HOMEBREW Digest #3039 Tue 25 May 1999

[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]


	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: Malt Flavor ("Stephen Alexander")
  aluminum (Andrew Quinzani)
  Re: Malt Flavor (Jeff Renner)
  counterflow chiller sanitization ("Coordinator")
  Siebel/autolysis (Jason.Gorman)
  Re:  Wyermann Munich ("J. Matthew Saunders")
  Broken Hop Bines (Dan Listermann)
  re EASYMASHER 3, almost ("Stephen Alexander")
  Re: Hop-ectomy (Jeff Renner)
  Honey Stout (Matthew Comstock)
  Siebel - brewing careers question (Mike Kauffman)
  ale yeast for fake lagers? (Bryan Gros)
  Siebel: adding grist to liquor ("Thomas D. Hamann")
  re: post-carbonation polyclar ("Greg Pickles")
  answer to question by david rinker (Radzan1000)
  "Them's phytin words..." (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
  German Wheat yeasts/ Old cardomom-autolysis ("WILLIAM R. SIEBEL")
  Re: ale yeast for fake lagers? (Jeff Renner)
  Re: hop-ectomy (Tom Lombardo)
  Yeast Culturing ("WILLIAM R. SIEBEL")
  lag times (Ted McIrvine)
  Dr. Pivo's Question about Kraeusening and Foam (Larsonjw)
  answer by j power - siebel - to rob moline - subject: clinitest (Radzan1000)
  answer by j. power - siebel - to aj de lange - subject: phytin (Radzan1000)
  answer of j. power - siebel to guy burgess - subject: acidulated (Radzan1000)
  answer of j.power - siebel to jm kenton - subject: acidification of (Radzan1000)
  Re: Wort Chiller Efficiency............ ("Perle")
  RO Water....what's left? (Nathan Kanous)
  The Jethro Gump Report ("Rob Moline")
  Jethros Done... ("Rob Moline")

Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! 2000 MCAB Qualifiers: Boneyard Brew-Off 6/12/99 (http://www.uiuc.edu/ro/BUZZ/contest5.html); Buzz-Off! Competition 6/26/99 (http://www.voicenet.com/~rpmattie/buzzoff) 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, 24 May 1999 06:27:12 -0400 From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net> Subject: Re: Malt Flavor JeffR writes ... >>I suspect that the volatile nature of some of the compounds also means that >>they fade as the malt ages, [...] > >I agree. I think that really fresh malt makes a difference. I malted my >own 6-row feed barley a few years ago and got a wonderful maltiness that >carried over into the CAP I made with it [...] I had a similar experience. I've promised myself that I would try making crystal from some 2-row pale malt sometime, but haven't gotten around to it. I think that Munich malt must age into oblivion too. >>I once spoke to a raver who insisted that >>he really loved whiskeys because it was the only was he could get the >>concentrated malt flavor he craved. Bull___, [...] > >I don't think I agree, although my whisk(e)y education is just starting. >There certainly is none of that aromatic maltiness in whisky, Which is really what I was trying imperfectly to say. Whiskey does show it's grain origin, but it leaves most of the doppelbock/malted-chocolate/munich-malt type of maltiness at the distillery, what is left of malt is soft and subtle. >but there are grain components. Right - but what a beer drinker, or maltster would call a "malty flavor" doesn't appear at the other end of the still in anything like the same form. The grains lend a certain subtle character and complexity of flavor. >Just look to the rye whiskies that we have shared >together recently, Steve, to see how different they are from bourbons that >are made virtually the same after the mash. Even with new charred oak >barrels, the grain bill comes through. Of course rye is THE one very notable exception. One that l know both Jeff and I appreciate. Rye adds a BIG 'high toned' vaguely peppermint-like flavor that does make to through the still. A similar flavor (and also a lot of beta-glucans and sometimes phenolics) are added by rye to rye-beers. This flavor is a major contribution to the flavor of bourbons, and moreso in Canadian whiskys and the nearly extinct but absolutely wonderful American 'straight rye' whiskies. I would argue that the flavor contribution from barley (malted or not) or corn thru a still are much less significant than rye - not zero tho'. >With Scotch whisky, using 100% malt >and used barrels, which have far less influence, the malt surely does make >a contribution. Truth be told, I *suspect* that any grain liquor, if treated like Scotch and allowance made for the peat smoke (some components of which make it thru the still) and the 'peaty phenolic bog water' used in production would produce a very acceptable "Scotch". Perhaps distinguishable from an all-malt Scotch, but not different by leaps and bounds. As for used barrels not being such a great influence - I disagree. The Scots age their whisky in used sherry & bourbon barrels. Sherry is a fortified tannic Spanish wine - Sherry, Jerez, Shiraz, historically shipped to Britain in barrels. US law forbids re-use of barrels in whiskey aging - another "stupid lawyer trick". Usually you can taste which type is used in a particular Scotch. Barrel aging - even beyond 10yrs in the same used barrel makes a big difference. For a truly A vs B comparison of barrel flavor look to some of the Scotch distilleries like 'The Balvenie' and Glenmorangie that have recently offered their whisky aged in different "woods". You'll see that the impact of the barrel origin *is* striking. >I don't have M. Jackson's whisky guide here, but I remember he suggests Glen >Deveron as tasting of unobscured malt. No peat, no sherry barrels. He >says that a newcomer to Scotch whisky wanting to familiarize himself with >the flavor of malt could do worse than spend a week with a bottle of Glen >Deveron. I've been meaning to do this myself. If you invite me over I'll bring something to counterpoint the G.Deveron. I suspect however that Glen Deveron (also sold more commonly as Macduff) *IS* sherry barrel aged. Jackson mentions sherry aromas in the description of all three bottlings. Jackson also describes the Macallan 10 in part as "Plenty of malt". Probably a better investment and more readily available than the Glen Deveron too. I'd be hard pressed to describe Macallan as "malty", altho the combination of background dextrinous sweetness and phenolics does suggest malt. I have also tasted raw distillate liquor (unaged) at the Glenora distillery in Nova Scotia http://www.glenoradistillery.com/welc.html a few years back. They are attempting to make true Scotch style whiskys in Canada. The raw distillate is not what anyone should call "malty"; "very rough vodka" gives the right impression of the major flavors. Since I was there Glenora has finally released their aged Kenlock whisky - I haven't tasted it. A great place to spend a few hours in N.S. BTW. Piggott, the British brewing science author also has a book out on the flavor components of distilled beverages. Well worth a scan IMO. A lot of discussion of the barrel components, lactones, aldehydes etc. Mort O'Sullivan (who also has great experience & training in this area) told me that Piggott had another whisky book coming out (circa 1998) but I haven't seen it yet. I agree there is something of malt in whiskey, but it certainly isn't the same flavor that we expect in a malty beer, nor is it a big thump-on-the-head flavor. back to brewing, -S Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 07:06:24 -0400 From: Andrew Quinzani <quinzani at mediaone.net> Subject: aluminum ate: Fri, 21 May 1999 14:50:03 -0700 From: "Dana H. Edgell" <edgell at cari.net> Subject: Re: aluminum Alan McKay says, >Anyone who says aluminum will give a mettalic taste has >obviously never used it, and is operating on hear-say. Get >used to it, because there is a great deal of hear-say which >gets retransmitted in brewing circles (yes, including this >one, though admittedly it's got a lot less than most). This can happen, depending on many factors. Beer has compounds in it that act like a mild acid and can remove some Aluminum. Depending on what you are doing...a mash, or a simple boil would affect just how much you would remove. A simple example....if you made a hoiday sause in a alumiunm pot it would have a green tinge to it (should be only yellow) because it removed some of the alum. Now maybe you want green beer (on St. Pats day?) but I don't. -=Q=- - -- "Q" Brew Brewery...Home of Hairy Chest Ale - ------------------------------------------------------------ quinzani at mediaone.net Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 08:25:53 -0400 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Re: Malt Flavor At 6:27 AM -0400 5/24/99, Stephen Alexander wrote: >JeffR writes ... >>With Scotch whisky, using 100% malt >>and used barrels, which have far less influence, the malt surely does make >>a contribution. <snip> > >As for used barrels not being such a great influence - I disagree. I wasn't clear with what I meant, which was that used barrels have far less influence than new, charred white oak barrels. I agree that even used barrels have a great influence on malt whisky. I believe that many distilleries do reuse barrels for several multi-year fills do get minimal influence. I look forward to further field research with Steve on this subject. Jeff Oh, I'm looking forward to having a beer this evening. There, now this is a beer post. -=-=-=-=- Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, c/o nerenner at umich.edu "One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 08:25:16 -0400 From: "Coordinator" <emcreg at one.net> Subject: counterflow chiller sanitization J Daoust <thedaousts at ixpres.com> wrote: >...after cooling my brew, and rinsing, what can i >use to make sure nothing green and fuzzy will grow between uses????... I boil 2-3 gallons of water and run it through the wort chiller before and after I use it. Effective and all the equipment is out and in place anyway making it simple. Todd (a recovering sanitization neurotic) Cincinnati, Ohio Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 08:57:00 -0400 From: Jason.Gorman at steelcase.com Subject: Siebel/autolysis A recent post that got no response. What say Ye? I did some searching in the archives, but could not find the information I was looking for. From what I have read, autolysis is basically the spilling of the yeast guts into the beer. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't this basically yeast nutrient? If you transfer to a secondary and add some DME, will you get renewed fermentation and rid yourself of the rubbery autolysis taste and smell? Jason Gorman River Dog Brewery Grand Rapids MI Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 08:59:59 -0400 From: "J. Matthew Saunders" <saunderm at vt.edu> Subject: Re: Wyermann Munich Matt replies and writes: >Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 15:36:14 GMT >From: marnold at ez-net.com (Matthew Arnold) >Subject: Re: Weyermann Munich > >On Sat, 22 May 1999 00:13:00 -0400, you wrote: > >>Now my question: Who sells Weyermann Munich in sacks and ships to Ohio ? >>(preferably close by). Anyone have an opinion on this malt ? > >Any homebrew store that uses Crosby and Baker can get Weyermann products. I've >used quite a bit of Weyermann Munich, Dark Munich, and Melanoidin in Alts, >Dunkels, and a Bock. I like their products quite a bit. Vintage Cellar at www.vintagecellar.com will ship Weyermann Munich in sacks to Ohio. You can also email the shop at sales at vintagecellar.com. Good Luck! Matthew in VA soon to be in CO. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 09:40:41 -0400 From: Dan Listermann <72723.1707 at compuserve.com> Subject: Broken Hop Bines Matt Arnold ( marnold at ez-net.com) worries about his decapitated bine. No fear, the node below the cut will quickly sprout two runners that will quickly replace the main bine. Dan Listermann dan at listermann.com 72723.1707 at compuserve.com Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 09:45:41 -0400 From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net> Subject: re EASYMASHER 3, almost Jack writes ... >The EM3 screen is 1/2" i.d. and ten inches long What's the intended audience ? It sounds too big for a 16" diameter 15.5gal sanke. Having used some homemade variants of the EZ-Masher in the past, I wonder just how much need there is for the bigger diameter and length. The 10" length can't improve the channeling situation, and anyone who needs 1/2" fittings to drain a half barrel mash tun is sparging way too fast. Maybe for a 55gal operation it would fit. Steve Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 10:16:17 -0400 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Re: Hop-ectomy marnold at ez-net.com (Matthew Arnold) worries that he killed his hop bine when he broke off the growing tip. Not to worry. While hops and other plants grow from the tip, a side node branch will grow and take over as the growing tip. As I recall from my Botany 101, this growth tip is called the apical meristem and prevents other potential growth tips from growing by producing a hormone that supresses their growth. When it is lost, the others are "released" and compete until one gets the upper hand. Sometimes you will get several, though. Jeff -=-=-=-=- Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, c/o nerenner at umich.edu "One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 07:42:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Comstock <mccomstock at yahoo.com> Subject: Honey Stout Greetings I bottled the last batch about a week ago. It was a 'honey stout' and followed a recipe related to one found in Papazian's book next to the 'Rocky Raccoon's Honey Lager,' or something like that. Basically, the recipe was: 4 # light DME 2.5 - 3# clover honey from the grocery store 1/3# roasted barley 1/2# black patent 1/2# 60L crystal Cascade pellets (6%AA) 1.5 oz. 60 minutes in boil Cascade pellets (6%AA) 0.5 oz. 15 minutes in boil 2 tsp. gypsum 1 tsp. Irish moss Nottingham yeast cake from previous batch. SG=1.059, FG=1.011 After steeping the specialty grains 30 min at 150F, I dumped all the malt extract and honey in at the beginning of the 1 hour boil. The fermentation started very fast and was very strong as expected - reusing the yeast cake. I am curious if others have tried this recipe. The (very green) beer after almost a week is developing carbonation nicely, but the flavor intrigues me. The first thing that hits me must be the honey aroma(?)/smell. I've noticed something like it in another commercial beer - from Devil Mountain Black Honey... something, something. Then I taste a kind of floral or grassy flavor. The cascades (I've not used them before)? Then the 'stout flavor' hits. This is a complex beer. Many different flavors. They all kind of compete for attention. Anyone else make this or something similar and have comments? Of course, I should probably wait longer than a week to taste test it.... Matt Comstock in Cincinnati. _____________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 08:03:06 -0700 From: Mike Kauffman <mkauffma at fred.fhcrc.org> Subject: Siebel - brewing careers question Siebel Staff, I hope this question isn't too inappropriate for the HBD; if so, I apologize. I would like to seek your advice, or anyone else from the Digest, in regards to getting into the brewing industry. I am a recent microbiology graduate ('95) with a few years of biotech experience. However, I am very interested in brewing microbiology, particularly quality control. Unfortunately, I have had no success in even getting a reply from anyone in the industry for suggestions on where to start. I have some home brewing experience, and quite a bit of practical microbiology and chemistry experience, but I don't know how to translate that into brewing. I would appreciate any suggestions, advice, comments, or help you may offer. Thank you for your time. - -- Mike Kauffman Flow Cytometry Specialist Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center 1100 Fairview Avenue, North BE-024 Seattle, WA 98109-1024 mkauffma at fhcrc.org Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 07:58:33 -0700 From: Bryan Gros <bryang at xeaglex.com> Subject: ale yeast for fake lagers? Jeff Renner writes: >> >> Nottingham Ale yeast (dry -- I know, I NEVER use dry yeast...) or Wyeast >>#2112 California Lager (optional) > >If you are going to use fermentation temperatures under 55F, then use a >lager yeast for the real thing. I am suspicious that 2112 is any better at >warm temps than any other lager yeast. It is used in steam beer at 60F or >so where it produces an *ale* type beer, not a lager. what do you mean by "*ale* type beer"? Do you mean estery? Is there any good yeast choice for making an acceptable lager tasting beer while fermenting at, say, 62 or so? - Bryan Bryan Gros Oakland CA Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 01:28:38 +0930 From: "Thomas D. Hamann" <tdhamann at senet.com.au> Subject: Siebel: adding grist to liquor To the guys from Siebel and anyone else interested. Why shouldn't I add the grist to the liquor, have always read that you should add liquor to grist, why? Are there pros and cons? Adding grist to liquor would avoid dry lumps and I think I'd reach strike temp. easier too. Thomas D. Hamann Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 08:51:34 -0700 From: "Greg Pickles" <gregp at wolfenet.com> Subject: re: post-carbonation polyclar >Dan Ritter asks: >Has anyone successfully used Polyclar to clear chill haze in the keg >*after* the beer has been carbonated? >... My experience was with an ale, not a lager, but it was similar. I had 5 gallons of an English pale ale that had a noticeable chill haze. I had carbonated and drank a little and it was a fine beer - a little haze didn't bother me! It turned our that I needed to take most of it to a party and since the majority of the party goers were not beer geeks, I decided I needed to clean up the haze, at least a bit. I chilled the beer down into the upper 30's to form as much haze as possible and to minimize the release of CO2 when I added the polyclar. I released the pressure on the keg, opened it and threw in a couple of tablespoons of polyclar. I then closed the keg, purged any air as well as I could by pressurizing and venting a few times and then shook the keg a bit to distribute the polyclar. I let the keg sit in the upper 30's for several days. Since I wanted to leave nothing to chance, I then ran the beer through a 5 micron filter which removed the polyclar and whatever it managed to grab hold of. It was a bit tricky because the entire filter operation had to be done under pressure (sort of like counter pressure bottle filling). Even though it was a lot of work, the results were great. I ended up with a beer that showed no haze at typical ale serving temperature and only a slight haze at colder temps. The beer didn't seem to suffer for all the handling either (but it was an ale so subtle changes would have been harder to detect than in a lager). Greg Pickles Seattle, WA Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 12:20:33 EDT From: Radzan1000 at aol.com Subject: answer to question by david rinker Dear David, I have actually used the same recipe in a 400 barrel brewhouse, a 560 barrel brewhouse and also an 880 barrel brewhouse. All I did was linearly change the proportions of all of the ingredients. This produced a beer that analyzed almost exactly the same. I could do this because all of the Brewing Material Efficiencies of the three brewhouses were the same, 95%. If I would have had to be dealing with different BME capabilities, I would have had to adjust the proportions accordingly. Brewpubs and microbreweries that we have seen, show BME's of 50% to 90%. Major brewers are at least at the 93% level. I do not know what homebrewers experience since I have never home brewed. To find your BME, divide the amount of extract you have actually extracted by the amount that was available in the grains you used, and then multiply by 100. If the new system has the same BME capability, the ramp is linear. If the new system has a higher BME rating, you will need proportionately less material than a linear ramp. If the new system has a lower BME rating, you will need a proportionately higher amount of material than a linear ramp. Any thoughts? DAVE RADZANOWSKI SIEBEL INSTITUTE Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 12:32:43 -0400 (EDT) From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker at welch.jhu.edu> Subject: "Them's phytin words..." AJ brings up some good points relating to my "phytin" post: 1) Yes, typos - all references to the /enzyme/ that breaks down phytate should have refered to "phytase" 2) "Phytin seems to be a generic name for the calcium/magnesium salts of any of several myo inositol phosphates which are found in plant matter and which play important roles in subcellular biochemistry (animal and plant)." Not sure about this - every reference I saw regarding phytate/phytin referred exclusively to the fully phosphorylated form of inositol - IP6 for short. To be sure, phosphoinositides do play MAJOR roles, especially in cell signalling pathways, but these are usually named seperately in shorthand form (eg - IP3,IP2,PIP2, etc). 3)"I believe the only animals capable of synthesis of phytases are ruminants" There are references out there on the production of phytase in rats, chickens, pigs, as well as humans (saaaaaay, who're ya callin a ruminant pal!). A variety of bacterial and fungal species produce the enzyme as well as many plants. Widespread production of this enzyme would make sense given that phytin is a major plant depot for phosphate - an essential nutrient. The fact that researchers are attempting to add exogenous phytase to feed meals to help increase nutrient availability, promote bioavailability of metals, and limit phosphate excretion in pigs and chickens seems to mean that, either the diets are so high in undegrated phytin that they are overwhelming the animal's endogenous enzyme or, perhaps the low levels of enzymatic activity they are measuring in the intestine are actually due to contamination from enteric bacteria, but I've only read the abstracts so can't comment on this last possibility. Have seen references to hepatic (liver) phytases and isolation of the enzyme from cell vessicles in intestinal brush border cells so maybe it's all kosher. 4) "I think the reaction, at each carbon, catalyzed by phytase, is something like \ \ C-PO3H2 + H2O ---> C OH + H3PO4 / H / H Thus the result is myo-inositol (good for yeast) itself and any proton release would be from dissociation of the phosphoric acid to monobasic phosphate which is the predominant species at mash pH." I still think this reaction is not correct. Simply put, if you are hydrolyzing the phosphate from the sugar you will either be breaking the C-O bond or the O-P bond. Either way BOTH the H and OH parts of the water molecule will be consumed in the reaction and there will be no net release of any protons. Simplified, the linkage looks like this: C-O-PO3 Breaking either the C-O bond with water: C...........O-PO3 Or the O-P bond with water: C-O...........PO3 Ends up with: C-OH an HO-PO3 where the newly added H and OH came from the added water molecule. The starting form - the monoester of the phosphate - is not supposed to change the pKa's of the phosphate oxygens so breaking this bond and liberating the phosphate should not cause any significant uptake or release of protons by the phosphate oxygens. Also, the C-H bond will certainly not be broken in this reaction, perhaps this is where you're diagram is going awry - it is balanced as written but the C-H is missing in the right hand side of your equation. 5)" make a phosphate buffer at about pH 7 (equimolar amounts of dibasic and monbasic salts) and add drops of some calcium salt solution. The pH will drop and precipittion will occur (though you may not see the precipitate with the naked eye if the buffer is too weak - 0.1M is more than strong enough)." As I mentioned in a previous post, I have done this using 5-10 mM concentrations in which the phosphate was buffered at pH = 7.0 but strangely enough I saw NO PH DROP following the precipitation - any explanation?? 6) "When Alan says "alkaline" he means pH > 7. OK, so be it. In the brewing industry, "alkalinity", as applied to the liquor, means the bicarbonate buffering capacity of the liquor" Would probably have been clearer had I used the term "basic" instead. 7) "........................................................So when planning brews, worry about alkalinity, not pH. I know it sounds funny but if I take my water and boil it, the pH goes from 6.5 up to 8.3 but the water becomes less alkaline (because CaCO3 precipitates - same mechanism as with the phosphate though the pK and pKs are different). I'm better off sparging with this boiled water because it neutralizes less mash acid thus allowing the mash pH to stay lower longer into the sparge. I guess this is true as long as you know you have adequate calcium present to effect acidification of the mash by reaction with phosphate. Unless I'm wrong about the lack of acidification in the phytase reaction itself, metal complexation with phosphate will be the mechanism lowering the mash ph. Of course, phytate itself is a great divalent cation sink so it may be bringing along enough calcium itself! -Alan Meeker Baltimore Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 11:51:59 -0500 From: "WILLIAM R. SIEBEL" <SIEBELINSTITUTE at worldnet.att.net> Subject: German Wheat yeasts/ Old cardomom-autolysis Hi Eric Fouche, 1. With regard to your question on Wyeast 3942. The best people to answer that question would be the suppliers of that particular yeast strain. However, I can tell you about some of the yeast strains that are held at the Siebel Institute that are popular yeasts for producing beers with a clove character. BRY 204: This yeast originated from Northern Europe. It is a top fermenting Trappist type strain which ferments rapidly at relatively warm temperatures. It can be used to produce ale and wheat beers with a rather dry but estery flavor and a light clove-like spicy character. BRY 235: A traditional Bavarian weizen yeast. Top fermenting and usually used at room temperatures to give a very vigorous fermentation. Produces a very estery beer with a mild clove-like spiciness. Hope this information is useful. 2. In order to answer your question as to whether you used to much cardomom in your wit beer, we need more information. What is your brewsize? You say that you added 3 gm each of various spices. This may or may not be O.K. depending on what concentration of the spices you are achieving. However, your description of what your beer smells like (rubbery and meaty) is a classic descriptor for the effects that yeast autolysis has on beer aroma. Your beer is in primary for 15 days. Have you removed the yeast once it has separated from the beer? Yeast left in the beer (particularly at room temperature) for 15 days will die and could very well give the kinds of aroma that you are describing. Hope this helps. Cheers, Lyn Kruger Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 14:59:52 -0400 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Re: ale yeast for fake lagers? At 7:58 AM -0700 5/24/99, Bryan Gros wrote (referring to my comment about Anchor Steam: >what do you mean by "*ale* type beer"? Do you mean estery? Yes. I think it was Michael Jackson who wrote, some years ago, that Anchor Steam was really indistinguishable from a pale ale, and a fine one at that. >Is there any good yeast choice for making an acceptable lager tasting >beer while fermenting at, say, 62 or so? I don't have any suggestions from experience, but I have tasted 2112 fermented at that temp in homebrews and felt it wasn't particularly lager like. Nottingham has been recommended on HBD and by the manufacturer for this, but I recently had a very fruity homebrewed ale fermented fairly cool with it. It had strawberry and pear aromas. Perhaps the brewer didn't keep it as cool as he thought. Chico/American yeast has also been recommended, but again, I have tasted some less than lager like brews from it. OTOH, I have been fooled a couple of times, but don't know by which yeasts. I think that cool temps is a big factor. Perhaps aeration, trub, pitching size and other factors play a part as well. Jeff -=-=-=-=- Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, c/o nerenner at umich.edu "One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 15:58:08 -0500 From: toml at ednet.rvc.cc.il.us (Tom Lombardo) Subject: Re: hop-ectomy Matt writes: >I made a big mistake the other day. I was checking on my hop bines and >noticed >that one of them was not wrapping itself around the twine. In an attempt >to >encourage it I started to wrap it around and it snapped off at the top. I >think >it was probably too cold. Am I right in assuming that this bine will not >grow >any higher (it's only about 4' tall). Should I just hack it off at the >base and >let another one grow up? Matt, Been there, done that. From the point of separation, two branches will grow. You'll get a somewhat shorter, but bushier plant. Let it grow. Tom (in Rockford IL) Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 16:37:29 -0500 From: "WILLIAM R. SIEBEL" <SIEBELINSTITUTE at worldnet.att.net> Subject: Yeast Culturing Hi Harlan Bauer, To repeat your process: Your "final"stage propagation is 3-4 gallons that is cultured in a 1/4 bbl Sanke keg. This is used to pitch 1 bbl wort in a 7 bbl cylindroconical fermenter. After 24 hrs this volume is topped up to 7 bbl and fermented out as the "first brew". To answer your questions: 1. Should you aerate the 3-4 bbl starter continously? If your stirring in the Sanke keg is adequate, additional aeration should not be necessary. However, you must insure that you are venting the CO2 from the keg. You do not want any CO2 pressure build-up as this will retard yeast growth.I assume that you have removed the check valve. If you are going to aerate, this will not do any harm, and air will be adequate. 2. What would be the optimum temp. of the starter for ale yeast? A general rule of thumb for any yeast propagation is to propagate at fermentation temperature.There is some controversy about this, but my personal opinion is that, if it is possible, stick to the rule of thumb. 3. When would be the optimum time to pitch? Depending on the yeast strain and the dilution steps that you are using during your propagation, the 3-4 gallon stage should be ready to to pitch into 1 bbl after 2-3 days. 4. On the second day, when you step up to 7 bbl, should you aerate the wort? Yes, you should aerate your wort to the usual level for the beer style( normally ~8ppm). A comment that I would have: Make sure that 24 hrs is the optimum time to transfer from 1 to 7 bbls. Again depending on the strain, this time may be shorter or longer. As a guideline, the best time to transfer to the next stage of propagation is at maximum yeast count. If you have the facility to perform yeast counts on your propagation stages, this is the best guideline that you can use. Happy Brewing! Lyn Kruger Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 16:44:37 -0700 From: Ted McIrvine <McIrvine at ix.netcom.com> Subject: lag times The easiest way to have a non-existent lag time is to reuse yeast from a primary fermentation that has just finished! I often get a massive fermentation in an hour or so. It is nice to hear that your long lag times aren't causing infection, but they approach the time needed for lactic bacteria, wild yeasts, and other nasties to get a foothold. Introducing a pack of liquid yeast to a quart of starter can produce long lag times for the starter, and that is bad too. If using yeast from a new pack, I get best results by using a small starter of 2-4 oz. of wort and double the amount every 12 hours until it is time to brew. If you can pitch your yeast at high kreusen, it will take off most rapidly. Cheers Ted > From: JPullum127 at aol.com > Subject: lag times > > i'm curious about how people are getting these ultra-short lag times. > i still am averaging 16-18 hours before i see any activity and then > usually have an inch or so of foam within 2-4 hours after that. the > beers all taste fine so this isn't really a problem but i would like > to see one of these 2-3 hours starts sometime. thamks marc Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 18:00:38 EDT From: Larsonjw at aol.com Subject: Dr. Pivo's Question about Kraeusening and Foam Dear Dr. Pivo, Several of us at Siebel's have made kraeusened and non-kraeusened beers at the same time, in the same brewery and our feeling is unanimous: kraeusened beer has better foam, everything else being equal (which it seldom is!). As far as a real reason for this, we haven't heard one either. Yeast could be a factor but we know that yeast autolysis can be a negative foam factor. Other explanations such as more and different residual extract after kraeusening - or wort components in the kraeusen ending up in the beer as opposed to stuck in a fermenter brandhefe ring - have been offered. None have been proven, but they have been the subject of many lively discussions in the Siebel Alumni Room after school. Cheers, Jim Larson Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 18:39:25 EDT From: Radzan1000 at aol.com Subject: answer by j power - siebel - to rob moline - subject: clinitest ON THE USE OF CLINITEST SUGAR DETERMINATION KIT - WAS THIS A LEADING QUESTION? I KNOW LALLEMAND USES THE TEST ON ALL OF THEIR YEAST AND I AM THANKFUL TO THEM FOR SHARING THEIR APPLICATION. WE PROMOTE THE CLINITEST WHEREVER AND WHENEVER WE CAN. THE CLINIITEST IS A QUICK, SIMPLE AND INEXPENSIVE MEASURE OF "REDUCING SUGAR" AVAILABLE FOR DIABETICS AT LARGER DRUG STORES. REDUCING SUGAR MEASURE IN BREWING ORIGINATED IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY AND CONTINUES TO BE USED INTO THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURE. THE TEST, THOUGH, DOES REQUIRE SOME INTERPRETATION OF THE RESULTS. FERMENTABLE SUGARS GIVE A HIGH REDUCING SUGAR VALUE, BUT NON-FERMENTABLE SUGARS (DEXTRINS) GIVE SOME REACTION ALSO. THE AVERAGE BEER HAS A REDUCING SUGAR LEVEL OF ABOUT 1% AS MALTOSE DUE TO THE PRESENCE OF THOSE DEXTRINS AFTER COMPLETE FERMENTATION OF SUGAR. THE CLINITEST MEASURES SUGAR "AS GLUCOSE" AND SINCE MALTOSE IS TWICE AS LARGE AS GLUCOSE, 1% MALTOSE CORRESPONDS TO ABOUT 0.5% GLUCOSE IN COMPLETELY FERMENTED BEER USING TTHE CLINITEST. BEERS WITH MORE THAN 0.5% CLINITEST READING ARE NOT COMPLETELY FERMENTED, UNLESS THE WORT EXTRACT LEVEL WAS UNUSUALLY HIGH. IN THIS CASE MORE DEXTRINS WILL BE PRESENT, MAYBE ENOUGH TO GIVE A READING OF ABOUT 0.75% (WE ESTIMATE BETWEEN LEVELS GIVEN ON THE CHART). WE ALSO USE A GUIDELINE THAT NO MORE THAN AN ESTIMATED 0.25% GLUCOSE ABOVE THE FINAL EXPECTED READING SHOULD BE PRESENT BEFORE WE TRANSFER BEER FROM FERMENTATION TO STORAGE. THIS ASSUMES THAT THE FINAL 0.25% GLUCOSE EQUIVELANTS OF SUGAR CAN BE FERMENTED DURING STORAGE. USING THE "FIVE DROP TEST" WILL GIVE YOU A QUICK ANSWER TO THE QUESTION "IS FERMENTATION COMPLETE?" WITH ONLY FIVE DROPS OF BEER. JOE POWER Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 18:39:27 EDT From: Radzan1000 at aol.com Subject: answer by j. power - siebel - to aj de lange - subject: phytin PYTHIN IS AN INSOLUBLE STORAGE COMPOUND FOUND IN RAW BARLEY. AT THE CENTER OF THE COMPOUND IS INOSITOL, A SUBSTANCE FOUND IN SOME LIPID COMPONENTS OF CELL MEMBRANES LIKE THOSE IN THE YEAST. INOSITOL ACTS AS A VITAMIN TO PROMOTE YEAST GROWTH. INOSITOL ITSELF HAS SIX HYDROXY (-OH) GROUPS. ALL SIX HYDROXY GROUPS ARE COMBINED WITH PHOSPHATE (PHOSPHORIC ACID) IN PHYTIC ACID. THE PHOSPHATES ARE NEGATIVELY CHARGED AND IN TURN FORM SALTS WITH MANY IMPORTANT MINERAL IONS INCLUDING LARGE AMOUNTS OF POTASSIUM AND MAGNESIUM, A FAIR AMOUNT OF CALCIUM, AND MINOR NUTRIENT MINERALS SUCH AS ZINC, MANGANESE AND OTHERS. THE MINERAL IONS ARE RELEASED BY PHOSPHATE (SOMETIMES SPECIFICALLY CALLED PHYTASE) ENZYME DURING GERMINATION OF MALT. WORT HAS LARGE AMOUNTS OF PHOSPHATE, POTASSIUM, MAGNESIUM AND A FAIR AMOUNT OF CALCIUM PLUS OTHER MINERALS AND INOSITOL DUE TO DIGESTED PHYTIN. ALL OF THESES ARE IMPORTANT FOR YEAST GROWTH. PHOSPHATASE OR PHYTASE ENZYME ACTIVITY CAN OCCUR AT LOW TEMPERATURE IN A MASH. NOT ALL OF THE PHYTIN IS DIGESTED DURING MALTING, SO THERE CAN BE SOME INCREASE DURING MASHING. MALT IS SUCH A GOOD SOURCE OF DIGESTED PHYTIN PRODUCTS THAT THERE HAS NEVER BEEN ANY REAL CONCERN WITH ENCOURAGING ADDITIONAL DIGESTION IN THE MASH - THERE IS NO NEED FOR IT, EVEN IN HIGH ADJUNCT BEERS. PROBABLY FOR THIS REASON THERE HAS NOT BEEN MUCH RESEARCH DONE ON PHYTASE. PROFESSOR NARZISS MADE SOME ATTEMPT TO EVALUATE PHOSPHATASE ACTIVITY IN THE MASH ("THE INFLUENCE OF MASHING PROCEDURE ON THE ACTIVITY AND EFFECT OF SOME ENZYMES - A SURVEY" PUBLISHED IN THE MBAA TECHNICAL QUARTERLY, VOL. 13, No.1, PAGE 11-21). HE CONCLUDED THAT "TEMPERATURES IN THE RANGE OF 50-53C PROVED TO BE THE MOST EFFECTIVE" IN INCREASING ACIDITY OF A MASH, PRESUMABLY BY RELEASING ACID PHOSPHATE. JOE POWER Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 19:37:51 EDT From: Radzan1000 at aol.com Subject: answer of j. power - siebel to guy burgess - subject: acidulated The only information you have on the water is the pH of 7.2-7.5. This is an interesting number, but an almost completely useless piece of information as far as brewing goes. If you had the alkalinity value for the water, you could use the pH to calculate the amount of carbon dioxide dissolved in the water. As soon as the water is heated for sparging, the carbon dioxide will be driven off. The alkalinity or bicarbonate content will for the most part remain in the heated sparge water and may affect the quality of wort as run-off continues. Bicarbonate alkalinity acts as a buffer, affecting the pH of wort even during run-off. The best way to evaluate the effects of sparge water on pH is to measure the pH of wort coming out of the lauter. This should never be above 6.0 or undesirable components start to be extracted from the grain in the lauter. The most valuable piece of information on a water analysis is alkalinity. If you have the alkalinity value of the water, a general rule is that if the alkalinity as calcium carbonate is under 100 ppm, you probably will not need to adidify the sparge water unless you run off for an unusually long time. See our response to Jeffery Kenton for more discussion on sparge water and acidification. As far as beer quality goes, pH also has an effect on maturation and stability of beer after fermentation. The best place to control pH of fermented beer is in the wort after the mash. This might involve acidifying the sparge water or thr wort during boil or it might involve addition of extra calcium at those points. We usually see beer pH in the 4.2-4.5 range; you can experiment to find out what beer pH gives the best quality from your standpoint. Joe Power Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 19:37:53 EDT From: Radzan1000 at aol.com Subject: answer of j.power - siebel to jm kenton - subject: acidification of The only reason to acidify the sparge water is to keep down the pH in the mash in the lauter during the last stages of run-off. The pH of the wort coming off is the best place to measure this effect. A good rule is to make certain that the pH of any wort being collected, especially of the last wort, should never be above 6.0. This will prevent extraction of undesirable material. If you find the pH goes above 6.0, you should acidify the sparge water. Otherwise the only reason to acidify the sparge water would be to let the acid carry through and acidify the wort being boiled. This could be accomplished by acidifying the wort directly - the choice is up to you. A reason for acidifying the wort might be to lower the pH of the fermented beer. Addition of acid to wort is more effective than adding the same acid to mash in lowering the pH of the final beer. In addition, you may not want to add all acid to the mash because the effect on enzymes in the mash may not be the one you desire. Temperature in the grain bed should be no lower than 60C and no higher than 80C. If the temperature gets too low, nun-off will be very slow and may become completely stuck. If the temperature is too high, all alpha amylase enzyme will be destroyed and some starchy material will develop either slowing the run-off or producing a starch haze in the beer. Within this range the higher the temperature, the lower the wort viscosity and the easier the run-off. About 75C is usually found most desirable. Joe Power Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 18:16:47 -0700 From: "Perle" <perle at postalzone.com> Subject: Re: Wort Chiller Efficiency............ The effiecncy of the wort chiller was not in question, yet was there a negative effect on the wort to reinfuse the chilled wort into the kettle to lower the temperature to the point when it could be pumped directly to the yeast slurry awaiting the fermenter. It takes 3 minutes of recirculation to in the brew kettle to lower the temp from boiling to 170 deg. Then at this point the wort outflow temp is 75 deg. , and can be directed to the fermenter. Is it "bad" to abuse the wort this way? Joe at the Victory Brewery of Oregon Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 21:22:09 -0400 From: Nathan Kanous <nlkanous at pharmacy.wisc.edu> Subject: RO Water....what's left? I've considered using RO water for brewing beer. My house has a water softener and I like that. I can choose to purchase or otherwise make RO water (aquarium and beer both need "good" water). I was under the impression that RO water was similar to distilled water (no ions / minerals) but had also removed organics and particulates. Fix, in AOBT, says "RO is a series of membrane filters that effectively removes organics, inorganics, and microbes. It also removes some water minerals, although generally it leaves water chlorine levels unchanged." How can you remove everything but the chlorine? nathan in madison, wi Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 23:09:16 -0500 From: "Rob Moline" <brewer at isunet.net> Subject: The Jethro Gump Report The Jethro Gump Report Tonight, I am reminded of many past events..... I remember George Sears, from Beenleigh High.... I remember Roderick Thomson...In his own word's he was a "wee Scottish git,"....he gave his life in Sri Lanka...died in Geneva.... I rememeber Sig, and Av, Chris, Cook, and Rick.......and mates worth having..... And brewers that gave of themselves.... But, with the knowledge of the weekend's events...I attended a party tonight, arranged some time ago, for a bloke that was leaving his employer, after a few years.... My son Robbie, 2 years old, was delighted to present Mike with a present....a stuffed frog.... When I explained to Robbie that whenever Mike saw that frog, he would remember him....he exclaimed..... "So, I go with him?" Mike gave Robbie a balloon.....filled with helium, tied to his arm.....and ....it died in the car on the way home....burst.... At home, Robbie could not be assuaged from his heaving, desperate crying, despondently calling..."Poppa....make my balloon better." His anguish surges, rasping, flailing....finally catharsing into sleep... But I know....my sleep will not catharse so easily........I cannot make this better.... Steve Perry, Administrator for the Institute for Brewing Studies, passed away last Saturday, within 48 hours of the birth of his daughter, the Perry's first child, Caroline..... "So, I go with you?" I only hope so.... Rob Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 23:36:05 -0500 From: "Rob Moline" <brewer at isunet.net> Subject: Jethros Done... Jethros Done... I'm done....Won't be back for a while............. Commercial obligations will be proficiently handled.... What counts for a brewer???? Does he get support from his organization??? His Community? His customers? Any body? Rob Moline brewer at isunet.net "The More I Know About Beer, The More I Realize I Need To Know More About Beer!" Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 05/25/99, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96