HOMEBREW Digest #2873 Thu 12 November 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

  Checking on the server... (Homebrew Digest)
  pronunciation (Jim Liddil)
  Home malting ("Keith Menefy")
  Pronunciation:  Pale Ale (Ian Lyons)
  pronunciation (pbabcock)
  Damp Rid (fridge)
  Newbi question ("Jan Brown southern U.S.A.")
  Re: Wheat and Munich Malts (Jeff Renner)
  Airlocks (Tom Clark)
  Clear Beer ("Stuart Baunoch")
  Carbonating Stone & Fermometer ("Marc Battreall")
  Wyeast phasing out small yeast packs? (Charles Epp)
  RE:  Damp Rid usage ("Kensler, Paul")
  Dessicant, "Poor man's RIMS" (Paul Shick)
  Re: Wheat and Munich Malts (Markus Berndt)
  RE:  repitching ("Spies, Jay")
  Re: Yeast washing when repitching (Tim Anderson)
  The word on wort, ("David R. Burley")
  beer transfer (Mason Harris)
  Double Diamond (Danny Breidenbach)
  RE: Clear Wort? (LaBorde, Ronald)
  steam heating (Mason Harris)
  Rotten Egg Porter (Ed Lentz)
  Confused about cara, dextrin, crystal, and carmel malts (Dave Humes)
  etymology (Vachom)
  RE: Yeast washing when repitching (#2872) (Steve Wood)
  I now pronounce... (pbabcock)
  RE: how do you say wort? (John Wilkinson)
  Filter recycling? (Tony Owens)
  ? mashing proc. of extract manufacture ("Frederick L. Pauly")
  another newbie question ("Jan Brown southern U.S.A.")

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: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 20:35:41 -0500 (EST) From: Homebrew Digest <hbd at brew.oeonline.com> Subject: Checking on the server... Beerlings: PLEASE! When checking on the server, either point your browser at hbd.org, or sent the word "status" to request@hbd.org. DO NOT SEND TEST MESSAGES!!! There are ISPs/Companies that do not recognize brew.oeonline.com as a bonifide domain (though it is), and WE CANNOT REACH YOU with your acknowledgement or any other mail (one of these is best.com, hint, hint). When you send a test message to see if the server is up from one of these domains, the test message becomes a queued and publishable message - you cannot cancel it as you never receive the server response. For those ISPs, the only choice is to check via the web (the status response won't reach you, either). If you don't have web access, and a status request to the request address pulls up no response, or if the web page is down, it's safe to assume the server is down - they run on the same box. If the server goes down, it is generally back up within 24 hours (72 hours if the failure occurs Friday night.) Even if you've been posting from an address and regularly receive acknowledgements, do not send a test message. There are myriad things that can occur between the server and your mailbox that would prevent you from being able to cancel it. Use the webpage and/or the status to request@hbd.org, please! That said, high winds in Michigan Tuesday night and Wednesday morning resulted in widespread loss of power. The hbd server and its host were caught in this blackout. All is well now, and delivery should resume with this issue. Thank you! Cheers! The Home Brew Digest Janitorial Staff Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 1998 22:21:25 +0000 From: Jim Liddil <jliddil at azcc.arizona.edu> Subject: pronunciation so how do you pronounce Clinitest? Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 14:53:32 +1300 From: "Keith Menefy" <kmenefy at ihug.co.nz> Subject: Home malting G'day I have been home malting for a couple of years now, (only over the last couple of months getting it roughly right) getting most of the information needed from the Internet. However, some of this information is inaccurate, misleading or just plain wrong. So I thought I would add to this with a collection of my inaccurate or misleading thoughts on the subject. Buying grain Obviously the best grain is your choice of malting barley. Go into a grain store and ask for Maris Otter malting barley and the attendant says 'Yes sir, how many kilograms?'....Wow! did you see that? ...a pig just flew past the window. I can only get feed barley. I have twice put in an order for malting barley at two different stores and got shafted both times with a more expensive feed barley. Are there any local (New Zealand) growers of malting barley reading this? Please contact me. Steeping Okay. You've got your barley, what next? " Well, you need to soak it in water. You want the water content of the barley to get up to about 45%. This means that if you're malting 10 pounds of barley, you want it to weigh just over 14 pounds when you're done. The soaking process will take you a minimum of 40 hours, or at least two days. Historically, quality malts were soaked 65-72 hours [1]. During this time you need to change the water at least daily, and preferably every 8 to 12 hours. You could also devise system whereby the water is constantly but slowly drained while being replenished by some type of slow sprayer. Nineteenth century maltsters changed the water every 24 hours, but current practice is to sprinkle fresh water over the grain constantly---which also allows the soaking time to be reduced to the 40-45 hour range." by Mark Stevens (stevens at stsci.edu), taken from Homebrew Digest #1571 Following the above regime (it gives the impression of a continuous soaking) drowns the barley giving an abysmal and erratic germination percentage. I give the barley progressively shorter soaks changing the water each time. First soak for four to six hours, drain but leave the grain wet, for a couple of hours. Each successive soak is shorter. After the initial soak I go to two hours, down to five minutes at the first sign of germination. Using this method I get close on one hundred percent germination and 'synchronised germination', it's beautiful, --a future Olympic games sport?? It then goes into the germination box when the first signs of root growth shows. I use a two metre by half metre box, holds about twenty five kilograms at a two inch depth. A deeper depth seems to generate too much heat and gives uneven growth. (The box also needs to be kept covered so that it keeps the cat out of it) It needs to be checked and turned every day to stop the roots matting together. It really seems to resent this turning because if you miss some and leave unturned it grows a lot faster than the turned grain. The unturned grain will have a green shoot when the rest of it is at the right stage for drying. So be thorough in doing the job. You want to look for the new growth stemming out from the end of the kernels (the roots end) and up the back of the grain, that is the opposite side to the crease. This growth is called the "acrospire" and is underneath the sheath of the grain. When the acrospire is roughly the same length as the kernel, the malt is fully modified. If you let it grow longer than the kernel size, the malt is said to be "over modified". If it is shorter than the kernel size, the malt is "under modified". Sounds easy doesn't it The grain will probably need some added water to keep it growing. Too much will speed up the germination process, I prefer to keep it slightly on the dry side. Three methods of checking degree of modification. 1 The bite method. As the acrospire grows from the root end the grain gets progressively softer. The pointy end is termed steely at this stage. From day one nibble a selected grain, starting from the pointy end. It takes practise, to get a feel for the steely bit, that is why you start from day one. You will feel the difference on successive days. 2 Visual method. The acrospire is just visible as it grows up the back of the grain, as a growth (line) under the husk. You need to be in good light to see it. Again check it every day to really get the feel of it. 3 Dissection method Just peel back the husk and look. Use all three methods until you get the hang of it. The bite method is supposed to be the most reliable. Drying I use a box with a mesh bottom and a fan heater blowing warm air up through the grain. It works but there has to be a better way. Don't use an open fire. While the idea off smoked malt sounds great, the result is undrinkable. And that's it. The type of kilning used is your choice. It certainly adds a new dimension to brewing. The good news is that I like the resulting beer, although I am never sure of the type of beer I will end up with at the beginning of each brew. I categorise it after several tastings. It has done reasonably well at local competitions. The bad news is that the extract yields I get is not very good. Around 15 points/lb/US gall. (that points/lb/gall seems to be some sort of standard. I have never seen it expressed in logical numbers). It could be the barley used, my malting, or my mashing system. Is there any way of finding out just how much potential sugars are in a malted barley? If it is the malting system just ignore all this. Cheers Keith Menefy Hukerenui New Zealand Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 18:09:43 +1030 (CDT) From: Ian Lyons <ilyons at science.adelaide.edu.au> Subject: Pronunciation: Pale Ale Visiting San Francisco earlier this year, I must have copped the snottiest waiter in Californ-eye-aye. Had the temerity to correct my pronunciation of Pale Ale! Here in Oz it's "Pail Ail". This guy, corrected it to: Parl-ay Arl-ay ! I've since had a lot of fun correcting waiters here.... and then telling the story. Hey and a question: How fast should I expect my lauter tun to flow? It's one of the famous Papazian, 20litre buckets with more holes than bottom, sitting in a second 20l bucket. Cranked it up on the weekend to make my first all-grain, and it seemed damnably slow: how long should it take a pint to come through? Also any brilliant schemes to reduce the dead-space in the bottom? I have thought of filling it with marbles or similar or another plastic bucket bottom. What's best; I don't want to reinvent something. Ian Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 06:22:30 -0500 (EST) From: pbabcock <pbabcock at mail.oeonline.com> Subject: pronunciation Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager... Jim asks... > so how do you pronounce Clinitest? I pronounce Clinitest dead. :-) See ya! Pat Babcock in SE Michigan 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: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 07:34:11 -0500 From: fridge at kalamazoo.net Subject: Damp Rid Greetings folks, In HBD#2872, Doug Moyer reported continuing moisture problems in his chest freezer, and Damp Rid hasn't helped. I've been using Damp Rid through the last two summers in my 7.2 cu.ft. freezer with good results. I bought a 12.8 cu.ft. lagering freezer this past june and another cup of Damp Rid. I've had a little moisture condense on the upper 12" of the cabinet walls when I have multiple carboys fermenting (venting into the freezer). The freezer dries right up when lagering. I too have noticed that a crust forms on the top of the crystals. I still collect moisture in the cup however. I have to drain mine every couple weeks in the summer. Much less often in winter months. I have to add crystals to mine twice a year. I plan to add a second cup to my larger freezer to see if I can do away with the last of the moisture when fermenting. Doug mentions a 16 cu.ft. freezer, which is larger than either of mine. Perhaps a second or third cup will do the trick in the larger freezer. I'm puzzled by the lack of accumulated water in the cup, however. I'd be interested to hear from others who have used this or other dessicants, or any other moisture removal methods, for that matter. Doug brings up a good point that there hasn't been much helpful information brought to the list on this topic. Hope this helps! Forrest Duddles - FridgeGuy in Kalamazoo fridge at kalamazoo.net The FrigeGuy is now online! Check out http://www.hbd.org/fridgeguy Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 06:54:40 -0600 From: "Jan Brown southern U.S.A." <jbrown58 at bellsouth.net> Subject: Newbi question I have several packs of champagne yeast from a wine party. I'd like to make a simple beer(ale). I'm going to pick up Premier malt today and the hops both bittering and aroma arrived yesterday. I forgot to order yeast... what results will the champagne yeast give me. thanks jan Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 08:58:10 -0500 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Re: Wheat and Munich Malts Thomas S Barnett <barnets at mail.auburn.edu> >When i brew a wheat beer i >will generally use about 65% wheat malt and 35% 2-row malt, employing a >step-mash procedure. I've been considering replacing the 2-row with >light Munich Malt. <snip> Should i be concerned about proper >enzyme strength for conversion? You should have no problems here. As a matter of fact, the wheat malt should be high enough in enzymes to convert the Vienna, even if it had no enzymes, but Vienna has more than enough for itself, too. There seems to be a common misconception that wheat malt is low in enzymes when in fact, it is not at all. >Should i use a decoction mash? Only for flavor, IMO, not because it is necessary. I've had good luck with weizens using the modified decoction mash schedule suggested by our erstwhile Austrian correspondent, Hubert Hangofer. Check the archives for his name and decoction. Jeff -=-=-=-=- Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan c/o nerenner at umich.edu "One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 09:10:09 -0500 From: Tom Clark <rtclark at eurekanet.com> Subject: Airlocks Here is an inexpensive way to provide an airlock aperture in nearly any container. Radio Shack sells rubber grommets suitable for this. They come in a package of 35 in various sizes. The package includes 7 in 3/8 inch size. (Cat # 64-3025). Drill a 7/16" hole in the lid of your container and work a 3/8" grommet into the opening for most airlocks. I have made up several for 2 liter soft drink bottles, 20 ounce bottles, etc... These come in handy for starters. They can also be used in wine making to handle smaller quantities left over when the carboy is too full. Also, a solution for when you want more than one opening in a container lid.... It is much easier than drilling a hole in a rubber stopper. Tom Clark Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 09:13:19 -0500 From: "Stuart Baunoch" <sbaunoch at homeruns.com> Subject: Clear Beer I do not have the funds to purchase a keg setup but would like to know of a way that I can eliminate all the sediment from the bottle of bottles. I would like the ability to drink out of the bottle and not worry about the sludge in the bottom going into my body and ruining the taste of the beer.... Dread that though of bad beer taste... Stuart Baunoch, Sturbridge, Massachusettes sbaunoch at homeruns.com Inventory Control Specialist, Hannafords Homeruns Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 09:35:23 -0500 From: "Marc Battreall" <batman at terranova.net> Subject: Carbonating Stone & Fermometer Hello All, Just wanted to reply back to the collective on my post last week regarding usage of the stainless steel carbonating stone. I got quite a few replies with the general consensus being that this is an awkward device to use in a Corny keg, which I think we all will agree. The were a number of methods described on how to connect it to plastic tubing, dip tubes, and a few other homemade connections. Thank you all for the replies. As far as I am concerned, all these methods are a hassle and still pose too great of a risk of contaminating the beer. The only alternative I think is not risky is to connect the stone to the CO2 line PRIOR to racking the beer into the keg and then proceeding with the force carbonation, and leaving the stone in the keg until the beer is consumed, or at least until the level is down far enough to retrieve the stone without mucking around in the beer. Yes, a good idea, but an expensive one! This would require you to have a few of these (or at least two) on hand otherwise you would be out of luck when it came time to oxygenate or aerate some wort. I don't know what these things cost today but I recall paying about $20 for mine not all that long ago and that's a little pricey to have a collection of them. I used to use the kind that are made for aquariums but they are made out of some kind of sand and glue and probably not very easily sanitized, and the few times I did use them they crumbled into pieces after one use in wort. So in the meantime I went ahead and carbonated my latest APA the same old way I did in the past: I pour about 1-2 quarts of wort in the keg at racking time which I had previously pulled off at the end of the boil and stored in Mason jars in the refrigerator, leave the keg at 70F for a week, cool it to 40-42F, and then connect the CO2 and slowly adjust the gas level upwards (about 2 psi a minute) towards the pressure required for the carbonation volume level for that type of beer as per the chart that I have. In this case I used 2.7 volumes as a target. The beer turned out great by the way and this method has proven to be successful for me. Believe me I have tried them all. YMMV of course. The Fermometer: I have one of these handy temperature strips on all of my glass carboys, have used them for years, and think they work pretty good. They may not be indicating the exact correct temperature, but at least they are consistent. The problem I was having is that they did not come with any instructions (don't laugh, read on!) on which one of the little colored boxes is indicating the actual temperature. The ones I have are all black, and the boxes around the temps are 3 different colors; navy blue, aqua blue and tan in that order from low to high. No biggie right, just pick a color, any color! Logic would tell you to pick the one in the middle right? The problem is I brew alot of lagers and well, the temperature spread between these 3 colored boxes is 6 degrees and I like to be a little more precise than that. So i decided to do a comparison check with a glass thermometer and see which color is the right one and the winner was the aqua blue one in, you guessed it, the middle. Now here's the funny part. I closed the refrigerator door and went about my business. A few minutes later I opened the refrigerator for something, looked at the Fermometer and the box that was aqua blue before (52F in this case) was now tan! So much for that experiment huh! Anyway, funny as that was it eventually turned back to aqua and I closed the door not caring about a one or two degrees anymore. The bottom line is I am sure the beer will turn out fine as it always has in the past. Have A Hoppy Day, Marc ======================= Captain Marc Battreall Backcountry Brewhouse Islamorada, Florida batman at terranova.net captainbrew at hotmail.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 09:12:56 -0600 From: Charles Epp <chuckepp at ukans.edu> Subject: Wyeast phasing out small yeast packs? Hi all. Thanks to everybody who sent private email regarding the new large Wyeast packs. There is 100% agreement that they don't work as claimed -- they're not ready to pitch, and used without a starter they have lag times of up to 24-36 hours. Here's the problem: the local homebrew shop guy tells me that Wyeast told him they're planning to phase out the smaller packs in favor of the larger ones. To my mind, that's bad news, because I'll have to pay several dollars more for my yeast and I STILL have to build starters. I'd much prefer using the older, small packs, which I've used for years (with starters) without problems. In short, with the new packs you and I pay more but get no real benefits. Can we convince Wyeast to continue producing the smaller packs? Or is my information wrong regarding Wyeast's plans to phase out the smaller packs? --Chuck in Lawrence, KS Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 08:12:44 -0700 From: "Kensler, Paul" <paul.kensler at wilcom.com> Subject: RE: Damp Rid usage Doug laments the poor performance he is receiving with "Damp Rid" brand desiccant: "For my dripping, soggy, 16 cu. ft. chest freezer turned beer fridge, I recently purchased some desiccant (Damp-Rid) on the advice of some recent posts to the digest. I placed it in place, and the results have been disheartening." Doug, I had (have) the same problem - the Damp Rid brand (comes in a Cool-Whip type bowl, right?) must absorb __some__ water, as there is moisture in the bowl, but not enough to make a noticeable difference in the chest freezer - it is still dripping wet inside. Admittedly though, the amount of moisture that is in the bowl is roughly equal to the amount that is condensing everywhere else, so I am suspect that it is working at all. I saw a post a while ago, and had some private correspondence with Paul Shick - he recommends a kind of desiccant that looks like dirt, and comes in a canvas bag. Paul said; "It's really great stuff. Even though my freezer was very wet from the summer humidity, it dried out completely in just a day or so." He got it at a local hardware store - I have checked with a couple around here (Dallas), and they don't carry it. I think you need to go to one of those hardware/general stores that carries a lot of miscellaneous household products, not just tools and lumber. Good luck finding it- Paul Kensler (Plano, TX) Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 10:18:58 -0500 (EST) From: Paul Shick <SHICK at JCVAXA.jcu.edu> Subject: Dessicant, "Poor man's RIMS" Hello all, Doug Moyer writes about his difficulties with dessicant in his chest freezer. Doug, my local hardware store has two kinds in stock: a loose white crystal, that you put in a dish (about $5,) and a brand called "Dry Moist" (about $7 for a canvas bag that holds about 2 lbs of a dirt-like substance.) The clerk strongly recommended the "Dry Moist," and it's worked very well. Within 2 days, the freezer was completely dry, despite the summer humidity, and the mold odors were gone. You're supposed to empty the contents of the bag into a baking dish and heat it in the oven every few weeks, to dry it out. It's really great stuff. Good luck finding it. Tom Keene asks about whether moving up to a RIMS set up is worth the trouble. An easier alternative might be a "poor man's RIMS," avoiding all of the electronics. If you have a burner, pump, and thermometer on your SS mash tun, you can get many of the benefits of a RIMS without much effort. Keeping the burner on low, with a low pump output to avoid problems with the false bottom, you can get very smooth and gradual temperature changes, as well as crystal clear runoff. I just run my flexible tubing up to the top of the converted keg, onto a perforated pie plate (my high-tech return manifold) under an inch or so of liquid. When it's time to run off, just switch the tubing over to the boil kettle and relax. My typical mashing regime now involves pumping in 7-8 gallons of 165F or so water to hit 153F or so (about 20 lbs of grain,) then letting it rest for about 30 minutes without any recirculation. The temperature generally drops about 2 degrees during that time. Then I start the pump to recirculate, and turn the burner on very low to raise the mash gradually to about 158F (over 10-15 minutes.) After the wort clears, showing that conversion has taken place, (clear flexible tubing has its advantages) I raise it to 164 or so as my half-hearted attempt at mashing out, then begin the runoff. I periodically pump a few inches of 170F sparge water on top of the pie plate in the mash tun, while running off. I almost always run off too quickly (20-25 minutes for 12 gals,) so my extraction isn't what it could be. However, I think the beer is generally less astringent with a quick sparge and runoff, and this is enough to convince me to save some time and add a bit more malt to the grist. So, Tom, it's a very simple way to get most of the benefits of RIMS. You do have to watch your temperatures and occasionally adjust a burner or a pump, unlike some of the RIMS crowd, but I think that's part of the fun. Give it a try. Paul Shick Basement brewing in Cleveland Hts OH Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 08:44:05 -0700 (MST) From: Markus Berndt <Markus.Berndt at Colorado.EDU> Subject: Re: Wheat and Munich Malts Hi, Thomas S Barnett asks about using light Munich malt in a Weizen beer. I brewed a beer like that a while ago. The grain bill was 65% wheat, 34% light munich, and 1% carafa (percentages by weight of grain). I employed a double decoction, to bring the mash from 104F to 122F, and then to 151F, then mashed out by infusing boiling water. There were no problems with conversion, or runoff. The resulting beer tasted a bit more malty than your typical bavarian Hefeweizen, I liked it a lot! Zwischen Leber und Milz passt immer ein Pils! - Markus Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 11:33:36 -0500 From: "Spies, Jay" <Spies at dhcd.state.md.us> Subject: RE: repitching All - Adam Holmes queried thusly in #2872: >>>Does yeast need to be washed free of trub and hops if it is being repitched immediately? Whenever I read about yeast washing it seems that the wash is only used to improve the yeast's ability to store in the fridge for the next month<<< Just my $.02 -- I usually brew continually from September to mid-May (and then merely frequently until the aforementioned September), and during that time, I use probably three to five Wyeast packs (depending on my particular style preferences at the time) in total. I tend to always have a 1056 something-or-other in the works, and usually a few other styles (a 1214 Belgian or a 1336 Alt, for example). I repitch on the same cake like a fiend. Without washing. Over and over. About every 4 batches I'll transfer the slurry (or part of it if my cake has gotten too big) to a clean sanitized carboy, but I don't usually change my yeast all season. Maybe my taste buds are too pedestrian, but I don't really notice any off flavors. I have noticed (re: the Belgian thread) that 1214 tends to get pooped out after about 3 repitchings (probably due to the high alcohol % of the finished product -- but then again 6-7 cases of a Chimay knockoff is enough for a few months ;-) I *try* to go from light to dark if I'm brewing different styles with the same yeast (i.e. light fruit ale to Alt to Porter with 1336 Euro ale), but I really don't think it would matter a whole lot. My house beer (if you could call it that) is Old Hophead, a high IBU (A)IPA, and I find that even the high % of hop residue in the (trub/troob/trewbe) doesn't alter things too much, as long as I stick with the same style. Don't go making a mild brown ale on the same yeast cake as your mega-IPA pucker face beer; you'll get a lot of excess hop contribution. If you try to keep your styles reasonably consistent from batch to batch, you can repitch with abandon, as far as I can see. Hell, breweries do it; why can't we? Just keep 3 or 4 carboys full, and don't let the yeast sit around without beer on top of it. You save money and hassle on the Wyeast packs, and your lag times are nil with proper oxygenation (mine rarely exceed 3 hours). If and when you transfer the yeast cake, try to flame the mouths of the respective carboys, and sanitize everything else well. Just speculation, but I think transfer of the cake every 4-5 batches tends to selectively leave behind the flocculant little dead yeasties, as long as you leave a couple of cups of beer on top when you transfer. Then again, maybe not . . . Looks like my $.02 has turned into about $.07. Cest la vie. Hope this helps, Jay Spies Wishful Thinking Basement Brewery Baltimore, MD Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 09:18:12 -0800 (PST) From: Tim Anderson <timator at yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Yeast washing when repitching Adam Holmes spake in this wise: >> The few times I have repitched yeast from a previous batch I have not done a distilled water wash or acid wash of the yeast. I brew batches in two successive weeks. The second week's wort gets tranferred directly onto the yeast cake of the previous batch (right after I transfer that batch to a secondary). I don't wash the yeast or the carboy. So far, no obvious taste problems but my questions are: << The proof of the pudding is in the eating. This harkens back to a frequent poster and happy heretic on the HBD many years ago who referred to him(her?)self as Dr. Barleywine. Dr. B boldly challenged many common practices, including bleach as a sanitizer and the need for secondary fermentation. But the one that got my attention was repitching similarly to the way Adam describes above, except that his beer would sit on the sediment for months! I've done this several times, and have had the best luck by racking off the trub after only a day or two and then letting it sit until I was ready to brew my next batch, at which time I have a combined brewing and kegging session. I have had some amazingly fast starts this way. The only bad experience was the third generation on Wyeast Belgian Ale (it was the only Belgian they had back then, don't remember the number). The banana esters were overwhelming. As I remember, this was my first "cooking" beer. A little too hoppy for pie, but a great marinade. tim Less than 12,430 miles from everybody who's anybody == 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, 10 Nov 1998 12:50:39 -0500 From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: The word on wort, Brewsters: Well, I finally caught up on honey-dews, e-mails and HBD reading at warp speed after being outatown for a few weeks. Steven Cavans puzzles over the pronunciation of "wort" and offers Some unfortunately incorrect suggestions. It is pronounced exactly like "word", except for the "t" sound at the end. Not so difficult to understand, eh? AU in German is like we say when in pain "ow", V at the beginning of a word is more like the English F Thus: Vorlauf is pronounced like "for- l - ow -f " Diacetyl is pronounced like "dye- ass-uh-teel" As to the question concerning the difficulty the French might or might not have in pronunciation: In pronouncing French, I always leave out half of the sounds in the spelling and it seems to be correct. The closer you get to Paris, the more sounds you leave out Professor Henry Higgins of My Fair Lady says: "The French don't care what you say as long as you pronounce it correctly ". I hope we don't use that model and that we keep the content of the HBD up to our past factual standards. Keep on brewin' Dave Burley Kinnelon, NJ 07405 103164.3202 at compuserve.com Dave_Burley at compuserve.com Voice e-mail OK Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 10:17:51 +0000 From: Mason Harris <smharris at ed.co.sanmateo.ca.us> Subject: beer transfer Hello brothers in beer! This may be a silly question, but I feel I should ask it before I try to transfer the beer and make a huge mess. I racked 5 gal. of ale into a cornie keg and dry hopped it. I shoud rack the beer off the hops this Friday. The problem is, I did not think about it and I hooked up the Co2 to carbonate it at the same time. Now the beer is well carbonated and will be ready to drink this weekend. The Question: Can I transfer carbonated beer from one keg to another with the pressure relief valve opened without making a foam explosion? I picture nothing but carbonated foam coming out the dip tube into the empty keg and then out the relief valve. If you have experience with this, please e-mail me directly as no one else is probably interested in thie procedure. Thanks. Mason Harris, MA (\ SMCOE Educational Audiologist -{ ||| 8- smharris at ed.co.sanmateo.ca.us (/ Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 13:32:45 -0500 From: Danny Breidenbach <DBreidenbach at nctm.org> Subject: Double Diamond Double Diamond Ale. I've never been able to find it in a bottle that hasn't been exposed to light --- I had it on tap once in Minneapolis. Even light-struck, skunky Double Diamond is fantastics ---- any cloners out there have some advice on duplicating? What grain bill, what yeast, what to watch out for? Just looking for some general guidelines. How on earth can we ever convince importers to bring beer across the pond in brown bottles? Labatt's used to put their beer in green bottles for us stoopid US people. They finally switched over to brown ---- why don't other importers? I refuse to by any Sam Smith stuff because it's in clear bottles ---- if I want skunk, I'll go hunt in the woods. - --Danny Ashburn, VA A fair piece southeast of Jeff Renner Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 12:44:49 -0600 From: rlabor at lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald) Subject: RE: Clear Wort? >>> Keith asks just "What is a "clear run off"? I have clear tubing from my mash/lauter tun to the kettle; same tubing used to siphon from primary to secondary. By the time I've recirculated (with a pump for 15-20 minutes) the wort transfered to the kettle is as clear and bright as the beer being transfered from primary to secondary fermentation. Not cloudy at all. In fact the bits and pieces of grain are usually gone fairly quickly but it takes a while for the wort to reach this very clear stage. Perhaps in your normal runoff you've noticed how clear the wort is after about 20-30 minutes of sparging/runoff? Target that going into the kettle initially. Dave Houseman <<< With my RIMS, I like to watch the conversion from starch to sugar happen before my eyes. Starch is translucent and looks cloudy and you cannot see through it. Conversion takes place as you say 20-30 minutes, I can see the liquor clear up as starch is converted to sugar. By the time conversion is complete, the liquor is so clear I could read newsprint through the 7/8 OD by 5/8 ID clear hose that is used to circulate through the HLT heat exchanger and mash. I am so convinced by this clarity that I don't even bother to do an iodine test. Just check the time and begin mashout. An entirely different type of cloudiness may be particles in the liquor such as husk particles, undissolved grain bits, etc.. This type of cloudiness can be reduced by mechanical filtering through the grain bed. This is where RIMS is kind to us because the filtering has already been done for us! Ron Ronald La Borde - Metairie, Louisiana - rlabor at lsumc.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 10:49:10 +0000 From: Mason Harris <smharris at ed.co.sanmateo.ca.us> Subject: steam heating Brothers in beer, I am a beekeeper who also brews beer. I have built a steam generator for one of my beekeeping machines and I am wondering if anyone has attempted to do what I am considering. I do single infusion mashes in a 10 gal cooler. I am thinking about attempting a step mash by hooking up my steam generator to a immersion wort chiller and running steam through it to bring up the temp. of the mash without adding water. Adding water to a step mash is a pain in the ass and ends up too soupy. Has anyone ever uses any type of steam coil inserted into the mash tun to bring up the temp? Please respond to me personally as this will not interest most folks. Thanks, - -- Mason Harris, MA (\ SMCOE Educational Audiologist -{ ||| 8- smharris at ed.co.sanmateo.ca.us (/ Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 13:45:54 -0500 From: Ed Lentz <elentz at mindspring.com> Subject: Rotten Egg Porter Hi All! I've been brewing now for about a year (10 batches) and have lurked here since my first batch. I've found a wealth of info here and usually find answers to most of my questions without having to ask. Having said that, here's my latest mystery. I recently brewed a porter (OG 1.060) which I fermented with a super smack pack of Wyeast 1084 (Irish Ale Yeast) pitched directly into the fermenter. After a modest (10hr) lag, fermentation took off like a rocket. The basement I use to ferment in quickly filled with that pleasant fermenting beer aroma. Not even 8 hours later, that pleasant aroma turned downright nasty and smelled like rotten eggs! The rotten egg smell continued until fermentation ended about 5 days later. Last night, I racked to the bottling bucket and took a gravity reading. 1.015. Not bad. Then I took a test taste expecting the beer to taste like crap. To my surprise, it tasted FANTASTIC! No detectable rotten egg taste or smell. At that point, with some renewed confidence, I primed and bottled. My question is this -- What could have caused this smell, and what is it exactly? Could it have been caused by an infection? Incidentally the beer has been sitting in the bottle now for a couple of days, it is already starting to settle and clarify and shows no visual signs of infection (ring around the neck, cloudy, etc). It tastes great, too. In the 10 batches I've made, this is the only one in which I experienced this pungent, unpleasant odor during fermentation. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Private email welcome. Ed Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 14:07:33 -0500 From: Dave Humes <humesdg1 at earthlink.net> Subject: Confused about cara, dextrin, crystal, and carmel malts Greetings, I've been wondering about the conventional belief about cara and dextrin malts adding to body, mouth feel, foam retention, and stability. My understanding about the production of dextrin malts is that they undergo a starch conversion during the malting process by raising the temperature of dampened malt to a high saccharification temperature. A rest at this temperature selects optimally for alpha-amylase and rapidly denatures beta-amylase, resulting in the starchy endosperm being converted to unfermentable dextrins. So, what happens when you use a dextrin malt in your mash? It seems to me that the dextrins are subject to the mash enzymes, so further glycolytic breakdown will occur to the dextrins contributed by the dextrin malt. And, since this process got a head start got during the malting process, the breakdown of dextrins to simple sugars and beta-limit dextrins would be more complete than it would be with the other malts in the mash. So, for a given strength beer where you want to add body and mouth feel, why not just increase the amount of malt and saccharify at a higher temperature? What is really gained by using a dextrin malt? My other question concerns the differences between cara, dextrin, crystal, and carmel malts. I've seen many malts described as cara-something; carapils, caramunich, caraviene, etc. Does the cara name prefix in these malts imply that they've undergone a high-temperature starch conversion and the remainder of the name is meant to convey the degree of kilning? Finally, is crystal and carmel just two names for the same thing, or are there really differences. Thanks in advance. Dave Humes >>humesdg1 at earthlink.net<< Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 13:18:10 -0600 From: Vachom <MVachow at newman.k12.la.us> Subject: etymology The conflict between prescriptive and descriptive definitions of language lurks in the pages of the HBD! I suspect that linguists look for language anomalies like the vocabulary of brewing--that is, a vocabulary that passes from the arcane and/or obsolete into fairly common parlance (with the advent of craft and homebrewing in the US)--as control cases of sorts in their efforts to discover how language changes over time, kind of like discovering an isolated Appalachian village where people still use language more accessible to Sir Walter Raleigh than to contemporary North Carolinians. From the prescriptive French perspective, Americans are the lowest sort of relativistic, cultureless guardians of our language, happily splitting infinitives, allowing "whom" to slip into an early grave, offending the civilized Western world like so many Dodsworths. If you look at things objectively, on the other hand, I guess you could say that "wort" will be pronounced the way it get's pronounced in this country, or, in the worst case scenario, it will be assigned a perky new name by the marketing firm hired by the makers of the Beer Machine. Wort up, Mike New Orleans, LA Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 14:57:26 -0500 From: Steve Wood <smwood at us.ibm.com> Subject: RE: Yeast washing when repitching (#2872) Adam, in response to your question about dry hopping. I use a Fermentap that allows me to invert my carboy. I use this tool during secondary fermentation and when I dry hop. Since hops naturally want to float, this inversion allows the hops to be suspended in the carboy. I use a hop sock and string (sanitized of course) loaded with 1oz of leaf hops, stuff them through the neck of the carboy and then tie off the sock onto the outside piece that holds the Fermentap on the carboy. I will then let it sit for at least 2 weeks doing an occasional drain via the Fermentap to remove any settling yeast and trub. Hope this helps! Steve Wood Tucson, AZ. Internet mail: smwood at us.ibm.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 16:11:28 -0500 (EST) From: pbabcock <pbabcock at mail.oeonline.com> Subject: I now pronounce... Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager... For those correcting vorlauf: Nice job! (I *knew* I should have left that one alone. 'Course, had I, we'd never know it was pronounced "for-lowf".) For those picking on diacetyl again, uh-uh. Don't go there. Let me call your attention to HOMEBREW Digest #1956 Thu 08 February 1996: Diacetyl: The Movie ("Pat Babcock"). Been there, man. Did extensive research. Hyuh! Hyuh! Hyyyyuuuuuhhhhhh! See ya! Pat Babcock in SE Michigan 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: Tue, 10 Nov 98 15:06:16 CST From: jwilkins at wss.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson) Subject: RE: how do you say wort? Lou Heavner wrote: >But then I grew up in the south, so all y'all damn yankees >probably wouldn't understand me anyway! ;) Hell, Lou, yew sound jest fine ta me. John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins at wss.dsccc.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 17:04:00 -0600 From: Tony Owens <ivy at fastlane.net> Subject: Filter recycling? I'm thinking of buying a filter like the one that Williams Brewins has for sale. It has two plates with the two fibered (not sure what material they are made of) filter disk that are sandwiched in between. The filters are about $2 a piece. I was wondering if anyone has tried reusing these...if so..how many times should I expect to reuse them? I'd hate to spend $8 a batch just to filter. Thanks in advance. Tony Owens Fort Worth, Texas Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 18:12:55 -0500 From: "Frederick L. Pauly" <flp2m at avery.med.virginia.edu> Subject: ? mashing proc. of extract manufacture Is there any source for the mash schedules used by the companys that make malt extract? Do they use single infusion, steps or decoction? rick pauly charlottesville,va Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 18:56:46 -0600 From: "Jan Brown southern U.S.A." <jbrown58 at bellsouth.net> Subject: another newbie question When I rack the wort(pale ale) into the secondary, I'm assuming I'll lose "X" number of pints to the stuff on the bottom of the first . My question is should I or should I not add water to the secondary to refill to a full 5 gallons. thanks jan Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 11/12/98, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96