---

	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:
  Malt, etc. ("Mark Bridges")
  Yeast growth/good books/more micros ("Steve Alexander")
  PU clone notes/amen (Bill Anderson)
  Brew school grads ("George De Piro")
  Seeded hops ("George De Piro")
  Bitterness (AJ)
  Galena Hop growing (Robert Arguello)
  Brewschool bashing (Charles Hudak)
  Cultivation questions (Bill Anderson)
  Robert Arguellos nettiquette (Jonathan Edwards)
  Mead conditioning question (Ron Warner)
  Putting new wort over an old yeast cake (tmcglinn)
  Beer label roullette/My praises... (Some Guy)
  Soda cooler ("Jay Krause")


Let a good beer be the exclamation point at the end of your day as
every sentence deserves proper punctuation...

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: Sat, 15 Aug 1998 22:48:45 -0700
From: "Mark Bridges" <mbridges at coastnet.com>
Subject: Malt, etc.

Greetings All:

An open question - does any of our susbscribers have access to Simpsons
Malt?  What I have is a nice floor malted (Maris Otter) Pale Ale malt. I'm
very happy with it's performance in my homebrewery (and at local brewpubs).
Are any of the collective familiar with this maltster and it's products ?

On a local note, my recent edition of CAMRA Victoria's "What's Brewing"
newsletter reports that HBD subscriber Dave Riedel won 1st place in the Dark
Lager category, and 3rd in English/Scottish Ales in CAMRA Victoria's 1998
Homebrew Competition. Well done Dave!

Cheers,

Mark Bridges
Victoria, BC



Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1998 05:18:47 -0400
From: "Steve Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Yeast growth/good books/more micros

A few 'gests ago George DePiro wrote ...

>     said that he had read that yeast growth is 8X (3 full divisions).  Why
 >    the discrepancy?

>     In the brewery, we do not give yeast enough oxygen for all the cells
 [...]
True. I understand *why* the yeast may only grow 3X, the question is really
*DO* they ?  That is - is this current commercial practice and if so where ?
M&BS, which is admittedly dated, suggest the 2 to 3 divisions is the normal
range (4X to 8X) and that peg lagers at 4X.  I believe I saw a mid-1980s JIB
paper which suggested a greater than 4X growth for British ales as typical, but
I don't have a copy at hand.  I'd be interested in seeing what common US micro
ale production and current British ale practices are.


>    to be at their 1% maximum sterol content.  Because of this, they won't
>     divide 3X (they become reluctant to divide at 0.25% sterol and cannot
 >    divide if their sterol will fall below 0.1%).  If we were to inject
 >    more oxygen into the young beer during fermentation, yeast growth
 >    would resume.  As stated above, this is not desirable (although there
>     are a few breweries that do this sort of thing by rousing the ferment;
>     the beers do take on a distinctive character).
Also by introducing oxygenated krausen.

>     Excessive yeast growth is great during propagation, but not while
>     making beer.  That is one major reason it is so important to pitch a
>     large, healthy starter.  This will reduce the production of fusel
>     alcohols and harsh esters that contribute to "that homebrew tang."

We have no disagreement here.  BTW - the math models for fermentation have two
terms for the fusel production rate.  One describes the Ehrlich mechanism and
explains some but not all of the fusel production and is proportional to the
yeast mass.  Integrated over time this term is approximately constant for a
given yeast at a given temp fermenting a given amount of sugar.  The other term
describes the synthetic mechanism elucidated by Ayrapaa (put umlauts over the
whole thing) is proportional to yeast growth rate.  The second term is the one
that George and I taste in underpitched beers.  This synthetic term dominates
in the production of n-propanol and n-butanol among others.

Of the esters some have models that are only proportional to sugar uptake - and
so are fairly constant (for a given yeast, temp, amount of fermentation) while
others like ethyl caproate are modeled as proportional to yeast growth rate
again.  The one George dreads (ethyl acetate) is, by this model, relatively
unaffected by yeast growth.

The model shouldn't be taken too seriously, it simply determines that most
important rate limiting substance of a mechanism and that creates a model term
with a dependency on growth, fermentation, amino acid uptake, etc.  The fit to
experimental data is pretty good tho'.

==
In a couple off-line discussions the question of "what is a good/great brewing
science book" has come up.  Imagine that you were interested in learning
brewing science and that you could realistically only afford to buy one (maybe
multivolume) set of brewing science books.  It should ideally be current,
complete and accurate.

Alan Meeker quickly convinced me that I have been overlooking a lot of
seriously misleading and downright incorrect background information in Fix's
PoBS - I've eliminated it from consideration.  This book needs a substantial
re-edit to make is recommendable - tho' the idea of a $30 book with the
intended level of coverage is very attractive.  DeClerk is of course great, and
of course very dated.  Malting and Brewing Science, 2nd ed, is quite a bit
fresher, precisely written without the excess baggage of translation, but
still - from 1978 this is getting a bit dated too.  After scanning briefly
Pollack 'Brewing Science' vol 3(?) I get the impression that this is a state of
the art compilation circa 1979-1986, but lacks the cohesiveness to be a
textbook.  Pollack has the added disadvantage of being out of print and costing
about $600US.

I haven't seen Kunze and don't know if it is encyclopedic enough to be the
choice for the single book to own.  Even if it is complete - the bits I've seen
quoted here cause me to doubt the trueness of the translation.  Anyone care to
comment ?

Anyone have a better choice ?

Anyone aware of any Wehenstephan research work in translation ?

==

'Some guy' who claims that my choice to not pick micros 6ers randomly from the
fridge bin at the local stores is self-defeating. Fooey.  I don't feel that I
need to play the fool for everyone who bought a bottling line.  The industry
needs internal competition - they can't just keep throwing products over the
wall and expecting growth.  They need coherent style labeling and they need
some sort of quality labeling which would ensure some very minimal standard of
quality and adherence to style.  I'm in favor of experimentation but why not
take advantage of word-of-mouth/pubcrawler/reviews etc before experimenting ?
That random pick just encourages no style no label and random quality - which
is ultimately very bad for the very good micros that we all hope will thrive.

Steve Alexander




Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1998 11:49:07 +0100
From: anderson at ini.cz (Bill Anderson)
Subject: PU clone notes/amen

Andrew asks for tips on his Pilsner Urquell recipe.

One thing I've noticed in many American clones, and even several European
lagers, is a lack of the acidic undertones that make a PU, Lobkowicz, or
Velke Popovice so great.

I asked the brewmaster at the Lobkowicz brewery where this comes from, the
yeast or a lactic acid rest, and was told it's primarily from yeast (a
Budweiser strain) but a sour mash is certainly a viable option if the beer
isn't pungent enough to keep it in style. His water has a ph of 7.9, the
wort= 5.05-5.15, and ferments out to 4.2-4.4.

I'm curious to hear what the more expert tasters have to say about the sour
undertones. For example, Sam Adams's Bohemian lager falls flat on its face
(IMHO), yet I recall (vaguely) that its decoction-brewed and uses only the
finest Saaz hops.
- -----
Amen to Scott and Steve's lamentations of Micro's and Brewpubs! On a recent
visit to the States, a friend proudly served up a night of Ipswich Stout, a
beer remarkably similar to a batch that I had once dumped down the toilet
as undrinkable-oxidized and unbalanced, with a really grassy aftertaste.

Bland is bad! Bad is worse!

 -Bill Anderson
Prague, Czech Republic
anderson at ini.cz




Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 16 Aug 98 09:16:00 PDT
From: "George De Piro" <gdepiro at fcc.net>
Subject: Brew school grads

Hi all,

Charles wrote, regarding the fact that some brewpubs serve a bland 
line-up:

"Blame it on brewpub owners who have no business being in the brewing
industry and *brewschool* graduates who know how to make "beer" but
know nothing about beer styles or history and who couldn't tell you the
difference between a Helles and a Pilsener."

What the heck is with these recent insults to those of us that have 
bothered to
advance our knowledge in a formal setting?  I'd say Charles has it 
exactly backwards.

Some of my Siebel classmates may have entered school with an ignorance 
about
beer styles, but they didn't leave in the same state!  That was the whole
 point
of it!  We had a lecture on beer styles, and the tasting sessions exposed
 students to
the wide world of beer.  Sure, it wasn't enough to get you a good grade 
on the BJCP
exam, but it served its purpose:  exposing aspiring brewers to the 
diversity of
their craft.

Perhaps Mort could tell us about the tastings and style lectures at H-W? 
 I know that
Kunze's text (used at some German brewing schools) has a full chapter 
devoted to
beer styles.  In Germany (and perhaps elsewhere), you cannot call 
yourself a
"brewmaster" without a degree.  In fact, you can't even get a job!  (yes,
 even in
Belgium).

Perhaps if more US pub-scale "brewmasters" would bother to learn a thing 
or two
about what they do, there would be a more diverse selection of better 
beer out there.

Have fun!

George De Piro  (Nyack, NY)


Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 16 Aug 98 09:24:30 PDT
From: "George De Piro" <gdepiro at fcc.net>
Subject: Seeded hops

Hi all,

This year and last my hop cones contained seeds.  No, I didn't plant any 
males.
As my dog and I walk around town I have been looking for any other hop 
vines, wild
or cultivated, to find the source of the males.  I finally found them, 
about two doors
down from my house!

These wild hops have a slightly different leaf shape then mine (more 
exagerated "cuts"),
and there are plenty of male inflorences (sp?).  My question to you all 
is how common is
this?  I'm sure the things have been there for years, but I never noticed
 until I started
growing my own and noticed that they were seeded.  How many of you have 
seeded
cones?  (Is that too personal?)

Have fun!

George De Piro  (Nyack, NY)


Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1998 11:31:42 -0400
From: AJ <ajdel at mindspring.com>
Subject: Bitterness

A few further comments on measurement of beer bitterness. The ASBC lists
4  protocols under bitterness. In Beer - 23A the absorbance of the
bittering principles extracted into isooctane (expensive gasoline) is
measured at 275 nm in a 1 cm cell and the result multiplied by 50 (23D
is essentially the same  but an automated flow analyzer is used). Thus a
50 BU beer would have an absorbance of 1 and a 150 BU beer an absorbance
of 3. The latter value is getting into the iffy region of many
spectrophotometers but the iffiness is with respect to linearity - the
noise floor is usually still a unit or two off. Note that some of the
really spiffy units will read down to absorbtions of 7!  As G DeP
suggests, changing path or dilution (caution - Beer's law is more
honored in the breach than the observance) can be used to get within the
best range of the instrument. It is incumbent upon the analyst to know
the limitations of the instrument and I am confidant that Louis knows
his.

What is more important to understand is that methods 23A and 23D do not
explicitly purport to measure the iso-alpha content of the beer. They
measure "bitterness" reported in "bitterness units" (BU). Methods 23B
(archived) and  23C do measure iso-alpha acid quantity (23C by solid
phase extraction and HPLC) and report this in mg/L. While BU and
iso-alpha content in mg/L are "practically identical" in beers brewed
with fresh hops it is also the case that beers made with old hops or
improperly stored hops or certain extracts will yield iso-alpha acid
readings which can be "significantly" below the BU value. For this
reason  method's 23A or D (and the EBC's similar method) are generally
preferred in that they represent "... a uniform method that best
expresses the true bitter flavor value of the beer." (ASBC Methods of
Analysis. Introduction to "Beer Bitterness").

For the homebrewer, 23A is vastly prefferable, not so much because of
the shortcomings of 23C with older hops but because the probablity that
he might get his hands on the required equipment for 23A is finite. An
added advantage is that calibration with a standard  is not required
(the instrument must, of course, be calibrated with respect to
wavelength and absorbtion but this should be part of standard operating
practice whatever determination is being done). Method C, conversely,
does require calibration with a standard (standard extracts are
available from ASBC but they are expensive).

It isn't, of course, totally beer and skittles with 23A. It's been
reported that sorbates, benzoates, coloring agents and some adjuncts
absorb at 275 nm. These are not things that homebrewers, or even most
craft brewers, would allow in their beer but they do impose an extra
burden on the analyst examining beers brewed with any of these
substances. If they are used their absorbance can be determined and
subtracted from production measurements.

It obviously can't hurt to do a calibration using 23A with the ASBC (or
any other) standard but it's probably  simpler and certainly less
expensive to do occcasional sanity checks on commercial beers whose
bitterness is (or is thought to be) well known. Another scheme would be
collaboration among investigators e.g. I measure PU, Louis measures PU,
other guys with access to a lab measure PU and we all report our results
here.



Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1998 09:03:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: Robert Arguello <robertac at jps.net>
Subject: Galena Hop growing

I have been fairly successful with my Cascade vines. This is their third
year in my yard and despite very poor growing conditions, (not much light
and very poor drainage), I harvest enough from two rhizomes to make the
effort worth while. I am wondering if I might have similar luck with Galena.
I live in northern, central California. Anyone out there with experience
with Galena?  

Also, I received 11 responses to my query about the appropriateness of my
tag line. Of the 11, 6 respondents indicated that mentioning products for
sale within the sig runs counter to the charter of the HBD. 5 HBD'ers
indicated that my tag line advertisement were restrained, not blatant and
non-abusive and had no problem with it. 

Without exception all responses that I have received were polite and sincere
and I thank you all. One reader included a segment of the HBD "Moderation
Statement", and that statement clearly shows that advertisements other than
those that are a direct response to a query, are considered inappropriate
and strongly discouraged. As a result, I have removed references to my
products from my signature, (except the URL for my web site). Thanks to all
of you who have helped clear this up for me, and to Al Korzonas for pointing
it out in the first place.

- -------------------------"Dances With Worts"---------------------
Robert Arguello
robertac at jps.net
http:/www.jps.net/robertac/keg.htm
- -----------------------------------------------------------------



Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1998 09:24:37 -0700
From: Charles Hudak <cwhudak at home.com>
Subject: Brewschool bashing

George takes exception to my "brewdegreebashing"

>What the heck is with these recent insults to those of us that have
bothered to
>advance our knowledge in a formal setting?  I'd say Charles has it exactly
backwards.
>
>Some of my Siebel classmates may have entered school with an ignorance about
>beer styles, but they didn't leave in the same state!  That was the whole
point
>of it!  We had a lecture on beer styles, and the tasting sessions exposed
students to
>the wide world of beer.  Sure, it wasn't enough to get you a good grade on
the BJCP
>exam, but it served its purpose:  exposing aspiring brewers to the
diversity of
>their craft.
>

It's funny, I just knew that you would respond to this George. Honestly, I
think that Siebel does a really good job with their curriculum. Some of the
newer schools, though, even those affiliated with Davis, seem to stress
pumping out new graduates rather than training them in the *art* of
brewing. I'm sorry if you happen to disagree but my experience with some of
these folks is that they get well versed in the *science* of brewing but
not in the *craft* of brewing. I've browsed the curriculums at some of
these schools and nowhere is beer history or beer styles ever mentioned.
Few even have recipe formulation sections, other than the pure technical
calculations of how to hit a certain S.G.

> In Germany (and perhaps elsewhere), you cannot call yourself a
>"brewmaster" without a degree.  In fact, you can't even get a job!  (yes,
even in
>Belgium).

Yeah but it's not that way here. I spent several hours talking with a guy
once who'd been homebrewing extract beers for a year or so. He was really
interested in going to a brew school and asked me what I thought. I said
that in order for him to get anything out of the school, he needed to have
a good background in chemistry, algebra and basic biochemistry. He said he
hadn't gone to college and he'd done poorly in these classes in high
school. I suggested he enroll in some classes in J.C. since he would have a
hard time keeping up if he didn't grasp these concepts. He himmed and hawed
and asked if it was really necessary. I told him that *I* wouldn't waste
$10,000 on a brew degree if I wasn't prepared to learn the material. He
thought about it for a moment and then said, "Well, do you think that
brewmasters would want to buy my recipes?"  I almost fell over laughing. I
had to explain to him that since I *did* have a background in brewing
science and had a better understanding of how all the parts came together
and was well versed in style history, that I would generally be able create
a better recipe than he could so why would I buy his? His lack of
commitment was obvious

The bottom line is not all aspiring brewers take the industry and the
profession as seriously as you George and that's the problem. 

>
>Perhaps if more US pub-scale "brewmasters" would bother to learn a thing
or two
>about what they do, there would be a more diverse selection of better beer
out there.
>

I would wholeheartedly agree but I don't think that a "brewdegree"
automatically makes you a great brewer. A lot of the quality comes from
your commitment to the craft and a broad understanding of the craft of
brewing not just the science. This is what a lot of brewers lack. 

If anyone else was insulted by my post, I apologize. Fact is, if you are
reading the HBD, you probably don't fit the profile that I was describing;
you've demonstrated your commitment to the craft. 

C--



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



Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1998 19:15:51 +0100
From: anderson at ini.cz (Bill Anderson)
Subject: Cultivation questions

Dear collective:
Since I'll be moving back to the US in October, I've decided to take
advantage of the goodwill offers of many brewmasters in the area and plan
to go on a yeast safari.

Armed with a jumble of home-made slants and knowledge gleaned from HBD and
the Brewery's excellent technical library, I will plod from door to door
begging scraps of sediment like a tinker calling for pots.

I've recently found an article Ed Basgall posted in HBD #2151, regarding
freezing yeast in a 15% DME solution. I thought this might be a good idea
for me, as I'm kind of clumsy and inexperienced in handling slants. I can't
decide which would be a better method, slants or frozen wort.

The deciding factors will be transportability and long-term storage, as I
don't see myself having a complete brewery setup for a couple of months.
What do you think is a better option?

I'll also be on the lookout for weisen strains. In the HBD archives I've
found reference to Wyeast #3068 as an estery weisen yeast. However, I've
often read that weisen is usually brewed with one strain, filtered, and
bottled with yet another. If this is so, how should I go about capturing
and reproducing a truly genuine weisen? Do they breed in captivity?

Is it possible to order from the Weihenstephan yeast bank, and does anyone
have a contact number?

Thanks in advance.

 -Bill Anderson
Prague, Czech Republic
anderson at ini.cz




Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1998 15:10:30 -0400
From: Jonathan Edwards <jdedward at us.ibm.com>
Subject: Robert Arguellos nettiquette

robert wrote:

"I have been recently spanked for the content of my "sig".
I was informed that I was using poor "nettiquette". HBD'ers who feel
offended by my sig are asked to e-mail me and inform me of their feelings on
the matter. I thought that my "nettiquette" was just fine, but I will bow to
the general consensus."

ah, robert, don't worry about it. i read the post you are reffering to and got
a laugh from it. some people really need to lighten up. i haven't seen this
person complaining about any other "commercial" sigs. of course, he is probably
doing it via email. wouldn't doubt that.

i mean, people here are really uptight about making sure they are the ones who
are right in a debate. whole, years old threads are posted to webpages. people
argue about technical aspects of thermonuclear recirculation dynamics of mash
density when combined with acidity of hydrogen induced ions charged with
neutrons extracted from partially crushed organically grown hybdrids of malt.
whew! get my drift?

guess i might not be the scientifically  oriented brewer, but i make a damn
good beer with my primitive 10 gallon gott coolers and keg boiler. i don't need
to preach about nettiquette, police mailing lists, or get into pissing contests
about whose fermenter is bigger. i like this mailing list but some people
really need to get over it, relax, and have a homebrew. keep your sig file
robert! to hell with the net police! :-)

jonathan


Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1998 16:27:53 -0400
From: Ron Warner <rwarner at annap.infi.net>
Subject: Mead conditioning question

Folks-
    I have a light ginger mead (only 9 lbs honey for 5 gal batch) which
has
been sitting in secondary since 2/14/98.  I want to bottle now for New
Year's consumption.  I want a sparkling beverage.  Wyeast Dry Mead yeast

was used.
    Do I have adequate remaining viable yeast to carbonate the bottles
using 3/4 cup priming sugar?  Should I pitch a conditioning yeast?  If
so, what yeast would you suggest?
TIA!
Ron in Severn (MD)



Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 00:05:50 +0000
From: tmcglinn at nz1.ibm.com
Subject: Putting new wort over an old yeast cake

Following on from the suggestion about a week ago to try putting a new wort
over an earlier yeast cake I did just that. The brewing session was not
well planned as I was suddenly confronted with a spare day due to late
cancellation of other things. I transferred the previous 6 day old wort to
secondary, draining off the remnants of beer, and added the new wort to the
container with the yeast cake in it. Without thinking I stirred the yeast
cake into the new wort, and immediately wondered if this was a mistake. Had
I just mixed a lot of dead yeast into my new wort? Was that a bad thing?
Only 2 hours later the wort is fermenting at high speed, while my previous
experience of rehydrating a few grams of yeast, usually meant enthusiastic
fermentation took 12 or more hours.

I still have several bottles of the same brew recipe I have just made, from
2 previous brews over the last few months, so a comparative tasting will be
done. I'd appreciate advice on stirring the yeast cake however. - Isn't it
funny that no matter how much you read and study, when you actually do it
you find things you hadn't thought about.

Tony McGlinn

Phone: (358) 9-459-4621
Mobile:(358) 40-538-1175
Internet; tmcglinn at nz1.ibm.com




Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1998 20:47:09 -0400 (EDT)
From: Some Guy <pbabcock at oeonline.com>
Subject: Beer label roullette/My praises...

Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager...

Steve once again steps upon the hot coals of human experimentation....

So, let me get this straight, Steve: You'll happily let me and others go
into the store with hard-earned cash to sample some unknown beer, but we
have to tell you what we thought of it to protect you from having to
sample a potentially bad beer?  And you'll not do the same for us? Fooey!
And Ppppppbbbbbbbllllllllttttttt!!! 

Ha! I'll get you! A moratorium on brew-reviews on the Digest. You send 
'em, I'll delete 'em! A-hahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaa. (Huh? What? I 
*CAN'T* do that? Says who? Oh. The Steering Committee. Oh. Ok. I'll just 
say mean things behind his back, then.) 

I hardly think that the brief burst of sales due to a first-offering's
appearance on a shelf will sustain a brewery very long, nor will it
encourage "no style no label and random quality". Yes: more people will
get "screwed" by a bad or mislabelled beer, but if the beer is despicable
to all, it won't survive and we won't be perpetuating the foisting of
blech under the guise of a craft beer. If *you* think it sucks and is
mislabelled, yet it DOES survive, it suggests that you are either wrong
about the beer or PALATES DIFFER. If you expect others to be your guinea
pig, you may need to play with their chromosomes to ensure your palate and
theirs are at least similar. Better yet: have the decency to lend your
palate once in a while by going out on the limb and trying a new brewery. 
Then tell *us* what you thought of them. Like Al says: you can always
bring them back. 

(BTW: I stopped providing reviews a while back. Got tired of being hacked
to hell by those whose opinion on the beer differed - particularly when,
by the zeal of their defense of some beers, it was apparent I got bad
samples. Perhaps, though, it simply relates back to the comment above
regarding the differences in palates. What I find to be excrement, you
might find to be nectar. Rough waters to tread, thanks: I'll take the
bridge.)

Not trying to dance all over your grave or anything with this. I just
think that what's good for the goose is good for the gander (is that
sexist?). If you want others to provide data to preserve your palate and
wallet, you have to be willing to do the same. All for one, and one for 
all and all that rot...

And to the fella commenting on being proudly served a beer he found
inferior: I hope you're never a guest in my house. I'd hate to proudly
serve a night of beer to you, then read about how pedestrian my tastes are 
on the internet. 

- ----------

Thanks to all who have commented regarding my involvement on the 'Gest. I
appreciate your comments (and I do think Eric intended his post as a
joke). Yeah, it takes time. Being "internetless" on occassion now causes
some anxiety where it didn't in the past, while other times I wish I could
just walk away from it.  For the most part, y'all make it easy. For the
rest, it really is a labor of love. Since I don't get the time to
experiment or add to my web pages due to being on the road so much, the
'Gest let's me "give something back"  by helping to get the information to
those that seek it. And I like to think my involvement somehow helps to
preserve this "institution" which the Home Brew Digest has become. 

But I'm not alone. I have a slave. A quiet person who seems happy to let
me be the "face" of the Digest while he works on the brains and the guts
of the it. Never once heard him complain when I've tossed up some
cockamamee idea for the Digest (OK: maybe once.), and has good-naturedly
and skillfully set this Unix wannabe on the straight and narrow more often
than I care to comment on. He has occassionally given balance to my very
aggressive type "A" personallity with notes like: "Do you *really* want to
post that?" He has never once refused to take on the moderation
responsibility when asked - even though he can never pass the mantle of
maintaining the code over to me (though I'm working on that. Really! I
am.) And I'm learning enough about this person that, though we've never
met, I number him amongst my closest friends. You would, too. 

I'd once again like to publicly and LOUDLY thank Karl Lutzen for
partnering with me on the Digest as well as for his constant stewardship
of the home-brewing community. I invite y'all to do the same. He gives a
lot to get so little in return.... 

See ya!

Pat Babcock sampling any old beer in SE Michigan
Personal E-Mail                    pbabcock at oeonline.com 
Home Brew Digest Janitor           janitor@hbd.org
HBD Web Site                       http://hbd.org   
The Home Brew Page                 http://oeonline.com/~pbabcock/brew.html
   "Just a cyber-shadow of his former brewing self..."



Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1998 20:17:16 -0500
From: "Jay Krause" <krause at galis.com>
Subject: Soda cooler

Hi all,

Long time lurker, first time poster.  Thanks for all the great info!

I have a line on a soda display cooler, the type you find at a drug store.
Is this good to use for fermenting, lagering etc.?

TIA

Jay Krause

Check out my Beer Lable of the Week at:
http://www.members.tripod.com/~beerlable






Return to table of contents

---