HOMEBREW Digest #3232 Wed 26 January 2000

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

		Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org
		Many thanks to the Observer & Eccentric Newspapers of 
		Livonia, Michigan for sponsoring the Homebrew Digest.
				URL: http://www.oeonline.com

  STONE (Stein) Beer (TKBFRED)
  Rodenbach Alexander ("Todd & Sherrel Crane")
  Saflager Yeast / Brewing Water (Tony Barnsley)
  Dextrins and mouthfeel - RIP ("Paul Smith")
  Yeast harvesting ("Dan Senne")
  Calif Ale Yeast Slurry (from a Stout, to a Porter)? ("Darrell Leavitt")
  overnight mashing ("Ratkiewich, Peter")
  Trappist Light (question) ("Darrell Leavitt")
  re-using yeast (my last question ....for today!) ("Darrell Leavitt")
  Bottling Day/Invert Sugar/Motor+Mill (Matthew Comstock)
  RE: Stuck Easy Masher.... (MaltHound)
  Wyeast Kolsch 2565 off-flavor ("Lewis, Tim                 HS")
  Efficiency vs.Yield (MaltHound)
  Dextrines ("Nathaniel P. Lansing")
  Overnight mash (Dave Burley)
  Re:Ginger Beer Recipes (Lynhbrew)
  Re: false bottom (patrick finerty)
  use of caustic as sanitizer (Suds2468)
   ("Dave Hinrichs")
  Color approximation (Brian Pickerill)
  RE: Stuck Easy Masher.... (Jonathan Peakall)
  hop storage?? (J Daoust)
  Practical Brewer download & quality ("Doug Moyer")
  Re: Color; Overnight Mashing ("G. M. Remake")
  Waters of the World (Brad Miller)
  Batch/Burst/Fly Sparging--Gott Cooler Setup (Kirk.Fleming)
  RE: Saflager Yeast ("Nigel Porter")
  Dextrin vs Protein for mouth feel (RCAYOT)
  conditioning temps and dry hopping temperatures ("Czerpak, Pete")
  stir plates ("Dana H. Edgell")
  RE: STUCK SPARGE; Wyeast 1187; Grain bed depth; O'fest lagering (RiedelD)

* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! * Entry deadline for the Mayfare Homebrew Competition is 3/15/00 * See http://www.maltosefalcons.com/ for more information 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 FROM THE E-MAIL ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!** IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, you cannot subscribe to the digest as we canoot reach you. We will not correct your address for the automation - that's your job. The HBD is a copyrighted document. The compilation is copyright HBD.ORG. Individual postings are copyright by their authors. ASK before reproducing and you'll rarely have trouble. Digest content cannot be reproduced by any means for sale or profit. More information is available by sending the word "info" to req at hbd.org. JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 00:26:33 EST From: TKBFRED at aol.com Subject: STONE (Stein) Beer Fellow Brewers: I'm looking for information on Stone Beer, i.e., what Stones are used, Brewing Process, Fermentation, all sort of that nature. If one of you can help, you can contact me via Email (tkbfred at aol.com), or fax to me at: (602) 241 -0142. Thanks for your help. Fred M. Scheer Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 22:39:46 -0700 From: "Todd & Sherrel Crane" <thecranes at uswest.net> Subject: Rodenbach Alexander I received the following letter from a good friend who works for New Belgium Brewing Co. Sense this is a brewing forum I thought it was worth posting. >It has come to my attention of the intention of Palm to discontinue Rodenbach Alexander from production. To those of us who love this brew it is a devastating idea. So I ask myself, can I do anything about this? Probably not, but then I ask myself, can I not do anything about this, and again the answer is no. So maybe we can do something together. Please contact Palm and tell them that they are making a grave mistake. Is the beer industry now driven by money? Such an accomplishment in brewing should be cherished and nurtured, not scrutinized with demographics and sales figures. I know first hand that once a beer is gone, the reasons for it's demise are forgotten and nostalgia sets in, people come out of the woodwork and protest their undying love for the beer, but it's too late. It may seem silly to some, but is it worth losing loyal customers by discontinuing a brand instead of slowing the production levels and schedules. Enough crying, if you enjoy Alexander, please tell the people at Palm so; tell them that you are not ready for them to throw away such a standard of excellence. Please forward this or write to AS MANY people as you can possibly think of and ask them/plead with them to write, call, fax, email Palm and ask them for Alexander's reprieve. This could just be the beginning of more cut-backs, Grand Cru may be next. Thank you, Lauren Woods PR at palm-nv.be Brouwerij Palm N.V. P.R. Department- Peter Buelens Steenhuffeldorp 3 B-1840 Steenhuffel tel: 052/31.74.67 fax: 052/31.23.44 Todd Crane thecranes at uswest.net Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 09:41:27 -0000 From: Tony Barnsley <tony.barnsley at blackpool.gov.uk> Subject: Saflager Yeast / Brewing Water SafLager does seen to ferment cleanly around 65F, but I was brewing a Rauchbier ad so any 'odd' flavours may have been masked. The Web site URL for DCL is IRRC http://www.dcl.com But it could be http://www.dcl.co.uk - -------------------- If you are using Distilled water you will need to add some minerals back. One way to do it is to mix in some normal water to give the profile you want. I use promash to decide how much to add, along with various salts and it works well In an all grain batch with distilled water, I wouldn't attempt to use any acid as the grain will buffer the mash pH. To adjust the sparge water assuming distilled as a base, then dilute 1 in 10 with distilled water and then use that to adjust you mash liquor using a pH meter. Add it 1ml at a time and stir until the ph meter reads 6 or just below. - -- Wassail! The Scurrilous Aleman Schwarzbad Lager Braueri, Blackpool, Lancs, UK Reply To Aleman At brewmaster Dot demon Dot co Dot uk Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 04:46:06 -0600 From: "Paul Smith" <pksmith_morin at msn.com> Subject: Dextrins and mouthfeel - RIP I would like to let the Dextrin and proteolysis thing go. I think that Dave and I are in closer agreement on this than it would appear. The substantial position statement appears to be thus: I believe that dextrins probably contribute something to mouthfeel, and I have not yet seen evidence (experientially or by study)otherwise; I believe their contribution is largely subsumed to medium-molecular weight proteins and b-glucans; I further believe that because much of the high-molecular weight protein degradation (to other products, such as medium-molecular weight proteins) occurs in the malthouse, the role of mash-engineered proteolysis is substantially minimized over yesteryear, when malt was simply not as well modified. Dave categorically denies that dextrins contribute anything to mouthfeel, as indicated by his original statement that: >>But if Charlie is the origin of Steve's concept that dextrins contribute to mouthfeel, he's wrong... And, like me, Dave refers to texts such as M & Bs and DeClerck to bolster his arguments since then. The issue has spurred a concern I have long had, and so I have a larger question I wish to ask of the community; it goes to methodology. I am not a research scientist. One gripe I have with myself, or Dave, or anyone, for that matter, is in the use of brewing texts as Bibles in answering real-world quandaries about brewing. I grant that knowledge is derivative (that which we know we derive from other knowledge and build upon to build new knowledge), and every day we move through life with a given set of assumptions we embrace, based on "known facts or authority." This is as it needs to be, if we're to get through the day without paralysis from seeking the answer to the minutae of normal existence. However, I do think this poses a potential trap in this forum. To simply read and quote M & Bs or Kunze or DeClerck as "manna from heaven" feels inadequate, to me. Anybody can read. But unless I take Dave's assumptions, or he mine, or any of us anything we read, and go to the lab to test the theor(ies), we know nothing more, except that "(x) says this," and so on. We are not lawyers, we are brewers. It is a lawyer's job to prove a point by eloquent argument, lending credence to that argument by reference to case law or civil statutes. To use the same methodology, by quoting a given text (a "sin" I am obviously guilty of) is less than satisfactory. As brewers, we want to make a better product, through direct, experiential examination, and, where our knowledge (and the ability to test that knowledge) is limited, through reliance on others. I believe only the former has truly persuasive power. Where am I going with this? I think all of us would do well to avoid sweeping, categorical statements affirming or denying the truth of a particular assumption unless we have done the work, in the lab, ourselves. There is very little in this world that I know of which is absolute, and brewing is certainly no exception. To quote text, to make "points" by quoting texts, is something which may rouse further study or pique curiosity (or win lawsuits); but it does not establish the truth. Paul Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 07:02:26 -0600 From: "Dan Senne" <dsenne at intertek.net> Subject: Yeast harvesting Could anyone explain the proceedure for washing and storing yeast using distilled water? Can this be used to harvest yeast from the slurry at the bottom of the primary after transfering the beer to the secondary? Thanks, Dan Senne Collinsville IL Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 08:12:25 -0400 From: "Darrell Leavitt"<Darrell_Leavitt at sln.esc.edu> Subject: Calif Ale Yeast Slurry (from a Stout, to a Porter)? I just bottled a "California Malted Oat Stout" (tasted wonderful, and I will send the all-grain recipe to anyone who might like it),...saved a substantial amount of slurry (perhaps 500-700 ml) and wish to make a Porter. I have heard the view that one should make darker brews when you re-pitch...and wonder will this be ok going to a Porter...... Also, if anyone has a good Anchor-sort-of-Porter recipe that they'd wish to share I'd love to have it. ..Darrell <Plattsburgh, NY> Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 08:19:00 -0500 From: "Ratkiewich, Peter" <PRATKIEWICH at ci.westport.ct.us> Subject: overnight mashing Randy wrote: "Does anyone know of any problems with mashing while you sleep? It sure saves on the length of the brew day. What problems might occur if the mash is left for 6 - 8 hours?" My partner and I have done two overnight mashes in the past three years. The first was a coffee porter, the second a six grain stout. In both cases we were looking for a high extraction, and a short brew day. The coffee porter had trouble fermenting, but we're pretty sure that was due to the high amount of coffee we used, not the overnight mash. In retrospect, now that it's laid down for a year, the stout is really one of the best that we've made. Aside from recipe specifics, this is what we did in both cases: Bring water to strike in temperature while grinding grain and setting up the brewhaus, the night before brew day. We strike in generally around 8-9PM by the time we're ready, (it's really not critical). After stirring in the grist we stabilize the temperature. With this single infusion method we shoot for a higher strike in temp of around 154-156 degrees knowing that the temperature will drop below 150 overnight. Once everything is fully mashed, we shut down the burners, put the cover on, and wrap the heck out of the mash tun with insulated moving blankets and duct tape. Then it's off to bed. When we come in the next morning, temperatures have dropped into the 144-147 degree range depending on the ambient room temperature. We immediately begin to mash out. Using this method we were cleaned up and closed out by noontime on brew day. I wouldn't use this method for every brew, but it seems to me that with higher gravity ales that have complicated grain bills, the overnight mash seems to really meld the various flavours nicely. I'm sure that there may be others out there that disagree or might identify problems with an overnight mash, so this should be interesting...... Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 08:26:24 -0400 From: "Darrell Leavitt"<Darrell_Leavitt at sln.esc.edu> Subject: Trappist Light (question) I recently brewed a "Trappist Light". I was interested in the Trappist ale flavor, but wanted to make it lighter in alcohol than many (and another I just bottled at 8.9 % ABW!). I was surprised that the resultant brew tasted much like a Hefe....and wonder if this is common? Here is the recipe: 2lb maris Otter 2 row 4lb Halcyon 2 row 2 lb Malted Oats 1lb Flaked Wheat 3 gal water, strike temp ~170, beta rest at 148 for 1 hour; alpha rest at 156 for 30 min first runnings were 1.070 OG=1.044 FG=1.008 3/4 ox Willamette at start 1/4 oz Willamette at 30 1/4 oz Willammette at 15 chilled and pitched a vile of WhiteLabs WLP500 Trappist Ale Yeast kept the temp below 65F Anybody know why this tastes like a "half-a-hefe"? ..Darrell Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 08:35:11 -0400 From: "Darrell Leavitt"<Darrell_Leavitt at sln.esc.edu> Subject: re-using yeast (my last question ....for today!) ok, I promise that this will be my last post (today)....soooo many questions! I have been re-using my yeast lately and am finding (consistent with the discussions here of the size of a starter) that my second brew is generally excellent...while the first one is just , well, good. Now the question: am I pushing it ot try to reuse the yesties a third time? I think that I am paying good attention to sanitation and such,...but even so, am I risking not just infection, but also having a "mutant brew"..... ...Darrell Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 05:48:48 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Comstock <mccomstock at yahoo.com> Subject: Bottling Day/Invert Sugar/Motor+Mill Howdy, In my last post a few weeks back, I described the bottling day from hell. You'll be happy to know the bottling session last weekend was without incident. Of course my wife was constantly reminding me of the *last time* and I deserved it. For some reason, I've got "Invert Sugar" on my mind. Invert sugar is the product of acid hydrolysis of sucrose (table sugar), to give glucose and fructose. That sounds a lot like honey to me. In the /techbroch.pdf file listed below, the USDA average sample of honey contains: Fructose: 38.2% Glucose: 31.0% Water: 17.1% Maltose: 7.2% Trisaccharides and higher carbohydrates (oh no, my protein diet): 4.2% Sucrose: 1.5% Minerals, vitamins, enzymes: 0.5% I've used honey in many recipes, including my favorite - a honey ginger ale. There is a lot of interesting information available in the links below: Honey: http://www.nhb.org http://www.honey.com/ http://www.nhb.org/download/factsht/techbroch.pdf Honey in beer: http://www.honey.com/recipes/beer/index.html and links therein. http://www.nhb.org/download/factsht/home_brew.pdf That's cool. But I digress. So sucrose gives you cidery beer? Honey works great in my experience. How's invert sugar? It seems like it should work a lot like honey? I found a posted discussion in the hbd archives, 1999 (AlK was involved somehow - search for "invert sugar"). I think common recipes for invert sugar were called into question. The conclusion seemed to be - why bother trying to make invert sugar? You only get partial hydrolysis of sucrose with existing recipes anyway and yeast can rip sucrose apart just fine. Does anyone have more info and experience about the use invert sugar in brewing? Common thread about motorizing malt mills. I bought a used phil-mill with a welded-on handle. Does anyone PLEASE have some ideas on how I can motorize this thing with my drill. My (slave labor) kids will thank you. Have a happy Matt Comstock in Cincinnati, OH. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 09:01:38 EST From: MaltHound at aol.com Subject: RE: Stuck Easy Masher.... In a message dated 1/24/2000 11:16:30 PM Central Standard Time, homebrew-request@hbd.org writes: In HBD3231 Todd, AKA << DawgDoctor at aol.com>> asks: "Anyone ever had problems with a stuck sparge using an Easy Masher? This is my second try with the Gott Cooler version and second stuck sparge. I crushed with the JSP mill. I collected my first 2 gallons at full flow, poured it back in to filter, collected a second 2 gallons of very clear wort at full flow, then suddenly, STUCK SPARGE. " I'd wager your problem is the "full flow" part. You are compacting the grain bed due to the hydrostatic suction when running off this fast. You really only want to start your run off no faster than you will run off while sparging. Try it and see if that doesnt make life easier. Regards, Fred Wills Londonderry, NH Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 09:02:44 -0500 From: "Lewis, Tim HS" <tim.lewis at hs.utc.com> Subject: Wyeast Kolsch 2565 off-flavor Dan Lyga wrote wondering about off flavors with Wyeast Kolsch 2565. I brewed 2 Kolsch's that also seemed to have the same problem. I was thinking that this taste was astringency from sparging the specialty grains too hot, or some other water related problem, but even using spring water and watching sparge temp. on the second batch there is still an off flavor. I've also had similar problems with similar yeasts like 1338 and 1007. I'm concluding that maybe some styles are not meant to be with homebrew, at least not with extract/specialty grains. Tim Lewis Enfield, CT Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 09:17:56 EST From: MaltHound at aol.com Subject: Efficiency vs.Yield Fellow beer-nuts, Lately there have been a number of posts regarding the supposed efficiency of this equipment or that procedure, etc. People make claims that they have xx% efficiency when doing this or that... One difficulty in establishing meaningful "efficiency" numbers is that you need to establish what 100% is. Since we all tend to guestimate what that figure is based on what we've read here and there, one man's 90% efficiency could actually be *lower* than another man's 80%. I hereby propose that for homebrewing purposes (and HBD communication) we institute a standard of quoting yield in a points per pound format instead. Certainly everyone knows that you will get different pts/lb for different ingredients, but it really is a simpler and more effective way of comparing yield results. I find in my own brewing that even with the addition of some quantity of lower yield ingredients (crystal malts, etc.), since the precentage of these in the mash is relatively small, the total batch yield is still fairly consistent and predictable. Regards, Fred Wills Londonderry, NH Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 09:34:09 -0500 From: "Nathaniel P. Lansing" <delbrew at compuserve.com> Subject: Dextrines Dave states: >>"The calorific food value of beer is principally due to the ethanol and unfermented carbohydrates, but it is doubtful whether the latter contribute to any other beer character, although glycoproteins may act as foam stabilizers." I find no evidence that dextrins contribute to mouth fullness.<< Try tasting a Coors Lite against a regular Coors. Quite a change in mouthfeel. With a simple addition of amyloglucosidase to break down the dextrines to lower the caloric content, the mouthfeel, low as it is, almost totally disappears. Since dextrines aren't sweet, and don't contribute to mouthfeel, what is the point of a 158 rest to maximize dextrine production? Some anectdotal evidence, I was making tea and inadvertently spooned in some malto-dextrine instead of corn sugar. That cup of tea certainly had quite a bit of mouthfeel compaired to a "normal" cup. >>I point out that British malts have always been highly modified. So Paul's ( and others in the past) implication that somehow we cannot effect proteolysis in the mash because the malts are already highly modified is incorrect.<< Huh? that just doesn't follw any logic I know of. I agree we can effect proteolysis in the mash; you can over-modify Brit malt and destroy head retention, but you must have been in a hurry there and left out a line or two. Pondering in Pittsburgh, Del Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 10:11:13 -0500 From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: Overnight mash Brewsters: Randy Billmeier asks if overnight mashing is OK. Check the HBD archives for a lot of discussion on this. Dave Line I believe was a proponent of this with his thermostatically controlled "Bruheat" bucket. Keeping an infusion mash at 150+ with British malt shouldn't be a problem . Problems may arise when your unheated mash falls into the 100-110F area. Thermophilic bacteria like lactobacillus, if still around, may love it. - ----------------------------- Harry Grier asks about making a ginger beer. As far as I know, Ginger Beer is like Ginger Ale. Neither contain alcohol to any extent. At least not in today's world. That's not to say they couldn't and you probably wouldn't go too far wrong adding some ginger extract, from quickly boiling some crushed ginger, to taste to one of your lagers or blond ales before bottling. - --------------------------- Like John Lifer in Indonesia, I have come across ice cubes in beer in the Philippine jungles. I also refused to have ice in my beer for the obvious intestinal reasons and I just don't like it. But I asked for a small container to hold the bottle and some ice and told them I liked my ice on the outside. They were a little amused, when told what I said, but cooperared fully. My old US golf partner always had ice in his beer. But then he drank Miller Lite, so diluting it didn't hurt and may have even helped! - ---------------------------- Keep on Brewin' Dave Burley Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 10:15:48 EST From: Lynhbrew at aol.com Subject: Re:Ginger Beer Recipes In a message dated 1/25/00 5:16:30 AM GMT Standard Time, homebrew-request@hbd.org writes: << From: "Harry & Kat" <grb2980 at cyber-south.com> Subject: Ginger Beer My mother had a ginger beer in New Zealand about three years ago. It was in a bottle, not draft. She can't remember the name of it or the brewery. She has asked me to recreate it. Any information or ideas about this brew would be helpful. Harry Grier , Dothan Alabama, grb2980 at cyber-south.com >> Harry, I have had some success with Ginger Beers. It depends on what you are trying to get for a flavor profile. Does your mother remember anything more about the beer like color, lingering sweetness, aroma, alcohol level, carbonation. What made her really like the beer. If you know this you can probably formulte a recipe tocome close. I have brewed both ale and lager versions. I felt that the Lager was more succesful in giving a clean ginger flavor. It is a very, very (almost frightenly) low alcohol brew. The key to the success with this beer is using very fresh ginger that has good flavor. I recommend visiting an Asian grocery market if you have one nearby for your ginger. The recipe is the Carib Shandy Lager recipe in Clone Brews (Tess and Mark Szamatulski. When I made it I increased the crystal maltand added some special B and honey to get a starting gravity of 1.030. Also, it does not take a huge amount of ginger to get good flavor. I generally use around 2oz of fresh grated ginger added during the last 15 minutes of the boil. Good luck, Lyn Howard, lynhbrew at aol.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 10:44:16 -0500 (EST) From: patrick finerty <zinc at zifi.psf.sickkids.on.ca> Subject: Re: false bottom Tim inquires about building or having built for him a copper manifold. while i will not volunteer to build it, here is some useful information. also, before building this i had never soldered copper before so this can't be that hard! to make your own manifold using 1/2 in copper pipe, you will need the following equipment: 1/2 in. copper pipe (6 ft is plenty) 1/2 in. 90 and T fittings propane torch (~$6-12 at a hardware store) solder and flux (mine were sold together in one pkg) hack saw copper pipe cutting tool ($5 Cdn at Home Depot) here's a site with directions for mashing in a cooler. http://www.brewtech.com/library/backissues/issue5.4/palmer.html manifold design link, i used #2 for a round cooler: http://www.brewtech.com/library/backissues/issue5.4/palmer_sb.html#manifold building the manifold was easy, really. get the copper pipe cutting tool, the ends of the pipe will be much nicer than when cut with the hack saw and you'll regret not having one once you've started sawing, believe me. the the harder part was fitting the manifold to the ball valve i had installed on the cooler, primarily because i wanted the manifold to rest on the cooler bottom and the valve is elevated above this. i ended up cutting a 1/2 in. 45 fitting in half and soldering it to the outlet T fitting on the manifold. this makes a nearly perfect fit. i can provide more construction information later if you'd like. -patrick in toronto - -- "There is only one aim in life and that is to live it." Karl Shapiro,(1959) from an essay on Henry Miller's Tropic of Cancer finger pfinerty at nyx10.nyx.net for PGP key http://abragam.med.utoronto.ca/~zinc Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 10:46:51 EST From: Suds2468 at aol.com Subject: use of caustic as sanitizer Just when you thought it was safe to read HBD you see someone dredging up the topic of whether it's okay to use caustic as a sanitizer. While reading the posts concerning this topic I couldn't help but notice that there was no mention of how beer flavor might be affected. I may have missed the post where this was addressed so if I did please scroll past this post. It's my understanding that it's okay to use caustic as a sanitizer if your focus is entirely on killing microorganisms. However, it's important that all traces of caustic be rinsed from the vessel afterward because even the smallest amounts may cause oxidation of the beer resulting in off flavors. Finishing tanks with phosphoric acid might be a better choice because it will neutralize any remaining caustic residue and the pH is much more beer friendly. Brent Ritchie State of Franklin Homebrewers Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 09:56:00 -0600 From: "Dave Hinrichs" <dhinrichs at quannon.com> Subject: >Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 11:42:43 -0500 (EST) >From: Paul Shick <SHICK at JCVAXA.jcu.edu> >Subject: Filter answer and question >Hello all, > DeVaux Gauger asks about water filters for removing >chlorine. DeVaux, almost any activated carbon filter will >remove 95-99% of chlorine (and chloramines,) if you keep the >flow within the range given on the filter. If you're setting >up a basement system, I'd suggest a cannister filter. They're >often listed as "below sink" or "whole house" filters, available >for about $10-15 from Sears, among others. The filter elements >vary considerably in price, from about $6 for standard carbon and >fiber on up. The basic carbon and fiber element is rated to remove >95-99% of chlorine and chloramines at a nice flow rate (about 2 >gallons per minute, as I recall.) You might want to disasemble >the filter after each use, to avoid bacterial growth. > For those with more experience than I with these filters, >I have a quick question. The instructions (for all the brands >I've seen) specify that one should not run hot water through the >filter, although this is usually paired with a suggestion not to run >any contaminated water through it. Is this just to avoid bacterial >problems, or does activated charcoal have problems at higher temperatures? >In particular, would 120-130F water from the hot water tank be less >likely to be dechlorinated? Would it pick up off flavors from the >filter? I'm asking because my tap water is finally down to near 50F >(good for chilling,) and it takes a lot longer to get 8 gallons up to >mash temperature. It's nice to mash in 25 minutes after starting the >burner, rather than 50. Thanks in advance. Paul Shick Basement brewing in Cleveland Hts OH As one of the designers of the Sears models the reason that are only for cold water is the materials used cannot take the high water temps and still perform to specifications. Since all filter housings that I am aware are made of plastics I do not think you can get a hot water rated filter housing. The various filter media often has different filtering capabilities to allow users to customize the filtration to meet the water quality. If you have turbid water a sediment filter may be useful. Carbon filters are referred to as taste and odor filters and generally reduce chlorine and such. Some carbon filters also have an additive to reduce the lead content of water. There are also several different chemical reduction media to take out things like nitrites (or is that nitrates) or other specific water problems. I have installed and "undersink" model and it works great for both brewing and cooking. Fortunately my local water is very good with minor filtration. For those with more difficult water problems a whole house model and possibly two units where multiple water issues exist. I would recommend that the filter be kept in service and changed regularly. Removing the filter or letting it sit in stagnate water can pose contamination risks. For those with severe water problems high hardness, iron content, etc.. consult with a water professional. Now, my biased opinion. Sears sells excellent products to take care of your water treatment needs at a reasonable price. Also the GE water softeners (sold at Home Depot) are made by the same company, Ecowater Systems. Dave Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 11:28:01 -0500 From: Brian Pickerill <bpickerill at mac.com> Subject: Color approximation I thought Spencer's post about color in HBD #3231 was very interesting. There is a very low-tech color approximation in the freeware Macintosh program BrewMeister. <http://hbd.org/brewery/files/BrewMeister.sea.hqx> I have no idea how it works, but it's in the ballpark for color estimation on a few brews that I checked, and I always thought it was a cool feature for a brew program--much neater than just showing the predicted SRM value. (I don't use BrewMeister routinely, but I wish the other programs I use had its color feature.) It doesn't rely on ColorSync. I think a feature like this in any program could be almost as accurate as anyone's batch to batch color consistency. If I make the same recipe more than once, I always get a different color. For that matter, buying the same malt, even from the same maltster, but a different batch, could result in quite a lot of color variation. My most recent batch is quite dark for style because I was out of extra light DME (and canned AG wort) for the starter. I guess what I am saying is that a brew program should attempt to show the predicted color. It's not going to be that accurate, but it's more meaningful to the average brewer than just showing the SRM values. - --Brian Pickerill, Muncie Indiana Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 08:30:16 -0800 From: Jonathan Peakall <jpeakall at mcn.org> Subject: RE: Stuck Easy Masher.... >>Anyone ever had problems with a stuck sparge using an Easy Masher? This is >>my second try with the Gott Cooler version and second stuck sparge. Nothing like that has ever happened with any "EZ" product. Just ask Jack. Sorry Jack, but I just couldn't pass it up. I always have had a very puerile (sp?) sense of humor. In reality, however, I would guess that the grain was compacted by sparging way too rapidly. I never open my lauter valve by more than a smidge, and it usually take 1-1.5 hrs to sparge, although I do run a little faster while circulating, as I use a "Rube Goldbergesque Anti-EZ mashing device with a jumpy mash thingy schedule". Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 08:43:42 -0800 From: J Daoust <thedaousts at ixpres.com> Subject: hop storage?? Is it possible to store hops, after using a portion of the package, in a zip lock baggy in the freezer.?? The guy at the beer shop says no, is he yring to get me to buy more products? Or is it feasible to store them this way to save a little$$. Thanks, Jerry Daoust Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 11:56:38 -0500 From: "Doug Moyer" <shyzaboy at yahoo.com> Subject: Practical Brewer download & quality Brewers, I've started the arduously slow process of downloading the Practical Brewer (see http://www.mbaa.com/membonly/publication/pdf.html ) I am guessing that many of you are doing the same, since the best I can get is just over 1 Kbyte/s. (I have a lightly loaded 112k ISDN at the office, so I suspect the bottleneck is at the mbaa site.) Can someone with good bandwidth post the pdf's on their site and let the rest of us know? (Would that be illegal?) Also, the image quality is terrible! Has anyone converted this to formatted text? (Would that be illegal?) Any tricks for printing the files as is to get a decent output? Brew on! Doug Moyer Salem, VA Star City Brewers Guild: http://hbd.org/starcity __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 10:53:03 -0600 From: "G. M. Remake" <gremake at gsbalum.uchicago.edu> Subject: Re: Color; Overnight Mashing Hello all, Thanks to those who responded to my request for help in developing a recipe color swatch in my Excel brewing program. The concensus was that it cannot be done accurately. So maybe I'm expecting too much of my simple program, but I see that the Recipator (found at brewery.org) does precisely what I'm trying to do. For a given recipe, it develops a colored cell as an indication of what the beer color may look like. So yes, it can be done, keeping in mind the limits of accuracy. Now I just have to figure out how to do it in my program. Randall asked about overnight mashing, recognizing the potential time-savings. This topic has come up before, and I am again compelled to sing the praises of split-session brewing. Some have reported mashing overnight, but temperature control can be tricky, and souring might become more of an issue. Whereas I don't mash overnight, I do mash and sparge at night, after which the collected wort sits on my stove until I boil it the following morning (or afternoon). I've been doing this about a year and have been very happy with it. It also produces some wonderful FWH results when the hops steep overnight. This past weekend I brewed a 95%+ Vienna malt Vienna employing a double decoction mash, and the mash/sparge session alone took over four hours on Friday night, after which I was plenty ready for bed. I got up and boiled on Saturday morning, and was finished cleaning up in time to take the kids sledding before lunch. I could not have brewed this beautiful recipe without split-session brewing. If you're looking to make the most of limited brewing time, give split-sessions a try! Cheers! Greg Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 09:29:17 -0800 From: Brad Miller <millerb at targen.com> Subject: Waters of the World I'm creating a program to calculate (or convert) water from one area to water from another area. What I was hoping to have people send me their water content for their city so I could build a database. Thanks for the help. Brad Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 11:34:10 -0600 From: Kirk.Fleming at born.com Subject: Batch/Burst/Fly Sparging--Gott Cooler Setup In #3231 Joel referred to batch sparging, and while sparging this past weekend I had time to reflect on the variety of techniques and equipment I've seen folks use. I chuckled when I thought about the extent to which folks have sometimes gone--in particular the commercially available rotary spray arm unit, and even some of the stuff I've built over the years. While not as 'hands-off' as batch sparging or continuous gravity-fed systems, lately I've simply used a large saucepan to shuttle hot water to the lauter tank--one saucepan at a time, as needed. I try to maintain a bit of a water cover over the grain--about 2-3 cm, but generally fail to some degree. Naturally, the convenience of this process depends on run-off rate, but the effectiveness is equal to the half-dozen or so other techniques I've used, and doesn't require any equipment set up. On another note, I used yet another apparatus this weekend--a perforated 7-gal HDPE bucket inside the Gott cooler for mashing/lautering. I haven't followed HBD in a long time and don't know if this is a common setup, but I had to improvise when a surprise window-of-opportunity opened up, and it worked great. Fantastically, actually. I perforated the bucket with 3/32" holes on the sides only--maybe about 500 of them at most. The 10-gal Gott cooler cover can still be placed on the cooler with the HDPE bucket inside--although it only tightens on about 1/8 turn. I ran a 25lb grain bill, approximately, and had ample room in the bucket for sparging, stirring, etc. Primitive, yet effective. Ah...another 8 gal of IPA headed my way. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 18:08:04 -0000 From: "Nigel Porter" <nigel at sparger.freeserve.co.uk> Subject: RE: Saflager Yeast Mike Pensinger wrote: >Is the Saflager the same way and if so what >are its temp ranges. Is there a place to find specs on it? Try visiting http://www.dclyeast.co.uk/ The yeast strain of saflager available to the HB market is S-23. Nigel Porter Guildford, Surrey, UK Return to table of contents
Date: 25 Jan 2000 12:09:59 -0500 From: RCAYOT at solutia.com Subject: Dextrin vs Protein for mouth feel I just want to break into the dextrin/protein discussion regarding body and mouthfeel. There is a clear relationship between molecular weight of dissolved polymers and viscosity. The viscosisty of a solution with dissolved polymer is directly proportional to the polymer concentration, and directly proportional to the polymer molecular weight raised to some power, usually less than one. That is for dilute solutions, higher concentrations lead to other relationships. I would guess that "body" is really related to "viscosity". The viscosity would be dominated by the polymers in the liquid and little contribution to the viscosity from dissolved low molecualr weight molecules like oligosaccarides. The question I have is how high in molecular weight are the soluble proteins and how high in molecualr weight are the dextrins? I am going to take a stabe at this, but I think that dextrins are pretty much trimmed down starch molecules, and are probably fairly low in molecular weight. In addition, proteins are usually coaggulated and taken out of solution if very high in molecular weight. The question of which one dominates would take some investigation. Someone mentioned a fraction containing >300,000 daltons as a MW, this is very high in molecular weight and would have a sigfnificant contribution to viscosity if present in any reasonable concentration. My own experiernce suggests that body can be somewhat controlled by mash temperature which would suggest dextrins at first blush, but proteolysis can also occur at mash temepratures for a short period of time before the enzymes get denatured. Roger Ayotte Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 13:47:18 -0500 From: "Czerpak, Pete" <Pete.Czerpak at siigroup.com> Subject: conditioning temps and dry hopping temperatures I have been caught in a high hopping rut lately (not a bad thing at all) with a few batches of IPA, imperial stout, and several barley wines. What are the thoughts concerning conditioning of the brews? Is it better to cold condition at upper 30s-low 40s (like serving temps) or at cellar temps or at normal fermentation temps like 60 to 65F. Does anybody have any data to support any of the above on time to condition, flavor profile, conversion of nasties or esters, etc. I figure the yeast have a tougher time at the low temps but is the conditioning process a yeast process or a general flavors mellowing and melding process? This might point towards the higher end of my above posted ranges. Also, is dry hopping more effective at warmer or colder. I generally dry hop at the 60-65F temperature. What happens if I dry hop and then throw the keg in the ol`fridge to chill it and then pull the hops out after whatever time period I normally use. I would say warmer is better based on solubility but perhaps some other effects are important too. Also, is CO2 pressure on the keg or in the headspace going to inhibit either the conditioning or the dry hopping effects? Tough questions, huh.. I welcome any thoughts posted or private. By the way, I have a Wyeast 1098 fermented imperial stout with an OG = 1.084. This ended up being pretty estery at the end of fermentation. I did use a huge yeast cake from a previous batch. It was bubbling within 4 hours and done bubbling in maybe 48 hours or so. Should this yeast be extremely estery in an imperial. Any experience with this yeast and high gravity brews? I used it for a english browne andf porter previously and would say they had a destinctively fruity taste/smell. Good in the brown though, seemed pretty englishe authentic. I did throw the imperial in the fridge after 2 or 3 weeks to sit. Should I take it out and leave it at room temperature for a time now or just leave it there cold to slowly condition. Thanks for any high octane help, Pete Czerpak Albany, NY Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 10:25:31 -0700 From: "Dana H. Edgell" <EdgeAle at cs.com> Subject: stir plates Alan Meeker suggests that I consider a stir bar instead of pump aeration to keep my yeast in suspension. I have thought about stir plates and remember making then inexpensively being discussed several times before on the HBD. I think a combination of stir plate, continuous aeration and warm temperatures would maximize yeast growth. I was trying to combine two of these into one by using the bubbles to stir also. A stir bar obviously would be better at stirring than bubbles but I think it would be poor for aeration. While the stir bar agitation would dissolve oxygen from the air inside the jar, it seems to me that that would get depleted rather quickly. The airlock and the CO2 from the yeast would prevent much more oxygen being disolved. I don't think a stir bar could oxygenate over the long run as well as a bubbler could stir. Of course, the fact that I already have an aquarium pump but not a stir plate may be affecting my judgement :). Dana - -------------------------------------------------------- Dr. Dana Edgell Staff Scientist mailto:edgell at far-tech.com FARTECH, Inc. (858) 455-6655 P.O.Box 221053 (858) 450-9741 fax San Diego, CA 92192-1053 Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 11:51:51 -0800 From: RiedelD at pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca Subject: RE: STUCK SPARGE; Wyeast 1187; Grain bed depth; O'fest lagering Todd in NC relates the following: >Anyone ever had problems with a stuck sparge using an Easy Masher? This is >my second try with the Gott Cooler version and second stuck sparge. I crushed >with the JSP mill. I collected my first 2 gallons at full flow, poured it >back in to filter, collected a second 2 gallons of very clear wort at full >flow, then suddenly, STUCK SPARGE. Almost an hour later I managed to collect >my 7 gallons. I ended up getting quite aggressive, racking the screen with Well, I have a few thoughts here: 1. If I recall, 'full-flow' may be a little aggressive... try backing that off a little; 2. An hour to collect 7 gallons is actually a little too FAST. Most literature recommends at least an hour for 5 gallons. If you runoff faster than that, you'll leave a lot of sugars behind. Did you usea different system before and get much faster flow? If you really feel that things are STUCK, I think Jack recommends gently blowing into the outlet to 'backflush' the screen. - --------------- Wyeast 1187: Has anyone used this strain? I recently pitch a good quantity (~400mL) of slurry to a 7.5 gallon batch of strong ale (OG 1.068) at about 68F. Oxygenated for 2 x 2.5 mins through an aquarium airstone (glass bead). It took at least 24hrs to get moving and it's still going pretty slowly (~7sec between airlock blips). Is this strain a slow worker? Sensitive to temperature (I'm fermenting around 68F)? - ---------------- Grain bed depth vs. recirc time: I've come to the conclusion that grain bed depth is very helpful in decreasing recirc time. My 8 and 10 gallon batches (and their subsequent deeper grain beds) really clear up nicely and quickly (5-10 mins instead of up around 20-30 mins!). I use a 50L converted Sankey as a mash/lauter tun. - Just a datapoint. - ---------------- Lagering/Oktoberfests: My fall brewed O'Fest recently dropped it's slight astringency and evolved into a nice, malty, smooth beer (used WYeast 2206). My point? It took a good 2 months of lagering to get this beer to where I wanted it. - another datapoint. cheers, Dave Riedel Victoria, Canada. Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 01/26/00, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96