---

	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:
  Ah...ah...ah-choo! (ThomasM923)
  Zymurgy bashing ("Dan Kiplinger")
  Mash Thickness (CLOAKSTONE)
  brownish color on deleaded brass ("Ratkiewich, Peter")
  Re: HERMS plans (RobertJ)
  iodophor question ("Sieben, Richard")
  Hoppy Pilsners, MIcrowaving mashes (Dave Burley)
  Re: Aventinus clone (KMacneal)
  What can I expect?... ("Darrell Leavitt")
  first pilsner (Dave Hinrichs)
  Homemade wine and Bucket seals (Dan Listermann)
  re:Idophor troubles (tmorgan)
  RE: Dan Kiplinger/Schmidling ("Donald D. Lake")
  yeast growth ("Alan Meeker")
  RE: beer vs. wine making (LaBorde, Ronald)
  White Horse Old Ale festival ("Nigel Porter")
  cleaning up old corny kegs (Mark Tumarkin)
  re: Iodophor Troubles (Mark Tumarkin)
  winemaking vs. homebrewing (Scott Birdwell)
  Brains and humility ("Jack Schmidling")
  RE: The Microwave? (Bob Sheck)
  My PBW Story (phil sides jr)
  Hop teas (Part 2) (Bob.Sutton)


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

* The HBD now hosts eight digests related to this and a few other hobbies.
* Send an email note to majordomo at hbd.org with the word "lists" on one 
* line, and "help" on another (don't need the quotes) for a listing and
* instructions for use.


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: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 00:38:37 EST
From: ThomasM923 at aol.com
Subject: Ah...ah...ah-choo!

In the HBD #3159 Dave Burley wrote:

"Rather than a hop tea added to the secondary, I routinely add hops at the 
nose for lagers."

Uh, you mean like snuff? Wow, that's going for the gusto all right...
I assume you recommend pellets...

Thomas Murray


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 02:28:57 -0500
From: "Dan Kiplinger" <knurdami at iname.com>
Subject: Zymurgy bashing

In response to:

>Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 07:52:35 PST
>From: "Foster Jason" <jasfoster at hotmail.com>
>Subject: Zymurgy Criticisms

>Now, this is clearly a factually accurate statement. However, it misses the
>point. Zymurgy is not intended as an "advanced or technical" magazine. It
>does not bill itself to be one and does not promise to satisfy the advanced
>homebrewers needs.

I agree totally!  If all of the magazines go to such high degrees of
technical talk than we can kiss goodbye all of the future homebrewers that
may end up as technically inclined as some of us think that we are.  I
highly doubt that anyone who is a homebrewer started out knowing everything.
I have read and will continue to read and support Zymurgy.  They have done
marvelous things for our cause.

Dan





Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 06:34:51 EST
From: CLOAKSTONE at aol.com
Subject: Mash Thickness

Nathan writes re: mash thickness:

>don't forget that PU undergoes an extensive decoction mash which 
could provide for the "rich dextrinous wort "...

I don't believe the decoction method is related to dextrin/maltose balances, 
rather the relative enzymatic activity of beta and alpha amylase.  

The true test would be to do two single infusion mashes (1) with the same 
water to grist ratio PU uses (I believe about 4 qts/pound) and (2) "Standard" 
1 qt/#, both conducted at 145, and see what one ends up with.  In fact, now 
that I'm inspired, I'll conduct a minimash and do a forced ferment and report 
on the results.  

Cheers,



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 07:52:50 -0500 
From: "Ratkiewich, Peter" <PRATKIEWICH at ci.westport.ct.us>
Subject: brownish color on deleaded brass

I was deleading a couple of brass fittings the other day.  Using a solution
of 1 part Hydrogen Peroxide to two parts white vinegar, as has been
previously suggested in this forum, I soaked the parts for 24 hours.  Upon
removing them from solution, portions of the brass parts had a brownish
coloration to them.  The rest of the surfaces appeared to be normal with a
dull tinge to the brass color.  Can any of the resident metallurgists out
there tell me if this is normal, and what the brownish color is? Should I
worry about removing it? The fittings are off-the-shelf brass compression
fittings to be used in my heat exchanger, so there will be contact with


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 08:11:12 -0500
From: RobertJ <pbsys at pbsbeer.com>
Subject: Re: HERMS plans

"Jeff Hewit" <aleman_ at excite.com> wrote:


I have seen some discussion on HERMS systems.  (I forget exactly what
"HERMS" stands for, except that "RM"  means "recirculating mash.")  My
understanding is that wort is pumped through a heat excahanger in the hot
liquor tank as an alternative to using an electric heating element in the
traditional RIMS set up. ...  I'm sure someone has posted
details on these set ups.  Does anyone know of any Web sites that include
HERMS plans?

We include plans with our HERMS (tm) kit. A discussion of HERMS (tm) and
it's performance can be found on our web site
http://pbsbeer.com/pbs/pbscat.html

Our home page, pbsbeer.com, includes links to brewers systems , some of
whom have built there own versions of HERMS (tm)

Bob


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 08:18:45 -0600 
From: "Sieben, Richard" <SIER1 at Aerial1.com>
Subject: iodophor question

Bob Fesmire related a no rinse use of iodophor yesterday and wanted to know
if he ruined a batch of beer.  Well, that depends.  It sounded like you
transferred into the just sanitized carboy before letting it dry, that would
be bad, especially if you made a lighter bodied beer.  Iodophore becomes
inactivated when it dries, so you should always have your equipment
sanitized and dried before you use it.  All you need do is turn your carboy
upside down a couple days before you need to use it to let all the liquid
drain out and have time to dry, bad stuff won't crawl up into it, bacteria
rains down into things.  Ok, so did you ruin your beer?  Taste will tell,
you may get away with it this time.  I have only ruined one batch of beer
and it was because one of my brew buddies had used iodophor at double the
recommended rate AND the beer was a very light bodied beer that can show
every defect. The beer was visually perfect, clear, good head....but the
taste was IODINE!  YUCK!!!

So the moral of the story is, use per instructions and let equipment dry
before use.

Rich Sieben


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 09:22:14 -0500
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com>
Subject: Hoppy Pilsners, MIcrowaving mashes

Brewsters:

Spencer Thomas sent me the following notes to help
straighten out what I thought was a mantra among
BJCP judges regarding no hoppy nose and lagers.

He said to me:

"  Dave> I disagree with many BJCP judges and
                 others who say a good
    Dave> lager should not have a hop aroma.

Who said that!?

I have seen comments that a continental pilsner
should not have a *dry hop* aroma.  Which,
judging by the examples we get here, is true.  (Of
course I'm sure there are hausbraueries in
Germany that dry hop their lagers...)  


I quote from the official BJCP guidelines in
support of hop aroma:

    2A. Bohemian Pilsner
    Aroma: Rich with a complex malt and a
    spicy, floral, Saaz hop bouquet.

    2B. Northern German Pilsner 

    Aroma: May feature grain and
    distinctive, flowery, noble hops.

    2C. Dortmunder Export 

    Aroma: Low to medium German
    or Czech hop aroma. 


On the other hand:

    9A. Oktoberfest/Maerzen Aroma: 

    ... No fruitiness, diacetyl, or hop aroma.

With which I disagree.  I find a nice
spicy hop character to be very
attractive in an Oktoberfest.

    14A. Traditional Bock 

    Aroma: Strong aroma of malt.
    Virtually no hop aroma. 


I agree with this one. "

Ahhhh! I feel better. I guess my taster and likes
in Eastern European, including the Bohemian
( Czech), Pilsners are not so far off after all.

Thanks Spencer!!

But, then, there's that hoppy Bock I've been
planning......
- ---------------------------------------------
Nathan Kanous asks if anyone has used
a microwave for cereal mashing.

I have used the microwave as an
experiment to prepare a small  mash for
my acid worts  added to my Irish Dry Stouts.
The temperature control probe works
fine for one or two cup quantities with
occasional stirring. However, I would
think that on larger quantities this might
be a problem as the outer edge will be
significantly hotter than the middle.
Why not just heat and store in your 

oven to maintain a temperature?

When I do a cereal mash, I just boil
the cereal until it thickens to gelatinize
it, add cold water to a temperature of
~160F and add a pound of crushed malt.
Wait 15 minuntes until it thins down and
add this to my regular mash along
with the rest of the grist at the start.
No need for stirring and holding 45
minutes or whatever. Correct the
mash liquor for the amount of water
you added in the cereal mash.

Keep on Brewin'



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 09:38:36 EST
From: KMacneal at aol.com
Subject: Re: Aventinus clone

In a message dated 11/2/1999, 11:18:22 PM, Mercer, David" <dmercer at path.org>:
<<Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 08:44:48 -0800 
From: "Mercer, David" <dmercer at path.org>
Subject: Aventinus clone

Dan asked about making an Aventinus-type weizenbock.

First, get Eric Warner's book, if you can find it. >>

I agree wholeheartedly.  Mr. Warner's book helped me win a gold medal in the 
Nationals this year.  My recipe (Weizen Christmas) is in this month's Zymurgy 
and is closely based on one of the recipes in Warners book.  One of the 
judges' comments was even that it was very close to Aventinus.



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 10:00:36 -0400
From: "Darrell Leavitt"<Darrell_Leavitt at sln.esc.edu>
Subject: What can I expect?...


I just brewed a Hefe and because I was a little short of ingredients I
experimented a bit:

8lb Maris Otter 2 row
1 lb Malted Oats <=
1 lb Torrified Wheat

single stage infusion  at  148 F

added 2 cups wheat dme in boil

used 1 oz Tetnang  at  start
          1 oz Saaz  at  30

Whitelabs Hefe yeast

 What can I expect?  Has anyone brewed such an animal before?  Did I make a
mistake?
 ..Darrell



Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 09:04:31 -0600
From: Dave Hinrichs <dhinrichs at quannon.com>
Subject: first pilsner

>Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 20:59:46 -0800
>From: "scott" <Cuckold at cornerpub.com>
>Subject: first pilsner

>Been brewing 10 gal. Hefe's with very good luck.  Haven't done the water
>analysis yet, as we just bought our house and insufficient funds.  Did
>install a charcoal filter, however.

If you have municipal water contact your supplier they are required by law
to provide this information for free.
***************************************************************
* Dave Hinrichs                 E-Mail: dhinrichs at quannon.com *
* Quannon CAD Systems, Inc.             Voice: (612) 935-3367 *
* 6101 Baker Road, Suite 204              FAX: (612) 935-0409 *
* Minnetonka, MN 55345                                        *
*                http://www.quannon.com/                      *


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 10:14:54 -0500
From: Dan Listermann <72723.1707 at compuserve.com>
Subject: Homemade wine and Bucket seals

Curt Speaker (Speaker at Safety-1.safety.psu.edu) writes:

< A novice winemaker, on the other hand, cannot make wine as good as a
small winery.  Homemade wine is better, but still pales in comparison to
commercial stuff.>

On one hand I have had some really sad commercial wines and on the other,
 

some very good homemade wines, althoughI don't have much of a taste for
wines generally. 


Homemade wines are taking off quite nicely.  I wonder why there is such a

division between wine and beer.  Very few people make both and yet they 
are
closely related.  


David Luck (Jeffry.D.Luck at aexp.com) writes about 7 gal buckets leaking 
CO2
during fermentation.  This is very common and, aside from being anoying,
perfectly harmless.  Try to see that the lid is wet when the bucket is
closed.  I still use these buckets sometimes and am surprised when they
don't leak.


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 08:10:42 -0800
From: tmorgan at esassoc.com
Subject: re:Idophor troubles

Fear not! You have done things exactly correct.  37 batches of home brew stand
behind attesting to this method of use with idophor.  I usually just make sure
that I have drained the last few drips of the stuff out first and commonly
transfer beer or whatever with things still wet.  Your beer should not exhibit
any hint of the stuff.  

        Tim Morgan
        Black Cloud Home Brewery
        Petaluma, CA
        email: tmorgan at esassoc.com


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 11:25:23 -0500
From: "Donald D. Lake" <dake at gdi.net>
Subject: RE: Dan Kiplinger/Schmidling

Dan wrote:  "Is Jack Schmidling that much of a defensive prick or am I
missing something."

I think you are definitely missing something.  I could hardly define
Jack using the vulgar colloquialism, "prick."  In my interpretation,
Jack's antenna was up because someone mistakenly said he was "hocking"
his wares.   Jack (mistakenly) interpreted the statement as derogatory
and responded in kind.

Now, his response was mistakenly interpreted by you to mean something it
didn't.   And so you responded with more derogatory statements (and
rather rude language at that).

This is how wars between small countries start!

It's interesting to watch the "keyboard testosterone" at work.  Some of
the attacking comments that have been posted would never be said in
person.  Because in person, there is a risk we would get an ass whoopin
(as we say in the South) by the party we offended.

Let's all cool our jets.

Don Lake
dlake at amuni.com

"It takes a big man to cry .......its takes a bigger man to laugh at
that man.
    - Deep Thoughts by Jack Handy




Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 11:49:41 -0500
From: "Alan Meeker" <ameeker at welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: yeast growth

Dave Burley writes:

> I think Alan Meeeker misunderstood Kyle's
> question about how one limits the number
> of growth cycles of yeast.

Actually Dave, I think YOU misread the question. You're not supposed to use
big words like "Ox-y-gen!"  ;)

But seriously folks...

> The answer is that yeast reach a certain
> concentration and level off in all cases at
> about the same value.

Well, not quite. As I tried to (succinctly) point out in my post, the total
amount of yeast cell division will depend upon various factors such as:

     the amount of ergosterol/unsaturated fatty acids present in the starter
yeast.

     the amount of dissolved oxygen (if any) and/or malt-derived lipids in
the wort.

     the size of the yeast starter.

    other (possibly limiting) growth factors such as nitrogenous compounds,
sugars or metals like zinc.


>By starting with a
> certain size starter you can limit the number
> of growth cycles the yeast have to go through
> to reach this number.  Larger starter, fewer
> growth cycles.

True, a larger starter will more quickly "eat up" the available nutrients
till one of them becomes growth-limiting. However, I think it is important
to realize that it is not necessarily "number of growth cycles" per se that
should be the focus of attention, but rather other factors such as the total
amount of wort materials going to create yeast cell mass, total yeast cell
mass, and metabolic state/health of the fermenting yeast that are the
important considerations.

For instance, a large starter that was poorly oxygenated during its growth
will be low in membrane sterols. Once pitched this large starter will
rapidly utilize all available dissolved oxygen in the wort and will (if no
other nutrient becomes limiting) divide till the sterols become so diluted
that division is no longer permitted. At this point the yeast will have
compromised membranes and may result in an unhealthy fermentation. In
addition, the starter may have only been able to divide a total of one or
two times (due to limited sterols) and this may not result in enough yeats
to conduct the fermentation in a timely manner - or even to finish the job!
Here, you are ending up with too few yeast, whose membranes are stressed
which could easily lead to all kinds of problems - long lag times, stuck
fermentations, decreased EtOH-resistance, increased susceptibility to
infections, increased autolysis, etc.

On the other hand, a large well-aerated starter may have enough reserve
sterol capacity that it will use up some other wort nutrient (say wort
sugars) before the sterols become limiting for continued yeast division.
Here, the cell division would be repressed due to low sugar and the yeast
would be signalled to go into its dormant phase/flocculate out, etc. Note
that here there would not have been a period of fermentation taking place
while the yeast were in a poor state of "membrane health" due to low sterol
concentrations.

> Ales typically have a smaller starter, since the
> by-products of the growth are the various
> sensory agents like esters, aldehydes and
> ketones which we expect in British Ales.
> Lagers, on the other hand are expected
> to be cleaner, so we start with a larger starter
> to limit the number of growth cycles.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm isn't part of the reason to use larger starters for Lagers
is because the lager yeasts' growth rate will be slower therefore we want to
assure that fermentation will be completed in a reasonable amount of time
(this helps prevent the possibility of contaminants getting a foothold...).

> This larger starter is also good, since we
> typically ferment the lagers cooler for the
> same reason of cleaness in taste. This
> larger starter allows a faster fermentation.

Which is the more important consideration?

Also, there seems to be an innapropriate division between "yeast growth
phase/aerobic growth" versus fermentation.
Aside from  a true "lag phase" in which the yeast population is gearing up
for growth in its new environment, the yeast will grow (increase in cell
size) and divide as long as environmental (temperature, pH, lack of toxins)
and nutritional (sugars, nitrogenous compounds, metals, oxygen, etc.)
conditions allow it to do so.

There is nothing magic about aerobic vs anaerobic respiration - these are
simply different mechanisms by which the cell derives energy and metabolic
building blocks; either pathway can be used to support cell division. There
seems to be an impression that pitched yeast at first "grow" (read: divide)
in an oxygen-dependent phase and that only later, after they have stopped
growing, do they get down to the serious work of fermentation. This is
incorrect - the yeast will be dividing throughout the process and, in fact,
it has been demonstrated that the bulk of fermentative activity takes place
in actively dividing cells.

All this is to say that, to my way of thinking, I want my yeast to be as
healthy as possible all the way through the fermentation to the point where
they go dormant and flocc out. I want this dornmancy to be due to the fact
that they have eaten all the wort sugars, not because they have used up the
nitrogen sources or that they have run out of sterols or unsaturated fatty
acids - deficiencies that will result in stressed yeast and undesireable
metabolic changes.


 -Alan Meeker
Baltimore, MD





Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 11:23:27 -0600 
From: rlabor at lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald)
Subject: RE: beer vs. wine making

>From: "Curt Speaker" <SPEAKER at SAFETY-1.SAFETY.PSU.EDU>

>a novice brewer, with a bit of time and 
>patience, can make beer that is just about as good as a 
>commercial microbrew.  A novice winemaker, on the other hand, 
>cannot make wine as good as a small winery.  Homemade wine is 
>better, but still pales in comparison to commercial stuff.

My thoughts, exactly, so well put.  True wine, is made from grapes, and as
suggested above, very difficult to beat the commercial stuff.

But where us homebrewers can excel, is to make fruit/country wines from
other than grapes.  Here, commercial examples are rare and we can conjure up
some very enjoyable product.  

The local homebrew shop had a winemaking class a couple years back, and made
of all things a grapefruit wine, well, let me tell you it was very good.  So
many fruits to experiment with, oranges, berries, etc.  The cost is very
minimal if you have access to the fruit or berries.  Here is where the
rewards are for homebrewers.

>Just had to add my $0.02 on this:

Yup, and here is my $0.01 on this.

Ron

Ronald La Borde - Metairie, Louisiana - rlabor at lsumc.edu


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 17:52:44 -0000
From: "Nigel Porter" <nigel at sparger.freeserve.co.uk>
Subject: White Horse Old Ale festival

Following my post yesterday, I have now done some digging.

The White Horse (Parsons Green, London) re-opens after its 
refurbishment on 24 November. The Old Ale festival is Saturday 27 
November, and starts around midday.

Hopefully might see you there?

Is this thanksgiving time - we don't have it over here.

Nigel Porter


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 13:00:56 -0500
From: Mark Tumarkin <mark_t at ix.netcom.com>
Subject: cleaning up old corny kegs

Dan Kiplinger askss:

>Also, (to all of you metallurgists out there) what is the best way to
make
>those ugly corney exteriors look new?

I've had pretty good success by first scrubbing with TSP - inside and
out. That does a great job of cleaning by itself. But if you really want
to make the outside shine, then hit it with BarKeepers Friend. It takes
a little elbow grease but the kegs end up looking great. Obviously, it's
not going to make a dinged-up, abused keg look new, but it will get it
looking as good as possible. You can also get stainless steel buffing
compound that can be used with a cloth buffing wheel on your electric
drill, but the BarKeepers Friend is less expensive and works very well.

Mark Tumarkin
Gainesville, FL


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 13:13:29 -0500
From: Mark Tumarkin <mark_t at ix.netcom.com>
Subject: re: Iodophor Troubles

Bob Fesmire is concerned about iodophor -

>I recently transferred idophor(iodine) out of a carboy and
>transferred beer from the primary carboy into this carboy. I did not
rinse
>the carboy containing the idophor, or the siphon hoses before i
transferred.
>I usually use bleach and rinse evrything, but i was under the
impression that
>idophor was more effective and did not need to be rinsed. Now I am
>concerened, should I have rinsed? Is my first all-grain of the new
brewing
>season down the tubes? Will I have to dump this batch?

No way, iodophor is truly no-rinse (as well as being very effective). I
usually let it air dry, and would suggest that you do the same. However,
I  have occasionally used a racking tube or hose direct from soaking. I
don't believe anyone will detect any taste of iodine from this - at
least if used in proper dilution strength. There's no need to use a
stronger solution, it won't sanitise significantly better and it will be
more expensive. The dilution rate varies depending on the manufacturer.
For the one I use the recommended rate is 1/2 teaspoon per gallon. Keep
in mind that iodophor is just a sanitizer, not a cleaner. You have to
clean off any organics, crud, etc before sanitizing or your beer is at
risk. That said, I've found  iodophor very easy to use and effective.

Mark Tumarkin
Gainesville, FL


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 15:28:04 -0600
From: Scott Birdwell <defalcos at insync.net>
Subject: winemaking vs. homebrewing

Curt Speaker posted some comments regarding winemaking versus beermaking
supplies at the local homebrew shops and invited shop owners to
comment.  He said:
"I have been having this discussion with several folks here in central
PA regarding the increased interest in home winemaking versus
homebrewing.  I honestly think that winemaking ingredients have
gotten significantly better in the past few years.  The end result of
this is that you can make pretty damn good wine at home now."

This is definitely true.  The quality of winemaking ingredient kits has
improved dramatically over the past five years or so.  Almost all of
these are manufactured in Canada, where there is a tremendous demand for
user-friendly, high quality, "quickie" wine kits.  Quality wine
concentrates have been available for many years, just not as well
packaged and as ready to use as these "new" wine kits.

"It is no longer a couple cans of Welsh's grape juice, half-a-cake of
Fleishmann's bread yeast and a couple pounds of sugar (just like
homebrewing is no longer a can of Blue Ribbon syrup, a couple #s
of sugar and the same Fleishmann's yeast)."

Quality ingredients, in the form of high quality grape concentrates or
malt extract have been on the market in the U.S. for almost thirty
years.  There have no excuses to use inferior ingredients unless you've
been un-informed or just plain cheap.

"The argument to this (as a winemaking & homebrewing friend of
mine pointed out) is that a novice brewer, with a bit of time and
patience, can make beer that is just about as good as a
commercial microbrew.  A novice winemaker, on the other hand,
cannot make wine as good as a small winery.  Homemade wine is
better, but still pales in comparison to commercial stuff."

While its true that a beginning homebrewer can easily make a good
quality homebrew, even on his first attempt (given quality ingredients
and information), I think that a beginning winemaker can make comparable
quality wine right out of the chute.  Just as a beginning homebrewer is
not likely to make a better beer than Sierra Nevada, the beginning
winemaker is not going to make something better than the best small
wineries.  This isn't to say, however, that neither is going to make a
very good beverage straight away (again, given quality ingredients and
information).  Even with the high quality wine kits, though, the
beginning winemaker is going to have to wait longer for that first batch
to "come around," than his beginning homebrewer counterpart.  Hey, this
is a good reason to do both.  Drink the homebrew while the wine is
maturing!

"All of this, coupled with what is likely a higher mark-up on
winemaking kits (yuppies have more $$ and will likely pay more for
wine kits), and it is only natural that homebrew stores are catering
more to the home winemakers."

    I can't speak for other homebrew shop proprietors, but I can say
that at my shop, the wine kits do not have a higher mark-up than beer
ingredients.  In fact, if anything, my mark-up on wine kits is slightly
lower than my beer ingredients.  However, consider that while a wine kit
averages around $50, a batch of homebrew will average about half that.
Of course, I will make more money on a $50 sale than a $25 sale.  This
really isn't a question of mark-up, it;'s a matter of of volume and
finding growth areas for our business.  The homebrew end of the business
has been stagnant for 3 - 4 years now, and the winemaking end is
beginning to show signs of growth after many years of just treading
water.  Heck, we still run 75 - 80% beer at our shop, but when I see an
area that I can nurture and help grow, I'm going to do it.  Anything
that helps cash flow in this small business will eventually benefit the
homebrewers, because we will have more money to invest in inventory (all
kinds of inventory).
    Actually, one thing you may not have picked up on is that these
posts were initiated by some of our Canadian neighbors.  The business is
much different up there than here in the States.  A typical shop in
Canada may run 75 - 80% wine instead of beer.  The way a shop in Canada
stocks their shelves will reflect this trend.  Understandably, these
guys are concerned about availability of ingredients and information for
their hobby and passion.  I'm sure there is variation there from
province to province, just as there is variation here in the states, but
you get the idea.  That's my two cents worth, anyway.

Scott Birdwell
Proprietor - DeFalco's Home Wine & Beer Supply
Houston  TX  (considerably south of Jeff Renner)
Former president of the Home Wine & Beer Trade Association


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 15:58:48 -0600
From: "Jack Schmidling" <arf at mc.net>
Subject: Brains and humility

From: "Phil and Jill Yates" <yates at infoflex.com.au>

> I have produced vast amounts of homebrew but am still working at well over
forty. What is
your secret Jack?

Vast amounts hyper-intellegence.

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

From: "Dan Kiplinger" <knurdami at iname.com>

>I am relatively new to the post but I am confused.  Is Jack Schmidling that
much of a defensive prick or am I missing something.....

I will let you judge the former but I think you will find the answer to the
latter in the above response to Phil.

> He obviously is not retired if has his name on what the neighbor kids are
producing.  Who's in charge of quality??!!

The neighbor's kids of course.  Of the billions and billions we have shipped, we
have never had a single return.

>Hey, the Easymasher is a cool invention to get people into all-grain with a
minimal investment.......

Funny how it always comes to that.  I have no problems pleading guilty of being
an obnoxious genius.

>  I am all for that and I respect it also.  But "the
better mouse trap" is (I think) going a bit too far.  (ask Mike Zindler)

Not sure who Mike is but sending the false bottom to the museum is vastly more
profound than a better mouse trap.  I just used that expression in a futile
attempt to be humble.

js

PHOTO OF THE WEEK  http://user.mc.net/arf/weekly.htm
HOME  http://user.mc.net/arf


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 21:20:08 -0500
From: Bob Sheck <bsheck at skantech.net>
Subject: RE: The Microwave?


Nathan Kanous <nlkanous at pharmacy.wisc.edu> writes about
"Has anybody ever used the microwave to conduct a cereal mash?"

I dunno. Maybe we should also ask if anyone's used a pressure cooker too?

only by experimenting will we know. 

And for hop taste or not in lagers- I guess if you're talking about
Budweiser <TM>
then I wouldn't expect to taste them (must get over-run by the beechwood
chips) !


Bob Sheck

bsheck, me-sheck, abednigo! Greenville, NC 
email:bsheck at skantech.net or see us at:
http://www.skantech.net/bsheck/
(252)830-1833
- -------------
"Madness takes its toll -- Please have exact change!"


Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1999 21:26:44 -0500
From: phil sides jr <psides at carl.net>
Subject: My PBW Story

I originally chose to not post this for two reasons: Firstly, I didn't
want to waste bandwidth on something people did not want to read about
and secondly, it is an embarrassing story.  I have received close to
thirty personal emails requesting to hear the story now and I have had
time to deal with the impending humiliation so here goes...

Summer before last, I was living in a house where I had to brew
outdoors.  I had a beautiful wood deck under a giant sugar maple and
with the exception of being at the mercy of New England's dynamic
climate, it was not a bad place to brew.  One afternoon, I was brewing a
Foreign Style Stout I call Rockinfreakapotamus and near the end of my
boil some rain started up pretty quickly.  I was able to finish the boil
and pump the batch out of the chiller into my waiting primaries, but the
bottom fell out before I could do any cleanup.  I quickly dragged all of
my equipment into my screen enclosed porch and left (read forgot about)
it for a few days.  The hot liquor tank was clean, but in the mash tun I
had 29 pounds of spent grain and a gallon or two of souring wort.  The
boil kettle had two hopsocks and a pile of coagulated break material
left behind.  I vowed to get to the cleanup in a "few days".

The few days turned into about two weeks and when I started to tackle
the job the first time, I decided I had underestimated the project and
did not have enough time allotted to clean the equipment properly.  I
postponed the cleaning again.  An unexpected business trip and a few
other of life's surprises turned this postponement into weeks.  I think
I did not clean the kegs until about seven or so weeks after brew day.
Around two months in the summer heat (even in New Hampshire) produced
results I am unable to even approximate with words.  I would give
anything to have a picture of the resultant mess.  The closest thing I
have seen is that stuff you grow in your refrigerator when you leave
something in there for six months or more.  Lots of colors, hairy,
moldy... all of that stuff in the mash tun.  It smelled like a
barnyard... come to think of it, like a fine lambic ;-).  The boil
kettle was worse, because the goo had rusted to the false bottom and
inside surface of the keg.  I had to rip the hopsocks to get them out.
I resigned myself to the fact that my kegs were ruined and I needed to
build two new vessels.  I even started looking for new Sanke kegs to cut
up but I still wanted to try to salvage what I had already built.

I had no idea where to even start cleaning this mess when I remembered I
had picked up a 5 Star cleaning kit to try a few months prior.  I have a
brewing buddy that swears by the stuff and I had wanted to try it, but I
always thought it was too expensive.  I figured I'd give it a shot...

First I scooped everything that was scoopable out of the vessels, then
soaked them in hot (160 F ) water for about an hour.  This loosened up
quite a bit of chunky stuff but the rust and most of the caked-on stuff
were undisturbed.  I then filled the kegs again with hot water, around
140 F this time and added two packets of PBW to each keg.  I held the
140 F for two hours.  I drained the kegs and rinsed with hot water and
DID NOT scrub a thing.  They were shinier and cleaner than I had ever
seen them.

It goes without saying that I use PBW on stainless exclusively at home
now.  I work part-time in a BOP and we do not use it there... yet ;-).
I have used B-Brite, C-Brite, TSP, TSP substitute, Bromite, and plain
ol' bleach  (not on stainless) in the past and none of these even come
close to the cleaning ability of PBW.  Nothing against the other
cleaners; I used them for many years effectively and it is hard to beat
TSP for the money... but PBW is simply amazing for the tougher jobs like
when I do something moronic although I do NOT plan on doing it ever
again.

Phil Sides, Jr.
Concord, NH
- --
Macht nicht o'zapft ist, Prost!



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 03:12:23 GMT
From: Bob.Sutton at Fluor.com
Subject: Hop teas (Part 2)

There's been a number of posts addressing hop teas... so I thought I'd
share my approach as it's so darned simple... too simple in fact.

I toss a few ounces of hops (pellets, plugs or whole leaf) into my
drip-style coffee maker and add 5-7 "cups" of water to the reservoir
and let 'er rip. The paper filter seems to retain the pellets quite
well. I cool the pot externally with ice and, depending on my mood,
add it to the secondary or keg. If I'm seeking a dry-hopped brew, I
typically use about half as much hops as compared to a conventional
dry-hop, where the hops are added late in the fermentation cycle.

This is particularly useful when you only have pellets, since the
carryover from the green muck is pretty much eliminated.

Cheers!
Bob

Fruit Fly Brewhaus

Return to table of contents

---