilty for not mentioning sanitation of the fruit in my last post. If the beer is too sour, the problem is a bacterial infection and not from the raspberries. The beer I made with a pound of raspberries per gallon was not too sour. What I did to sanitise the fruit (which is guaranteed to have lots of lactobacillus and wild yeast on it... even if it was frozen... freezing will only kill some of them) was to mush up the fruit and carefully raise the temperature to between 140 and 150F (60 to 66C) for 10 minutes, and then adding it to the secondary. If the beer does get infected, then even the sweetness from the crystal malt will be gone. Here's two more points I omitted: boiling the fruit will "set the pectins" which will result in permanently cloudy beer (unless you add pectase (pectic enzyme) to the fermenter) and CO2 will scrub out some of the aromas, so I suggest you add the fruit to the secondary rather than the primary. There will still be some CO2 evolution from the fermentation of the fruit, but half as much as if you would have fermented both the fruit and the malt sugars in the primary fermenter. If your beer is exceedingly sour, I'm willing to bet it was bacteria that caused it and so unless you pasteurise it after fermentation (NOT recommended) any sugars you add (even lactose) will be eaten by the bacteria. You could try tempering the sourness with calcium carbonate or you could pitch the dregs from a few bottles of Cantillon or Boon Marriage Parfait, wait three years and call it pseudo-Framboise (of the Lambic variety). *** More AHA/AOB bashing: Firstly, the AOB is the parent company. The AHA, IBS, Brewers Publications and the GABF are under the AOB. I just got off the phone with a HB supply shop owner... no doubt you know about the fire sale Brewers Publications had on the Beer Style Series books. I just learned from this shop owner that these incredible prices were not made available to homebrew shops and now customers are coming in saying: "$11.95!? I just bought four of these for $3.95 each at a bookstore!" I've defended the AOB on other things, but to slap the backbone of the homebrewing industry like this, (in my opinion) stinks. I know of one homebrew book publisher that refuses to give the online bookstores bigger discounts than they give homebrew supply shops. It's high time we remember the hand that feeds us homebrewers! Al. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 19:13:14 GMT From: marnold at netnet.net (Matthew Arnold) Subject: Decoction: a summary of responses I want to thank all the people who took the time to answer my questions about decoction mashing. As I anticipated, there are a wide variety of ways to decoct, with varying merits. To sum up the replies I received: 1) Try mashing in around 105F and using the decoction to bring it up to 130-135 then use boiling water to bring up to saccrification temperature. This keeps the mash from sitting at the protein rest temperature too long. 2) Mash in at the protein rest temperature of your choice and let the mash temperature drop. Thus the mash will fall into ranges where the enzymes have been deactivated. Naturally this adds a degree (hah!) of difficulty in predicting the size of the decoction to get up to the saccrification temperature. 3) Forget about it entirely and use a pound or less of Melanoidin or Aromatic malts. 4) Stick to brewing English ales (OK, I made this one up myself). I may yet give decoction a whirl. Right now, though, I'm working on my IPA and Wit recipes. Wish me luck! Once again, thanks for all your help! Matt P.S. NotObBrewing: How 'bout those Red Wings? - ----- Webmaster, Green Bay Rackers Homebrewers' Club http://www.rackers.org info at rackers.org Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 14:43:41 -0500 (CDT) From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com> Subject: Mashing and laeutering in separate tuns Bill writes: >I use a glass on steel 5-gallon pot as mash tun for most of the beers I >brew. <snip> and: >Transferring the mash to the lauter tun only takes a couple of minutes and >allows the filter bed to set up better the in the single tun method. <snip> How so? I mash and laeuter in a single 18.75-gallon SS kettle into which is mounted three EasyMasher(tm)-like screens that are connected with a SS cross which is connected to a ball valve on the outside. I have never had any trouble establishing a filter bed (although I have not tried rye or wheat in this tun) and it has held as much as 46 pounds of malt. It has a 50,000 BTU ring burner under it. See my website for photos. Also, wouldn't the transfer of the mash from mashtun to laeutertun increase the amount of aeration of the mash that goes on? I have always tried to be very careful to minimise introduction of air during the mash, but I believe that Charlie Scandrett once posted that the introduction of air in the mash may be more detremental than post boil hot-side aeration. Isn't simpler better? Also, I dread the thought of glorping* 46 pounds of malt and 80 pounds of water from one container to another. Shoveling 55 pounds of damp malt into the compost heap is bad enough! * glorping is a word coined by fellow Chicago Beer Society member Randy Mosher. Al. Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL korz at xnet.com http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/ Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 98 8:58:22 EDT From: "Ted Hull" <THull at brwncald.com> Subject: mashfest '98 Hey folks: I've been trying to get scoresheets back from this MCAB QE for 6 weeks now. My understanding is that awards have been posted on the Web and passed out, but that no one has received scoresheets in the mail. I checked by e-mail with Dr. Fix, b/c he won the category I entered. I know Louis Bonham has been busy with other MCAB issues lately, but I've never gotten a response from Scott Mills with the Mash Tongues. At least some form of explanation would be wonderful. Yes, I'm peeved about taking pains to get my entry there quickly (Fedex) and paying the entry fee without getting the feedback. But I'm almost to the point of utter hopelessness about seeing these in the mail. Help! Ted Hull Atlanta, GA Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 14:53:57 -0500 From: Jim Herter <james.m.herter.1 at nd.edu> Subject: Attitudes I haven't been able to keep up on the HBD lately, but today was an exception. I generally scan the "Contents" to see the latest and/or applicable topics. I find myself looking with interest to see who is posting in response to what topics. Al Korzonas is usually one of these contributors that do their part to make the HBD worth reading. I found the comment from Paul, - "a few individuals who think it is their sole responsibility in life to respond to every question posted in the HDB. Like it is their job or something" - puzzling. If responding to posts is not an objective of this list - if not the prime objective - then what's the point. Hell, I admonish myself for not participating more than I do. I commend those that do reflect upon their experiences. The more the contribution, the better. If I don't want to read about someone's dog showing potential for the BJCP (Which I do. Very amusing. Gotta get me one of those dog's!), I page down. If you don't agree, that's your choice. I myself encourage the input. Jim Herter St. Joe Valley Brewers Chairperson and Great Lakes Brewing News Indiana Correspondent 219.631.0113 Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 06/20/98, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96