HOMEBREW Digest #2861 Wed 28 October 1998
![[Prev HBD]](/img/previous.gif)
![[Index]](/img/index_button.gif)
![[Next HBD]](/img/next.gif)
![[Back]](/img/Back.gif)
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: hbd # 2859, 10/26/98 ("Fred M. Scheer")
Re: Brown Malt (Mike Uchima)
re: RIMS - Pump clogging potential/Manifold (John_E_Schnupp)
FWH, hbd 2860, discussion....... ("Fred M. Scheer")
Cleaning dip tubes (Paul Edwards)
re: sanitizing the HERMS setup (RobertJ)
pH papers - my experiment ("Frederick L. Pauly")
Thomas Fawcett & Sons Malt/s (LEAVITDG)
Cereal Mash ("Matthew J. Harper")
Re; Canning wort for starters ("Matthew J. Harper")
IBU calculations ("Czerpak, Pete")
Polarware Thermometers (Brandon Brown)
re: Canning Wort for Starters (Michael A. Owings)
in defense of Hank's (Vachom)
Gott thermometer installation (LaBorde, Ronald)
Wort Stability ("Phil Barker")
HOPS BOPS 98 (nancy george)
One Gallon Oak Barrel (Tim Anderson)
A toast! (Dave Sapsis)
Bottle or Keg it? (Jonathan Nail)
re: HERMS Sanitation (Ronald Babcock)
FWH Experience ("Houseman, David L")
Koelsch Yeast for Fake Lagers (Ken Schwartz)
Re: pH papers (Jeremy Bergsman)
FW: Dusseldorf & altbier (Kim)
Indoor all-grain full boil ("Andrew Avis")
Dispensing Kegged Beer (Thomas S Barnett)
Rusty freezers, clogged pumps and FWH utilization (Paul Shick)
Canning wort for starters ("Steve")
re: Prime Tabs, Freezer Repair (Mark Tumarkin)
Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!
Send your entries in for Hoppiest Event On Earth yet?
Details: http://members.tripod.com/~BrewMiester_2/Home.html
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: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 20:48:41 -0700
From: "Fred M. Scheer" <maltster at marsweb.com>
Subject: Re: hbd # 2859, 10/26/98
Fred M. Scheer wrote:
>
> Date: Fri, 23 Oct 98 22:53:12 PDT
> From: "George De Piro" <gdepiro at fcc.net> WROTE:
> Subject: Munich malt / Brewing all-grain vs. extract
> The maltsters claim that they seek out this barley because
> it yields higher levels of amino acids during malting, which are then
> transformed into melanoidins in the kiln. I have wondered (out loud
> in this forum)if this is really necessary: there should be more than
> enough amino acids present in a barley with 10% protein to yield a plethora of
> melanoidins upon kilning.
>
> George, you're right, it is not necessary to have a high Protein malt
> ( six row or two row) to make a high quality MUNICH Malt.
> A 2 rowed barley with 11 - 11.5% total protein has enough amino
> acids avaialable for the melanoidine reaction.
> I just purchased 25,000 bushels of 2 - row Harrington with total protein
> ranging in 10.7 - 11.5%. I will use that barley also to make MUNICH Malt.
>
> George wrote:Could there be something to the German maltster's
> desire for higher protein barley, or is it just differences in
> the kilning methods? Hmmm...
>
> George, HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM...German Maltster do not desire higher protein
> malt to make specialtys - one of the reasons is that they have Malt
> with higher Protein ( ranging > 11.5%). The lower Protein malt's (10.5 - 10.7)
> is used in the production of Pilsener Malt and others.
> Also, there is a difference in the kilning process. Temperatures and time
> will dictate the outcome of the malt, and sometimes I'm questioning
> (now even loud on this excellent forum)if they don't make malt (specialty
> malt) extra for export purposes; as they do with Export beer preparation???.
>
> George wrote: I say that you can use malt from any country
> you want in any beer you want. This is America, damn it, a great melting
> pot!
>
> George, you said it...............................................
Fred M. Scheer
Malt Montana
Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 23:00:53 -0600
From: Mike Uchima <uchima at pobox.com>
Subject: Re: Brown Malt
Darrell asks:
>
> The next day I added this 4 lb of brown malt to 4lb of Mairs Otter Pale malt,
> along with 1 lb flaked barley, and about 1/3 cup of Black Patent. Protein
> rest (a la Miller), conversion for 2 hours, etc....
> The pH was much more acidic than I'd expected...which led me to believe that
> I may have made the mistake of using a malt that was highly modified....ie
> that I used too much of it.
By "highly modified", I assume you actually meant "dark"... ("Highly
modified" means something else.)
If this is anything like the Brown Malt I've used, using it for 40%
(give or take) of your grist is going to result in a very strong roasted
coffee character. I've never used it for more than about 30%...
> Is this a malt that should be used like crystal, in which case 1 lb or so
> would be the upper limit?
IMO, you can use a lot more than a pound... but 4 pounds might be a
*little* on the high side.
> The mash had a wonderful aroma....
Brown Malt is great... especially in Porters and Stouts.
- --
== Mike Uchima == uchima at pobox.com ==
Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 22:09:26 -0800
From: John_E_Schnupp at amat.com
Subject: re: RIMS - Pump clogging potential/Manifold
Randy asks,
>Also concerning the copper manifold. Seems like the H shaped
>manifold using 1/2" copper pipe and tees is the most popular
>design. My question here is instead of soldering the copper
>together could I just use flare fittings. This could save me some
>money on soldering equipment.
Flair or compression fittings should work fine but would be
on the expensive side. Try this instead, solder your manifold
together and then take it apart by heating the joints to get
the solder to flow again and then pull the connections apart
with a pliers (or other similar device). Then used sandpaper
to smooth the solder until you can force the pieces together
with a good friction fit. If it is for the return manifold
the very slight leak won't be a problem and if it is for the
pickup manifold in the mash a slight leak there won't matter
either.
John Schnupp, N3CNL
Colchester, VT
95 XLH 1200
Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 23:27:43 -0700
From: "Fred M. Scheer" <maltster at marsweb.com>
Subject: FWH, hbd 2860, discussion.......
RE; FWH
While I was brewing in Europe, we made some test's with FWH.
To make a long story short, we observed that with increasing
IBU's ( above 20 ) the Hop Aroma got lost as IBU's increased.
Below 20 IBU, we got more Hop aroma as IBU's decreased.
The UV-spectrophotometric analysis (at 275 nm) where
correlated to the taste panel results, and we had some very
close correlations. The tests where made with German and
Czech hops. We concluded that dry hoping was a better way
of getting a Hop aroma in a beer with more than 20 IBU's;
and as Homebrewers beers (most of the one I taste) have that,
I recommend dry hoping.
By the way, I would like all you Brewers to know that I really
enjoy the postings very much; and I learn a lot. Txs
Fred M. Scheer
Malt Montana
Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 07:09:17 -0500 (EST)
From: Paul Edwards <pedwards at iquest.net>
Subject: Cleaning dip tubes
"dead-eye" renner wrote:
>I've found that while the .22 cal. brush works OK, a much more thorough
>way is to use the .22 bullet itself. Just line up the dip tube *exactly*
>with the barrel of a .22 rifle (I suppose a pistol would work), clamp in
>place and fire off a round. Be sure of what's down range (i.e., no
>240v GFIs, large glass carboys, CO2 tank necks or fruit flies). At 1200
>fps, that little slug will scour out all residual beer sludge! Of
>course, there may be a bit of deposited lead, but it'll be sterile!
My method is similar, but here in Indiana we can buy copper-jacketed
.22's, so lead build-up is not a problem. For those of you forced to use
regular rounds, a tincture of coriander will remove the lead.
- --Paul E.
Thankfully waaay down range of Ann Arbor
Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 07:46:42 -0500
From: RobertJ <pbsys at pbsbeer.com>
Subject: re: sanitizing the HERMS setup
Peter.Perez at smed.com wrote
I have a question for the HERMS users. How do you sanitize the inside of
your copper coil heat exchanger before you start pumping wort thru it?
PBS HERMS does not have to be sanitized. The coil is submerged in water
that is reaching from 170 to 185F which, I believe, would be pastuerizing
temp. range. In addition, the wort will be boiled after going through the
coil.
We recomend the coil be back flashed after use with clean water and allowed
to dry.
Should you still be concerned you could, 1. boil water in the HLT, 2. run
B-Brite (to clean) and iodophor through it
Bob
Precision Brewing Systems URL http://www.pbsbeer.com
Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 08:03:48 -0500
From: "Frederick L. Pauly" <flp2m at avery.med.virginia.edu>
Subject: pH papers - my experiment
Just my 2 cents worth on the pH paper thread.
I tried many types of papers and also a few cheap ($100) meters
and could not get comparable readings from any off them.
My experiment with papers was to buy some pH 5.0 buffer and test
all the strips I had. The only paper that gave me an accurate
reading was the Phil Frank papers by Fil-Chem.
Now this is only one experiment but it was good enough for me.
You can find them at Fil-Chem at juno.com and I think there might be
some info about them on the web.
Rick Pauly
Charlottesville,Va
Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 08:31:42 -0500 (EST)
From: LEAVITDG at SPLAVA.CC.PLATTSBURGH.EDU
Subject: Thomas Fawcett & Sons Malt/s
Date sent: 27-OCT-1998 08:19:50
I recently posted regarding a brown malt (British, I believe) and
THOMASM at aol.com advised me NOT to perform a protein rest in that I may
inadvertently break down medium length proteins. Thankyou Tom.
Now, how does one understand the "INdex of Modification" that Fawcett
publishes? ie, what is low and what is high?
For ex,
Malt index of modification also elsewhere
Maris Otter 38-42 38.5
Halcyon 38-42 39.5
Pipkin 38-42 40.0
Lager 38-42
Wheat 32-35 35.0
Oat 30-33
My question has to do with how to know what is and what is not modified...
to what extent...?
Is it the case that if there is NO number for the index of modification,
then it is NOT modified, and therefore could use the protein rest?
...Darrell
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ _/
_/Darrell Leavitt _/
_/INternet: leavitdg at splava.cc.plattsburgh.edu _/
_/AMpr.net: n2ixl at amgate.net.plattsburgh.edu _/
_/AX25 : n2ixl at kd2aj.#nny.ny.usa _/
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 08:41:04 -0500
From: "Matthew J. Harper" <matth at progress.com>
Subject: Cereal Mash
In today's Digest Jeff Renner (A little less than 1/2 a country away)
discusses
using a cereal mash on coarse corn meal for hiS CAP. The procedure he
describes
*sounds* like a decoction to me. Am I missing something, or is it just
another name since it's not (so much...) malt that gets boiled?
-Matth
Matthew J. Harper
Principal Software Engineer
Progress Software Corp.
Nashua, New Hampshire
matth at progress.com
Sometimes you're the windshield - Sometimes you're the bug
Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 08:46:06 -0500
From: "Matthew J. Harper" <matth at progress.com>
Subject: Re; Canning wort for starters
Here comes the botulism thread again!!!!!!!!!! <grin>
Andrew Lynch asks if it is OK to pre-can wort for use in making
starters...
Andrew, sure its OK. TO do it By The Book you should use a pressure
canner due to the acidity levels of the wort being canned and potential
for botulism type ickies in the resulting product. However, many people,
myself included, use the more traditional preserve method with longer
than typical boils. I also only make small batches of canned wort up at
a time to minimize my exposure to The Big B. Still others I know keep
wort in well sanitized jars in the fridge, making a couple each batch.
Then they use the dreggs from the last batch as the starter base in
the next batch.
It does make creating and stepping up starters a snap though! 5 minute
turn around time, can't beat that!
-Matth
Matthew J. Harper
Principal Software Engineer
Progress Software Corp.
Nashua, New Hampshire
matth at progress.com
Sometimes you're the windshield - Sometimes you're the bug
Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 08:55:18 -0500
From: "Czerpak, Pete" <Pete.Czerpak at siigroup.com>
Subject: IBU calculations
When using the various software packages for recipe formulation, usually
there is a choice for hops calculation method. I was wondering the
inherent differences between the methods (Tinseth and Rager) and why
they yield vastly different number in terms of IBUs. For my recipe,
they yielded values of about 25 and 48 or so.
When books are written about styles, is there a given standard method
that is used?? For example in Daniels book or Papazians??
Thanks,
Pete Czerpak
pete.czerpak at siigroup.com
Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 07:04:09 -0800 (PST)
From: Brandon Brown <brandonbrown at yahoo.com>
Subject: Polarware Thermometers
I recently bought a Polarware 40qt mashtun/lautertun combo with a
false bottom and temp gauge. After my first three beers had some
problems, I checked out all of my equipment and determined that the
gauge was off by at least 9 degrees (F). I bought three digital
thermometers (for different stages of the all-grain process) and
returned the Polarware to the store and got a new one.
The new gauge actually will read past boiling, but the gauge is again
off, and almost to the same amount the first one was. Is there some
adjustment for the gauge I need to make? I don't see a screw for
adjusting it anywhere on the gauge. Has anyone had similar luck with
these gauges? I'm in Chicago so the maximum correction value for
altitude would be 1 degree, but these tempatures I'm measuring are all
for the mashing, not for boiling.
Any ideas?
Brandon
==
Brandon Brown (773)251-5353
Director of Development Fax:(773)442-0131
Protech Solutions Inc. bbrown at protechinc.net
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free at yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 15:20:56 GMT
From: mikey at swampgas.com (Michael A. Owings)
Subject: re: Canning Wort for Starters
> ... I fill the fermenters, and boiling bath can it in quart jars.
Bet you'll get a lot of responses to this one. Basically there are two
camps on canning wort:
One side claims that boiling water bath canning of wort poses a small
but deadly risk of botulism -- thus you should always pressure can.
The other side claims that while a boiling water bath may not kill
botulism spores (which it won't) wort is a sufficiently hostile medium
to discourage spores from "hatching" (or whatever the correct term
is).
Try searching the archives at http://www.hbd.org. You should find
plenty of arguments on both sides, as this issue pops up from time to
time on the hbd.
Personally, I pressure can wort.
***********************
Lord grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change.
The courage to change the things I can. *** And the wisdom to
hide the bodies of the people I had to kill because they pissed
me off ***
Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 09:23:17 -0600
From: Vachom <MVachow at newman.k12.la.us>
Subject: in defense of Hank's
In #2860 Hans lights up Henry Weinhard's (insert color here) and amber
ale in general as a cross-over beer for the masses. Well, I agree.
Lots of micros make the ubiquitous flagship "golden" and "amber" as a
way to tap into the massive light lager market; it's pretty much an
economic necessity. But, I have to stick up for Hank's in this respect:
Stroh's, the people who brew Hank's, saw a market niche and capitalized
on it. Hans recalls shelling out $3.50 for a 12 of Hank's some years
ago while attending college in California. Let us picture the young
college student and pals standing before the beer case: Bud, MGD,
Coors--$3.00 a six; Deschutes, Anchor, Redhook, Oregon Brewing--$7.00 a
six; and then, Henry Weinhard's, on sale for $3.50 a 12!-- probably goes
for about the same a six back in Portland, but the brewery's trying to
gain a share in the California "designer" beer market by flooding it
with a bargain basement priced product. Of course, they go for the
Hank's! This is the key to the Weinhard brand success. The clever
marketers at Stroh's recognized that micros were (still are) WAY
overpriced, and that there was a huge customer base out
there--particularly in the micro-swamped Northwest-- who would be
willing to buy a product of lesser quality than the best micros (and
that there were a bunch of overpriced micros out there that weren't much
better than Hank's) but more flavorful than the increasingly less
flavorful trend of draft/ice/dry beer. I suspect they also realized
that the advent of micro breweries has created a new kind of
consumer--the person whose beer choice depends on the occasion. This
more discerning consumer ponies up for the Deschutes or the Catamount
for himself and for special occasions, but when it's a picnic for 20, he
loads the coolers full of Henry Weinhard--palatable to himself but not
going to freak out his Bud-swillin' friends, and, most importantly, not
going to send him to the poor house.
Mike
New Orleans, LA
Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 09:26:20 -0600
From: rlabor at lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald)
Subject: Gott thermometer installation
>>>
From: Peter.Perez at smed.com
Has anyone installed a dial thermometer on their Gott mash tun? Where did
ya get the therm from and how did you install it?
Thanks,
Pete
<<<
Yes, and it took me a while to get it all together. I posted it to the HBD
earlier, you must have missed it. Anyone has a good chance to find an
answer to a common question if they try a search of the HBD archives first.
Here is the post:
I got it all together and it works well. Purchased two 1/2 inch NPT female
to 1/4 inch NPT female brass fittings, and one 1/4 inch male nipple.
Drilled a hole through the Igloo side to accept the small diameter of the
1/4 inch female end of the fittings, used a rubber hose washer on the
inside fitting, and teflon tape on the male threaded nipple. The pieces
all fit together nice, and I snug it all up with wrenches (gently here,
don't want to crush the Igloo). The Ashcroft thermometer with 1/2 inch NPT
threads, just screws onto the outside fitting.
Ron
Ronald La Borde - Metairie, Louisiana - rlabor at lsumc.edu
Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 09:39:20 -0600
From: "Phil Barker" <pbarker at earthlink.net>
Subject: Wort Stability
A couple of whole grain batches ago I collected two quart jars of cooled
wort for later use in yeast starters.
My question is: does the wort degrade over time?
It has been stored in two sterile mason jars at 40 degrees F.
Thanks, Phil
Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 10:57:46 -0500
From: nancy george <homsweet at voicenet.com>
Subject: HOPS BOPS 98
The Homebrewers of Philadelphia and Suburbs would like to invite you to
enter and/or judge the HOPS BOPS 1998. By having a relatively freeform
competition, we are in no way throwing stones at the formal judging process,
style guidelines or all the dedication, knowledge and hard work that judges
do to further the craft of brewing. We just want to have fun.
HOPS BOPS 1998--Homebrewers of Philadelphia and Suburbs/Best of Philadelphia
and Suburbs Homebrew Competition November 15, 1998 at Red Bell Brewing
Company, 31st & Jefferson Sts. Philadelphia PA.
Tired of the "Style Nazis" goose stepping across your score sheets? Do you
feel that the need to pigeonhole beer into a predetermined parameter stifles
the creativity of your brewing process? Have you brewed a beautiful Dry
Stout that you dry hopped, have all your friends say, "This is the best beer
you ever brewed-- it's a winner!" -only to be shot down by the judges
because it's "not appropriate to style"? If you've noticed you either have
to choose between brewing to compete or brewing to be creative and all of
this has turned you off from entering homebrew competitions, then this
year's HOPS BOPS Homebrew Competition is for YOU! So send in your Wheat
IPA's, your Rye Pilsners, your dry
hopped Octoberfests. We promise the criteria for this competition will be-
Is it clean?, Is it good?, Is it well balanced?--Beer style be damned! The
only caveat is- if your beer does resemble a classic style, please explain
in a few words why your beer is not that style. (Example: It's a dry stout,
but I dry hopped it.). (Classic styles are still welcome, within the
criteria.)(Or if it is a classic style, please tell us.) So the gloves are
off, restrictions are off- and may the best beer win!
Entry Categories are divided by ale or lager, other or none of the above
(wheat yeasts for example), cider & mead. The subcategories of ale and lager
are light, amber, dark or strong (above 1055 O.G.).
1. Each entry will be made with two (2) brown or green bottles, 12 to 16
ounces, free of labels, with plain or blackened crown caps. No raised
lettering/symbols on the bottles, no porcelain caps. Entries are $5 for the
first entry, $3 for additional entries. There is a $5 surcharge at the
discretion of the organizer for late entries. Checks should be made payable
to 'HOPS'.
2. All entries must be received by November 11,1998. Ship/drop off entries
at Home Sweet Homebrew, 2008 Sansom St. Phila. PA 19103. (Anyone else who
wishes to act as a drop off may do so, provided entries are delivered to the
above address by the cut off date.)
3. For returned score sheets, entry must include SASE. All other score
sheets may be picked up at Home Sweet Homebrew after the competition.
4. Competition open to all homebrewers. Beers produced in a commercial
establishment will not be accepted.
5. Each brewer is limited to one entry per subcategory.
6. All entries become the property of HOPS.
7. Prizes not awarded at the competition may be picked up at Home Sweet
Homebrew, or by other arrangements. Any added expense of shipping the prizes
is the responsibility of the contest winner.
HOPS BOPS will also be holding a benefit raffle in memory of Mark Johnston,
a local National BJCP judge. Mark was tragically killed in an automobile
accident last summer. We will be donating the proceeds from the raffle
tickets to his wife and family in his memory. For all those who had the
opportunity to know Mark or to judge with him, his loss leaves a void
amongst our community of homebrewers. His wry wit, good humor and
exurburance for the hobby always made
him a welcome addition to any competition. Raffle tickets may also be
purchased by mail or phone for those wishing to help get his family through
this horrible loss.
For further information or to register as a judge, please call Home Sweet
Homebrew at 215-569-9469, or e-mail homsweet at voicenet.com. Also, info can be
accessed at the HOPS
website:http://www.netaxs.com/~shady/hops/archives/events/199811.html
Nancy & George
HomeSweet Homebrew
2008 Sansom St. Phila PA 19103 USA
215-569-9469 215-569-4633 (fax)
homsweet at voicenet.com
Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 07:55:24 -0800 (PST)
From: Tim Anderson <timator at yahoo.com>
Subject: One Gallon Oak Barrel
I've gotten some email enquiries since I mentioned my one gallon oak
barrel in an earlier post on a different subject. In case others are
interested:
My wife got the barrel for me for Christmas last year (damn I love
that woman!). She bought it at a local homebrew and winemaking shop.
It is the cutest thing. Made exactly like a big barrel (big thick
staves and heavy duty metal bands) but on a small scale. It's made
with American oak. So far, the oakiness is pretty intense, and in a
one gallon vessel, the surface-area-to-volume ratio is pretty high, so
I just use it for a few days to a week at a time. What I do is put
one gallon of a five gallon batch in the barrel for the secondary
ferment, with an airlock in place of the bung, or let it condition
with the bung in before kegging. Even with just one fifth of the
batch on oak for a few days, the oak character is profound.
We were gone for an extended period this year, and I filled it up with
cheap white rum, which sat for about three months. What came out was
amber colored and almost painfully oaky. I like it, my wife doesn't.
Most of the time it sits with a sanitizing solution in it. If you get
a new one, be sure to follow all the conditioning steps. At first it
isn't even water-tight!
By the way, the shop where she got it is F. H. Stenbart:
http://www.pcez.com/~fh_stein/
in Portland OR. They carry a variety of sizes, up to some pretty big
honkers. But I would guess with shipping, something local would make
better sense.
==
Please ignore the advertisement below. Thank you.
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free at yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 08:02:54 -0800
From: Dave Sapsis <DAVE_SAPSIS at fire.ca.gov>
Subject: A toast!
Well, I was derided by an American Maltster for suggresting to use
continental malts in continental style beers. (Fred, send me some malt,
;-)). And George dP is absolutely right (saying he likes to use some
German Munich in English Ales) . My bad. Use what gets you there. I
have no doubt that there are some real good things out there I have not
seen. And I meant not to stifle creativity. To clarify my point: malt
is a primary ingredient, thus constitutes a first order factor in the
end product. If you are having trouble honing in on the flavors you are
looking for, look at the first order factors before worrying about
lesser, albeit interesting, things affecting beer flavor. Specifically,
pay attention to the type, characteristics, and condition of the base
malts.
AlK also points out some confusion regarding my ascription of the word
"toasty" to describe the influence of good Munich malt. He prefers
"melanoidin". The problem is that the aromas and flavors in munich to
which I speak are from melanoidins, but quite different than other
melanoidin flavors/aromas (e.g, caramel, roasty, etc.). While I fully
agree that toasty is not a perfect word, I do think it captures some of
the essence of the aromas and flavors found in fests, bocks, and to a
lesser extent, alts. Toasty, as in the aromas that come off a toaster
as you heat bread. Certainly not the *same* but rather deeper,
richer, with a note of sweetness to them. And Al is abolutely right,
compare a colored beer like Becks dark to something made with a high
proportion of Munich, and these characters will be very easily
perceived. And if anybody comes up with a better descriptor, pass it
on.
peace.
- --dave, sacramento
Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 09:31:33 -0800
From: Jonathan Nail <jnail at dvdexpress.com>
Subject: Bottle or Keg it?
Greetings!
Watching and waiting for that right moment when I should move my Spiced
Maple Porter from secondary to its final home before consumption... but not
sure which storage medium would be best. This is definitely a beer to be
enjoyed around the holidays, rather robust and a little high in alcohol, and
(hopefully) nicely spiced. I was thinking of bottling this one and letting
it condition naturally, but then again I would love to keg it, force carb it
and then bottle it and let it rest a bit more. This will give me the bottles
I want (so I can share as gifts) but also a sediment free bottle, which is
what I really want. But I am not certain what is the best way for the flavor
of the beer.
I guess I could keg it with priming sugar (real maple syrup), let it
condition for a month or so and then draw off a bit to rid it of settled
yeast and then counterpressure bottle. Or alternately I could buy a three
gallon corny, keg three gallons and bottle the rest for natural conditioning
and compare... but man... that is a little more expense than I was hoping
for...
Has anyone experienced the difference of force carbonating a strong ale,
then bottling and letting it rest that way as compared to conditioning in
the bottle with the lees for a long period of time? How do those who make
the Barleywines and other heavy strong beers, or specialty ales that benefit
from "laying down" do it? Do they condition naturally with the yeast present
in the bottles or keg it and then transfer to bottle?
Private responses welcomed. Thanks!
Jonathan
Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 11:45:34 -0700
From: Ronald Babcock <rbabcock at rmii.com>
Subject: re: HERMS Sanitation
Pete asked how does one go about sanitizing the inside of the heat exchange
coil.
When I get finished with the previous brew session I make a 2 gallon batch
of Five Star - PBW to clean out the residual wort by recirculating and
holding the temperature at 130 deg. At the beginning of brew day I sanitize
the inside of the coil with Five Star - Star San by circulating it for
about 5 min. I follow that by a rinse of water to purge the coil of any
residual Star San. This produce would not typically be rinsed but the coil
does not drain well. The Five Star products is what I prefer to use but any
comparable product should work fine.
- -----------------
On another note I just modified my system to include a PID controller and
did the preliminary test this past weekend and was thrilled with the
stability of the temperature in the MLT. After calibration it maintained
the mash temperature +/- .2 deg for over a period of an hour with a big
grain bill (28#). I'm sure that amount of grain helped dampen the
fluctuation of temperature. I did not test out the ramp function on the
controller, but when I set the temperature at the next rest the temperature
increase was better than about 2.5 deg a min. I am wandering how well the
3-way valve will hold up under the consistent opening and closing of the
valve to circulate thru and to bypass the heat exchanger. I guess time will
tell. The next test batch will be a smaller grain bill at about 16# and
will have to see if it does as well. Maybe I can figure how to set up the
ramp function so I can control how long it takes to reach the next rest.
Once I get more data and a suitable enclosure for the electronics I will
put the info and pictures up on my web site.
Cheers, Ron
Ronald Babcock - rbabcock at rmii.com - Denver, CO
Home of the Backyard Brewery at http://shell.rmi.net/~rbabcock/
Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 14:09:59 -0500
From: "Houseman, David L" <David.Houseman at unisys.com>
Subject: FWH Experience
Jeremy and Al have commented on FWHing. To add fuel to the fire, I'll
relate that my exprience with FWH has been a great improvement in my
all-grain German beer styles where hop flavor and aroma should be either
not present or at very low levels. I've simply put the bittering hops
in the kettle during the runoff. I typically don't try to get a leg up
on boiling until I've at least nearly completed the runoff and
determined the volume and OG of my wort which then get's adjusted with
water as necessary to compensate for a 1.5 hour boil. I've found that
there is a very slight hop flavor and aroma that adds a subtle
complexity to Dunkels, Bocks, etc. without it being as assertive as it
would if I'd done flavor/aroma additions for other styles. Bitterness
seems to work out correctly for the styles, although I will calculate
IBUs for the high end of the range for the style so I end up within the
range. While I haven't read the German texts and have no facts to back
up my assumptions or experiences, other than the beers do very well in
competitions, I do find the simple matter of adding all the bittering
hops to the kettle and letting the wort run in then boil gives an
accurate and pleasing complexity to certain styles of beer. Besides,
it's easy.
Dave Houseman
Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 12:24:45 -0700
From: Ken Schwartz <kenbob at elp.rr.com>
Subject: Koelsch Yeast for Fake Lagers
Randy Ricchi writes:
"I was wondering if anyone has used it to brew lager-style beers such as
pilsner, Octoberfest, Bock, etc., and if so, did you feel the yeast made
a
good pseudo-lager?"
I just did my annual Oktoberale using White Labs' version of this
yeast. I entered it in our club's Oktoberfest comp and one of five
judges noted some slight fruitiness. I have to admit it seemed to throw
a bit of fruit at first but it's subtle and it seems to have subdued
since then. It is otherwise pretty clean and malty so I'd say it was at
least somewhat successful at making a fake lager. I fermented at 65F;
White Labs indicates this yeast craps out quickly below 62F so I didn't
want to push it.
Truth be told, I had much better luck (as for neutral flavor) with
Danstar Nottingham dry yeast in a Bohemian Pilsner last spring,
fermented at 60F. Scored around 42 in each of two separate tastings,
with the judges not knowing it was made with ale yeast. I've also used
Wyeast Eurpoean Ale (#1338?) in an OFest with pretty decent results.
I'll probably try one of these two next time.
See the article at the Brewing Techniques website for more on this:
http://brewingtechniques.com/library/styles/1_2style.html
- --
*****
Ken Schwartz
El Paso, TX
kenbob at elp.rr.com
http://home.elp.rr.com/brewbeer
Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 11:45:17 -0800
From: Jeremy Bergsman <jeremybb at leland.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: pH papers
"Bayer, Mark A (Boeing)" <BayerMA at navair.navy.mil> asks
> what would be helpful is if you have the calibration data, jeremy. then we
> would all know how much and in which direction our ph papers suck.
Well, that was several years ago and I don't know which papers I tested. I
have just made up fresh .1M succinate buffer, which my just-calibrated Orion
710a pH meter with its combination probe says is pH 5.296 (significant
figures joke). I have two of those multipaper strips here in the lab. When
I dip them in the first thing I note is that none of the tabs looks exactly
like the colors on the box. In each case, however, you can see that 2 of
the 3 tabs are irrelevant as they are for determining other pH ranges.
Unfortunately the one we are interested in in each case is supposed to be a
brownish orange at pH 5.3 so any beer color is going to add to the
difficulty in determining the true color.
Anyway, I don't know if this is what the homebrew stores are selling, but I
have here Sigma P4536 designed for pH 4.5-10, and colorphast 9588 for pH
5-10. IMO even with three overlapping papers these are too wide ranging for
our purposes. The tab of interest changes from orange to red from 4.5 to 7
for the sigma, and from orange to purple over 5.0 to 8 for the colorphast.
Now let's try to read these papers. Both of these are better than I
remember for the ones I tested several years back, but still do not clearly
indicate the pH. In each case you would probably assign the pH between the
example given for 5.0 and that for 5.5, but I would guess much closer to
5.0, probably 5.1 for each. So these are off by .1 to .2 if wort color does
not throw you off. The ones I suggest are not only easier to read with a
clear solution, but also less subject to wort color trickery. Also they're
much cheaper! I will retract the descriptor "suck," at least as far as
these two are concerned.
***************************************************
fridge at kalamazoo.net writes:
> After reading my receptacle tester post this morning I
> thought I sounded like I was picking on Jeremy. That
> wasn't my intent, and I'm sorry if it sounded that way. I
> used Jeremy's name to identify the source of information I
> was referring to in my post.
No sweat. I almost posted a "thank you" for picking up my dropped
ball. You were absolutely right of course.
- --
Jeremy Bergsman
jeremybb at stanford.edu
http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~jeremybb
Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 14:02:55 -0600
From: Kim <kim at nconnect.net>
Subject: FW: Dusseldorf & altbier
Will be in Germany the middle of November and am wondering if anyone has
suggestions on where to stay while in Dusseldorf, Berlin, Dresden, Leipzig
and Munich?
thanx.
Kim
Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 12:02:17 -0500
From: "Andrew Avis" <Andrew.Avis.aavis at nt.com>
Subject: Indoor all-grain full boil
Greenman has an electric stove and would like to get into all-grain brewing.
I brewed for 1.5 years on a gas and then electric stove top by splitting
boils between two 16 qt SS pots ($20 each at most department stores). It
means some juggling, and it takes forever (especially on the electric) to
bring ~3 gals per pot to a boil, but it works and is probably safer than
propane cookers in the basement. You may want to protect the stove top with
some flashing or foil, as the heat is more intense than with regular
cooking.
Best of luck,
Drew in Calgary
Andrew Avis
Technical Writer, Nortel Terminals Documentation
ESN 775-7393
Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 14:47:19 -0600 (CST)
From: Thomas S Barnett <barnets at mail.auburn.edu>
Subject: Dispensing Kegged Beer
Hello all,
I have recently purchased the necessary equipment for kegging
my beer using the 5 gallon Cornelius Kegs. I drilled a 1 in. diameter hole
in my fridge and attached a faucet/tap for dispencing the beer. Does
anyone have information on 'balancing' the system? That is, i'd like
some way to determine how long the tube from the CO2 tank to the faucet
must be in order to dispence a beer with a good head. My current system
uses a 6 foot tube, which works well for some beers and not so well for
others. I've been told that the beer at the faucet should be exiting at
about 1-2 psi for proper head formation and that there's a 3 psi drop per
foot of tubing as the beer travels from the keg to the faucet. Of course,
the guy who told me this served me what i considered to be a pretty flat
beer directly from his system. Hence, i have reason to question what
he's told me. Is the information he's provided correct? Any other
suggestions? Thanks. Tom Barnett.
Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 16:16:23 -0500 (EST)
From: Paul Shick <SHICK at JCVAXA.jcu.edu>
Subject: Rusty freezers, clogged pumps and FWH utilization
Hello all,
Robert Arguello asks in HBD 2860 about rust problems in his
chest freezer. Getting rid of the rust might be as aesy as spraying
some Rustoleum paint on it, if it's not too bad. Preventing it is even
easier. Some months back, Al K, among others, suggested using a dessicant
in chest freezers that are kept above freezing temperatures. I kept
forgetting to try this until about two months ago, and I can't believe
what a difference it makes. The moisture and "moldy" odors are completely
gone. It cost about $7 for a canvas bag of dessicant that you can dry out
in the oven every few weeks. A great deal.
Randy Pressley asks about grain clogging up the pump in his new
RIMS setup, and whether or not to build a filter. I've wondered about this
question myself, especially since folks have recently suggested using SS "lint
trap" scrubbies around the pickup (under a false bottom) in converted keg mash
tuns. I think that this is more worrying than you need to do, in general.
Most pump users have a valve at the exit of the pump (probably a gate or ball
vavle) that they use to regulate the flow. During the first few minutes of
recirculation, I find that I have to clear this valve pretty frequently, using
just a quick twist to open it and reset it. This give any trapped grain a
chance to flow back into the tun, without raising the flow rate long enough
to cause any problems with compaction of the grain bed. After a few minutes,
the grain bed has established itself, and there's no longer a need to worry.
Unless there's a massive failure of the false bottom, it's pretty much
impossible to get enough grain through to hurt the pump. (Don't ask about
how I know about failing FBs, please.)
On the other hand, I'm kind of leery of the scrubby around the pickup
idea, especially if you're using a jet burner under the mash tun. I can
picture grain clogging up the scrubby badly enough to restrict the flow, and
having a lot of scorching going on as a result. Has anyone tried this with a
jet burner? Any problems so far?
Finally, lots of folks have asked recently about utilization rates
for hops used in FWHing. Some people have been using about the same rate
that they get for a 20 minute boil, others the same as a 60 minute boil. In
their "Analysis of Brewing Techniques" book, the Fixes measured a HIGHER
utilization for FWH than for a 60 minute boil. My own tasting has me tending
toward the lower end of the utilization scale, but I don't have any hard
measurements to point to. This sounds like a job for Louis Bonham and the
BT Experimentation Team! Louis, do you have any plans for experiments along
these lines?
Paul Shick
Basement brewing in Cleveland Hts OH
Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 18:50:42 -0500
From: "Steve" <stjones1 at worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Canning wort for starters
Andrew writes about canning wort to make starters.
I started doing this about a year ago, and asked for
opinions here on the digest.
The most common response I had was the fact that I used a
quart starter, but only about 50 ml to start with. After a
day or so, I'd step it up to 250, then the full quart. The
time lag may have allowed the remaining starter to become
contaminated.
Although I never noticed any problem before, I decided to
can wort in quart jars and half pint jars. I use the half
pints to start my slants, then step up to the quart jars so
I don't have any open jars setting in the fridge for a day
or two. Actually, I usually brew 2 8 gallon batches on brew
day, so I make two starters from one half pint, then step up
each one with a pint (half of a quart in each), then step up
again with another quart each. So, I can 3 quarts for every
half pint. As always, YMMV.
Hoppy Brewing,
Steve
State of Franklin Homebrewers
about 625 miles south of Jeff in Johnson City, Tennessee
http://home.att.net/~stjones1
Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 19:05:57 -0500
From: Mark Tumarkin <mark_t at ix.netcom.com>
Subject: re: Prime Tabs, Freezer Repair
Tim Martin asks:
Will someone please direct me to a mail order source for "prime tabs".
These were mentioned four or five months ago but nobody mentioned where
to
get them. They sound perfect for my occasional split keg/bottle
situation.
Page 12 of the Sept/Oct Brewing Techniques has an ad from Venezia &
Company, apparently the makers of PrimeTab. Their
phone number is 206-782-1152. Standard disclaimers apply - and then
some. I'm not even a satisfied customer, never having
tried the product, just saw the ad.
*************************************
Robert Arquello asks:
After only a couple years of service as a fermenting cooler, my
relatively
new chest freezer is rusting. The rust is eating at the interior walls
and
floor of the unit, especially at seam areas. There is a LOT of moisture
present in the freezer at all times so I suppose that I shouldn't be too
surprised at this development.
Can someone suggest a treatment? I suspect that it will involve some
sanding
of the rusted areas then a coat of some sort of paint? Suggestions as
to
what I should use to cover the interior surfaces would be greatly
appreciated.
A long time ago I had to repair the rusted out floor of an old VW bug,
hardware cloth and fiberglass did the trick in that case.
I'd suggest you try fiberglass resin after removing the rust either by
sanding or chemical rust remover. Doesn't sound like it's
rusted through so you probably shouldn't need any fiberglass cloth,
certainly you won't need the hardware cloth. : )
Mark Tumarkin
Gainesville, FL
"I'm glad my bottle opener is Y2K compatible." - Bradley Dilger
Return to table of contents
HTML-ized on 10/28/98, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96