HOMEBREW Digest #3256 Wed 23 February 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

  FAN/amino acids in yeast nutrient ("Pannicke, Glen A.")
  More (but different) Yeast questions (David Lamotte)
  Calcium Chloride (phil sides jr)
  commercial pitching rates ("George de Piro")
  RE:  Cold break layering ("George de Piro")
  Re:Plastic fermenters ("Dic Gleason")
  Kolsch yeast (Richard_R_Gontarek)
  MBAA (Terence Tegner)
  Kettle/Bucket Mashing (Matthew Comstock)
  heads and tails (Marc Sedam)
  Re: Misguided Post Hogs ("Pannicke, Glen A.")
  N2 fixation and one more thing about fusels (patrick finerty)
  Yeast Growth (RCAYOT)
  Continuous agitation (Jeff Renner)
  Pitching Rates and Munich Malt (JDPils)
  Ester production? ("Paul Kensler")
  Puerto Rico Brewpubs or Beer Bars (woodsj)
  underpitching (JDPils)
  Not one Element but Two (Brad Miller)
  Questions on Hops, Decoction, and Watering Down (Steven Gibbs)
  MCAB 2 - Be There. (RBoland)
  Wisconsin Water (Keith Busby)
  Bluff City Brewers 12th Annual Homebrew Competition (JGrabowski)
  Stones & Phillers:Don't drink and post! (Aaron Perry)

* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! * AOL members: Visit the AOL Homebrewing boards before they're gone! * Go to aol://5863:126/mBLA:185893 * 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: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 15:14:38 -0500 From: "Pannicke, Glen A." <glen_pannicke at merck.com> Subject: FAN/amino acids in yeast nutrient On Fri, 18 Feb 2000 Fred L. Johnson asked about FAN/amino acids in yeast nutrient: >Could someone provide a brief summary of >1) the requirement for free amino nitrogen by yeast for growth, (i.e. >is free amino nitrogen "required" for growth or just to prevent fusel >alcohol production?) As you may have read already, FAN is an absolute requirement for yeast growth. However, so far the postings have left out the importance of two amino acids, specifically leucine and valine. According to G. Fix, yeast usually cannot metabolize adequate replacements of these amino acids from other sources of nitrogen (though maybe some can convert keto acids appropriately). Apparently, worts deficient in valine also tend to lead to elevated diacetyl levels as valine and leucine help (through later metabolic pathways) to reduce these naturally occuring levels of diacetyl. I bring this up since diacetyl is another hot HBD topic ;-) For more info see Mr. Fix's article below: http://brewingtechniques.com/library/backissues/issue1.2/fix.html I don't believe that FAN levels within the acceptable range will have a reducing effect upon fusel alcohols since fusels and esters are produced from FAN constituents anyway via the Ehrlich mechanism. Dave Burley hit on the best ways to reduce the fusel production. Add krausen blow-off or skimming in an open fermenter a secondary measures as well. Dave also mentioned agitation as contributing to increased fusel production. Might that be due to the slight increase in metabolism and growth by suspending the yeast and maximizing their exposure to the wort? Food for thought here. >2) the amino acid requirements by yeast for growth The most oft cited suggestion I have come across is to keep FAN levels above 200 mg/ml to avoid stuck or slow fermentations. >3) the concentrations of the above that can be expected in all grain >worts, and This is dependent upon a number of variables including your grain selection, mashing regime, wort boil, etc... But, if I may use the numbers George throws out in the above article as a f'rinstance: All-malt wort at 12 degrees P (SG = 1.048) approx. 300-325 mg/L FAN All-malt wort at 10 degrees P (SG = 1.040) approx. 250-270 mg/L FAN >4) the situations in which supplements to the wort might be required? If your FAN is below 150 ml/L you might need supplements to avoid stuck or incomplete fermentations. For more info refer to M. Lodahl's article in Brewing Techniques (given below) and to M. Meilgaard's chapter on Wort Composition in "The Practical Brewer" (not available any more on line). http://brewingtechniques.com/library/backissues/issue1.2/lodahl.html Yeast nutrient/energizer, however you want to package it, can be used for stuck or slow fermentations, but your best bet is to avoid this situation by carefully choosing malt extracts which are really ALL MALT, do a partial mash or move to all-grain brewing along with keeping adjuncts low. Some products labeled as yeast nutrients may only provide a source of the ammonium ion such as urea or diammonium phosphate. Other may actually contain peptones and yeast extracts. Personally, I only use these additives as a last resort for a batch beer. I save it for my starters by adding a few grams of each - you know, as a snack. Glen Pannicke Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 14:31:02 +1000 From: David Lamotte <lamotted at ozemail.com.au> Subject: More (but different) Yeast questions Well it certainly is yeast season here on the HBD, and isn't it great. With all this talk of starters, amino acids and contaminated smack packs - I would like to focus on what Wyeast does well (rather than what they may have done badly) How do they prepare their foil packs so that the yeast stays viable and (relatively) free from contamination for years ? I have just smacked a pack of 1028 dated March 1998. No this is not a misprint - it was nearly 2 years old. Admittedly it took 5 days to swell to full size, but I will be pitching what I expect to be clean, viable yeast into my starter tonight. For comparison I have had an ozzie liquid yeast that was dead after 12 months in the fridge, but an old Wyeast has never failed me. I read in texts that yeast should be stored under wort for a maximum of 2 weeks, so how do they do it ? Does anyone know what conditions the propogate the yeast under prior to packaging, and can we adopt it for storing our yeast at home ? Also I was amazed to read in Kunze, that a single yeast cell, under ideal conditions, can split its own weight of glucose into Ethanol + CO2 each and every second - that equals 200 million molecules of glucose. Boy that's fast - gotta love them yeast. And no I haven't performed this experiment myself or seen it with my own eyes. On this occasion I am happy to believe Kunze - unless of course it is one of the well known typo's. David Lamotte Newcastle N.S.W. (thats a few hours North of the Baron) Australia Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 00:43:50 -0500 From: phil sides jr <psides at carl.net> Subject: Calcium Chloride Anyone know a source for food-grade Calcium Chloride? Phil Sides, Jr. Concord, NH - -- Macht nicht o'zapft ist, Prost! Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 01:32:49 -0500 From: "George de Piro" <gdepiro at mindspring.com> Subject: commercial pitching rates Hi all, Bob expresses his view about commercial pitching rates: "The debate rages. Several points have been made on the assumption that commercial breweries pick their pitching rate for reasons of flavour etc. "Sorry, they pitch high for one reason only, money. They cannot afford a 12 hour lag. If they can force through a batch of beer in 96 hours, a 3 hour lag vs. a hour lag results in a 10% productivity gain." Back to me: While it is true that commercial brewers are concerned with money, which of course = time, the successful breweries are actually concerned with flavor, too. History has shown what happens to breweries that allow accountants to alter the production techniques. The brewery goes under. Schlitz was once one of the largest brewers in the U.S.A. Ever wonder what happened to them? Is it that their marketing didn't include enough big-breasted woman caressing beer bottles until the foam frothed out? Not entirely. They chose to allow accountants to examine their brewing procedures. The bean counters saw that fermentation takes a relatively long time, and time = money, so they asked if it could be reduced. The brewers were able to speed up fermentation by using techniques common to yeast propagation, including constant agitation of the wort. While this had a dramatic effect on the rate of fermentation, it also had a dramatic impact on the flavor of the beer. You might think that your typical Schlitz drinker wouldn't know the difference between well-made Schlitz and the accountant's version, but they did. They also stopped drinking it. So much for Jeff Irvine's (aka "Dr. Pivo") "full-flavored fusel lager." While most of us agree that megabrews are boring, insipid products that inspired us to begin this great hobby (or profession), you cannot simply bash them with sweeping strokes claiming that they do not care about the flavor of their beers. They care tremendously. The problem is the people in charge of deciding what flavors are desirable also think Wonder bread is great. I'll stop my little rant, have fun! George de Piro C.H. Evans Brewing Company at the Albany Pump Station (518)447-9000 http://evansale.com (under construction) Malted Barley Appreciation Society Homebrew Club http://hbd.org/mbas Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 01:39:34 -0500 From: "George de Piro" <gdepiro at mindspring.com> Subject: RE: Cold break layering Hi all, Keith writes: "I have noticed what I take to be a layer of cold break suspended a few inches down from the top of the wort. I do not recall seeing this until recently. Could it have anything to do with my use of oxygenation (this is the only recent change to my techniques)?" Back to me: Yes, it could be from the oxygenation. One method of cold break removal is to bubble air through the wort and allow the bubbles to rise up with bits of cold break attached to them. The cold break can then be removed from the surface of the brew. I wouldn't have guessed that 2, 30-second bursts of O2 would be enough to float a significant amount of cold break, but hell, there are far more obvious things in the world that I haven't figured out too easily, so it could be. Have fun! George de Piro C.H. Evans Brewing Company at the Albany Pump Station (518)447-9000 http://evansale.com (under construction) Malted Barley Appreciation Society Homebrew Club http://hbd.org/mbas Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 23:55:52 PST From: "Dic Gleason" <dicgleason at hotmail.com> Subject: Re:Plastic fermenters >A company called Hobby Beverage Equipment Company >makes 5.5,6.5, and 12 gal plastic conicals with stands, thermometers, >racking arm, bottom drain valve, etc.. I have the information from Hobby Beverage Equipment Company. While there are no thermometers on the fermenters they do have everything else. They have 2 different 6.5 Gal conical fermenters ($95.00 and $168.00) 12 gal for $225.00. A half barrel that holds 25 gal. is $350.00 and the Full Barrel, 40 gal is yours for only $425.00. No mention of shipping or handling costs. I have only received the catalog and don't know anything about the company so I have no affiliation with the company. They are at www.minibrew.com Dic ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 07:03:48 -0500 From: Richard_R_Gontarek at sbphrd.com Subject: Kolsch yeast I'm thinking about brewing a Kolsch, since it is one style I've never done before, but I'm confused about which yeast I should use. Should I go with Wyeast 1007 (German Ale) or 2565 (Kolsch)? If anyone has used these yeasts in this style, I'd appreciate your advice. Thanks! Cheers, Rick Gontarek Owner/Brewmaster The Major Groove Picobrewery Trappe, PA Richard_R_Gontarek at sbphrd.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 15:26:07 +0200 From: Terence Tegner <wheaties at mweb.co.za> Subject: MBAA Hi brewing brethren, South Africa to the rescue. I have downloaded the entire Practical Brewing and burnt a CD with it. Anybody who is short a piece here and there is welcome to contact me and I will attach the necessary. The CD is not for sale. A crook I am not(not much anyway). The reason I downloaded it is because I thought it might be the new edition (fat chance) as I bought the original at great expense some years ago. A well worthwhile investment, I might add. Regards Terence Tegner (pronounced TYNER) aka Phail Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 05:52:31 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Comstock <mccomstock at yahoo.com> Subject: Kettle/Bucket Mashing Kevin M. Mueller writes: "I decided to try mashing in my old enamel over steel brewpot. It has a small chip in it, and I was wondering if this will effect my flavor." I doubt a little chip in your enamel pot would be a problem. If you mash and the little chip starts to look like a big chip, then I'd worry. But I'll tell ya. I mash in my bottling bucket. I presume you've got one. I'd guess I spent less than $10 for my set up, if you ignore the cost of the plastic bottling bucket. Here's what I use: 1. I wrap my bottling bucket in that reflective emergency blanket stuff and a couple of belts. I don't lose but a few degrees over a couple hours. Fine with me. Towels would probably work just fine. 2. I use, but probably don't need, a grain bag that on the inside of the bucket, to kind of hold the mash. That was $8. 3. I have a drain made out of CPVC, the heat resistant type. It's shaped in a question mark shape and sits on the bottom of the bucket it screws on to threads on the back side of the bottling spigot. I just bought a 5 ft. length of CPVC pipe(and cut it to size), several CPVC elbows and a threaded adapter to attach to the spigot threads. I drilled holes in the longer length of tubing that sits on the bottom and wrapped a piece of screen around it. This sounds way more complicated than it is. Just go to Home Depot, visit the plumbing section, and start sticking things together like Tinker toys. Bring your bottling bucket spigot, too. If it fits together, buy it. I doesn't have to look a certain way. You've just got to move liquid from point A to point B. If I can do it.... One advantage of this setup is that you mash and lauter in the same container; a combitun. None of this transferring-hot-mash business like you'd have with your kettle (unless you have a spigot in your kettle). For a better description of the basic idea here, check out the Library at: http://brewery.org for an article written by Mr. Jack Schmidling: http://brewery.org/brewery/library/KettleARF.html Matt (I-like-the-hbd-I-guess-that-makes-me-a-wanker) Comstock in Cincinnati __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 09:35:25 -0500 From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam at unc.edu> Subject: heads and tails Steve A. wrote... "Oxo-acids are the 'heads' of the amino acids, while the ammonia ions are the 'tails'. Whenever yeast consume AAs they immediately separate the heads and tails even if they need to rebuild the very same amino acid they just tore apart. It probably has to do with the regulation mechanisms. Anyway if you feed your yeast just one, or a few amino acids it will use the 'tails' to make the others and to some smaller extent the 'heads' will be reused. The unused 'heads' or oxo-acids are just begging to be made into fusels or aldehydes." Heads and tails?? I hope Phil isn't listening and, if he is, has stopped spinning that poor cat. Felines of Burradoo beware. Cheers! Marc Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 10:04:24 -0500 From: "Pannicke, Glen A." <glen_pannicke at merck.com> Subject: Re: Misguided Post Hogs On Sun, 20 Feb 2000 "MudGuts" spoke of Misguided Post Hogs >to the guys who espouse great gobbets >of knowledge beyond beer brewing >dont post until you know what you are >talking about. Theres a lot of brewers > who are scientists and engineers >who also know what is being written >is worse than improbable - its often >utter shite. Henk, Aside from ranting about us "wankers", do you have anything of value to offer this forum? If you (or any of your technically inclined fellows down under) see something which is "utter shite" then speak up! It's your duty! We'll flame that fountain of misinformation until he cries like a little girl and publicly admits his ignorance! Granted, there's a LOT of bollocks being thrown around in here, but I happen to have gleaned quite a bit from those you may consider to be some of the major spewers. Half of the experiments run here are not designed, but then who has the time, money or resources to run a proper DOE on hop schedules or oxygenation? For the most part we'll have to live with simple "spurments" like Dr. Pivo does. Not only is this forum a vehicle for the dissemination of information, but it is a social environment and a form of entertainment where people say hello, BS, argue and discuss (even the trite). I hate to admit it, but some of the flames can be enjoyable too ;-) Personally, I'm a relatively new voice on the HBD and I've lurked for a number of months before ever speaking up. I can guarantee you that without this interaction, the forum would be dead and lifeless. Glen Pannicke alehouse.homepage.com Opinions are like a**holes - everyone's got one and they all stink! Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 10:19:27 -0500 (EST) From: patrick finerty <zinc at zifi.psf.sickkids.on.ca> Subject: N2 fixation and one more thing about fusels howdy folks, "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net> makes a statement that is not quite right. > Most bacteria and fungi (and in all probability yeast) can reduce > nitrate to ammonia, or consume ammonia ions directly for use, by far and away, most organisms are incapable of fixing N2 to NH3 (reduction of atmospheric N2 to ammonia). this is a 'hard' reaction to do and requires a special set of enzymes (the whole complex is called nitrogenase). bacteria that can do this process (Nitrosomonas, Nitrobacter) are sometimes found in a symbiotic relationship with plants. the bacteria form so-called root nodules and supply the plant with NH3. it's best not to use probabilities when writing about biochemical processes; save that for the geneticists and ecologists! in a fit of mental weakness, i failed to use the appropriate biochemical term for the process in which higher higher molecular weight alcohols are produced. if you care to search for info about this, the biochemical process is called 'transamination' and is a part of a general process named catabolism. ok, back to the NMR spectra... -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: 22 Feb 2000 09:03:30 -0500 From: RCAYOT at solutia.com Subject: Yeast Growth while I really appreciate the comments Steve Alexander made about fusels etc, tehre is a problem I have with his analysis of yeast growth, to wit: "Note that if we pitch REALLY big as in lager brewing, then 75% of the final yeast cake is new growth, if you pitch really small, as from a smack-pack, then maybe 99% of the final yeast is new growth. The difference in flavor is not likely due to the difference of 75% vs 99% new yeast growth. Adding an extra 32% (100*(99/75 -1)) of off-product doesn't give the sort of night-and-day differences that underpitching causes." Well, if we have 75% new growth, then the 25% reproducted only three times its orig9inal biomass, however if we have 99% new growth, the result is about 100X increase in biomass, to me that is significant yeast growth and would probably have a perceptible impact on beer character. Roger Ayotte Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 09:45:02 -0500 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Continuous agitation Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> wrote: >Anyone care to >explain how agitation causes the >formation of fusel alcohols? Don't know the actual mechanism, but I believe this is the reason for Charlie P's admonition to "Relax, don't worry, have a homebrew." Worrying can produce all kinds of bad effects, evidently including elevated fusels, and is bad for your health anyway. It's nice to see scientific evidence from M&BS to back up Charlie. Jeff -=-=-=-=- Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, c/o nerenner at umich.edu "One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 13:20:43 EST From: JDPils at aol.com Subject: Pitching Rates and Munich Malt Greetings Fellow Brewer's, Since early January I have been reading various posts on attenuation with large amounts of munich malt, pitching rates in general, and of course oxygenation. It has taken me a bit of time to formulate my experiences and observations on these subjects. I too wonder how many of the great "benchmark" German Beers such as Paulaner Salvator and Ayinger Dunkel can acheive 80% attenuation and ferment in the high 40's to very low 50's and produce a very clean tasting beer that is primarly munich malts and possibly decoction mashed. Being a lager head, I have strived to brew the best European, particularly Czech and German styles. Attenuation has always been a focus for all lagers I have made. I have never found my lagers to be too dry. I also beleive higher residual sugars can compete with the various malt flavors and reduce the mouth feel. I pay great attention to my yeast starters. In general, I have found for lagers, the more yeast I pitch, the lower the ferment temperature and the better results. I have been brewing both ales and lagers for 11 years. I have made 22, 12 gallon batches of lagers since 1995, with virtually the same process and equipment. Half were pilseners and half were Munich or Bavarian styles. On a side note, with my brewing practices below, I never have any problems attenuating ales unless I am trying to make a high gravity beer. Apparant attenution is close to the maximum for a specified yeast strain. I have evolved my procedures to pitch 1/3 to 1/2 gal of starter solution either by triple stepping a standard Wyeast smack pack or single stepping a White Labs vial. Alternatively, I have repitched yeast from the primary fermentor with or without washing in water and from the secondary by doing a single starter to 1/3 gallons. I do not add yeast nutrients and only filter hot break by using loose leave hops with a false bottom in my boiler. I counterflow chill to 5F over the cold water temp, anywhere from 55 - 75F depending on what time of year. I also oxygenate with a SS filter for 1 minute for a 6.8 gallon carboy. I try to ferment between 48 - 55 absolute limits in a chest freezer. I have seen lag times from 4 hours to three days, depnding on the pitching temp and yeast starter used. There is a direct trade of between longer lag times and subtle off flavors from higher pitching temps. The optimum condition is to get the minimum lag time at the lowest pitching temperature. When stepping up new yeast I always see longer lag times, however the beer still tasted fine as long as the pitching temp was below 60 - 65F. Usually if I pitch at or below 55F I need yeast from a primary fermentor be it mine or a local brewery's to acheive short lag times. I consider less than 12 hours to be acceptable. This also brings up the question as to how we each detemine lag time. My definition is visible foam, more than 10% of the area, on the top of the fermentor without rousing. I searched back about 5 years worth of recipes to try and understand how well I have done. For pilseners I would say I have met with good success using a variety of yeasts (WY2124, WY2178, WY 2206, WL Pilsener) at about 72 - 76% apparant attenuation. These recipes use less than 10% munich and at least 90% pilsener malts. For bocks, dunkels, and octoberfests I have used anywhere from 15% munich to 75% munich and in some cases 50 - 65% dark munich. For these beers attenuation is a struggle. For those in the 15 - 25% range it appears I get one or two percent less compared to a pils using the same yeast whereas for 30 - 75% munich about 3 - 5 points less. In one case I acheived only 65% attenution with 67% dark munich malt. My last batch of dunkel was 50% dark munich - 25% lght munich - 25% pils malt. This beer had an apparent attenuation of 72%, which is 2% below what the manufacturer says about the yeast strain. I pitched yeast from the primary of a pilsener. This appears to be the best I can do wiothout further advancements and I still am at FG's of 1.016 whereas I would like 1.014 or 1.012 for a 1.056 SG. What I recommend is as follows: 1) For beers that use more than 30% Munich malts, yeast must come from the primary of a previous batch or a commercial brewery to acheive the desired amounts of attenuation. Even then expect a couple percentage points lower. 2) Pitch at the lowest temp possible. With the above yeast the lag time should be 4 - 12 hours at 50 - 55F. For lagers with less than this amount of munich, building up a starter will do just fine, but perhaps keep the pitching temp up to 60 F until some CO2 is evolving. 3) Aerate or oxygenate at pitching is critical In the future for high % munich beers I will try 1) mash temperatures in the 148 - 153 range to optimize fermentable sugars. 2) more yeast slurries from local breweries to reduce the ferment temp. below 50 F, without increased lag or ferment times. 3) investigate water alkalinity and haardness to optimize more fermentables. I hope this helps some of you in your quest for better beer. Any comments on or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Cheers, Jim Dunlap Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 14:19:12 -0500 From: "Paul Kensler" <paul.kensler at attglobal.net> Subject: Ester production? I have something that puzzles me... Reading Kunze's book (Chapter 4), regarding ester production, he states that INCREASED fermentation temperature will LOWER ester production, and LOWER fermentation temperatures will INCREASE ester production... This seems counter to what I have previously known about ester production... is there a caveat somewhere that explains this, or...? Admittedly, I have not fully read the book yet, so is this in reference to lager yeasts only?... Anyone with insight on Kunze's reference in specific, or ester formation in general? Paul Kensler Lansing, MI Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 17:30:39 -0500 From: woodsj at us.ibm.com Subject: Puerto Rico Brewpubs or Beer Bars Have to make a quick business trip to Puerto Rico. I've searched the Real Beer Page for brewpubs. No references to anywhere in PR. Does the collective have any suggestions or experience ? Looking for either brewpubs or good beer bars, either in San Juan or anywhere on the island. Post replies to HBD or private e-mail is fine. Thanks in advance. Somebody's got to do it.......... Jeff Woods Camp Hill, PA Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 18:07:37 EST From: JDPils at aol.com Subject: underpitching I cannot help put my two cents worth in on the concept of underpitching. I think homebrewer's cannot avoid this with lagers, unless they are pitching from a previous batch or from commercial yeast. Recommending underpitching to a homebrewer can only result in grossly underpitching and inviting the potential for off flavors and contamination. Most problems I have encountered with off flavors in home brew come from poor yeast management, usually underpitching. The only bad lagers I made were yeaars ago before I didn't oxygenate and use large starters. As for ales I think the only way to overpitch is to use an extremely large slurry from a commercial brewery. So, in general I beleive the best results will occur with the sortest lag time and adjust the mash and ferment temperatures and select the correct yeast strains to develop specific flavor profiles. As for the claim that many American beers have no character due to overpitching I strongly disagree and suggest that these claims be supported by example so others may understand them. I just went to a Winter Beer Festival at the Elysian Brew Pub in Seattle. We tasted beers from many the larger and smaller breweries on the West Coast. They all had what I call "house yeast character" Some were fruity, some with hints of diacatyl, some having strong banna, and some clean. All reminicent of other brews from these breweries. Redhook's signature beer, ESB, which is OK and very consist when I have tried it out of state, promotes diacatyl by stopping the fermentation prematurely. Cheers, Jim Dunlap Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 15:14:18 -0800 From: Brad Miller <millerb at targen.com> Subject: Not one Element but Two Does anyone know about running multiple heating elements at the same time. Does this trip a breaker if they are on the same one? I wanted to rig up my HLT with an element and run it at the same time as my RIMS element. Would this work? Brad Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 16:52:33 -0800 From: Steven Gibbs <gibbs at lightspeed.net> Subject: Questions on Hops, Decoction, and Watering Down While brewing this weekend a couple of issues came to mind: 1.) How do you calculate bitterness units when reusing hops from a prior batch?; 2.) Has anyone done an analysis of the additional extraction rate on modern malts when utilizing a decoction mash versus a single temperature infusion mash?; and, 3.) If you have brewed a batch and received too high of an original gravity, how do you calculate the addition of sterile water to lower the gravity to the appropriate level? I was brewing two batches and because I had utilized a large quantity of noble hops in a Pilsner, I decided after draining the hopped wort into my fermentors, to go-ahead and first wort hop (FWH) with the six ounces of whole hops while also adding my normal during hops for the second brew. I tasted the tea at the conclusion of the session just prior to pitching the East and it tasted absolutely wonderful, and very different from what I would normally expect. The result of decocting my German 2-row Pils malt in a single decoction mash schedule seemed to bump my extract up approximately 5 points on a 10 gallon batch. It would be interesting to see which techniques would not only contribute positively to taste but also to economy by allowing a higher extract rate without a tremendous amount of additional effort. Finally, as you can probably tell from my last question, my pilsner finished too high and so I added some boiled water which was left to cool to room temperature prior to infuseing. I will soon find out the results but I was curious for future reference on how to calculate this type of high gravity brewing. Thanks for your answers. Steve Gibbs Bakersfield FOAM Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 20:54:36 EST From: RBoland at aol.com Subject: MCAB 2 - Be There. The Second Annual Masters Championship of Amateur Brewing and Technical Conference (MCAB2) will indeed be a national and international event! So far, we have speakers, judges, and conference attendees from Alberta, Alabama, California, Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, New York, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ontario, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, Vermont, and Virginia. Don't miss this opportunity to rub shoulders and trade experiences with some of the best brewers and judges around. You'll also have ample opportunity to taste some great homebrew, including cask ales. When: March 24, 25, and 26, 2000. Where: Hampton Inn Union Station, St. Louis, MO. Information and registration instructions are on the St. Louis Brews website, www.stlbrews.org. We've also just expanded the program, adding Dave Logsdon of Wyeast and Chris White of White Laboratories to the agenda. They'll share the same stage so get your registrations in and your questions ready! We'll meet you in St. Louis. Bob Boland Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 21:02:42 -0600 From: Keith Busby <kbusby at ou.edu> Subject: Wisconsin Water Anyone out there in Hartland-Delafield-Oconomowoc-Wales who can tell me what the local water is like? I am moving there this summer and may be on a well. Replies best off-list, I should think. Keith Busby George Lynn Cross Research Professor Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies University of Oklahoma 780 Van Vleet Oval, Room 202 Norman, OK 73019 Tel: (405) 325-5088. Fax: (405) 325-0103 Starting Fall 2000, Professor of French University of Wisconsin-Madison Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 22:23:41 EST From: JGrabowski at aol.com Subject: Bluff City Brewers 12th Annual Homebrew Competition The Bluff City Brewers and Connoisseurs are proud to announce the 12th Annual Homebrewer's Extravaganza. First round judging to be held Friday 4/7/00 beginning at 6:30pm at Admiral Benbow's, hospitality party to follow. Balance of categories will be judged on Saturday 4/8/00 beginning at 8:45am at Bosco's Pizza Kitchen. Awards dinner that evening at the High Point Pinch. Great prizes will be awarded for Best of Show, Best of Ales, Best of Lagers, Memphis Metro Brewer of the Year and the second annual Johnny Appleseed Cider contest. 1st, 2nd and 3rd place winners will receive our beautiful Commemorative Pint Glasses and the all new 2000 Custom Commemorative 12th Annual Medals. Entry packets and information is being added to the club's web page located at memphisbrews.com and will be available by the end of February. For more information, contact either Jay Grabowski (jgrabowski at aol.com) or Rob Harris (robsteeler at aol.com). Best regards and good brewing!!!!! Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 23:54:42 -0400 From: Aaron Perry <vspbcb at earthlink.net> Subject: Stones & Phillers:Don't drink and post! <HTML> Sorry to Dan.......but thanks, <P>I think I had too many Tripples that night, I wasn't too clear.&nbsp; I do in fact have a William's Carbonation stone(no affil.).&nbsp; This unit consists of a long tube (stone on the end) that is fitted into the short "in" tube with a provided washer.&nbsp; This results in getting the carbonation stone(ss 2 micron) pretty close to the bottom of the keg.&nbsp; So the gas "in" is still gas "in". The "out" is the normal unobstructed dip tube.&nbsp; My problem is the beer was going through the stone, up the tube and out of the "in" connection. After that it trickled down the gas line of the philler and into the bottle............backwards!? I double checked everything, then bottled a braggot with the same carb. level / temp.&nbsp; This brew bottled smooth as could be, <BR>normal, easy "counterphilling"(no affil.).&nbsp; After my good session I figured I'd try the "stone" brew again... same out through the in routine. I played with the pressure, high and low. I raised the keg as high as possible figuring the extra couple inches might help the siphon pull the beer down the "out" tube. No luck still. Just a steady trickle from the "in" tube! <BR>Hope this clears things up.&nbsp; Better yet hope this helps to figure out what's wrong <P>Thanks a lot!! <P>Aaron Perry <BR><A HREF="mailto:vspbcb at earthlink.net">vspbcb at earthlink.net</A> <BR>&nbsp; <BR>&nbsp;</HTML> Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 02/23/00, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96