HOMEBREW Digest #3293 Fri 07 April 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

  attenuation again ("Doug Moyer")
  Re: English/Scottish Ales (KMacneal)
  Oasis Capstone ESB ("Leonard, Phil")
  HSA & Glyco-Proteins ("Nathaniel P. Lansing")
  Restarting stuck wine ("Nathaniel P. Lansing")
  NA beer procedure ("Nathaniel P. Lansing")
  Belgian Wit ("Pannicke, Glen A.")
  Hops in my primary ("Charles Sprigg")
  Carbonating Barlywine (Richard Foote)
  Re: Kegging (Jeff Renner)
  Re: Sanitizing on the cheap (Demonick)
  Re: Sanitizing on the cheap (Jeff Renner)
  RE: Phil Yates post ("Murray, Eric")
  Mash Hops (Dana Edgell)
  simple green (Ralph Link)
  pretentions and thick dough-in (Jim)
  Week long diacytl rest, Fining with Ising Glass (procedure) (Charley Burns)
  Secondary Fermentation (John Leggett)

* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! * Entries for the 18th Annual HOPS competition are due 3/24-4/2/00 * See http://www.netaxs.com/~shady/hops/ for more information * 18th Annual Oregon Homebrew Festival - entry deadline May 15th * More info at: http://www.hotv.org/fest2000 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: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 09:10:54 -0400 From: "Doug Moyer" <shyzaboy at yahoo.com> Subject: attenuation again Brewers (and brewsters), "Penn, John" <John.Penn at jhuapl.edu> takes Alan Meeker's comments and combines them with a single irrelevant data point and comes to a completely illogical conclusion. (Sorry to be so blunt, John, but them's the apples.) Without knowing the composition of John's wort (sold as a health supplement?) no conclusions whatsoever can be drawn about his yeast's performance. None. Period. (Also, just because the gravity is over 1.000 doesn't mean that fermentable sugars remain.) All you librarians out there: what does the literature say about variations between COMMON strains of yeasts and their ability to process various sugars? (Let's not discuss the weird yeasts at this point.) Most of the variation that I've seen discussed on the hbd refers only to lager yeasts' ability to ferment mannose (or perhaps another dextrin), which ale yeasts are not able to process. This is NOT relevant to my original question which referred only to ale yeasts, but probably doesn't make an appreciable difference anyway. Assuming you had identical wort composition, why would 1056 attenuate differently from 1728? Simple question. Anyone have a answer that isn't just a WAG? (Okay, the literature will most likely focus on lager yeasts. Whatever--as long as you lay out the data in an informative fashion--not just broad edicts.) Brew on! Doug Moyer Salem, VA Star City Brewers Guild: http://hbd.org/starcity "There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness.'" ~ Dave Barry __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 07:19:00 EDT From: KMacneal at aol.com Subject: Re: English/Scottish Ales In a message dated 4/6/2000 12:17:29 AM Eastern Daylight Time, homebrew-Alex MacGIllivray writes: << Does anyone have a recipie for an English or Scotish ale that might have been brewed around the 1890's. Thanks, Alex MacGIllivray >> Alex, Here's a recipe I adapted from the Scotch Ales book in the brewing series. It's reported to be representative of beers from the 1860's. I've made it a couple of times, but I haven't been able to get it to carbonate very well. Use a large starter (I grew up a yeast pack to 1 gallon, decanted & pitched; I also pitched on a yeast cake of a previous batch of lower gravity beer) Mac's More Than a Wee Heavy Category : Strong Scotch Ale Method : Partial Mash Starting Gravity : 1.131 Ending Gravity : 1.033 Alcohol content : 12.7% Recipe Makes : 5.0 gallons Total Grain : 21.13 lbs. Color (srm) : 26.7 Efficiency : 68% Hop IBUs : 57.4 Malts/Sugars: 1.50 lb. Biscuit malt 6.63 lb. Light Malt Extract Syrup 10.00 lb. Scottish Ale Malt 3.00 lb. Amber Dry Malt Extract Hops: 4.00 oz. Kent-Goldings 5.0% 45 min Boil temperature of water: 212F Grain Starting Temperature: 65F Desired Grain/Water Ratio: .95 quarts/pound Strike Water: 5.02 gallons of water at 179F First Mash Temperature: 158F Water Absorbed by Grain: 2.11 gal Water Evaporated during boil: 1.50 gal Wort Left in Brewpot: 0.33 gal Add 3.92 gal of water to yield 5.0 gal of wort Notes: Salt additions to mash water (I have very soft water): 1/4 tsp kosher salt 5g calcium carbonate 8g water crystals (gypsum & epsom salts) Wyeast Scotch Ale Yeast Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 08:01:16 -0500 From: "Leonard, Phil" <p_leonard at dsionline.com> Subject: Oasis Capstone ESB Hello, I searched through the HBD archive hoping to find a recipe for this great ESB but did not find one. I was wondering if anyone here has the recipe. Thanks, Phil Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 09:31:05 -0400 From: "Nathaniel P. Lansing" <delbrew at compuserve.com> Subject: HSA & Glyco-Proteins In reference to HSA; "The evidence documenting the negative effects of hot-side aeration is extensive. (For examples see Fix 1992, 15:5; Narziss, Brauwelt 1993, 3; Huige 1992.)" Fix "Analysis of Brewing Techniques" page 25 On glyco-proteins; "Recent research has distinquished beer constituents that are responsible for the formation of beer foam from those that contribute to the foam's texture and retention (Heinz 1987; Siebert and Knudsen 1989; Melm, Tung, and Pringle 1995). In regard to its formation, dissolved carbon dioxide and moderate molecular weight proteins (molecular weights near 10,000 daltons) are most important. In striking contrast, foam stability is strongly enhanced by the presence of carbohydrate/protein complexes. The proteins consist of roughly 10% of the complex and have molecular weights around 40,000 daltons." ibid, pg 131 Glyco-proteins are also mentioned in a recent "Journal of the ASBC". ................................... N.P. (Del) Lansing Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 09:31:06 -0400 From: "Nathaniel P. Lansing" <delbrew at compuserve.com> Subject: Restarting stuck wine Russ asked about restarting a stuck maple wine. The most sure way (not the only way) of restarting a stuck wine is: Get a package of Lalvin K1-V yeast. Rehydrate as normal in 1/2 cup water. After 15 minutes add 1 teaspoon sugar and 1 teaspoon of yeast _energizer_the kind with vitamins and yeast hulls; it should be brownish in color and smell of vitamins. When that mixture is fermenting actively (15 min ?) add 1/4 cup of the stuck wine. Do not aerate, and wait for the fermentation to come back to Kraeusen. Now add 1/2 the volume of the starter (you should have 3/4 cup now) of stuck wine (you add 3/8 cup stuck wine). Wait for that to come back to kraeusen, that can be a coupla hours. Add 1/2 the starter volume again in stuck wine (1 1/8 cup starter + 9/16 cup stuck wine). Wait til this comes to kraeusen. Continue increasing the starter volume by 1/2 its' volume in stuck wine, each time waiting til active fermentation is evident. When you have 1/2 your batch as an active starter you can mix in the final half of the stuck wine. This obviously will require a series of increasingly larger vessels. The K1-V yeast has a "Competitive factor" which helps it take over the fermention ( not a big deal, the other yeast is shot) and is a neutral yeast which shouldn't taint the flavor of the maple. An additional teaspoon of yeast hulls halfway through the process will help the yeast tolerate the alcohol that is already present. The alcohol is why the repeated steps, slowly allowing the yeast to adapt to the high alcohol already in the wine. Just adding a fresh yeast will not produce rapid results, it will be stunned by the alcohol. Be patient through the process it will work. Best of luck, N.P.(Del) Lansing Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 09:31:04 -0400 From: "Nathaniel P. Lansing" <delbrew at compuserve.com> Subject: NA beer procedure I lost track of who asked about boiling off alcohol to produce NA beer. I tried a method with some reasonable results. A local theater company needed NA stout for a play so the actor could drink 4 beers each play and not slur his lines, it is a small venue and the audience would have smelled rootbeer. The product was donated to stay on the proper side of the BATF. Take a 4 lb can of hopped malt extract and dissolve that into 5 gallons 190 degree water. This should pasturize it suitably for our purposes. Let stand 15 minutes before running through a counterflow chiller. Add yeast and bottle as if this was homemade rootbeer. When proper carbonation is reached refrigerate the whole batch. Simple enough. It doesn't make real beer, but it comes out better than commercial NAs. A kit with an assertive hopping rate will help counter the inevitable residual sugar. Be lucky, N.P.(Del) Lansing Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 09:52:44 -0400 From: "Pannicke, Glen A." <glen_pannicke at merck.com> Subject: Belgian Wit On Wed, 5 Apr 2000 Chris Schiffer wrote of Belgian Wit: >Interesting to know. Lynne claims she "will not reveal the type of >coriander nor orange peel." But I will. The orange peel is Spanish or >Haitian grown and the coriander is a good high oil content coriander >intended for use in the liquor and liqueur industry. Chris, Thank you for providing this forum with *USEFUL* information that benefits the entire homebrewing community by expanding our knowledge of the subject and *NOT* using it as a vehicle for crass commercialism. Glen Pannicke glen at pannicke.net Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 07:05:48 PDT From: "Charles Sprigg" <csprigg at hotmail.com> Subject: Hops in my primary Hello all, I'm new to this whole home brewing world - I have only completed one 5 gal batch so far, and I started my second last night. The first batch (an All Malt Amber) turned out nicely (much to my surprise). The new one I just started is an American Pale Ale. My question is about hops in the primary. First some information - on my first batch I placed my hops in a hop bag and as a result it came out nicely at the end of the boil. With this last batch I didn't use a hops bag. I added 1 1/2 oz bittering hops and boiled 55 min, then added the finishing hops (another 1 1/2 oz) for the last 5 min. When I went to pour the wort into the primary through a funnel (with a screen) it clogged the screen almost immediately, rendering my funnel useless. In a mild panic, I tried to clean the hops off the screen with my brewing spoon. No luck - still clogged. So, I just dumped the wort into the primary and went on with the process. Taking Mr. Papizans advice I had a homebrew (yummmm...) and tried not to worry. Right now my primary is fermenting away vigorusly, but there is/was a lot of suspended hops in the liquid. Is this okay? Will it affect the quality or flavor of the brew? Is there anything I can do to fix this? I'm hoping it will settle out and when I rack to my secondary I'll have nice clear beer. What are the chances of that? Sorry to bother you with beginner questions. But, thanks for any advice you can share. Private e-mail is great if this is not worth putting on the list. Thanks, Charlie Sprigg Bristol, Vermont USA ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 10:31:35 -0400 From: Richard Foote <rfoote at mindspring.com> Subject: Carbonating Barlywine Dale Fogg asks: >I have a barley-wine (OG 1.100 - FG 1.012) that has been in the secondary >since November. My question is this, what is the best way to carbonate this? >Force carbonate, or is there enough active yeast left to just prime and >bottle? And speaking of bottles, I would like to bottle in smaller (6-8 oz) >bottles, but all of the sources that I have checked do not have any thing >like this. Any suggestions? Thanks in Advance for your help. I've tried three different methods with barleywine. Method 1: Prime with dextrose only (O.G. unk. no doubt over 1.000) Method 2: No priming (O.G. 1.120) Method 3: Prime with fresh yeast and dextrose (O.G. 1.100) Results: Method 1: Worked great Method 2: Flat as anything Method 3: Worked great Sorry I don't have more details, but I don't have access to my records right now. Source for bottles: The 8 oz. Coke bottles work great. Since they are only very lightly tinted green, keep 'em in a cardboard box to avoid the brew becoming light struck. These bottles seem to be popular with the office crowd, at least around here in the Atl area. Hope this helps, Rick Foote Whistle Pig Brewing and Home Remodeling Murrayville, GA Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 09:47:34 -0400 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Re: Kegging Richard Foote <rfoote at mindspring.com> wrote about Sankeys: >Once you get the spear removed, you'll want to do the standard cut off the >unless you filter, which would make cleanup between fillings much easier. >A tubing cutter works great for this. I don't filter and haven't found this to be at all necessary. I often keg beer right out of the primary that's still slightly fermenting. That gives natural carbonation (I may have to vent excess or add some via the CO2 tank depending on how well I guessed at the remaining extract). Even with the sediment from racking still fermenting beer, after the first glass or two, I get perfectly clear beer until the keg blows. If I'm going to be transporting the keg I'll rack it off the sediment to another. Here's a racking trick I just picked up from watching Mike O'Brien of pico-Brewing Systems. Mike puts an ordinary plastic picnic tap in line as a valve. He just shoves the plastic line on the spout (I've done this with a short hose for quick n dirty bottling) and uses the tap as a valve. You can flip it backwards to make it stay on, of course. No more folding hoses or playing with those little plastic hose clamps. 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: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 08:22:51 -0700 From: Demonick <demonick at zgi.com> Subject: Re: Sanitizing on the cheap From: "Hampo, Richard (R.)" <rhampo at ford.com> > I use Iodophor for sanitizing carboys, kegs, and buckets. However, > being the frugal type, I typically don't fill the whole carboy (or > keg or whatever). I put in a quart or two and slosh the stuff around > for the specified couple minute contact time. The question is: Does > the recommended contact time mean submersion or is "wet" OK? I have > not had any trouble with this method for the 5+ years I If you haven't had any trouble for 5 years, it seems to be working. Personally, I soak. If your container is sealable like a keg or a carboy, you only need to fill the container somewhat more than 1/2 way. Let it soak right-side up, then turn it upside-down. You can also use the same solution to sanitize the carboy as you do to sanitize your brewing gear during a session. Sanitize the carboy, empty the carboy into a bucket, seal the carboy, and use the solution in the bucket to sanitize your gear during the brewing session. Cheers! Domenick Venezia Venezia & Company, LLC Maker of PrimeTab (206) 782-1152 phone (206) 782-6766 fax orders demonick at zgi dot com FREE PrimeTab SAMPLES! Enough for three 5 gallon batches. Fax, phone, or email: name, shipping address (no P.O.B.) and phone number. (I won't call. It's for UPS in case of delivery problems). Sorry, lower 48 only. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 11:45:43 -0400 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Re: Sanitizing on the cheap "Hampo, Richard (R.)" <rhampo at ford.com> asks about sanitizing with iodophor: >Does the recommended contact time mean submersion or is >"wet" OK? Wet is all you need. Big dairy tanks are sanitized with a few gallons that are sprayed. That's why they have wetting and foaming agents. 25 ppm at one minute should do the trick, or 12.5 ppm at ten minutes, according to p. 9 of the new Williams catalog (where they sell test strips). I paid ~$10/gallon for dairy tank sanitizer bottle - that's really cheap! 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: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 13:36:12 -0400 From: "Murray, Eric" <emurray at sud-chemieinc.com> Subject: RE: Phil Yates post Phil writes: When I first started brewing I worried about so many things that I should and shouldn't do and it all came from reading books and listening to people who I thought sounded like they knew it all. It was only from experience that I gained confidence and somewhere down the track it occurred to me that so much of what I had previously taken as gospel was complete and utter bullshit. Brewing good beer just isn't this complicated. Unless you want to make it so. All I can say about this Phil is, AMEN Brother. Eric Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 11:10:24 -0700 From: Dana Edgell <EdgeAle at cs.com> Subject: Mash Hops Jeff Renner posts Hubert Hanghofer citing Ludwig Narziss to state that FWH works because the hop oils are oxidized into soluble forms without the guarding vapor blanket and vapor stripping. Can we assume from this that when adding hops to the mash we don't actually get any stabilization until the sparge stage when the already extracted hop oils are exposed to oxygen in the kettle. Is the standard stiring of the mash enough to oxidize the hop oils? A more practical question for those with mash hopping experience: Are any hop oils left behind in the grain bed absorbed by husks, grain etc. when mash hopping so that the efficiency is lower and should be compensated for? Thanks Dana PS: Does this mean that we have found a benefit from HSA (hop oil stabilization) that can extend the wars even longer! - -------------------------------------------------------------- Dana Edgell mailto:EdgeAle at cs.com Edge Ale Brewery http://ourworld.cs.com/EdgeAle San Diego Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 16:30:14 -0500 From: Ralph Link <rlink at escape.ca> Subject: simple green Has anyone had any experience using the cleaning product "simple green" as a cleaning agent, kegs, carboys, etc. Thanks for any info provided, private e-mail welcomed. "Warm beer and bread They say it will raise the dead" Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 21:14:55 -0400 From: Jim <jimala at apical.com> Subject: pretentions and thick dough-in Phil and/or Jill Yates write(s): "When I first started brewing I worried about so many things that I should and shouldn't do and it all came from reading books and listening to people who I thought sounded like they knew it all. It was only from experience that I gained confidence and somewhere down the track it occurred to me that so much of what I had previously taken as gospel was complete and utter bullshit." Absolutely. This parallels my experience in brewing, and I suspect that of many other lurkers, who read the Digest and giggle to themselves at the silly pretentions of some (by no means all) posters. Kudos to Phil and/or Jill for pointing this out. Chad Bohl writes: "Does anyone have any experience with a dough-in rate of about 2/3 qt. water per pound grain? " Yep, I do that a lot. It's a bit hard to mix, though. I dough-in at 105F for 20 minutes or so and then infuse to 150-160F, skipping the protein rest, usually ending up with 1.75 to 2.25 quarts per lb., more or less. And of course, relax and don't worry (see the above comments); hell, it's just beer, after all. :) Jim's Brewery Pages: http://home.ptdprolog.net/~jimala/brewery/ Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 18:24:14 -0700 From: Charley Burns <cburns99 at pacbell.net> Subject: Week long diacytl rest, Fining with Ising Glass (procedure) I brewed my yearly dopple bock almost 3 weeks ago now. OG 1.085, Wyeast 2308, 2 litre starter (active when pitched). Primary for 14 days at 50-52F, got down to 1 glub every 30 seconds so I pulled it out of the fermentation chiller and brought up to 68F. Came up to 1 glub every 12 seconds and stayed there for 5 days. Now down to 1 glub per minute. I think that was a bit more than a diacytl rest. Don't think it'll do much harm though. When I pulled it out of the chiller it stank like sulfur. Smell is gone now and it looks much better now that the yeast has mostly come out of suspension. I stopped by the HB shop today and picked up some Vienna malt to use this left over 2308 to make a vienna. I picked up some ising glass finings to try out (never used the stuff before).The instructions say to add it to a little beer then mix it in to the main batch, but don't talk about sanitizing it. I normally boil water, take it off heat and add gelatin, mix it up real good, cool it down and then add to secondary. Can I do this with Ising Glass too or is there some reason it can't be cooked? Charley (working way too hard) in Sacratomato California. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 22:18:44 -0400 From: John Leggett <leggettjr at home.com> Subject: Secondary Fermentation Ok all you hard core all grain brewers, give the new guy a break and tell me about secondary fermentation. I am brewing extract kit ales in a primary for about 7 days. How long do I rack these brews to a secondary? I'm just looking for some guidelines and general advice. You posts are entertaining and valuable , but a little over my head (currently). thanks for the advice. Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 04/07/00, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96