---

	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: Carbonating Kegs & chilling beer ("C.D. Pritchard")
  warm water cooling (Fred)
  pre-chiller (Mark Tumarkin)
  Hot Weather (Martin A. Gulaian)
  Survey Says ... (Demonick)
  I guess not (Kris G. Mueller)
  1bbl setup (Terry)
  Where Have All the Pivos Gone? (Lester Long)
  Weiz words... (MICHAEL WILLIAM MACEYKA)
  Dogma ("Don Van Valkenburg")
  effluvia and Ice Cream Mixer motors (Stephen and Carolyn Ross)
  Canine mother? (Pat Babcock)
  Dishwashers as "Sanitizers" ("Eric J Fouch")
  FW: The Indiana Gump Report ("Rob Moline")
  I've had enough (FridayMtn)
  Re: Dogma? /Whose Dogma ? ("Stephen Alexander")
  A chilling data point OR this is really cool ("Frederick L. Pauly")
  A gentle reminder (Jeff Renner)
  Re: Dogma? (Jeff Renner)


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

* Subscribe to the Distilled Beverage Digest
* Send "subscribe" in body of note to dbd-request@hbd.org
* Subscribe to the Home Vintners' Digest
* Send "subscribe" in body of note to hvd-request@hbd.org

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: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 09:30:02
From: "C.D. Pritchard" <cdp at chattanooga.net>
Subject: re: Carbonating Kegs & chilling beer

Eric Schoville asked:

>Also, almost all of my ales are cloudy.  Does anyone have
>any recommendations on how to fix this problem?

Other than a brew that used a home stored yeast that must have mutated into
something that didn't want to settle, my cloudy ales have been due to chill
haze.  Assess this by chilling the brew and seeing if it gets hazy.  For
chill haze removal, I chill in a corny (it's the secondary fermenter and
has the dip tube shortened by 1-2") to 40 degF and then gently stir in 2-3
Tbs. of polyclar "disolved" (doesn't really disolve, so stir it before
adding to keg) in about a cup of 170 degF water.  Some warn of foaming from
liberation of adsorbed CO2, but I've never had that problem.  I usually let
it sit for a week and then rack to the dispensing keg which gets force
carbonated.  If you're patient, skipping the polyclar and letting the keg
sit at 40 degF for 1-2 months will allow the haze to settle.

As for Eric's question on force vs. natural carbonation, I've never tried
natural carbonation.  I like forced carb. becasue it yields a finished brew
in a day once you get the hang of it.  For ales at 40 degF, I hook CO2 at
20 psig to the beer out line and rock the keg (while it's standing upright)
until no more CO2 is taken up by the brew then remove the CO2.  Next day,
reduce the pressure back to dispensing pressure if necessary and it's ready
to dispense.   

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
Dana H. Edgell asked:

>Does anyone out there with warm chilling water, pre-cool it
>further with an imersion coil in ice/water? If so can you give any details
>about how this performs? i.e. temperature differential, gal/min, coil
>length etc.

I tried a prechilling coil of about 20' of 3/8" copper tubing in a pincic
cooler containing an ice/water bath to reduce the tap water temp. but had
to add a pump in the bath to move the iced water over the coil to get
decent heat transfer.  Even then, I wasn't impressed with the dT across the
prechiller.  It then it dawned on me that my HLT was insulated and has a
pump, so... I use an immersion chiller and powered stirrer in the boiler
(details of both via the web page below) to cool the wort until the
discharge water from the chiller is just barely warmer than the entering
tap water then fill the HLT with ice and water and *recirculate* the iced
water through the chiller.   Takes about 20 minutes total to chill 5
gallons this way when the tap water is ~75 degF.  Eyeballing the flows: 4
GPM for the tap water and 1-2 GPM for the ice water.  BTW, a stirrer in the
boiler really speeds wort chilling with an immersion chiller.


c.d. pritchard cdp at chattanooga.net 
http://chattanooga.net/~cdp/  



Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 10:30:19 -0400
From: Fred at KingstonCo.com
Subject: warm water cooling

Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 15:54:52 -0700
From: "Dana H. Edgell" <edgell at cari.net>
Subject: Yankees & chilling beer

Dana Edgell asks:

>Does anyone out there with warm chilling water, pre-cool it
>further with an immersion coil in ice/water? If so can you give any details
>about how this performs? i.e. temperature differential, gal/min, coil
>length etc.

Yes... My well water here in South Florida is a constant 78 degrees. I use a
25' copper immersion chiller in my boiler connected to a 25' copper
pre-chiller coil in a 5gal bucket. Performance is generally measured by the
differential between the cooling water and the water to be cooled... I just
run the water straight, no ice, to begin with, until the temp drops to about
100 degrees, (the differential between 78 and 200 is pretty good) then I add
ice to the pre-chiller(the differential between 100 and 78 isn't too
cool!!). I also have a 19' freezer in the garage. Any time I see that the
ice maker bucket in my regular refer is full, I just dump it to a 5gal.
bucket in the freezer. By brew day, it's usually full, so getting ice here
isn't a problem. Overall, the cooling process is about 45 minutes... I have
the stuff to make a copper counter-flow chiller... and in hindsight... if
I'd have known the numbers... I wouldn't have wasted the time to make the
chained immersion chillers... I'd have made the counter-flow chiller from
the start... And of course... my water's a bit un-cool... so depending on
what your water temp is, your mileage will vary...


Fred Kingston
Kingston & Company
http://www.KingstonCo.com



Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 10:24:54 -0400
From: Mark Tumarkin <mark_t at ix.netcom.com>
Subject: pre-chiller

Dana Edgell writes:
Uh-Oh, I had better insert a brewing note before I go to justify this
waste
of space. Does anyone out there with warm chilling water, pre-cool it
further with an imersion coil in ice/water? If so can you give any
details
about how this performs? i.e. temperature differential, gal/min, coil
length etc.

Living in Florida (Gainesville's in North Fl, so that makes me a ... oh,
nevermind) the ground water is never really cold enough to chill
adequately. So I use a prechiller. Not being of the scientific
persuasion, I haven't measured and therefore can't tell you the temp
differential or gal/min. However, simply - it works well. I had bought a
50' coil of 3/8" copper tubing at Home Depot (insert standard
disclaimer). I used a 30 foot section to make my immersion chiller -
coiled around a corny keg. Using my tap water this cooled the wort, but
only down to approx 95-100 degrees. I took the remaining 20', made
another coil and plumbed it inline before the main chiller. I simply put
this into a pot containing a bath of mostly ice and some water. It does
the trick, I can now drop the temps down to approx 80 degrees very
quickly - less than 15 minutes.

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

A current (or re-current) theme on the HBD recently has been the science
vs art of brewing. This seems to get a lot of folks on both sides a
little too stressed. Just chill out, consume another hand-crafted malt
beverage. Hit the page down key, whatever. As I said, I'm not
scientific, I don't understand some of what is being discussed, but I do
read most of it. If I'm totally lost or bored, the page down always
works. The unfortunate part of this whole thing is when people take it
too personally (and there has been some fairly personal name-calling).

Bob Uhl called for a split in the digest into two parts - art and
science, I don't think that will ever happen but it would be a shame if
it did. They are both part of the same process. Take what you can from
either or both. Apply it within your understanding, capabilities, brew
system, etc. As long as you are passionate about the process and the
product, that's what the HBD is all about.

I found the interchange between Steve A and Alan McKay interesting. In
this morning's HBD Alan gives a list of topics that he feels are too
blindly accepted without enough scientific backing, they are just
repeated and passed from one brewer to the next as fact, what Jack S
refers to as momilies. Some of these ideas/practices are commonly
accepted, some aren't - most of them certainly generate ongoing
discussion - with often opposing viewpoints being stated. Again, that's
what the HBD is all about.

The HBD has been my main source of knowledge, and certainly inspiration,
for homebrewing. My thanks to all of you!!! I'm more of an artisan
brewer, than scientific. But as my brewing knowledge has increased over
the last several years I find that I understand more of the science side
as well, so I'm glad to see the highly technical/scientific discussions
as well as the basic newbie questions. They are both integral parts of
the HBD.

To bring this back round to Dana's question. There are certain things
that keep coming up in the HBD because they are so crucial to producing
the best beer you can. Cooling is one of these things. Throughout all
the science and art posts, I try to pull out the things I can apply as
'best practices.'  Cooling your wort quickly is one of these. But we all
apply them as we find appropriate to our own breweries. I think that
counter-flow chillers may be  more efficient, but I chose the simplicity
and ease of sanitation with the immersion chiller. Ongoing discussions
in the HBD were what made me aware of the pros and cons of both options.

Another thing that made a huge difference in my beer quality was getting
a fermentation fridge. That may not be necessary for some of you with
cool basements (damn Yankees!), but it has made an amazing improvement
for me. I'd like to see more discussion on these best practices, the
crucial things that we can agree make the most difference in improving
our brewing, but I quess we can't always agree even on these things -
but hey, that's the nature of the HBD, and thanks for it!

Mark Tumarkin
Gainesville, FL




Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 11:14:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: mag6 at po.CWRU.Edu (Martin A. Gulaian)
Subject: Hot Weather

We've had a whole lot of 90 degree plus weather here in Cleveland
this summer, interspersed with the occasional 70 degree day or two.

Mostly I just shut down my brewing for the summer since I don't
have air conditioning or a particularly cool basement.

But I was wondering: since most of the fermentation for my ales is 
over within a couple of days anyway, could I dodge the heat by 
brewing in those two-day windows of cool weather? It'll get warm
again, but only for maybe the final 10% of the fermenting. If
all the esters and other hot weather flavors are produced during
the actual process of turning sugar into alcohol, it shouldn't
matter much.

I've seen a lot of stuff posted here about warm weather fermentation,
including finding a clean yeast, ways to keep the beer cool, and
so on, but I've never seen anything identifying the first couple
of days as a "critical period". Is it? What do you think?

- --
Marty Gulaian - Cleveland, Ohio


Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 08:16:59 -0700
From: Demonick <demonick at zgi.com>
Subject: Survey Says ...

John Palmer wrote in HBD #3079
>
>But as a born and raised Michigander, I can tell you unequivocally
>that Michiganders are not Yankees, they are Tigers!

Ahhh ... but are you DAMNED TIGERS! ?

>I have an idea. What if Pat and Mark work up a Survey form on the HBD
>website that we all could fill out to describe how we brew? You know,
>whether we use extract or all grain, heat sanitize, iodophor, bleach,
>couterflow or immersion chill or waterbath, primarily ales or lagers,
>keg or bottle, everything!

I think this is a great idea!  Way to go, John Palmer.  Something we
can all do and contribute to together.  How about Pat and Mark working
up a putative survey form and submitting it to the HBD for discussion?  
Once it appears that it is acceptable it can be posted to the HBD
Website and filled out by all.  I don't mean to load Pat and Mark up
with work, and I'd be happy to help.  We could even divy-up the
subject matter and individual volunteers could make first-pass surveys
for submission to the the group.  Perhaps this project would get us
out of this current incarnation of the periodic HBD divisiveness.

Details of water, starters, aeration, temperature, carbonation.  
Where in your process do you rely on the magic of plaid?  Barefoot?
Heating systems.  Incantations.  Bottling/kegging.  

If the idea passes muster with the masters I'd volunteer to do the
first-pass on starters.

Domenick Venezia
Venezia & Company, LLC
Maker of PrimeTab
(206) 782-1152  phone
(206) 782-6766  fax orders
demonick at zgi dot com

Pursuant to US Code, Title 47, Chapter 5, Subchapter II, '227, any and all
nonsolicited commercial E-mail sent to this address is subject to a download
and archival fee of US$ 500.  E-mailing denotes acceptance of these terms.



Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 11:43:50 -0400
From: Kris_G._Mueller at umit.maine.edu (Kris G. Mueller)
Subject: I guess not

My original question was only if anyone else found the picture
offensive. Apparently not. I was accused of being hyper-sensitive to
the PCness of my environment. It is clear to me now that the people who
responded are hyper-sensitive to other people thinking about the
implications of sexism and other biases. It is really sad. Those of you
who assumed I am a woman are wrong. That doesn't stop me from using a
critical eye when reading Zymurgy, the HBD, the New York Times, or
whatever. That is about all I want to say about this subject to this
group, as the purpose is of course better beer. Plus you all have to
keep your claws sharp so you can tear apart the AHA and get Milosovic
on Charlie. Have fun with your crusade and I will have fun with mine.
Kris


Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 11:59:04 -0400
From: terry at brewfellows.com (Terry)
Subject: 1bbl setup

Hi all,

I am in the process of installing a 1 barrel allgrain brewery in my shop for
demo purposes, and to make myself beer, of course.  I have a 50 gallon
stainless unitank. It's double walled so I plan on insulating and adding a
false bottom for use as a mash tun.  I also have a 46 gallon kettle.  I
wanted to use my existing hot water tank as a liquor tank but even with it
cranked up as far as it will go the water only comes out around 150 degrees.
Is there anyway I can modify it to get hotter water?  Also, I need a natural
gas burner that will bring about 35 gallons of wort to a boil in a
reasonable amount of time.  Any Suggestions?  This being the slow season I
have about 2 months to get this done and get the shop back in order for next
brewing season so I would appreciate any info you could give me.  Thanks in
advance.

Terry


Terry White
Brewfellow's Fermentation Services
http://www.brewfellows.com
Better Living Through Fermentation



Return to table of contents


Date: 10 Jul 1999 17:53:37 -0000
From: Lester Long <LesterLong at redneck.efga.org>
Subject: Where Have All the Pivos Gone?

This article was intended to run before my "Lady and the Dishwasher" article,
but apparently it was rejected for non-correct characters (on the keyboard,
not Pivo et. al.).  Have at you again, mates:

I am the artist formerly known as Secret Squirrel (HBD 3025).  One well-known
HBD contributor can confirm that, if he cares to do so, and if anybody else is
interested enough to doubt it.  I realize my unauthorized use of the title
"artist" will meet with some disapproval, but I can't claim to be a scientist,
so the lesser evil will have to do for now.

I began reading Dr. Pivo's swan song, beginning in HBD 3074, with some dismay
and confusion.  What's he getting on about, I wondered.  He sounds like a man
who's been issued a death sentence by the sawbones.  Finally, Pivo got to the
point - he was saying goodbye alright, but not to this mortal coil, to the HBD.
And no doubt there are those whose opinion on his exit is, "Don't let the door
hit him in the (*)".  I don't agree, and I hope Pivo will reconsider.

Recent refusals in this venue to address the good doctor of pivology by his
self-assumed title may or may not have played a part in his departure.  These
refusals were deemed in bad taste by Phil Yates (HBD 3075).  Stephen Alexander
then came forward to defend his own such refusal (HBD 3077).

"I could have called him "Pivo", but that really is ridiculous when his name is
no secret", wrote Stephen.  

Robin Griller has now uncloaked (think Star Trek, not alt.sex.whatever) to
throw water at some length on Stephen's defense.

I have to point out that Stephen apparently didn't always think it ridiculous
to call "Dr. Pivo" as such.  As recently as HBD 3031, Stephen wrote: 
"I'd cite a references (sic), but then Dr. Pivo would be on my case".  
George De Piro, who was also taken to task by Robin, was not always so adamant
about avoiding the P-word either.   George wrote in HBD 2809, 
"Dr. Pivo has raised the question ...".
To be fair, later in that same post, George also wrote, with considerable lack
of logic, 
"I don't know who you are, Dr. Pivo.  Why should I trust anything you say about
how a beer tastes?"  
I've read Michael Jackson (the beer guy, not the singer) extensively and have
seen him in person, but I wouldn't take what he says on faith, nor do I presume
to know who he "is"!  

By HBD 3013, George was refusing to address Jeff Irvine as Dr. Pivo, but he
either didn't know or refused to use Jeff's real name.
"An anonymous poster ("Dr. Pivo") has been ranting a bit ...." wrote George.  
Note the erroneous use of the term "anonymous".  Pseudonymous is the correct
word.

I have to side with Robin and Phil on this one.  Robin's dissertation on irony
(HBD 3078) was right on the mark and although I can't attribute any specific
motive to those who, as Phil put it in HBD 3075, made a "pathetic attempt to
ridicule (Pivo)", I also sensed a gloating tone in their remarks as they seemed
to revel in Pivo's outing.  It gave me the same sinking feeling in the pit of
my stomach I might have watching a pack of dogs surrounding a bear at bay.  I
also find it ironic that Jeff Irvine wasn't stripped of the Dr. Pivo title
until after he was outed by Bob Poirier in HBD 3029 (May of this year).  The
scientists were uncomfortable with the pseudonym.  Yet, they couldn't avail
themselves of the  simple technical tools available on the Internet to
determine Pivo's real name?  They had to rely on somebody stepping in and
publishing the URL to Pivo/Jeff's website?  I refuse to accept it as
coincidence that the stripping of Pivo's title followed hard on the heels of
this "outing".

I hope Dr. Pivo will stick around, under any name, although I'm comfortable
with "Dr. Pivo".  I hope Stephen Alexander will stick around, and I won't hold
it against him if he takes on an exotic nym or calls himself an artist.  In
fact, the futility of pigeon-holing people was recently brought home to me when
I quoted without attribution, in a private email to Stephen, whom I assumed had
not an artistic bone in his body, a poem by a Chinese poet who died over a
thousand years ago.  Not only did Stephen correctly attribute the poem, but he
responded with a haiku of his own, about beer, and a pretty damn good one at
that.  So he does have an artistic side.  I wish he would show it more on HBD. 
I wish Pivo would show a little more tolerance to those who like to quote from
their dusty tomes.  Can't we all just get along? Can't believe I said that!

Pivo, I want to hear about the visit of the Czechs.  I don't mind getting it
from you by email if forced to, but for the benefit of all concerned (and
apparently more than a few are interested), I wish you would let the whole
forum know.  I should also point out that you risk being called full of * if
you don't tell about it here, because people will say you were bluffing : ).

Now, I've attempted to use the scientific method to dig up who said "Pivo" and
when they stopped saying it, and the artistic method to lend some color to just
the facts, ma'am.  Somewhere in the middle, my own prejudice no doubt slipped
in.

Now, let's make some beer and then sit around and drink it.  Or something.

Lester Long
(No, that is NOT my real name, but I always did like the way it sounds!)





Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 14:16:24 -0400 (EDT)
From: MICHAEL WILLIAM MACEYKA <mmaceyka at welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: Weiz words...

Dave Riedel solicits weizen suggestions:

	It was Edelweis Dunkel that inspired me to begin brewing.  I have
tried many things over the years to make the perfect weizen, and have reached
the pinnacle only once, and then only for a few, brief, shining days.  If I
had applied more science to my endeavors, I might have been more successful
and more reproducible, and more importantly, more helpful to you.  However,
here are the few conclusions I have drawn from my own brewing and the brewing
experiences of others:

Malt extract weizens always came out too sweet, too dark, and too clear.  I
think it might have something to do with the way they are mashed and/or dried
or condensed that makes too much unfermentable sweetness and not enough
protein come through.  And I never seemed to get any clove, and only some
banana.

I have had good success with malt bills consisting of 60% malted red or white
wheat and 40% continental pilsner malt.  I can lauter this with my
Phalse-Phloater with out any trouble if I mix well and run off slowly.  Oh,
and other than yeast, water (mine is very soft), and malt, I use no more than
1 ounce of noble hops, in the 3-4% aa range, all added at the beginning of a
60-75 minute boil.

I have had problems getting enough clove flavor for my tastes, so I have
attempted to do ferulic acid rests of 15' or so at 45 C.  I have always missed
my mark and done "protein/ferulic acid" rests around 50 or so.  I raise to
sacch temps in the low 60's C (90-120' hold) with a combination of boiling
water and a 1/3 volume thick mash pull which I take straight to boiling.  The
results have been clear (! crystal if I leave in the fridge for a few days and
donUt rouse the sediment) weizens with good balance between clovey phenolics
and fruity esters and still plenty of protein chewiness.

I believe the yeast is the most important ingredient in making a weizen.  I
always use lots of Wyeast 3068.  It is a bit difficult for me to convert my
yeast growing system into commonly used ones.  I think I pitch roughly the
equivalent of at least a two quart starter.  I have found my samples of this
yeast to be a little more flocculant than most claim (though still not very, I
say low-med low) and very attenuative.  I usually ferment around the mid 60's
F.  Fermentation temperature, aeration (I just shake and swirl the carboy),
and pitching rates all have tremendous impacts on the flavor profile.  It
seems that the higher temps favor esters and lower pitching rates favor
phenolics.  My current thinking is that I taste bubblegummy flavors if
woefully underpitched and Band-Aid like flavors if only moderately
underpitched (with the former being suprisingly better, though usually too
sweet and flat).  These latter conclusions may be confounded by the fact that
they were also extract beers.

As for reusing the yeast: I have found that 3068 may not be the same yeast
twice.  The Wyeast 3068 is a single strain, but I have found as I culture it,
it seems to behave somewhat differently from batch to batch.  The differences
I have noticed seem to be mainly in the ester profile, shifting from
banana-dominated to red fruit-dominated.  One person, an extremely good brewer
and yeast manager, who used it several times in a row without reculturing made
a beer with little or none of the defining esters or phenolics.  This is not
just a problem with home culturers.  Ray Daniel's reports in his excellent
book, "Designing Great Beers" that the strain designated as Weihenstephan 68
from several different sources (Wyeast's is 3068) behaved differently in side
by side fermentations of the same wort.  All of this suggests that mutations
may crop up from time to time which are noticeable in the beer.  However, I
and others who have reused the yeast cake once have not found significant
differences between the yeast components of the flavor profile.

The one thing that we all see is that the flavor profile of the beers changes
daily.  Usually the esters peak and then decline, sometimes in a matter of a
week, with the phenolics declining more slowly and eventually plateauing as
the dominant flavor.  However, the few times that a couple of us put
dunkelweizens on top of the yeast cake from a just fermented weizen, the ester
profile seemed to be much more stable.  Whether this is from more yeast (which
seems counter-intuitive), higher gravity or luck I do not know.  I have never
been satisfied with my dunkelweizen recipes, so I will leave it to others to
make suggestions.

What has seemed to help me the most in making better weizens is to 1) stick
with one regime and change as few variables as possible from the last time and
2) Repeat 1. This might seem anal to some, but I am after something more than
a drinkable beer.  And yes, I enjoy doing it.

	Hope this helps, hope this is but one of many weizen posts to come,
and hope I finally figure out how to reproducibly brew one of the best, yet
more elusive, of beer styles.


Mike Maceyka
Baltimore, MD
mmaceyka at jhmi.edu

Having my idea of fun, and sipping Egaardense Tripel, the best, and never
resurrected, tripel made in Baltimore...




Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 15:37:00 -0700
From: "Don Van Valkenburg" <don at steinfillers.com>
Subject: Dogma

Three cheers for Alan McKay who tells it like it is.  There is far too many
assumptions that are thrown around without much thought, or even better
trial and more trial.  Without trial and repeatable results we are not much
better than Born-again-brewers who are repeating the sins of previous
brewers.

Secondary fermentors are another dogmatic MUST-DO that is in my mind of
questionable value.  I have often been quoted Charlie P. who suggests doing
a secondary.  When I had the opportunity to ask him in person, he said
something to the effect -- I am paraphrasing him here (not a quote)--  you
don't have always do a secondary and I don't always do one myself - relax
and have a homebrew.

Cheers
Don Van Valkenburg
brew at steinfillers.com
www.steinfillers.com



Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 17:03:01 -0600
From: rosses at sprint.ca (Stephen and Carolyn Ross)
Subject: effluvia and Ice Cream Mixer motors

Dear collective,

I have found that when brewing with sexist pictures of damn Yankees using
Clinitest in aluminum it's best to use a coarse crush and acidify the
sparge.  Keeps the bitterness from getting excessive.


Mike Pensiger (BeerLvr at hrfn.net) wrote:
>I saw a web site the other day that had a mash mixer on it.  The individual
>used an Ice cream maker motor and paddle.  I have picked up a few of these
>in the past at thrift stores and garage sales for ~$5 or so.  Seems that
>that might provide a high torque motor that should work.


What website Mike?  I've found some excellent sites

http://www.hom.net/~rogerson/brewpage.html
http://www.flash.net/~arkmay/Mark/rsf_tour/index.html

through the HBD on making RIMS or mixmashers, but something that uses an
Ice Cream motor may be more fitting for my admittedly poor gadget-making
skills.

Any thoughts gadgeteers? TIA,

Stephen

_______________________________________________________________
        The Rosses                       rosses at sprint.ca
   Stephen, Carolyn and Sam                306.665.8336

                    "Vitae sine cerevesiae sugat."




Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 22:59:09 -0400 (EDT)
From: Pat Babcock <pbabcock at mail.oeonline.com>
Subject: Canine mother?

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

Canine mother. Dogma. Dog ma. Get it? Anyway, "Don Van Valkenburg"
<don at steinfillers.com> sez... 


> Secondary fermentors are another dogmatic MUST-DO that is in my mind of
> questionable value.  I have often been quoted Charlie P. who suggests doing
> a secondary.  When I had the opportunity to ask him in person, he said
> something to the effect -- I am paraphrasing him here (not a quote)--  you
> don't have always do a secondary and I don't always do one myself - relax
> and have a homebrew.

Now wait just a minute! Who ever said a secondary is a must-do? In you r
own quote, the cult-meister merely SUGGESTS a secondary -  not like his
gypsum abuse, but a mere suggestion!

Not trying to pick on you, Don, but I've never heard the secondary foisted
as a "must do", and I've been around the block a few kicks. Doesn't mean
I've "heard it all", but I was sort of surprised by your assertion that it
was being proposed as a necessity of the process.

Me? I usually do use a secondary, but only because I'm pretty lazy. 
Wuzzat, you say? Yup. I don't like the extra work incurred in trying to
get the primed beer as trub-free as possible, so a secondary suits me just
fine! Kind of like the settling tanks in a water treatment plant: you
settle in one, then pump off to a second one and settle again. The second
has less, um, "stuff" in it that the first. The bigger solids are left
behind with each settling, so there's less to siphon. Typically, bu the
time I go to a secondary, the beer is pretty much finished fermenting, and
is just starting to drop clear (ales). Could I achieve the same results
w/o the secondary? Most definitely!

(The secondary affliction also allows us faster access to the lees for
repitching, in most cases, too - if such interests you...)

 -
See ya!

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



Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 11 Jul 1999 00:13:07 -0700
From: "Eric J Fouch" <fouches at iserv.net>
Subject: Dishwashers as "Sanitizers"

HBD:
After seeing an approbation of the Zymurgy dishwasher article (don't read
it, haven't seen it) I'm wondering about the original post involving
(remember?) the existence of micro-cocci bacteria in post dishwashed bottles
presumably according to the article.
My question is this:  Did the article post any clinical results on bottle
contaminates using the dishwasher the way I do (throw a half cup of bleach
into the washer in lieu of any detergent)?
Seems to me this would kill most of the bacteria, at least give 'em one hell
of a headache.


Eric Fou.... Loretta

PS-  Dr. Pivo: Sorry- I told Kyle not to send that hotdog video.  It's
strictly a West Coast thing.




Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 11 Jul 1999 02:56:34 -0500
From: "Rob Moline" <jethro at isunet.net>
Subject: FW: The Indiana Gump Report

  			The Indiana Gump Report
  Jethro is visiting the inlaws in Indiana...... so
 brevity is the rule.

>From: Robin Griller <rgriller at chass.utoronto.ca>
>Subject: Canadian companies, the aha, and CABA
>I was interested to see that Lallemand, of Montreal, Canada, is providing
> >goodies to members of the American Homebrewer's Association. Very
> >generous of them indeed. Does Rob know whether Lallemand is intending to
> >do something similar for members of CABA, the Canadian equivalent, or do
> >they prefer the larger market of our more populous neighbour south of
> >the border? Interesting to see such an announcement appearing on hbd the
> >day after Canada Day!
< >Robin
> >p.s. I am not a member of either organization.

   You are not a member of either org?

  ROTFL!!!!!!!

  I suggest you follow Ken Schramm's advice.

  Thank God above that Maytag, or some other dishwasher manufacturer
 didn't sponsor it!!!

 Cheers!
 Indiana Gump  :-)

PS...  Like my momma always said about raising children...."If you spit on
one,
you gotta spit on 'em all."





Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 11 Jul 1999 05:51:53 EDT
From: FridayMtn at aol.com
Subject: I've had enough

Folks,
	I've had enough.  The brewing info we get isn't worth wading through 
interminable squabbles, rails about ladies and dishwashers, geographic 
monikers and the interminable, incredibly insufferable, ramblings about 
and/or by Dr. Pivo.
This forum has become fun for a few and all but useless to many.
	It simply isn't worth wading through acres of verbiage (read that 
"verbal garbage" to harvest the occasional nugget of useful knowledge.  
	I've submitted questions and received many very helpful, friendly 
personal responses.  Perhaps that is the way to use this forum.  
	Obviously many read the hbd but few actively participate.  
	I, for one, intend to bail out for a bit and let the current three 
areas of absolutely no interest and the petty squabbles die the peaceful 
death they so richly deserve.  Perhaps, maybe a few months from now, a fresh 
breeze will have blown across this forum.  As it is right now, I think this 
subscriber will go back to wandering across beer links in search of something 
a tad more relevant to this wonderful hobby.
Thanks for the good stuff (whenever it did manage to sneak itself in),
John Terrell
fridaymtn at aol.com


Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 11 Jul 1999 12:33:41 -0400
From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Dogma? /Whose Dogma ?

Alan McKay writes ...


>Stephen Alexander asks :
>>I don't see much blind recitation - do you Alan ?
>
>Well, yes I do, actually.  Let's see :
>
>- Brewing with Aluminum
>- HSA (yes, you have some good data, but how many of the
>  folks who warn of it have actually read that.  How many
>  of the rest of us HSA our beer with no problems?)
>- Liquid vs Dry Yeast
>- The need to add malt to adjuncts when boiling them
>- use only 1/3 the amount of sugar to carb a keg
>- malt extract priming gives "creamier" head
>- use of adjuncts in extract beer w/o mashing
>- use of twist-off bottles
>
>The list goes on and on.

Whoa Alan, that's a list - but it's NOT commercial dogma.  Your original
post stated ...
>I think someone who blindly recites the dogma from the Big Boys [...]

Since when do the "big boys" tell us anything - pro or con about aluminum
pots, yeast format, partial mashing, keg priming, extract priming or
adjuncts in extract beer or HB application of twistoff bottles.   So far the
only "big boy" point that you could demonstrate was HSA and I already
addressed that one.  Even as HBD dogma goes  I *RARELY* in recent years see
anyone reciting dogmatically on the topics above.

>It's like gardening.  The majority of people who have a
>garden in their backyard use techniques [...] for large-scale,
>industrial farming.  ...[imaginary problems omitted]
 ....
Overtilling, underutilization of acreage and wasting water (which Alan
cited) are absolutely *NOT* features of modern farming practice.  Nonsense.
Go look at
http://www.agric.gov.ab.ca/navigation/crops/barley/index.html
and see what they say about row spacing, seeding rates and irrigation for
our beloved barley - noting that this info is just a crude overview of
modern practice.  I think Montana AG had a better barley site, but I can't
seem to find it alt the moment.

You appear to be phobic about commercial practices yet you clearly don't
know
what it is. Maybe it's fear of the unknown and misperception of these
techniques -
and not the techniques themselves ? Let's get back to the brewing topic.

>But you have to be very careful when reading it because the
>goals of a large-scale brewer are very different from our
>goals.

Commercial brewing does have *somewhat* (not very)  different goals than HB.
You should NOT be CAREFUL at all  about reading anything since that is a
path to a closed mind.  You should ideally be very liberal in listening to
all sources - read everything.  All information is good, all voices and
opinions add rather to than detract from your understanding - even
conflicting and incorrect ones.  You should read and listen to everything -
*and* think critically about it - then select carefully when you act.  You
certainly should not APPLY commercial brewing methods until you *understand*
the potential value and problems. But you cannot understand if you don't
read
& listen.

The biggest difference is  that of scale. HBers can afford to spend more per
batch,
but commercial operations can spend much more on equipment
that is regularly used - low O2 control, pressure controlled boilers etc.
So we each have different cost limitations.  In commercial practice the
scale issue means that a vorlauf is a small %age of the wort and that
surface
per volume in tun, boiler and fermentor is tiny compared to HB.  Thermal
flow in tiny HB fermentors is essentially non-existent, the whirlpool forces
in a tiny half bbl boiler are also microscopic.

>For one thing, they are willing to sacrifice flavour
>for shelf-life (and that's a pretty big thing).

A-B not concerned with flavor ? Not true in any way.  Most breweries would
kill to have the flavor consistency and control that A-B has - tho' they
would most certainly not choose the same flavor profile.  *SOME* commercial
brewers like A-B/Miller etc make an economic decision to produce a beer
which meets with mass market approval - making it so light and mild that
they appeal to people who (IMO) don't even like beer!  That is an
accomplishment, tho' not one I aspire to. They produce identical tasting
product in plants around the globe.  Of course Ayinger, Paulaner, Orval
and Guinness are also commercial beers that travel widely too.

Just for the record, of the journal articles I read - it appears that only
Coors, among the American mega-brewers is open in publishing their research
while A-B is pretty secretive.  In JIB and Brauwelt Int'l most papers are
from such places as Guinness, Fullers, Wehenstephan and various research
centers supported by a lot of he names you really like to see on tap.  The
notion that Bud/Miller/Coors somehow are the dominant voice in published
research and in books is very wrong.

>But on a
>homebrew level we don't even have to worry about that because
>we don't filter the yeast, and therefore get a much greater
>shelf-life out of the beer.

In my experience this is true for HB (and commercial) beer when bottle
conditioned - which means a small fraction of HB.  Other  forms of HB do
have shelflife problems.  If you have enough fridge space to quickly fridge
all your beer after fermentation, and drink it within 10 weeks - they you
most likely don't see much oxidation.  OTOH if you leave a keg - even in a
cool basement for a few weeks then you might see some highly variable
flavor changes - perhaps due to production methods.

My *opinion* is that oxidation flavor problems (oxidized oil/fatty acid
flavors, paper/cardboard flavor, 'dumbing' taste, sherry flavors and excess
aldehydes) ranks as a more serious HB problem than defective fermentation
(not infection) off flavors, yet is less well understood.  Some beer flavor
changes are not oxidative in nature, but IMO most "past it's peak" flavor
effects can be attributed to an oxidative process.  Perhaps I'm more
sensitive to this problem than most.

Of course in the final analysis are right Alan.  You  have nothing to learn
from  commercial brewers (or farmers) as long as your mind is closed and
filled with misperceptions.  So close your eyes, plug your ears, stick your
head deeper in the sand and find the 'page down' key.  You seem to think
that commercial brewers are forcing you to home brew in some particular
way - that is nonsense.  Read and consider everything then choose what works
for you.

 -S





Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 11 Jul 1999 16:22:16 -0400
From: "Frederick L. Pauly" <flp2m at unix.mail.virginia.edu>
Subject: A chilling data point OR this is really cool

I cool my 10 gallon batches with a two stage immersion chiller.
The first coil sits in an ice bath and the second coil sits in
the boil kettle. I occationally stir the one in the kettle by
grabbing the copper input/output lines. Last saturday it occured
to me that the input line, which should have been ice cold, was
not ice cold. I stirred the coil in the ice bath and felt the
input line get ice cold. No wonder it was taking so long to cool
those beers. Anyway I will be swirling both coils from now on.
Just thought I would pass this along.
Rick Pauly
Charlottesville, VA


Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 11 Jul 1999 16:05:28 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu>
Subject: A gentle reminder

In Homebrew Digest #3066 (June 25, 1999), Mike Rose  mrose at ucr.campuscw.net
wrote

>Since Jeff is gone for a week I'm going to
>wild and not put my home city.
>Lets hope he doesn't check the archives :^)

I've already severly chastised Mike in private email for this uncalled for
breech of protocol, and trust it will not happen again.  Meanwhile, all of
you other slackers who fail to let us know where you are, or don't sign
your posts (frothingslosh at aol.com just don't cut it), shape up!  I am
considering having Fred's proctologist (is he on a retainer?) make
corrective housecalls.  Or maybe the sexy housewife!  Don't say you weren't
warned when the doorbell rings!

Rennerian coordinates are optional.

Jeff

PS  I don't really need a ";-)", do I?

 -=-=-=-=-
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: Sun, 11 Jul 1999 17:00:05 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Dogma?

"Alan McKay" <amckay at nortelnetworks.com>wrote:
>Stephen Alexander asks :
>I don't see much blind recitation - do you Alan ?
>
>Well, yes I do, actually.  Let's see :
<snip>
> - The need to add malt to adjuncts when boiling them
<snip>

As I recall, I originated this "dogma" as part of my ongoing CAP project.
I said I do it because it was the traditional way that commercial brewers
of all sizes (short, fat; no, no, no, that's not what I mean to say) did
100 years ago, according to Wahl & Henius and other old sources.  Why did
they do it?  I wasn't sure.  In part I suspected it was because there would
be enough sugars produced in the mash rest before boiling that nice malty
flavors would be produced as in continental decoctions.  I also knew that
some homebrewers had reported to me that their cereal boils (corn and/or
rice) "set up" on them, and years ago I had experienced this problem, back
before I know about Wahl & Henius.  Others, including Alan, I believe, said
they had no trouble with this.  I think Alan suggested that the commercial
brewers did this so they could pump the cereal mash, something homebrewers
didn't have to do.  Then Steve Alexander (?) and I think others reported
that this avoided starch retrogradation, which could be observed as
stiffening (I think this is why oatmeal and cornmeal mush set as they cool)
and that retrograded starch has been reported as resistant to conversion.

I do know that the cereal mash thins remarkably and is easier to handle
(less potential for scorching in the boil, for instance) than all cereal
does.  I also like to do it for traditional reasons,but I think that there
has been introduced here convincing theoretical reason besides.  I don't
think this qualifies as blind recitation or dogma.

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

---