HOMEBREW Digest #3304 Thu 20 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

  Yeast Q's-Dave Burley- Dr.Cone ("Rob Moline")
  Pump Problems (Brent Dowell)
  Buzz Off 2000 ("Houseman, David L")
  Dr Cone, Dry Yeast Amounts? (erniebaker)
  more thoughts on Samichlaus (Marc Sedam)
  Yeast Q's- Mike Rose-Dr. Cone ("Rob Moline")
  Bravo/Chloramine (AJ)
  starting out ("Sean Richens")
  Brita and screw-on filters ("Sean Richens")
  RE: Built-in cooler ("Richard Pass")
  But The Party Ends For Rick ("Phil & Jill Yates")
  Re: Keeping the cover on (KMacneal)
  re: Labatts Velvet Cream Porter ("Drew Avis")
  Dr Cone: Yeast Storage ("Pannicke, Glen A.")
  yeast question for dr. cone ("Czerpak, Pete")
  Understanding lagering ("Brian Lundeen")
  Big Brew Day - How much water? (grigg)
  splooge (Marc Sedam)
  Phil's Lauter Tun (Dan Listermann)
  Syphon Problems (Dan Listermann)
  Re: Giving Jeff a break (Jeff Renner)
  Re: the immersion chiller shake (Jeff Renner)
  keeping iodophore (Jeff Renner)
  Re:the immersion chiller shake (Jim)
  Cardamom and fishing ("Paul Niebergall")
  Acidifying Sparge Water (Art Tyszka)
  dubbel (JPullum127)

* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! * 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: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 14:46:53 -0500 From: "Rob Moline" <brewer at isunet.net> Subject: Yeast Q's-Dave Burley- Dr.Cone From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Question for Clayton Cone: Would you please discuss % attenuation, laboratory conditions of the fermentation and method of measuring it? Will all brewing yeasts with similar bio-chemistries ( i.e. all those who can digest the same sets of sugars) attentuate to the same percentage under lab conditions if stirred during the fermentation and for a long enough period? What are other practical factors in a fermentation that can affect attenuation? How do you account for the various attentuation limits given for similar yeasts and how can we homebrewers use these numbers? Dave , Attenuation has to do with the specific ability of each strain of beer yeast to ferment the fermentable sugars present in wort. These sugars are monosaccharides- (glucose / fructose), disaccharides - (sucrose / maltose) and trisaccharides - (maltotriose). The ability to handle and the rate that it handles each of these sugars is built into its genes, the DNA instruction code. It is a fixed characteristic of each strain of yeast. With an exact same wort, inoculation level, ppm O2 and fermentation temperature, the same strain of healthy yeast should ferment at the same rate and reach the same attenuation limit. A similar yeast, as you mentioned, will have its own DNA set of instructions and it will march to its own drummer at its own cadence. Outside influences can alter this: Change in wort composition, fermentation temperature, too many repitchings, acid wash damage, poor nutrition, O2 deficiency for too long, toxic material in wort, mutations and infection (both wild yeast and bacteria). Attenuation is the measure of the decline in Gravity / Specific Gravity of wort during fermentation. The reason there is the use of the terms "apparent" and "real" attenuation / fermentation / extract is that the initial and final, after fermentation, extract in the wort is measured by a hydrometer that is calibrated to measure specific gravity (Gravity, Plato, Brix, baume or % sugar). There is a slight error in the specific gravity reading at the end of the fermentation due to the presence of the negative S.G. or thinning effect of the. alcohol . The initial hydrometer reading minus the final hydrometer reading divided by the initial hydrometer reading X 100 will give you the apparent % attenuation or apparent degree of fermentation. To obtain the % real attenuation or real degree of fermentation you would have to eliminate the alcohol by boiling it off then add distilled water to bring the volume back to the original volume, then take a hydrometer reading. This would measure the real extract at the end of the fermentation. The initial hydrometer reading minus the final real extract hydrometer reading divided by the initial hydrometer reading X100 will give you the real % attenuation or real degree of fermentation. The real finished extract is always higher than the apparent finished extract; therefore the % real attenuation / degree fermentation will always be lower than the % apparent attenuation / degree fermentation. All of the good beer yeast can handle the mono and di - saccharides with ease, except a few that are a little more sensitive to glucose inhibition than others. Glucose inhibition means that the yeast has troubles transporting the maltose into the cell until all of the glucose has been converted. This is usually not a problem with the alpha and beta amylase present in malt. However, with glucosidase enzyme additions to the mashing or high DE syrups added as an adjunct, the glucose levels can slow the fermentation down considerably and possibly stop the maltose fermentation before it is complete. Low nitrogen levels in the wort can make the yeast more sensitive to glucose inhibition. It is the variation in ability of the different yeast strains to handle the tri - saccharide (maltotriose) and variations between batches of wort. that usually causes the most variation in the % attenuation. It is also not recognized as well as it should that a few degrees in mashing temperature between mashes can make a noticeable difference in the wort composition and in turn result in a variation in % attenuation. Example: % wort solids Temp. of mashing . 60C 66C 68C Monosaccharides* 10.1 9.5 10.2 Disaccharides* 51.7 48.1 42 Trisaccharides* 14.3 13.6 12.7 Maltodextrins** 23.9 28.8 34.9 % Extracts 76.2 75.3 74.6 % Fermentables 76.1 71.2 65.1 * Fermentable ** Non-fermentable This variation in wort composition found in the above mashing temperature range can be a very useful tool for the brew master to assist in designing his/her own style of flavor and mouth feel of beer and explains the range of attenuation that can be found with the same strain of yeast. Variations in wort composition due to the addition of caramels, dextrins and different adjuncts result in different levels of unfermentable carbohydrates and will give you higher a gravity at the end and lower attenuation even though the fermentation is complete. There are two official methods to determine the attenuation limits and the amount of fermentable sugars present in a wort for a given strain.. The American Society of Brewing Chemist (ASBC) that takes 48 hours and the Mid European Beer Analysis Comity (MEBAC) that takes 24 hours. ASBC: 250 ml. aerated wort in 500 or 1000 ml. fermentation flask. (measure initial extract, plato, S.G.) 1 gram compressed beer yeast (vacuum filtered) Close with water or mercury seal. Hold flasks at 15 - 25C. Shake several times daily When fermentation is complete, about 48 hours, filter beer free of yeast and determine apparent and real extract. and calculate the apparent and real % attenuation. MEBAC 200 ml. aerated wort. in 1000 ml. Saugflasche* (measure initial extract, plato, S.G.) 15 grams compressed beer yeast (vacuum filtered) 2 - 4 drops Ferment at 20C for 24 - 26 hours. Determine gravity. Determine gravity again after 3 - 4 hours. If gravity is stable, fermentation is complete. Filter wort and measure final extract (real and apparent).. * The Saugflasche flask is designed to measure the flocculation characteristics of the yeast at the same time.. During the commercial production of every batch of beer, a small portion of the batch is added to this flask and the flocculation characteristics are monitored on every strain daily to determine if there is any change in the normal degree of flocculation or absence of flocculation. This is an early warning sign that a fresh culture of yeast might be needed sooner than scheduled. Apparent attenuation limit (%) =( initial extract (S.G.) - final extract (S.G.) ) divided by initial extract X 100. Real attenuation limit (%) = (initial extract (S.G.) - final extract (S.G.) w/o alcohol ) divided by initial extract X 100. You should consider adding yeast nutrients such as Fermaid K at 0.2 grams per gallon to your wort to assure your self of a healthy yeast fermentation and that the yeast will reach complete attenuation. Clayton Cone 1. "Rob Moline" <brewer at isunet.net> on 04/15/2000 01:47:40 AM To: Clayton Cone/Lallemand cc: Subject: HBD Question Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 13:04:45 -0700 (PDT) From: Brent Dowell <brent_dowell at yahoo.com> Subject: Pump Problems So, I just recently bought a very nice little pump from Moving Brews (6144MM HIGH TEMP) and brewed a 10 gallon batch up this weekend with it. It was nice not to have to hoist a picnic cooler full of water up to the ceiling! At any rate, after using it, I do have a couple of questions I was hoping the more experienced pump users could help me with. 1) This pump does not seem to be self priming. I'm pretty sure it says that in the specs on it. I was having some problems priming it even though it was at the lowest level in the setup. Ie. the kettle I was heating the sparge water in was higher than the pump, but even with all the valves opened and the out going hose lower than the pump, water would not voluntarily flow into the system. This required some old fashioned siphon suction applied to get it primed. Is there some secret here I don't know about an easy way to prime the pump? 2) Once I was using the pump, I seemed to 'lose' the 'prime' every now and then and would have to re-prime the pump to continue. Although I had a pretty tight plumbing system, ie. fittings screwed in tight with teflon tape, hose clamps on the hoses, valves set to wide open, I would still get bubbles in the plumbing that seemed to cause the pump to cavitate and stop working until I primed it again. 3) I did try to use the pump to recirculate the liquid in the mash, but was not successful. (Probably NOT the pumps fault in this case as the mash was marginally stuck due to improper mixing on my part) Any tips on how not to was wort when using it to pump wort? 4) Any tips on cleaning after use? Basically I just recirculated some hot water through it, followed with a light iodophor rinse, then a clear water rinse. 5) Any other little tips and tricks would be nice. I do plan on eventually doing a rims/herms type system but rather than add a whole lot of complexity in right now, thought I would start off slow and get used to this new toy first. Thanks for the help, Brent Dowell Antioch CA __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send online invitations with Yahoo! Invites. http://invites.yahoo.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 16:16:05 -0400 From: "Houseman, David L" <David.Houseman at unisys.com> Subject: Buzz Off 2000 The Beer Unlimited Zany Zymurgists, BUZZ, homebrew club would like to announce the 2000 Buzz Off Competition. This year it will be held on June 3rd at the New Road Brewhouse in Collegeville, PA. Entries are due by May 27th. Flyers to regional judges and prior entrants will be mailed this week. Further information for those that are not on our mailing list can be found at http://www.voicenet.com/~rpmattie/buzzoff/ . Once again the Buzz Off will be an MCAB Qualifing Event as well as the lynchpin of the regional Delaware Valley Homebrewer of the Year. We're soliciting entries as well as BJCP judges and those who would like to steward at the event. David Houseman, Organizer: dhousema at cccbi.org Chuck Hanning, Judge/Steward Coordinator: hanning at voicenet.com Beer Unlimited, mailing destination and participating sponsor: brewipa at aol.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 13:29:14 -0700 (PDT) From: erniebaker at webtv.net Subject: Dr Cone, Dry Yeast Amounts? Dr Cone My question is concerning the proper amount of dry yeast to pitch to a 5 gallon batch. Years ago it was always 1 (5 gram packet) to 5 gallons. A couple years ago it was two 5 gram packets. At present it has been recommended to pitch 15 or 20 grams of dry yeast. I believe its time to issue good firm advice on the real amount of dry yeast to pitch. (Ale & Lager).. Thanks for sharing your knowledge.. ernie baker 29 Palms, CA Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 16:59:41 -0400 From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam at unc.edu> Subject: more thoughts on Samichlaus The quest continues... Armed with a reference (generously mailed to me by Jim Liddl) discussing how to help yeast grow up healthy enough to ferment out high-alcohol brews, I came up with an idea. Jim, I'll skip the Tween 80 for this one. I'm thinking about starting the fermentation using the dregs from a prior 5 gallon fermentation (got it already). What I want to do is add the wort *over time* to the yeast. I have enough quart canning jars to can an entire 5 gallon batch, so I thought I'd start the ferment in one gallon of Sami-wort and pressure-can the other four gallons. I would add two quarts of wort to the ferment every time the kraeusen head started to fall. Eventually I'd have all five gallons in the fermenter and wouldn't have to worry about the explosive fermentations I've had with barleywines and the like. I seem to recall reading that Hurlimann had done something similar (add fresh wort over time) when they brewed Sami. I'm going to Switzerland this summer and plan to visit the Feldschloesschen Brewery (last brewer of Sami) to pick anyone's brain who will talk...and speak English. The OG of the wort will be around 1.130 through the addition of some honey. The grist will be only 2-row pilsner malt so it will be as light as possible. I'll likely start with 7.5 gallons of wort and boil off 2 gallons in a converted keg to permit a rollicking boil. Phil, I lack the pool table and women. I'll have to settle for a rollicking boil. I've considered that canning the wort would darken it some and might increase the bitterness. I can live with both. What do you think? Can anyone see problems with this? Suggestions? Cheers! Marc Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 17:03:02 -0500 From: "Rob Moline" <brewer at isunet.net> Subject: Yeast Q's- Mike Rose-Dr. Cone From: "maltandhops" <maltandhops at email.msn.com> Subject: Questions for Dr. Cone Dr. Cone They have been previous post in the HBD about the role of yeast and their influence on mouthfeel. I'm not referring to attenuation but possible interaction with proteins. (proteins contributing to mouthfeel, not yeast metabolism). There have been situations where a person has split the same wort into two fermenters and pitched different yeast, and the beer with the lower FG ends up having more mouthfeel. Can you explain what we are observing? Second question. I just rigged up my stir plate to stir my 7 gallon fermenter. I want to get good attenuation, not yeast growth. At what gravity (%) should I start the stir plate, and at what intervals should I run it? ( 1 minute per hour ??) Thanks, mike rose Mike, (1) I am not aware of any work that is being done on yeast and beer mouth feel apart from the factors that you mentioned. However, this is a very hot topic in the wine industry. We have several strains of yeast that produce enough polysaccharides and manoproteins that they do add texture and add mouth feel. There is no reason to believe that this does not happen to beer. The low levels of polysaccharides and manoproteins in wine can be detected more readily because of the lighter structure of wine. Beer already has a sizable amount of carbohydrates (extracts), however, who knows what contributions these compounds can have on beer. My company is in the process of building a factory to produce these compounds for the wine industry, you can bet that we will now explore its use in the brewing industry. (2) Growing yeast in the first stage of fermentation is an important part of the brewing process. Yeast produce alcohol at about ten times the rate while growing than it does when it reaches the stationary phase and no more yeast growth. Many of the flavor compounds are produced during the growth phase. If you do not have any yeast growth you would have to inoculate the wort with many times the amount of yeast or it would take you many weeks for the fermentation to go to completion. If you repitch yeast you can increase the pitching rate and minimize the amount of growth before the yeast reaches the stationary phase., however, you may run into the problem of bringing over off flavors from unhealthy or lower viability repitched yeast. Stirring continuously until near the end of fermentation will improve the fermentation rate, especially for cool and cold temperature fermentations. Allow time near the end for settling. The problem with intermittent stirring is that there will be a heavy build up of CO2 (supersatuation) betweens stirring that could result in an explosion of foaming when you start the stirrer. Clayton Cone Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 01:04:16 +0000 From: AJ <ajdel at mindspring.com> Subject: Bravo/Chloramine Thanks to Alan Meeker for posting from Richard Feynman - beautifully put as this brilliant man often did. A couple of comments on Sean Richens obervations on water processing for chorine/chloramine: 1. Activated carbon gets oxidized by chlorine: C* + HOCl --> CO* + H+ + Cl- and thus, while an activated carbon filter doesn't "fill up" with chlorine it does become exhauseted when all the activted sites (symbolized here by C* in the notation of Faust and Aly "Chemistry of Water Treatment, 2nd Edition", Ann Arbor Press, Chelsea, MI, 1998 p180) are oxidized. Chloramine also oxidizes the carbon C* + NH2Cl + H2O --> CO* + Cl- + NH4+ but once some CO* is formed, it oxidizes additional chloramine CO* + 2NH2Cl --> C* + 2H+ + 2Cl- + H2O + N2 thus restoring the active (but unoxidized) carbon sites. This is catalysis as the net reaction is 3NH2Cl --> 2H+ + 3Cl- + NH4+ + N2 (same reference here) and thus, theoretically, the carbon is not consumed as long as chloramine (and not free chlorine) is the only chlorine source in the water. 2. The primary reason that chloramine is used in the water treatment industry today is because of concern about THM formation. THMs are thought to be carcinogenic by some. Others think this issue is another example of mindless government interference in matters it doesn't understand. Whoever is right, cloramine is less bacteriocidal but, because it is also less volatile, tends to maintain bacteriostasis out to the limits of a distribution system. 3. Metabite is very relevent to brewing and no further treatment is required. A single Campden tablet (about 700 mg of potassium metabisulfite) will rid 20 gallons of water of its chloramine to the level of 3 mg/L (typical). A little sulfate, a little potassium, a little chloride and a little ammonium ion (which is a yeast nitrogen source) are added to the water in quantities insignificant for most brews. I recommend this treatment to anyone with chloraminated water. A little excess sulfite (i.e you use more metabite than is required to react with the chloramine) can only help your beer. It's no coincidence that lager yeasts are great sulfite producers and that lagers stay reduced throughout the long lagering period. 4. I think Sean is theorizing that one needn't worry about chloramines in brewing because they are less likely to form chlorphenolics than chlorine. This is so - indeed they were first used in water treament for this property long before the THM rule - but I don't think it's worth risking bad beer. I've certainly tasted chlorphenolics in beers I've judged and have no way of knowing whether they were made with chlorinated or chloraminated water but, as chloramination is now so prevalent, I'd suspenct that chloramine was the culprit. Chlorine is so easy to remove - let the water stand over night. Chloramine is too. Throw in a Campden tablet. Why take a chance? Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 22:58:34 -0500 From: "Sean Richens" <srichens at sprint.ca> Subject: starting out Dear kysard at excite.com Having started from a similar background as yours, I can offer you a few relevant tips which I think you will grasp right away: - first, homebrewers are a fairly laid-back group, so signing your posts with a given name allows others to address you as "Hi Fred" rather than "dear kysard at excite.com". - the biggest difference between biotech/antibiotic/research fermentation and brewing is that brewing is ecological. In other words, you don't have a sterile medium with a single strain. It's closer to waste treatment microbiology - you are trying to create conditions that favour the strain you want over the wild flora, and kill off enough of the wild stuff to ensure your culture a good head start. The drop in pH as fermentation starts and the hops are the big item, and some yeasts are pretty aggressive and can kill off interlopers. When you get TOO deeply involved in homebrewing you might get interested in mixed yeast cultures. - you have already found a good website on this subject. Try the hbd's alter ego at www. brewery.org - it has lots of stuff. - you can make really clear beer, but many home brewers get hooked on the almost-clear beers they make and find that filtration takes away a certain something. I'm sure you will get a lot of other good advice here. Sean Richens srichens.spamsucks at sprint.ca Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 23:08:32 -0500 From: "Sean Richens" <srichens at sprint.ca> Subject: Brita and screw-on filters Brian asked: >So what volume of carbon do your typical screw onto the faucet types of >filters have, and what would be a suitable flow rate for them? I have no idea about the first part of the question, not being an owner of such a device. Can Glen or someone else answer? I'm personally curious what the manufacturers of the screw-on or countertop filters recommend for a flow rate. Sean Richens srichens.spamsucks at sprint.ca Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 15:24:20 +1000 From: "Richard Pass" <richard.pass at anu.edu.au> Subject: RE: Built-in cooler Hi Chris, the cooling coil as shown would tend to cause stratification because you are cooling the bottom more than the top layers, due to the fact that the coolant heats up as it passes up through the coils. A simple solution would be to reverse the coolant flow introducing it via the upper coil. This would set up convection currents which would increase cooling. Richard Pass Canberra Australia > Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 19:06:09 -0400 (EDT) > From: Chris Cooper <ccooper at a2607cc.msr.hp.com> > Subject: Built-in cooler > <snip of beautiful ASCII diagram of Chris's cooler> > > > Chris Cooper, Pine Haven Brewing (aka. Debbi's Kitchen) > Commerce, Michigan Member, Ann Arbor Brewer's Guild > (Approximately 25 miles from 0.0 Renerian) > > > > ------------------------------ Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 21:06:49 +1000 From: "Phil & Jill Yates" <yates at acenet.com.au> Subject: But The Party Ends For Rick Rick Magnan has problems racking lagers. Well Rick, I'm sure someone will have a better solution for you but one possibility is to ferment in a plastic fermenter with a tap at bottom (spigot - I believe is the Yankee term). This removes the necessity for syphoning completely. It is a simple matter to gravity feed via plastic tubing for all racking purposes. You may have read somewhere that fermenting in plastic is a no no (as I did - but I can't recall which book) as oxidization will occur through the plastic. I don't wish to dispute that this is possible but in my experience it has never been the case. I know I am drifting from your first question, but I use the example to answer your second question which you have directed at me specifically. If I could be bothered, I could go through my books and find many examples of procedural requirements that I would term B.S. Are you asking because you haven't discovered any yet or are you just genuinely testing me? To be honest on the matter, I will say that most of the B.S. has been what self appointed experts have said (and there is no shortage of it in the HBD) rather than what has been written in books. But I can find examples of both if you are having difficulties discerning them for yourself. At the moment, it bothers me that Dave Burley continues with his "jet of steam drives off the oxygen above the boil due partial lid cover" theory on oxidization. If it works for Dave that is fine. For me, it is just another theoretical piece of B.S. But I have already been in trouble with Dave for my rudeness, so I will leave the matter to anyone else who wants to get concerned about it. It isn't on my agenda of "things to worry about". Steve Alexander comes up with some pretty obscure "things to worry about" items which I also put in my "not to worry about" rubbish bin. But Steve also comes up with some pretty good stuff as well. As does Dave Burley. I am certainly not the adjudicator of anyone's posts or theories and if I have implied that I apologise. I am just another homebrewer (as are we all) with my own experience to draw on. Unfortunately for you Rick, I am the adjudicator of any posts that can be deemed "in argument" with the Baron and it is my pleasure (sorry, I meant displeasure) to advise you that you will be the first bloke strapped to the boab tree and force fed Ray's obnoxious skunk oil. We are most interested to observe the results. So far, it has killed everything else stone dead! Cheers Phil Baron of Burradoo Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 07:10:33 EDT From: KMacneal at aol.com Subject: Re: Keeping the cover on By keeping the cover on, won't you hinder driving off HMDS which would be especially noticable in a pale lager? Keith MacNeal Worcester, MA In a message dated 4/18/2000 12:19:16 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Dave Burley writes: << I suggest interested brewers try a simple experiment which I have done with two identical kettles. Do one boil with the lid off and one with the lid partially on and covered with a towel or other insulator to reduce condensation on the lid so as to maintain as best as you can the same volume in the two kettles during the boil and compare the results. Compare the wort colors at the same OG. Ferment separately diluted to the same OG, but identically and compare the color and flavor. You will find the open boil to be darker and the flavor of the beer to be less clean. Do this with a pale lager to best understand the effect, although I have also noted ( but not experimentally) a similar effect in pales. One would conclude that higher hopped beers will be more affected. >> Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 06:31:58 PDT From: "Drew Avis" <andrew_avis at hotmail.com> Subject: re: Labatts Velvet Cream Porter Mark Yehle <myehle at socket.net> asks about Labatts Velvet Cream Porter. This is the beer that started me homebrewing back in '88 - if I recall correctly they discontinued the beer shortly after. The local homebrew shop owner nodded sagely when I told him I wanted to brew this beer, and he jotted down a recipe, sold me the stuff, and sent me on my way. It was the standard Coopers Stout kit + DME + some crystal + hops, and it tasted *nothing* like LVCP. I really wasn't paying attention to things like hops back then, Mark, so I can't make any suggestions there. But I have a strong suspicion that LVCP was brewed with a lager yeast, something malty (Wyeast 2035 or 2206 might be close). It was almost as dark as Guinness, had very little roast flavour, and a lot of body. This would suggest (to me, anyway) a combination of chocolate, dark munich, and medium crystal malts for colour, and a higher mash temp. Good luck, if you come close, send me a recipe! Drew - -- Drew Avis, Merrickville, Ontario Visit Strange Brew with Drew: http://fast.to/strangebrew ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 09:58:41 -0400 From: "Pannicke, Glen A." <glen_pannicke at merck.com> Subject: Dr Cone: Yeast Storage Dr. Cone, >>In your opinion what is the best long-term >>yeast storage method available to amateur brewers? >Ann Dumont, the person that is responsible for our yeast culture collection >recommends that yeast that is kept on slants be grown 72 hours at 25 C on >YM-Agar then covered with sterile light mineral oil (to prevent drying out) >an refrigerated at 4C. I've been storing my yeasts on slants for about a year now with great success. However, they have not been covered in sterile light mineral oil and therefore have to be recultured on a three month schedule. I would love to gain the benefits of longer term storage with the light oil method. When it come time to inocculate from this oil-covered slant, is the oil simply decanted to expose the colonies? My concern is over the movement of the oil removing the colony from the agar surface. Also, do the yeast require any washing while on the lant prior to inoccultation or will transfer into liquid media suffice? Sorry, I have never had the pleasure of dealing cultures stored in this manner ;-) Glen Pannicke Merck & Co. Computer Validation Quality Assurance email: glen_pannicke at merck.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 09:59:24 -0400 From: "Czerpak, Pete" <Pete.Czerpak at siigroup.com> Subject: yeast question for dr. cone 2 yeast questions for Dr. Cone: 1) In your opinion, in making a starter solution for a beer either from dry yeast (where it may not be needed totally) or from a liquid yeast product, is it better to pitch or scale-up in volume at the point of maximum cellular budding or point of population maximum? In terms of getting the yeast to continue the reproductive phase. Does this differ when you want to ferment rather than grow yeast in number? 2) In terms of dry yeast and their use in high gravity brews like imperial stouts, scottish ales, and barley wines, is it better to pitch maximum number of cells that are properly rehydrated (ie. about 4-6 packets) or the slurry left from a previous batch. All things being equal, is the yeast health and happiness any better with one method or the other? Thanks very much for taking the time to help us out here Dr. Cone. We truely appreciate your advice and the sharing of your knowledge. Happy brewing, Pete Czerpak Albany, NY Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 09:26:46 -0500 From: "Brian Lundeen" <blundeen at rrc.mb.ca> Subject: Understanding lagering I will probably regret asking these questions simply because I won't understand half of what is written, but... What is happening (chemically, biologically, whateverilly) to the beer as you slowly decrease to, and maintain at, lagering temperatures (I can go down to 32F if need be)? (please be as technical as possible) Also, what, if any, differences are their between beers that go directly to lagering in the secondary, then bottled, and those that are bottled, carbonated at room temps, then returned to the fridge and put through the lagering process? Thanks Brian Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 14:28:22 +0000 From: grigg at att.net Subject: Big Brew Day - How much water? Paul Gatza reminded us of the upcoming Big Brew Day. Has anyone looked at the amount of water in those recipes (6.5 for all grain, 5 for extract)? I'm going to find it hard to squeeze out 4 gallons of wort using those amounts. What is the expected volume? Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 10:43:30 -0400 From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam at unc.edu> Subject: splooge Try getting some food-grade anti-foam agent from a HB supplier. St. Pats has some. It's something like $2.50 for a small bottle and should prevent your massive foaming. As for your statement "...I shake the crap out of the fermenter the first few days of the ferment..." I might suggest shaking it within the first 24 hours, but no more. Risk oxidation. On the other hand, in a closed system violently producing CO2 it may not be such an issue. Cheers! Marc Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 10:51:05 -0400 From: Dan Listermann <72723.1707 at compuserve.com> Subject: Phil's Lauter Tun Jeremy Arntz ( arntz at surfree.com) asks about improvments over the hose clamps that come with Phil's Lauter Tun. I freely admit that this system needs my attention, however one should remind one's self that it was designed in a time when money was much tighter. I am frequently stunned at what some brewers are now willing to spend for marginal process improvements. The hot liquor tank hose clamp is best used as a shut off valve as the sparge arm is designed to deliver five gallons in about 45 to 60 minutes. I use mine wide open. Finer flow control can be found by raising or lowering the hot liquor tank. The outflow clamp is prone to clogging and poor control. This would be a problem with other sorts of constrictive ( ie. ball valves) devices as well. I personally use a better system and hope to develope a marketable version in the future. I cut the hook portion of a racking cane about six inches below the hook and attach it to the output hose. The hook is draped over the side of a pot ( called a grant in the lingo ). The flow rate is regulated by raising and lowering the pot (use boxes, books, boards, whatever). There is no flow when the output of the hook is at or above the level of the mash and it increases in a very controled manner as the pot is lowered. Note that there are no constrictions to clog with this system and the control is very fine. I do leave the hose clamp in place but for shut off purposes only. When the pot fills, I pour it into the brew kettle. BTW Phil's truck, as it turns out, did not throw a rod as was origionally suspected. A better diagnosis ( not Phil's) showed that the throwout bearing blew. Much cheaper! Dan Listermann dan at listermann.com 72723.1707 at compuserve.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 10:51:07 -0400 From: Dan Listermann <72723.1707 at compuserve.com> Subject: Syphon Problems Rick Magnan ( magnan at jimmy.harvard.edu) asks about why he has problems with the syphon breaking when he racks lagers. The cooler temperature that lagers are fermented at retains more CO2 in solution than beers fermented at ale temperatures. When they are passed through the sharp end of a racking cane the turbulence formed there can bring the CO2 out of solution. If the flow rate is not fast enough to pull the bubbles down the hose, they collect until the syphon slows or even stops. This is very annoying. Try beveling the inside edges of the racking cane to smooth the transition between diameters. This will reduce turblance. If a slight commercial plug can be tolerated here, I might also suggest purchasing a "Phil's Racking Cane." It is made of thinwall stainless steel tubing with beveled inside edges to reduce turblence and, since the inner diameter is larger, it moves the brew faster as well which helps move along any bubbles that do form. ( Check out the unique stand off device made from a stainless steel spring - the height is adjustable!) BTW, Phil used his truck to help me move almost two tons of malt yesterday. He was asleep when I asked him to help and misheard my question. He wondered what I wanted with two tons of mulch. Dan Listermann dan at listermann.com 72723.1707 at compuserve.com Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 08:41:03 -0400 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Re: Giving Jeff a break >MICHAEL WILLIAM MACEYKA <mmaceyka at mail.jhmi.edu> theorizes >that the break you are seeing is formed >from proteins which were not denatured in the boil but were denatured at the >higher temps in the pressure cooker. I think that's true, but I get additional break even in the wort I can at atmospheric pressure, although not as much. 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: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 09:09:14 -0400 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Re: the immersion chiller shake Aaron Robert Lyon <lyona at umich.edu> wrote >Does this have any effect on how well your cold break settles to the >bottom of the kettle?... How >long does it take for a cold break to settle out while cooling? ... >I didn't want to shake my chiller because I thought it >would kick up some cold break. I's my experience that cold break is very fine and takes longer than a typical chilling time to settle out. Hot break is quicker to settle, and is more important, I think, to remove. I think it should settle out is fairly short time after you stop shaking - 15 minutes maybe. I recirculate my wort with a pump during chilling which accomplishes the same thing as shaking and filters it through the hop bed on the false bottom. This theoretically, at least, removes both hot and cold break, although the cold wort going into the fermenter is never as clear as the hot wort is, so this filtration is imperfect. I also wonder if the pump chews up the hot and cold break that may get through then hop bed and makes it too fine to be fitlered out. This may also be the reason my canned wort develops a break. I've never had any problems with the brews that would lead me to think I wasn't getting good break removal. 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: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 10:52:46 -0400 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: keeping iodophore Brwers Sure it's cheap to make up fresh iodophor solutions, but why isn't it still good after 24 hours as was suggested here if it still has good color? I like to keep a spray bottle around and I sure don't want to have to make up a new pint every day. 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: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 11:08:05 -0400 From: Jim <jimala at apical.com> Subject: Re:the immersion chiller shake Aaron Robert Lyon writes concerning shaking one's immersion chiller: "Does this have any effect on how well your cold break settles to the bottom of the kettle? " And the answer is: I don't know. I used to worry about removing all the trub. I tried whirlpooling, but the immersion chiller interfered with that. I considered installing a bulkhead fitting and a screen of some sort to keep the trub and hops out, but decided it was either too much trouble to do, or too expensive. After much anguish (not), I made a tradeoff, cooling the wort very rapidly in exchange for some trub in my fermenter ( I now siphon the cooled wort through a Chore Boy scrubby thingy which removes most of the splooge, providing I have used whole hops, not pellets, in the boil), and I rack into a secondary after 5 days or so, which gets rid of pretty much all of it. Is a little trub in the fermenter a bad thing? I don't know. I suspect it doesn't matter much, from no other evidence than the quality of the beer I make. By some accounts it is even a Good Thing (tm). And it seems to me that most if not all the cold break will end up in the fermenter when using a counter-flow chiller. Since you already have the bulkhead fitting and valve on your boiler, I bet you can make or buy something like an EasyMasher ( EasyBoiler? EasyStrainer?) that would work for you. I bet JS would be happy to tell you all about it, too. :) Cheers and beers (no fears), Jim Adwell Jim's Brewery Pages: http://home.ptdprolog.net/~jimala/brewery/ Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 10:17:38 -0500 From: "Paul Niebergall" <pnieb at burnsmcd.com> Subject: Cardamom and fishing Jim writes about cardamom in beer: >Does anyone besides me add cardamom to their beer to reduce skunking? >While perusing the patent office's database late one evening last year I >discovered patent #4,389,421, entitled "Method for controlling light >stability in malt beverages and product thereof ". This intrigued me, and >upon reading the text of the patent, found that it claimed that, among >other things, adding 60 parts per billion of cardamom to beer would >dramatically reduce or even prevent skunking of said beer while not >changing the flavor of the beer. I have white, green, and black cardamom pods in my spice cabinet (Courtesy of Penzey's http://www.penzeys.com/ ). I took some out and weighed them on a gram scale. The black are the heaviest (about 0.5 gram), and the green were he lightest weighing in at about 0.20 gram. Anyway, I figure that 60 ppb is equal to about 60 micrograms per liter, or about 1,200 micrograms for a standard 5-gallon (20 liter) batch. 1,200 micrograms is way less than a gram (like 12 ten-thousands of a gram to be exact). So are you telling me that a 0.5 gram pod is enough cardamom to treat over 400 batches of beer? This surely is powerful stuff. Or are we talking about some kind of cardamom extract ? I am as tired of it as anyone else is, but I will make one last comment and then shut up for a while. To whoever it was who compared fishing to homebrewing: >Sit on the end of the dock with a can of worms and a >cane pole and you will catch fish. Going after a specific >Kind of fish is when fishing gets complicated." >And I'll add: going after a world record of a specific >kind of "fish" is when you need to turn to the science >behind the art (and the HBD), but you don't need to >if you are content simply "goin' fishin'". Do you really think that someone who spent his time researching about fishing in a library could outfish someone who has spent an equivalent amount of time in a boat actually fishing? I can see it now Steve Alexander and Alan Meeker in a boat, equipped with them is the latest technology that money can buy, sonar, gps, temperature probes, pH meters, even a $25,000 bass boat. Furthermore, the librarians are fresh from a year-long research period were they spent a million dollar grant studying the art of fishing. They has flown over the lake, studied aerial photos, topographic maps, attended lectures by fishing experts, visited Bass Pro Shops in Springfield, MO, and even conducted a gravitometer survey of the area. Up against them is an old guy in a row boat who has never so much as read a fishing magazine (hell, he cant even read), but he has been fishing the same lake almost every weekend for the better part of ten years (at least when the weather is not too bad). You name the specific species of fish that you want the contestants to catch. Who is going to catch more fish? Who is going to enjoy their time on the water more? I know who I have my money on. Time on the water. Time in the brewery. Think about it. Paul Niebergall Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 11:29:23 -0400 From: Art Tyszka <atyszka at mail.cbf.com> Subject: Acidifying Sparge Water Hey all, Have a question about acidifying sparge water so that a rising pH isn't as much a concern. Have seen it mentioned here and in several other places, but I've come across recommendations from 1/4 tsp of acid bled to 1 Tbsp of phosphoric acid. So, is there any sort of agreement on how much to add, and how much is too much? And, what detrimental effects can too acidic sparge water have? Thanks Art Tyszka Chesterfield, MI Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 12:01:24 EDT From: JPullum127 at aol.com Subject: dubbel well since my basement is starting to get into the high 60's i thought it might be time to try a dubbel. i haven't made one before ,would anyone care to comment on my plan? 1. 10.lb dwc pilsener malt 1.lb aromatic malt 1 lb buscuit malt 1 lb munich malt 1 lb caramunich malt 1/2 lb special b 2 ounces choclate malt 1/2 lb candi sugar(i've had this in the freezer for a couple years) 1/2 lb table sugar (sucrose)- i have a bunch of corn sugar at home also could use. 2 ounces styrian goldings 60 min 1 ounce saaz at knockout wyeast 3787 trappist ale yeast single infusion mash at 154-152 thanks guys Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 04/20/00, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96