---

	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: Wyeast #1968 (ThomasM923)
  Purity of Dry v's Liquid Yeasts (David Lamotte)
  homebrewers help and advice(Bob Fesmire) (DGofus)
  Aeration questions (Bob Fesmire) (DGofus)
  Testing we shall do... ("Lutzen, Karl F.")
  Cutting Out Keg Tops (Mark_Ohrstrom/Humphrey_Products)
  Beer Swap! (Mark_Ohrstrom/Humphrey_Products)
  Humble questions (Jeremy B. Pugh)
  Nitrogen Minikeg Taps (Jeff Hall)
  Whole Hops or Pellets. (Chad Simkin)
  foam terminology (David Whitman)
  Wyeast Swedish Ale (1947) Questions (Christopher Peterson)
  Headspace and carbonation (Al Korzonas)
  Yeast Starters/Good Head (Bill Jankowski)
  Bitter and Alt (Bill Jankowski)
  Corn Syrup ("Val J. Lipscomb")
  Wyeast 1968 (John Wilkinson)
  Wyeast 1968 ("Bridges, Scott")
  Boil overs ("J. Matthew Saunders")
  Rasberry Wheat recipe? (Brian Morgan)
  Grades of CO2 ("John & Diane O'Hare")
  Re: St. Pat's Response (Doug Roberts)
  Re: Sourdough ("Brian Dixon")
  Diacetyl Rest info needed (Sean Murphy)
  Incorporating Coffee in a stout (Sean Murphy)
  Yeast and Barley Wine (Sean Murphy)
  Re: Hydrogen beer; St. Pat's bitching ("Brian Dixon")
  DEFINITION OF A CFU (Cat Tambling & Jim Buttitta)
  CFU's/ NG? (Eric.Fouch)
  Bacteria Purity Standards (Fran Hoey)
  Yeast Starters---One Flavor/Odor not mentioned ("Peter J. Calinski")
  cfu (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
  LiqBred ("Philip J Wilcox")
  He's baaaaack ! ("Stephen Alexander")


Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!

Enter The Mazer Cup! _THE_ mead competition.
Details available at http://hbd.org/mazercup
Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org

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!

Contact brewery at hbd.org for information regarding the "Cat's Meow"

Back issues are available via:

  HTML from...
        http://hbd.org
  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

COPYRIGHT for the Digest as a collection is currently held by hbd.org 
  (Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen). Digests in their entirity CANNOT be 
  reprinted/reproduced without this entire header section unless 
  EXPRESS written permission has been obtained from hbd.org. Digests
  CANNOT be reprinted or reproduced in any format for redistribution
  unless said redistribution is at absolutely NO COST to the consumer.
COPYRIGHT for individual posts within each Digest is held by the
  author. Articles cannot be extracted from the Digest and
  reprinted/reproduced without the EXPRESS written permission of the 
  author. The author and HBD must be attributed as author and source in
  any such reprint/reproduction. (Note: QUOTING of items originally
  appearing in the Digest in a subsequent Digest is exempt from the
  above. Home brew clubs NOT associated with organizations having a
  commercial interest in beer or brewing may republish articles in their
  newsletters and/or websites provided that the author and HBD are
  attributed. ASKING first is still a great courtesy...)

JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)


----------------------------------------------------------------------


Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 03:08:25 EST
From: ThomasM923 at aol.com
Subject: Re: Wyeast #1968

 John Herman wrote: 

"I had used Wyeast #1968 on three occasions for an ESB.  I also emailed
Wyeast about the need to rousing.  They said you don't need to, but that
your FG should be a couple of points higher than usual." 

I used this yeast strain once for a porter, and liked the results. The
starting gravity was 1.056 and it finished at 1.019 (starch rest at 155-150
for 1 hour). I wanted some residual sweetness without relying on crystal
malts, and #1968 delivered. As I recall, I roused the yeast once after the
fermentation had slowed down.

This yeast finished very quickly. I used oxygen for the first time with this
batch, so that had something to do with it.

"My advice is that, unless you properly aerate, don't use this yeast."

- ---I agree. 

"I was not happy with the results.  I found the ale to be too sweet."

- ---If you want some malty sweetness in a particular batch, I feel that #1968
is a good choice. I found that a  terminal gravity of 1.019 really wasn't that
sweet.

Thomas Murray
Maplewood, NJ



John Herman




Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 21:46:36 +1100
From: David Lamotte <lamotted at ozemail.com.au>
Subject: Purity of Dry v's Liquid Yeasts

Matt Comstock posts an interesting discussion with Lallemand
concerning dry yeast in HBD #2929.

He was told ...
"The standard for the presents of wild yeast by my company is less
than
1 wild yeast per 2,000,000 beer yeast cells or less than 0.000005 %.
That is not perfect but mighty close to it. "

And further asked ...
"Do you have any idea for those of liquid yeast manufacturers?  Is
there a bacteria standard as well, or is that simply: none."

I would not have a clue, but I did remember reading some specs of a
leading liquid yeast producer on the web.  I won't give any names but
you can find the details at http://www.wyeastlab.com <Grin>

The Purity Standards are listed as: 
	Wild Yeast and Mold ; Negative in 10 ml suspension
	Bacteria ; < 1 cfu / ml
	Yeast Mutants; None detected

So there it is - all our questions answered. Now if we only knew what
'< 1cfu / ml' meant ... anyone got any ideas.

Thanks
David Lamotte
Brewing Down Under in Newcastle, N.S.W. Australia


Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 06:43:45 EST
From: DGofus at aol.com
Subject: homebrewers help and advice(Bob Fesmire)

I would like to thank the collective publicly for all the help and advice I
have received any time that  I have asked a question, or posed a problem. I
recently asked which would work better for my system, a false bottom or copper
manifold. I got tons of helpful info. I used the manifold for the first time
this weekend and it worked great! My false bottom got retired to my brew
kettle to filter out hops and trub, again worked great!!!!!!. I also asked
about my converted kegs and the problems with moving liquids and keeping temps
in line. Again, you guys have come thru and gave excellent advice. Thanks to
all who has helped this brewer go from extract to all grain, and love every
minute(well, almost every minute) of it.

Bob Fesmire
Madman Brewery
Pottstown, PA
Dgofus at aol.com


Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 06:50:53 EST
From: DGofus at aol.com
Subject: Aeration questions (Bob Fesmire)

I am thinking about purchasing a aeration system. I see advertised the oxygen
tanks with diffuser. I believe that it is one more step to improving my beer. 
I guess that there are all different brands, so any advice would be
appreciated. The one that I am leaning toward is the Oxynator by liquid bread.
Thanks in advance. 

Bob Fesmire
Madman Brewery
Pottstown, PA
Dgofus at aol.com


Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 14:55:09 -0600
From: "Lutzen, Karl F." <kfl at umr.edu>
Subject: Testing we shall do...

	as the subject says, 
a test if the posting works...


Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 16:05:06 -0500
From: Mark_Ohrstrom/Humphrey_Products at humphreypc.com
Subject: Cutting Out Keg Tops


Harold Dowda asks:

> Also, other than using a torch (I may still be able to use one,
> not likely) is there a reasonably efficient way to cut the tops
> off the kegs?  Which system (gas etc) is Easiest to use and
> still produce an acceptable job?  Thanks.

The best way that I have found requires access to a decent-sized air
compressor (usually more common 'round the 'hood than a plasma cutter.)
Get yourself an air-driven muffler cut-off tool (basically, a small
abrasive saw) for $15-20, two or three replacement abrasive discs per keg,
a worm-gear hose clamp large enough for the body of the air tool, and a
wire coat hanger.

Cut a piece of coat hanger long enough to loop around the Sankey valve in
the center of the keg, and secure the ends of the loop to the cut-off tool
with the hose clamp.  Adjust the swing of the cutter to the desired
diameter of the opening (be careful that the disc doesn't contact the rim
of the keg -- a 12inch opening is usually OK, and matching lids are
available at Target for $10) and tighten the clamp (gently!, if your tool
has a plastic body).  You may have to remove (GASP!) the clear plastic
safety-shield to get the right radius -- put it BACK on when you're done).

Wearing safety glasses (MINIMALLY), or preferably, a full face shield, AND
hearing protection, begin a very shallow cut while swinging the tool around
the Sankey valve.  Be careful NOT to tangle your feet in the air hose!
Continue to cut deeper and deeper in repeated passes.  As you begin to
break through the top of the keg leave a "spider" of metal to support the
keg top until you're ready for the final pass.  Assuming you're not
standing next to the compressor you can use water to cool the cut as you go
(stainless gets harder as it heats up).  Change the cutting disc as
necessary.

After the top is cut out, remove the SHARP burr around the opening with a
die grinder, or a hand-held stone.  Check your progress with a wad of paper
towel, NOT your finger! If you do use your finger, be sure to have some
salt handy to make the memory *really* vivid!

This method is relatively fast, doesn't require exotic equipment (an air
compressor is WAY useful around the house <snort>!) and leaves a MUCH
better finish than I've ever seen done by an amateur with either a Sawzall
or a torch.


Standard disclaimer:  If you maim yourself, or by-standers, by following
these instructions to the letter, don't EVEN be thinking of getting a
lawyer to sue me!  Act like a thinking person.


Mark (wonderin' how they cut off the tops of wooden barrels,
   back in the early days of homebrewing) in Kalamazoo





Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 16:05:12 -0500
From: Mark_Ohrstrom/Humphrey_Products at humphreypc.com
Subject: Beer Swap!

Michael Josephson asks:
> ... I bought a six-pack of their Black Chocolate Stout,
> which is, IMHO, a world class beer. Now I'm down to my
> last bottle and beginning to tremble at the thought of
> not having anymore. Are there any NY brewers out there
> who would be willing to ship me a case? In exchange for
> a similar favor?...some homebrew? ...


I too, am interested in swapping the output of local (quality) micros
beyond their normal ("legal") distribution.  I have access to Bell's
(Kalamazoo BC), Roffey's, Arcadia, New Holland, Atwater Block, Robert
Thomas and other Michigan micros.  I too, would like to try some of the
Brooklyn Black Chocolate Stout,  Victory Hop Devil and other killer brews.

Let me know what you've got, and what you want!

Mark in Kalamazoo




Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 11:18:52 -0700
From: jpugh at hjnews.com (Jeremy B. Pugh)
Subject: Humble questions

Hello all,
        I have been quietly reading the digest for some time and while I am
facinated with the advanced brewing techniques I am still getting the
basics down. You have to learn to crawl...I was hopping (grin) that some
kind soul could answer a few basic questions that have been plaguing me in
my malt extract brewing procedures.They may seem obvious to most of you but
again with the crawling and walking thing. Also perhaps someone could
reccommend a more basic mailing list suited for beginner's like me.
        1. I have been losing a great deal of my wort during the boil (at
least a gallon). My last batch, I used three gallons of water to 6 lbs of
light malt. I steeped 1 lb of crystal malt to the boiling point, removed,
added my malt, and hops and boiled for 60 min I don't have a large boiler
and i have a boil over problem when I cover the pot. When I reduce my heat,
I don't get a rolling boil. Is good or bad? Should I let the wort reduce to
make it more concentrated or am I just evaporating all the yummy goodness
into the air?
        2. I have been using grain bags during the boil to avoid sparging.
I thought this was a good idea for looseleaf hops as well. However, I
noticed a lot of sediment in my carboy this go around. Should I use a
strainer to gather up the looseleaf hops? Note: I brew solo so I am not
sure how to practically accomplish this.
        3. Lager yeast. I am attempting a steamesque beer and I purchased a
wyeast smak-pak of california lager yeast from my local brewer. He advised
me that I didn't really need to wait for the incubation period to commence,
i.e. the packet to swell, and that I could just pitch and go. I smacked the
pack about 48 hours before I brewed and pitched at 66 degrees, the packet
had not swelled at all. I  am still expectanlty waiting for signs of life.
It has been a full 24-hrs and then some. Should I aerate some more, pitch
more yeast, or just settle down and be patient?
        Thanks in advance. Feel free to send me private e-mails so as not
to bother advanced digest readers.
        Jeremy B. Pugh
        jpugh at hjnews.com
        "Never argue with someone who buys ink by the barrel." -- Mark Twain





Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 09:49:03 -0800
From: Jeff Hall <hallj at targen.com>
Subject: Nitrogen Minikeg Taps

Has anyone tried using 'whip-its' Nitrous Oxide cartridges
designed for making whipped cream to tap a 5 liter minikeg?
I'm thinking of trying it on minikeg of stout ('bottle' conditioned).
Would NO2 gas work in place of pure Nitrogen gas?
Thanks,
Jeff Hall
Seattle, WA




Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 14:33:03 -0500
From: Chad.Simkin at nextel.com (Chad Simkin)
Subject: Whole Hops or Pellets.

     Hi, I just recently started to read the HBD.  I am somewhat a new 
     brewer but I have done my reading.  I just recently made a batch and I 
     decided to use whole hops instead of pellets.  It seems like I got a 
     stronger smell and taste from the whole hops compared to the pellets. 
     Can anybody comment on this.  In a recipe can you sub. 1oz.pellet for 
     1oz.whole.  Just curious thanks.


Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 08:55:24 -0500
From: David Whitman <dwhitman at rohmhaas.com>
Subject: foam terminology

Dan Listerman asks if there's a scientific term for the collapse of foams.

I know a fair amount about the physical chemistry of foams and I am not
aware of a single special term used for this phenomenon.  Researchers in
the area tend to talk about the inverse effect - foam stability.  For
disappearance of foams, I've seen papers using the phrases "foam collapse",
"foam decay", "foam breaking", "foam destabilization" and "foam rupture".
If you refer to the process as  "collapse", you'll be understood and as
scientific as anything I've seen.

An excellent review of foam chemistry that I often refer back to when
thinking about foams and foam collapse is:

R.J. Pugh, "Foaming, foam films, antifoaming and defoaming", Advances in
Colloid and Interface Science, v64, pp 67-142 (1996).




Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 14:48:16 -0500
From: Christopher Peterson <peterscc at email.uc.edu>
Subject: Wyeast Swedish Ale (1947) Questions

Beer Freaks:

	I aquired Wyeast 1947 Swedish ale for nearly free recently. I must admit,
its obscurity had as much to do with its purchase as its price. All I've
got to go on is that Wyeast says it gives a floral nose and malty profile
yada yada yada. Questions: Anyone have some input on Swedish Ales? I for
one no nothing of Swedish ales. Anyone use this yeast, and if so, for what
styles? Any and all information welcome, privately or through HBD. TIA. 







Christopher Peterson
peterscc at email.uc.edu


Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 16:09:00 -0600 (CST)
From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com>
Subject: Headspace and carbonation

Again, a long-delayed comment...

Dave writes, quoting an article from breworld:
>"A bottom fermenting lager yeast cultured up in a 30-litre keg was
>then pitched in to the beer immediately prior to racking on the
>bottling line.  The pitch rate desired was 0.5 million cells per ml.
>No oxygenation was given to the beer at this stage but our German
>colleagues in association with Michael Hoeck calculated that
>sufficient air in neck would provide the yeast with the oxygen
>required. This meant good control was required during packaging, as
>over-filling here would have a significant effect on the final
>carbonation level achieved in bottle. The fermentation in the bottle
>would be expected to increase the carbon dioxide level from 0.5vols
>to 3.5vols."
> 
>This seems a bit counter-intuitive to me.  I thought that it has been
>pretty much universally accepted that priming sugar or wort added at
>bottling time was rapidly fermented, and that little if any
>respiration takes place, or for that matter is desirable.  If there's
>any truth to this idea, it would explain the positive correlation
>between CO2 levels and bottle headspace that has been reported by
>several on the digest and observed by myself also.  On the other
>hand, since the article is talking about the formulation of a
>Bavarian Weiss, maybe a larger than usual amount of yeast growth in
>the bottle is considered desirable and contributes positively to the
>overall profile.

I don't believe the article is correct regarding this association.
I was one of the people who researched this phenomenon and can vouch
for the fact that too little headspace does indeed decrease carbonation.

The reason I don't think it is correct is quite simply because oxygen
is not required for fermentation.  A year or two ago, another HBD'er
(sorry, buried deep in my disk somewhere) and I discussed the thought that
perhaps it was due to the fact that during respiration (yes, indeed,
respiration) more CO2 is produced than during fermentation.  However, we
did some quick calculations and determined that the priming sugar was
enough to induce the Crabtree Effect (also called reverse catabolism, I
believe) which *suppresses* respiration and causes 90+% of the oxygen
to be used for cellular activity other than respiration.  Therefore,
for all intents and purposes, brewers yeast *don't respire*.

Actually, it would not be difficult to test the article's assertion...
three bottles:

1. filled normally,
2. high fill - taking care to introduce little or no oxygen, and
3. high fill - aerate the heck out of the beer.

My gut feeling says there is some *other* factor (not oxygen in
the headspace) that causes this phenomenon.

Al.

Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz at brewinfo.com
http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/


Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 17:06:19 -0500
From: Bill Jankowski <wjankowski at snet.net>
Subject: Yeast Starters/Good Head

As a service to my fellow HBD'ers, I'd like to finish out the starter
thread that I'd started a couple of days ago. Much thanks is necessary to
Ted Mc Irvine, Nathan Kanous, George De Piro, Scott Murman, and Jack
Horzempa for their quick responses to my query.

	In summary, one should always use starters when using liquid (Wyeast)
yeast. The popular "smack packs" only contain about 50 mL of yeast when
fresh, which the directions on the pack say should be stepped up to at
least 12 oz of wort prior to pitching. I'd screwed up by pitching a smack
pack to 1/2 gal (roughly 2000 mL) of wort, or about 4X as much as I should
have.
	In the future, my procedure will be as follows:
1. "Smack" the pack.
2. Wait 12-24 hours until pack is firm, ~1 inch thick.
3. Pitch smack pack to 12 oz of wort (~1/2 cup DME)
4. Wait 24-48 hours until fermentation is complete.
5. Repitch 12 oz starter to 1/2 gal of wort.
6. Wait 24-48 hours until 1/2 gal starter is at high kareusen.
7. Brew.
8. Pitch the whole damn starter to the beer.
	Also as a follow up, the starter kicked off about 48 hours after I'd
pitched the smack pack to the 1/2 gal of wort, and was the prettiest white
head that I'd ever seen. Smelled fine, no floaties. Pitched it to my new
bitter this afternoon.
	As a future item for discussion, I like head! In an effort at aiding head
production, I make my starters from half light DME, and the other half
wheat DME. When I prime the beer, I do it using 1 1/4 cup of wheat DME. Am
I helping, hurting, or barking at the moon?

Thanks,
Bill Jankowski
Texan In Exile				Colchester, CT



Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 17:36:38 -0500
From: Bill Jankowski <wjankowski at snet.net>
Subject: Bitter and Alt

Hope ya'll enjoy these. I'm still waiting to see how they turn out. The
alt's in bottles, and the bitter's using the aforementioned starter, should
be done in about a month.

Bitter Junior Naval Officer

8 Lbs Maris Otter
0.5 lbs 20 L crystal
0.5 lbs malted wheat
3 oz Cascade
1 oz Fuggles
Wyeast American Ale

Mash in at 127F with 2.25 gal at 135F for 30 Min.
Raise to 154 with 1.125 gal boiling water for 1 hour.
Sparge with 4.5 gal 175F.
90 min boil.
With 60 min left, add 1 oz Cascade.
With 30 min left, add 1 oz Cascade.
With 2 min left, add 1 oz Cascade.
Cool, pitch yeast.
Ferment ~60F for 1 week.
Transfer to secondary, dry hop 1 oz Fuggles.
Bottle using 1 1/4 cup light DME in bottles with 2 stripes on the bottom.

Alt in the Family

8 Lbs Pilsner Malt
4 Oz Vienna 
1 Oz Chocolate
1 Oz Black Patent
7 Oz Munich
2 Oz Saaz Hops
1 Oz Hallertauer
Wyeast California Lager


Mash in with 1.5 gal 120F water for 30 Min. Add water chemicals to mash in
water.
Raise to 145F for 20 min by adding 1 Gal Boiling water.
Raise to 155F for 20 min by adding 0.5 Gal Boiling water.
Sparge with 175F water to collect 7 Gal.
Boil for 90 min.
With 45 min left, add 1 Oz Hallertauer.
With 10 min left, add 1 Oz Saaz.
At end of Boil, add 1 Oz Saaz
Transfer 6 Gal to primary.
Pitch yeast and ferment at 55F for 2 weeks.
Lager at ambient 35F for 1 week.
Bottle with 1 3/4 cup wheat DME.





Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 16:59:30 -0600 (CST)
From: "Val J. Lipscomb" <valjay at NetXpress.com>
Subject: Corn Syrup

Greetings Great Gurus,

I came across a hybrid recipe for Old Peculier on the UK-HBD
that calls for ,among a lot of other stuff,"Maltose(maize)Syrup".
Seems like a long defunct HB shop here had something called
"Brewers Corn Syrup". Does anyone (come on HB shop owners) know
of a US source for it-in small quantities??

TIA,
Val Lipscomb-brewing in Sunny San Antonio (it was 83F yesterday)




Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 17:15:45 -0600
From: John.Wilkinson at aud.alcatel.com (John Wilkinson)
Subject: Wyeast 1968

Mark Swenson asked in HBD #2929 about Wyeast 1968 and whether rousing was
necessary due to its flocculent nature.

I have used 1968 more than any other yeast and while it is highly flocculent
I find that if aerated well it doesn't need rousing.  When I first started
using it I sometimes had attenuation problems but traced it (thanks to HBD)
to inadequate aeration.  Since I have been aerating adequately I have had no
problems.  I think adequate aeration is preferable to rousing in any case.
I use O2 now but had good results before by pouring the wort between sanitized
buckets to aerate.  By the way, I think good aeration is a good idea with any
yeast.  It just seems to be a bit more critical with 1968.  Good yeast,
though.

John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - John.Wilkinson at aud.alcatel.com


Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 08:30:28 -0500
From: "Bridges, Scott" <ScottBridges at sc.slr.com>
Subject: Wyeast 1968


Mark writes:

>I have searched the archive for 1968 to no avail.  (BTW, this surprises me.
>I'd welcome some search hints.)
>
>I intend to use Wyeast 1968 for an ordin'ry next weekend.  I've heard that
>it is very flocculent and requires rousting during primary.  Is this true?
>If so, what is a rousting plan that provides satisfactory results?

Hi, Mark.  Great choice of yeast.  This is one of my favorites, and is very
good in bitters.  I would like to burst your Momily, though.  I have also
heard this same comment about 1968, and it seems to get repeated very often.
In my experience, I have never had any difficulty in getting it to ferment
out.  I've used it many times, and I would say that with adequate pitching
rate and aeration, you should have no problems.  Good luck.

Scott
Brewing in Columbia, SC.


Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 18:22:15 -0500
From: "J. Matthew Saunders" <saunderm at vt.edu>
Subject: Boil overs

Collective,

My last three brew sessions, I've been using a little widget my wife got
for me to control boiling.  To my astonishment (I was pretty skeptical, the
thing looks a bit like a tin can lid), I've been able to leave the pot and
do other things rather than worry if there was going to be a big mess all
over the stove.  Once again, last night I was able to rack beer in one
room, while boiling in another and even catch a bit of TV.  I think it was
$2.50 plus tax and shipping.  If any of you want details, send me an email.

Cheers!
Matthew.

===========================================================
The Arts in Technology--Creative Consulting and Contracting

J. Matthew Saunders (540)951-3090
saunderm at vt.edu   http://www.dogstar.org

"We have to work in the theatre of our own time,
with the tools of our own time" --Robert Edmond Jones
===========================================================




Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 15:36:59 -0800 (PST)
From: Brian Morgan <bkm_42 at yahoo.com>
Subject: Rasberry Wheat recipe?

Hi -
  I'm still a beginner (3 batches of IPA under my belt...), but want
to try a rasberry wheat beer (for my wife).  I haven't been able to
find any extract recipes - any suggestions?
   Thanks!
   Brian Morgan
    bkm_42 at yahoo.com
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free  at yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com



Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 20:03:33 -0500
From: "John & Diane O'Hare" <johare at groupz.net>
Subject: Grades of CO2

I've recently acquired a corny keg set-up, minus the CO2.  For whatever
reason, my local welding and fire extinguisher shops do not wish to fill my
5lb. cylinder and the nearest place that advertises is about 40 miles away.
There is however a paintball supply shop in town.  The owner says he can
fill cylinders but doesn't have any specifics on the CO2.  I've read that
certain small cartridges for BB guns, etc. have oil and are marked "Not for
Human Consumption"  Does anyone know if this applies to the bulk CO2 for
paintball guns as well?  Private E-Mail is fine.

Thanks,

John,




Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 18:54:41 -0700
From: Doug Roberts <gertchie at earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: St. Pat's Response

>>>>> "don" == don oconnor <oconnor at ccwf.cc.utexas.edu> writes:

    don> Since I use netscape mail I sent this thru my husband.

Ouch!

- --Doug



Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 21:43:55 PST
From: "Brian Dixon" <briandixon at hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Sourdough

>>"RANDY ERICKSON" <RANDYE at MID.ORG> wrote:
>>
>>As a follow-up to Jeff Renner's post last week about the
>>rec.food.sourdough newsgroup and FAQs:
>>
>>It appears that the HBD's own Brian Dixon is the author of the
>>sourdough starter FAQ.  You can see it at:
>>ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet-by->>group/news.answers/food/sourdough/starters
>
>This is a set of Q&As.  I haven't had time to read it, but a far more
>complete FAQ is is compiled by Darrell Greenwood at:
>
>http://www.nyx.net/~dgreenw/sourdoughfaqs.html
>
>There were many contributors to this, including your's truly.  I >think
>Brian's may be a part of it, too.
>
>Jeff

Oh man, do you guys bring back memories!  That FAQ that I wrote slightly 
embarrasses me now.  I've learn SO much more about yeast since then, and 
believe that I now understand much more about what is happening as a 
newly started sourdough starter goes through it's birthpains on the way 
to a good robust starter.  BUT, even though I've promised now for years, 
I've never rewritten the FAQ!  The info in the FAQ was based on 
empirical experience and observations.  I've started many starters from 
scratch and always felt disappointed when others gave up, or 'cheated' 
by adding commercial yeast to their bread recipes, so I wrote the FAQ.  
Oh well, thanks for the trip down memory lane ... I really will re-write 
the FAQ one of these days.

And Jeff, I always wondered if you were the same guy as the one in 
rec.food.sourdough or not.  Remember "Sourdough Dave" Adams?  Whatever 
happened to him.  Last I heard, he was working at Cray Computers (or 
Cray Research), and then he disappeared ... figured he retired or 
something, but you'd of thought that he'd stay in contact, eh?

Brian

PS: Sorry for being off topic.  But just so's this is a beer brewing 
post, remember to never feed your sourdough within a few days to a week 
of brewing unless you want Lacto Bacillus in your beer.  Ask my brother 
about the very first beer he brewed ... on the day he was feeding his 
sourdough starter.  Mmmmmm, sour beer!  For those p-lambic brewers in 
the crowd, consider feeding your starter on the same day you brew, and 
fan the gas off the starter into your fermenter! <g>



______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com


Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 22:51:23 -0800
From: Sean Murphy <smurphy at sdcoe.k12.ca.us>
Subject: Diacetyl Rest info needed

Hi there,
I'm planning on brewing a Pale Lager in the Pils / Export style in the
few weeks and I would like to do a diacetyl rest but am not sure of the
exact time to do the rest.  Miller's Homebrewing guide recommends
starting the rest when the wort is 2/3ds of the way through it's
fermentation.  This much I understand, but do I conduct the rest in my
primary fermenter and transfer after the rest, or should I transfer at
the end of primary, into secondary and then do the diacetyl rest in the
secondary?  Any info would be greatly appreciated.

Sean in San Diego




Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 22:57:17 -0800
From: Sean Murphy <smurphy at sdcoe.k12.ca.us>
Subject: Incorporating Coffee in a stout

Howdy,
I brewed a batch of Stout on 1/1/99 O.G. 1.047 and transferred it a
little more than a week ago when active frementation had ceased at
1.010.  It's been tucked away in seconday ever since, but I've
contemplated making 5 out of the 10 gallons into a coffee stout.  I do
not have any coffee extract or flavoring to add except what I can brew
in my own coffee maker.  Any advice on how to incorporate coffee flavor
into this batch?  Should I put it in in the secondary or just prior to
bottling?  How mych coffee would be a safe jumping off point for a five
gallon batch?  Should I brew a pot and cool it before adding it to my
batch or am I just asking for an infection?

Thanks
Sean in San Diego




Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 23:03:35 -0800
From: Sean Murphy <smurphy at sdcoe.k12.ca.us>
Subject: Yeast and Barley Wine

Hi there,
I'm planning on brewing a Barley Wine to ring in the end of the
millenium.  I've been re-pitching White Labs American Ale yeast  for my
last few batches and am wondering if a healthy 1/2 gallon starter will
do the trick?  Will I need to repitch more yeast  at some point in mid
fermentation to really bring down the gravity? Should I rouse the yeast
and if so when should I do this?  I been told to use Champagne yeast,
but am not sure if this will have any negative effects on flavor.  If I
was to use champagne yeast when should I do this and in what stage of
fermentation?  Any suggestions / advice would ge breat

Sean in San Diego



Return to table of contents


Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 22:08:03 PST
From: "Brian Dixon" <briandixon at hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Hydrogen beer; St. Pat's bitching

>Subject: Hydrogen beer; St. Pat's bitching
>
[snip]
>The hydrogen beer story is a brand-spanking-new urban legend that has
>traveled an amazing number of miles in the short time it's been
>circulating. One thing that people forget when reading this is that
>hydrogen is incredibly flammable (anyone remember the Hindenburg?)
>Also, the flame is invisible, defeating the whole purpose of lighting
>the hydrogen beer belch on fire for all to see and marvel at.
>

Minor point of correction, and a fun trick: Hydrogen does impart quit a 
good flash of flame when it goes off.  When I was a kid, I used to make 
hydrogen by putting lye (sodium hydroxide) and water in the big glass 
coke bottles (can't buy them anymore), mixing it well, then dropping 
crinkled sheets of aluminum foil in.  You do this and then snap a 
balloon on the top of the bottle and watch it inflate.  We'd then tie 
the balloons on a string and light them with a match tied to a stick 
(gotta keep your face back ya know!).  Man!  They'd make a big boom!  We 
took pictures at night with the flash too.  I might even still have a 
few (with artistically 'shocked' faces for the camera of course).  It 
was a lot of fun.  But anyway, yes we did get quite a lot of flame and 
light out of the hydrogen.  My junior high chemistry teacher is 
responsible for teaching us this trick ... nice guy!

Brian

PS: Don't try this with the new plastic coke bottles.  The 
lye/water/aluminum mixture is quite exothermic.  The water often reaches 
a full boil, and more than one _glass_ bottle broke while performing 
this experiment.  The new plastic ones would probably melt.  And the lye 
mixture is nasty stuff that you don't want splashing on or around you 
(or in your eyes!)


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 12:54:17 GMT
From: mugwert at ime.net (Cat Tambling & Jim Buttitta)
Subject: DEFINITION OF A CFU

On Tue, 19 Jan 1999 00:23:40 -0500, you wrote:
> David Lamotte <lamotted at ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>Subject: Purity of Dry v's Liquid Yeasts
>

>The Purity Standards are listed as: 
>	Wild Yeast and Mold ; Negative in 10 ml suspension
>	Bacteria ; < 1 cfu / ml
>	Yeast Mutants; None detected
>
>So there it is - all our questions answered. Now if we only knew what
>'< 1cfu / ml' meant ... anyone got any ideas.
>

A cfu is a colony forming unit. When you properly streak out a plate
each bug (bacteria or yeast) will grow and  divide to form a colony.
So a cfu is one viable bacteria or yeast cell.

Jim Buttitta
mugwert at ime.net



Return to table of contents


Date: 19 Jan 1999 08:38:54 -0500
From: Eric.Fouch at steelcase.com
Subject: CFU's/ NG?


HBD-
Dave asks:
 So there it is - all our questions answered. Now if we only knew what
'< 1cfu / ml' meant ... anyone got any ideas.

1cfu / ml means One Colony Forming Unit per Milliliter

Now a question or two of my own-
I'm currently running a natural gas line to the garage. I'll T off the NG stub
behind the oven, and run some black iron pipe through the garage wall.  I'll
put a ball valve shut off in the garage.  My question is the best (safest,
cheapest, easiest) way to run the gas to a 30K burner I scabbed out of an old
water heater?
I got a flexible gas line, like the ones used for appliances, but I have no
way to connect to the 3/8 reverse flare fittings on the burner to the 1/2 pipe
threads, unless I buy an $80 water heater regulator.  New water heaters only
cost $120!
Then I had a thought- Why can't I terminate the ball valve with a hose barb,
and use that tan rubber gas hose like the stuff we used in college chem lab?
We currently have it in our lab here at work, to.  It is made for NG, very
flexible, and I could disconnect it and store it in the basement when not in
use.
Also, since NG is low pressure, low flow, I should be able to get some flame
control from the ball valve shut-off, right?  I mean, for the most part, I'll
want to go full bore anyway, boiling 7-10 gallons at 30K BTU, right?

Thanks

Eric Fouch
Bent Dick YoctoBrewery
Kentwood, MI


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 09:56:32 -0500
From: Fran Hoey <FJHoey at TigheBond.com>
Subject: Bacteria Purity Standards

In Homebrew Digest #2932 (January 19, 1999), David Lamotte inquires,
"Now if we only knew what
'< 1cfu / ml' meant ... anyone got any ideas."

"cfu/ml"  = colony-forming units per milliliter

Fran Hoey


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 09:46:17 -0500
From: "Peter J. Calinski" <PCalinski at iname.com>
Subject: Yeast Starters---One Flavor/Odor not mentioned

In HBD #2930 George De Piro gave a great description of various flavors
that could indicate problems.  Well, he left one out.  Diaper pail.  That's
right.  When I stepped up this last batch of yeast, I used some starter
wort I had canned.  The first step up went fine.  When I did the second
step up, I opened a quart of the canned wort and dumped it in the starter
jug.  Shook it and replaced the air lock.  Then I noticed a foul odor in
the air.  Sure enough, I tracked it to the jar I had just poured the
starter from.  Horrible, foul, "diaper pail" is the best description.

Needless to say, I wouldn't risk using it on a full batch.  I let it
ferment down and decided to try a test.  It still smelled like diapers.
When I brewed yesterday, I put about 1/2 Gal. of the batch in the starter
jug (after pouring off the spent "wort").  I'm thinking I will let it
ferment down and maybe even bottle it. 

Any opinions out there on what are the risks in tasting it? 

Pete Calinski
East Amherst NY
Near Buffalo NY
0 Degrees 30.21 Min North, 4 Degrees 05.11 Min. East of Jeff Renner


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 10:33:58 -0500 (EST)
From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker at welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: cfu

D. Lamotte asks about the definition of cfu, specifically, what cfu/ml
means.

cfu stands for Colony Forming Unit. In saying that there is less than or
equal to 1cfu/ml Wyeast means that if you were to culture 1 ml you would
expect to see no more than one bacterial colony on average.



- ------------------------------------------------------------------
"Graduate school is the snooze button on the alarm clock of life."
	
	-Jim Squire


 -Alan Meeker
Johns Hopkins Hospital
Dept. of Urology

(410) 614-4974
__________________________________________________________________





Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 08:24:45 -0400
From: "Philip J Wilcox"<pjwilcox at cmsenergy.com>
Subject: LiqBred





From: Philip J Wilcox at CMS on 01/19/99 08:24 AM

Madman Bob Fesmire asks about Oxygenators,

Liquid Bread is the system I have and am basically happy with it. If you
get the chance to shop the things side by side pay atention to the quality
of the regulator. LB's is not of the higest quality. It is quite soft and
has dented upon the chance droping. The threads in the inside are also
becomming stripped after 10+ bottles of use over the last 3 years. In the
past I stored the O2 bottle with the regulator off, but now its too much a
PITA to get the regulator on and off.  Has anyone else had this problem?

I have also found that if you turn it on all the way to create a "rolling
boil" effect in the carboy you are wasteing gas. I used several 1.1 cu ft
tanks with only 3-5 uses, when your supposed to get 15-20. You only have to
crank it up to the point where you can visabily notice it working. You do
this twice for 15 seconds each. Letting the foam settle between blasts.

We should be airating our starters also. But for how long for these tiny
volumes? And is there a better way to sanitize the 316 SS stone they give
us than boiling? Thats time consuming and another trip up and down the
stairs for me. Suggestions??

Phil Wilcox
Poison Frog Home Brewery




Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 11:11:10 -0500
From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net>
Subject: He's baaaaack !

No it's not Nokomaree, just me.

Distilling topic - Mike Allred asks several questions about liquors and
several answers in a more or less correct vein and then Jeff Renner drove
home the correct detailed description regarding scotch, blends and vatted
whisky's.  One or two points still deserve comment.

Blended scotches shouldn't be ignored (do as I say, not as I do) even though
they include grain alcohol - they can provide remarkable consistent and good
flavor at a reasonable price.  The current issue of the "'Malt Advocate"
http://www.whiskeypages.com , has an interview with Richard Paterson, master
whisky blender for Whyte& Mackay - rather nice job if you can get it.  The
same issue, as already noted on HBD, awards Hopdevil their domestic beer of
the year award. Congrats Jim Busch and the guys at Victory Brewing - tho'
I'm concerned that the attention paid to Hopdevil hides the fact that
Victory makes some of the finest commercial  lager beers in North America.

Philip Wilcox adds.
> B) single malt= 100% the same malt ie. Scot malt
Scotmalt is a tradename for malts from 'Brewing Products Ltd', not a scotch
whisky malt.
> G) there is a book available from ThingsBeer (thingsbeer at voyager.net) on
> how to distill corn fermetables for fuel purposes ...
Be sure to get a license from the BATF before you try this - BATF takes no
prisoners.

Jeff Renner adds
>Oddly enough, the distillers are not particularly fussy
>about yeast and typically use dry yeast.
I'm not sure that selecting dry yeast means that distillers are less picky.
I know that one distillers yeast can ferment maltotetraose  to a limited
extent !  Several other selection criteria for whisk[e]y yeast are discussed
in "Yeast Technology" by Gerald Reed et al.  The flavor profile of the yeast
is relatively less important, than in beer since many of the flavor active
compounds are removed in distillation. Attenuation, speed, low fusel levels
are probably much more critical.  Mort could probably add a lot here if he's
still listening.

> Many Bourbon distillers are more fussy and culture their own yeast.
They are more secretive - that is certain.

>A typical Bourbon grain bill might be 70+% corn, 10-15% rye and/or wheat,
>and 8-15% malted barley.  It astounds me that as little as 8% malt
>[..] I'm sure it is 6-row.
And George DePiro adds the M&BS description of distilling malts in the UK.

I have 15% malt + 85% gelatinized grain mashed at 56C with a bump to 62C and
is fermented at 20C-30C(!) as a typical whiskey mash cycle.  The SG of the
mash wort is in the normal range for beer (like ~12.5P) because this yeast
operate most satisfactorily at the SG.  Of course bacterial and wild yeast
infection is rampant since there is no boil.  This matters little since the
'sins' of the ferment are purged in the distillation.  The resulting wort is
distilled by either a continuous or pot still - and the choice has a major
impact on the resulting liquor. Pot distilled whisk[e]y (which is almost
exclusively Scotch)  gets some flavor profile from the wort while continuous
or 'Coffey' distilled liquor gets very little flavor from the wort (except
for the rye contribution) but primarily is flavored by the barrel or other
post distillation additions.

Tim Wauters notes on the rum topic ...
>under the name Sucanat.  It can be used as a substitute for some of those
>difficult to locate (for me at least) British dark brewing sugars.
Brown sugar, molasses, sucanat all have a similar flavor profile.  IMO these
three don't fit in IPAs.  British 'chip sugar' or electropositive caramel is
made with ammonia compounds and sugar syrup and caramelized to various
extents.  The flavor addition reportedly gives a notably dry finish note -
sucanat doesn't.  I'm not aware of a good substitute available to US HBers.

===
Decoction ...
Jim Bentson writes that LKBonham writes then Brauwelt Int'l (1986) reports
 ...
>(It concludes that the qualitative
>differences in beers produced with decoction vs. infusion
>mashes were "extradinordinally small," and that, "based on a

I think the debate is still open for additional evidence.  Kunze "TB&M"
(revised in the mid 1990s) states of triple decoction, "...three mash
processes produce very aromatic beers".

As for Louis Bonham's and Andy Thomas' "RIMS vs Decoction" BT article, the
results are to me inconclusive or perhaps favor decoction.  The second part
of the test involved a bock beer in which the decoction version suffered
from some rather extreme fermentation problems.  Taste comparisons for that
beer can offer little information that would sway me.

For the first part, a helles recipe, the judges preferred the decoction
helles 5 to 1 - quite decisive.  The judges did prefer the maltiness of the
RIMs helles 3 to 1, but also made several references to grainy (negative)
flavors in the RIMS helles.

Another mitigating factor is that the BT article states, "... and Andy has
found that shorter [10-15 minute decoction] boil times are sufficient to
extract Bavarian  style flavor".  The article states in a footnote that Greg
Noonan believes that longer boil times improve flavor. This was also the
opinion of Art Beall, this year's Ninkasi winner (who won on lagers and a
german wheat), in private communication.

To be fair the BT article does accurately state these results, but many
HBers seem to think that the clear conclusion is the decoction doesn't
matter.  The  matter is "open to debate" is the stated article conclusion.

What do I think ?  That decoction is a lot of work and time but does very
probably add a small but noticeable improvement in flavor.  I also
personally think that pressure cooking wort (see comments by me,
C.Scandrett, and experiments by Charlie Rich in the HBD archives) adds many
of the same benefits with more hardware and less time & effort.

===
>Momilies not withstanding, does anyone have an opinion, fact-based or not,
>on non food-grade 5 and 6 gallon buckets ?

Material within the plastic can leach out particularly into alcohol and
fats.  For non-food grade plastics, the residual plastisizer levels may be
high, the colorants toxic, and in the case of recycled plastics may contain
such nasties as insecticides residue.  The FDA website has some notes on
recycled plastics and their content.

Is it dangerous ? Improbable, but why take a chance.  You can often get free
but dirty FG buckets simply by asking politely at a bakery, or new ones from
US plastics.

====
After a 15 weak hiatus I've decided that continuing my self-imposed
absence was not productive.  RE HBD policy/censorship - Pat Babcock, whom I
still disagree with in several ways, has shown considerable integrity in his
POV on the topic and his addendum to the HBD policy page.  For the others
involved I have more faint praise.  BTW can anyone answer why AHA policy is
a valid topic, but HBD policy is not ?  As John Gilmore said,  "The Net
interprets censorship as damage... and routes around it."

Steve





Return to table of contents

---