---

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


Contents:
  carboy question ("Dalibor Jurina")
   ("Dan Diana")
  P-decoction (Eric Tepe)
  Stroh's fate? (James Jerome)
  Soluble and Insoluble protein question ("Michael Rose")
  cider pointers ("Thomas D. Hamann")
  more stupid brewers tricks ("steve lane")
  mystery beer (Nina Cohen)
  YEast slants: the saga continues... (Some Guy)
  Rims Questions ("J. Kish")
  Re: RIMS Question ("Dan Schultz")
  Ullmann's Encyclopedia (JohanNico)" <JohanNico.Aikema at akzonobel.com>
  The Jethro Gump-BT Report ("Rob Moline")
  Shame On South Australia ("Phil & Jill Yates")
  RE: Bottle cap labels (Art Tyszka)
  beer clip art (Jim Adwell)
  Re: beer clip art (Bill.X.Wible)
  Fermenting Cornies, pilot wort/beer oxidation (Dave Burley)
  re: the brew-ha-ha ("Nathaniel P. Lansing")
  re: cream ale yeast ("Nathaniel P. Lansing")
  Polyclar / cornies / HSA ("Pannicke, Glen A.")
  re: an open apology ("Stephen Alexander")
  Liquid vs. dry yeast (for newbies) (Ted McIrvine)
  archives (Prestoniam)
  10 gallon cornies ("derek scott")
  Wyeast 1084 question ("Foster Jason")
  My deliberate mistake, photos, BdG, fermenting in cornies, those new to the HBD ("Graham Sanders")
  RE: Wyeast 1084 question ("Pat Babcock")


* Don't miss the 2000 AHA NHC in Livonia, MI 
* 6/22 through 6/24 http://hbd.org/miy2k

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


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: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 22:31:10 +0200
From: "Dalibor Jurina" <dalibor.jurina at ri.tel.hr>
Subject: carboy question

Hello,

I have made Teflon carboy cap with 1/2" valve, 10 mm SS pipe for pressure
relief and 10 mm SS pipe long 2" for aerating wort. Since this carboy will
stand upside-down aerating aquarium stone will have to stay in wort until
fully fermented.
Is this OK, or NOT?
Also is Teflon heat resistant so I can sterilzate it in pressure cooker?

Thanks
Dalibor



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 14:07:32 -0700
From: "Dan Diana" <dands at ftconnect.com>
Subject: 

A few more comments on Jeff Renner's posting in Homebrew Digest #3352 (June
15, 2000). For reference, Jeff writes:

>Schlitz was my beer of choice back in the late 60's, too.  can't say why,
>but I convinced a friend's father who owned a restaurant and bar in
>northern Michigan to switch his tap to Schlitz, and it went over well with
>his patrons.

>Kirby Nelson of Capital brewing in Middleton, WI, developed a recipe for
>the WI sesquisentennial and "Great Taste of the Midwest" beer festival in
>summer, 1998 from old Schlitz logs (I think, he would only hint very
>broadly last time I  asked, but I think that's what I heard earlier).  They
>subsequently brought out a similar beer as part of their regular year
>'round lineup called "Capital 1900," although the recipe is not that old.
>Anyway, as they make it now, it's 1.052, 30% white corn grits (somewhat
>unusual), 22 IBU, all German hops (the one in 1998 used Cluster bittering
>hops, I think.  You can get white grits at the grocery store - don't get
>the instant ones.  Unfortunately, they're fortified with iron, which may be
>a problem.  Or you could use yellow corn meal, which I prefer, or flakes if
>you don't want to do a cereal mash.

>My guess is that Schlitz of thirty years ago may have been more like 1.044
>or 46 and 18 IBU.  BTW, I occasionally buy a 40 oz. Schlitz.  It's way more
>tasty than the standard run-of-the swill.  I understand that they went back
>to their earlier recipe after sales dropped.  However, I have a sneaky
>suspicion that they may use corn syrup.  Just a suspicion based on the low
>cost of the beer, nothing else.

>Good luck.

>Jeff


Jeff's suspicions on the Schlitz of 30 years ago (see pasted message below)
is pretty consistent with what Fred Eckhardt reports in his Essentials of
Beer Styles (1989 edition). He quotes Schlitz's profile as follows:
        OG=1.043
        FG=1.010
        % ABW=3.5
        IBU=11
        color=2.5 SRM

>From surveys of literature, I think Schlitz was brewed from a recipe of 6
row malt and corn grits. Unfortunately, I could not find any ratios. I'd
guess that amount of grits in the recipe ranged from about 65% (for a
standard domestic beer) to around 20% (typical premium to super premium
beer) based on what Eckhardt calls out in his discusssion of these two
categories. By the way, articles around the 1981 timeframe of Schlitz's
collapse indicated that the amount of malt used in Schlitz was increased to
address the perceived quality issues. Hence, there is some evidence that
they were tweaking the recipe to cut costs.

Hops were likely to be the Clusters variety. Given the low level of
bitterness (Eckhardt quotes 8-12 IBU as being the taste threshold), the hop
addition schedule was not trying to provide much flavor or finish hopping.
Instead, I'd guess that they were going only for bitterness additions near
the beginning of the boil.

I've never seen any discussion on Schlitz's yeast. They touted having a pure
culture which I suspect was a proprietary strain. Does anyone out there have
any info on what yeast they used or a suitable substitute?

Hope this help, Please respond with corrections, comments and
clarifications.
Dan



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 17:29:18 -0400
From: Eric Tepe <erictepe at fuse.net>
Subject: P-decoction

Collective,
I have a new pressure cooker and am wanting to try a p-decoction. My
main question is do I decoct the thick part of the mash or just the
first runnings? Any input would be appreciated. Private e-mail is ok.

Thanks in advance to all that respond.

Eric Tepe.



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 20:12:48 -0600
From: James Jerome <jkjerome at bellsouth.net>
Subject: Stroh's fate? 

In light of the recent thread concerning Schlitz, I was curious if
anyone on the list  can provide information on what happened to Stroh's.
I was my favorite in high school (Yea, we could drink at 18 back then)
and in college.  Mine was certainly not a knowledgable palate at that
age, but I remember their brew in the slightly narrower, taller can than
other commercial beers.  I thought it tasted a lot better than the A-B
standard fare for the same price.  

A few years ago while traveling, I bought some Stroh's in a blue can to
stock the hotel fridge. This was in Johnson City, TN.  I bought them out
of nostagia and because I had not seen any in South Carolina in a long
time.  Very bad choice.  I sampled three or four to be sure it wasn't
just an anomaly.  Threw out the whole 12-pack and went and bought
something actually drinkable.  Was this a typical experience?, or just a
poorly stored or old batch?  What happened to Stroh's?  Did their beer
change and like Schlitz they lost a 'generation' of loyal consumers? 

 Just curious...

Jett in TN


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 18:14:23 -0700
From: "Michael Rose" <maltandhops at msn.com>
Subject: Soluble and Insoluble protein question

Collective,
    I have 2 questions regarding soluble and insoluble proteins.
If I'm doing a decoction, the boiling will cause a breakdown of the
protein-starch matrix releasing more protein into the mash. 

1) Will this protein be soluble or insoluble protein?

2) How does insoluble protein benefit beer?

Thanks,  mike rose     Crestline,  CA       maltandhops at msn.com 




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 10:48:07 +0900
From: "Thomas D. Hamann" <tdhamann at senet.com.au>
Subject: cider pointers

Hi folks,
              tomorrow we are going to an Adelaide Hills orchard for an
apple crush, fresh juice for 70 cents/litre. Of course I'm going to make a
cider but all my books are in storage and I need a few pointers please,

1. I want to avoid a boil, is one vital?
2. if I pitch 14 grams of Coopers dried yeast (lots) will campden tablets
be necessary?
3. will yeast nutrient or energizer be necessary?
4. should I add sugar of any form? High alcohol isn't that important.

This will be a 20-25 litre batch.

Many thanks in advance, Thomas.

thousands of kays from Jeff but Hans Renner lives in Reynella, or was that
Rennerella.............




wadde hadde dudde da?          

 ..............................................Stefan Raab,  Koelner! wadden
sonst!


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 22:00:46 CDT
From: "steve lane" <tbirdusa at hotmail.com>
Subject: more stupid brewers tricks

It was a wonderful day to brew this spring and I was going to try out my 
brand new digital thermometer with 3' SS probe and timer.  The same piece of 
crap that has been discussed for the last 3 weeks on the board.  Half way 
through the mash, my readings went totally haywire and I had no idea where 
my mash temp was.  I did, however, know where the nearest RadioShack was,,, 
and this thing was going back and going back now.
Thinking ahead, I knew I would be gone for 30 minutes and I couldn't leave 
the RIMs heater on that long, (before I got the PID's), so I left the heater 
off and hit the gas burner.  Just to give it a little bump before I left.  
In my infinite wisdom, I felt if the mash got a bump, so should I.  Open 
another homebrew.
Get in the car after downing the brew and realize I might of left the RIMs 
heater on.  Get out of the car, check the heater, it is off.  No worries and 
off I go.
30 minutes later I return to an extremely thick mash that is a rolling, 
eerrrrrrr.... bubbling boil.  Left the gas burner on.
Brew turned out great and it was my little secret as I served it to some "so 
called", expurtz.
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 21:50:24 -0400
From: Nina Cohen <nina at swva.net>
Subject: mystery beer

Hello, folks:

I happen to subscribe to a number of lists, including one for birders.
Someone on that list mentioned a mysterious pair of beer cans he found.
Here's the quote from his post:

Just as a brief non-bird aside, at the farm where I work, a plank of
cracked wood had came away from the side of the main barn. I
took the opportunity to pull out some old starling nests from inside,
and came across two rusty old beer cans. They're shaped like a tin
of beans rather than a modern beer can, and have two opposing
'triangles' in the lid to drink through instead of the usual single
triangle. They have a gold label and I think the beer is called
'Hudepohl', with a brewery in Cincinnati, Ohio. Could anybody have
a guess as to how old they would be? My guess is that the people
building the barn stuck them in there, though unfortunately, I don't
know how old the barn is. Why did they have two holes instead of
just one? I've never seen anything like it.

I'm sure there must be some chatters out there who've had years of
'field experience' with drinking beer!!  :)

Can anyone help with this beer identification?

Thanks,

Nina Cohen
Floyd, VA
nina at swva.net


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 23:31:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: Some Guy <pbabcock at hbd.org>
Subject: YEast slants: the saga continues...

Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager....

Well, now! The Irish Ale yeast appears to be thriving. A beautiful, clean
looking sediment, crop of foam on the top. Orval has produced something. A
very loose sediment. St. Louis Lager has produced a larger-grained looking
sediment. The Bavarian Lager is doing something, too -  some foam on
surface, obvious sediment. Unfortunately though: the control has grown a
slime mold.

I intend to dispose of the control, recognizing the risk that the
remaining samples could be likewise contaminated, but I'm going to do some
testing on the remaining samples to determine what's growing in them -
yeast or something other. Then, if it appears to be yeast, (brett and
yeast in the Orval case...) I'll create small test batches to ferment with
them. It appears that in at least two of my wee starters, I may have
revived yeast put down five years ago.

I love this hobby!

- -- 
 -
See ya!

Pat Babcock in SE Michigan         pbabcock at hbd.com
Home Brew Digest Janitor           janitor@hbd.org
HBD Web Site                       http://hbd.org
The Home Brew Page                 http://hbd.org/pbabcock

"The monster's back, isn't it?" - Kim Babcock after I emerged
                                  from my yeast lab Saturday




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 22:23:54 -0700
From: "J. Kish" <jjkish at worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Rims Questions

Beerlings,
 
    Raymond Lowe asked where is the best place for a valve
in a RIMS system; before or after the heater?

 In my own system, there is no valve at all. I control the
flow rate with an ordinary lamp dimmer.  Dimmers don't like
electric motors, so I connected a 60 Watt lamp across the 
motor.  The dimmer dims the lamp and varies the speed of
the magnetically coupled pump very nicely, so I can adjust
the flow rate right where I want it!  No valve necessary!
You could omit the lamp by adding a snubber in place of it.

    Joe Kish


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 23:03:58 -0700
From: "Dan Schultz" <dschultz at primenet.com>
Subject: Re: RIMS Question


Raymond Lowe asks:

>The question I have (it may be trivial) is related to the valve that
>I will control the flow of the wort with. ...does it really mater where the
valve is located?

Not being one to conform, I put my valve at the outlet of my HERMS coil and
I can't see where it has created any problems. I will note that while puting
the strike water in my Gott Mash Tun, I pump the wort through the coil to
remove air trapped in the line and to help keep the strike water hot.

I never open the valve while the pump is off as all that is in the coil will
drain back into the mash tun.

IMHO, putting the valve at the coil outlet lets the pump supply its full
capacity to getting the wort through the coil. The valve purley acts as the
limiter. I was initially worried that I may only get a trickle of flow but
in reality ended up with a 1 gal/min max flow rate. Too fast in my opinion.
But better safe than sorry. Whether this makes sense in actual fluid
dynamics, I have no idea.

Burp,
 -Dan



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 09:00:10 +0200
From: "Aikema, J.N. (JohanNico)" <JohanNico.Aikema at akzonobel.com>
Subject: Ullmann's Encyclopedia

Hi,

Maybe to technical for some, maybe interesting for others:
Link directly to the sample article "Beer" at:
A selection of articles can be downloaded free of
charge to give you an impression of the high quality and
user-friendly structure of the articles.  

 --> http://www3.interscience.wiley.com:8087/ull_free05_fs.html

Greetings from Holland, Hans Aikema
http://www.hopbier.myweb.nl/



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 02:18:19 -0500
From: "Rob Moline" <brewer at isunet.net>
Subject: The Jethro Gump-BT Report

			The Jethro Gump-BT Report
Folks,
     As much as it pains me, personally, just subscription money........ I
was a bloke who re-signed with BT just before the end...I must disagree with
all your flames of that op...
     And I am sure that you will hear it soon from the horse's mouth...but
for now ...please allow me..
     To explain that I know Stephen, not from just his aid to a small brewer
such as I was, when he aided me, but also since then, when I was just a
bloke on the phone......


     Back then, I was a small brewer trying to do the un-known...advertise
in full page, four color, 3 internationally distributed mags, a certain Gold
Medal for an obscure Kansas brewery...
     Unknown area....as it didn't make any sense for such a brewery to touch
such a thing....     Why, would it generate traffic in South Africa.... or
Saint Lucia, Queensland? No, it was a pride thing....
     And Stephen made it happen for a small dead end, 500 bbl brewery...such
was his dedication to spirit of the industry....
     This is not to say that we didn't have major support in dollars from
our suppliers, and from All About Beer, and New Brewer...we did.....
     Stephen Mallery spearheaded the artistic support, paying for his
photographers to do our ad, at his expense....and to his concept.....
     And with that support, and the support of the other mags, and
suppliers, what would have been un-imagined...became a reality.......

    Now, to explain that no one wanted BT to succeed more than he did....(as
if that needed mention) defies logic.....


     When one is losing one's pinnacle of achievement, as was BT to Stephen,
legal liabilities weigh in.....
	Number One.....He has to pay his lawyer......
	Number Two ....Comes obligations to subscribers....family....suppliers and
other debts.....


     I know that he has....maintained all obligations.....and in my last
conversation with him.... he stated that he had all the subscriber details,
such as magazine requests...labels for same....and such ...already to
go.....but it would take so many thousands of dollars to fulfill those
requests....Money which he did not have......But expected to soon
acquire....just for postage!

     Jethro sez, of course, Time will Tell......But, as for me, I continue
to believe in Stephen Mallery, wherever his course leads....
	And I will await my magazines....whenever they come....And even if they
never come.....

     My main concern is that he doesn't do a huge financial debt,
compromising his family, for producing the arguably best magazine that EVER
existed on our sport.....

	For sins such as these, I would allow much latitude.....

Jethro Gump










Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 20:34:38 +1000
From: "Phil & Jill Yates" <yates at acenet.com.au>
Subject: Shame On South Australia

Dave Edwards feels perhaps he should apologise for disturbing my deep rooted
football faith. And all I had to do to elicit such an apology was to mention
the beer known as West End.

This, to a South Australian (well certainly a self respecting homebrewing
one), is akin to asking Superman to eat a lump of kryptonite!!

No probs on the footy side Dave. Actually I have come to enjoy watching
Aussie Rules. Ever since that mongrel crowd from Newcastle (the team Dave
Lamotte loves) beat Geoff Toovey over the head in that spiteful Grand Final,
I've been off the Rugby. Cept of course to see the Blues thrash the pants of
Graham Sanders' beloved Maroons. I did enjoy that!!

But what I am upset about is the beer available on tap at the Adelaide
casino. It was once that Coopers Pale Ale, Sparkling Ale and Dark Ale was
available. Now Coopers has been dumped completely. Very sad. The closest you
can now get is a Southwark Pale Ale, nothing but a Coopers copy. This is to
a foreigner a great pity. I was hoping to show off your casino to Steve
Alexander (the great betting man) but I doubt he will like the Southwark.

Never mind, from the sounds of things Steve won't be out here in a hurry.
He's tied up at the moment writing last posts to Del. Steve has written a
lot of last posts. I keep thinking at the rate he is going, he will have
written a last post on every conceivable aspect of brewing, and we won't
hear from him any more!

Only joking Steve, I don't care what they all say about you, I think you're
okay.

Cheers
Phil




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 08:25:41 -0400
From: Art Tyszka <atyszka at mail.cbf.com>
Subject: RE: Bottle cap labels

The bottle cap labels some people are looking for are pretty easy to find.
I've been using them for several years.  Check your local yellow pages for
Paper Suppliers or Commercial Printing Suppliers.  Stock number is "label
SS50-P" (Label Blank Corp.)  They're .75" in diameter and 120 to a sheet.  I
don't remember how many are in a box but probably 150 sheets or so.

If you have a page layout program like Quark or PageMaker you can easily lay
out a grid and put your logo and the name of the brew on the labels.  They
run through a laser or inkjet with no problem.

- -- 
Art Tyszka
Loyal Shepherd Brewing Co.
http://www.loyalshepherd.com
Chesterfield, MI



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 08:30:56 -0400
From: Jim Adwell <jimala at apical.com>
Subject: beer clip art

Michael O. Hanson and Bill.X.Wible are wondering where to find beer clip art.

You have right in front of you as you read this a wonderful tool for
finding things, called a computer, and associated keyboard and display.
I'm very surprised that this lot of technically-oriented on-line brewers
has to ask these things.  Shame on you! :)

Here's some quick links, found by typing in 'beer clip art' in the Yahoo
search box and clicking the 'Search' button, and then clicking on 'Go To
Web Page Matches' on the resulting page ( you can do your own search with
all those other search engines ) :

http://users.netropolis.net/dusty/angelsbeerclipart.htm
    this one even has music...

http://www.brewery.org/ClipArt.html


This is a clip art searcher; I have found it quite useful:

http://www.webplaces.com/search/
    
And I am sure there's more; ya just gotta look for it.

For an example of how to use an enormous amount of clip art on a webpage
while keeping the download time short, see the following ( which has
nothing whatever to do with beer):

http://www.servtech.com/~jimala/why.htm

Cheers, Jim

Science is a tool, not a religion
Beer is not football; football is not beer ( Ozzies excepted )



Jim's Brewery Pages:
http://home.ptd.net/~jimala/brewery/


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 09:03:45 -0400
From: Bill.X.Wible at QuestDiagnostics.com
Subject: Re: beer clip art




I am a computer programmer, Jim.  I know all about this thing called a
computer and its keyboard.

I was looking for sites, links, etc. that have good beer-related clip art.
And this SEEMED like a place where people would know about such
things.I am perfectly capable of using yahoo, excite, lycos, infoseek, or
any of the other search engines to find them -  if I have hours to spend
wading through all the crap that a search for 'beer', along with 'clip art'
or 'images' would return, most of which would not be remotely related
to what I was looking for.  In short, I found, as have others, that the
internet search engines pretty much suck at finding content.

Thanks for the links you did supply, I will check them out.

Bill




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 09:50:21 -0400
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com>
Subject: Fermenting Cornies, pilot wort/beer oxidation

Brewsters:

Often the topic comes up of using cornies for fermenters. I am not being
critical but I am often puzzled why one would do this.

I can think that perhaps it is possible to get several cornies into a
fridge for temperature controlled fermenting, versus perhaps only one
carboy because of the shape of the respective vessels,  but are there other
reasons?  I could imagine the cornie used for this purpose is difficult to
keep clean, isn't it? What with all those nooks and crannies around the
fittings, the difficulty in making a good seal and such. How do you remove
that bathtub ring easily? Aren't you limited to say 4+ gallons of beer
versus 5 gallons? 
- -----------------------------------
Lynne O'Connor says that HSA on a pilot scale was noticable but on
commercial scale not noticable and concluded that if commercial brewers
couldn't agree, why should we worry?

But, we homebrewers are doing pilot and smaller scale and this is perhaps
the reason it is important to us ( the high surface area to volume ratio of
our worts)  as homebrewers and not to commercial brewers.  

Lynne, undoubtedly in your tours of older European Breweries you have seen
boiling hot wort being emptied out of the boiler into a grant exposed to
air through 4 - 6 inch diameter pipes..   How can they do it? The surface
to volume ratio is quite low and little air gets mixed in. Not so with
racking a 1/4 inch or less diameter stream as we homebrewers often do. 

It is fair for me to observe that the straightforward observation of this
effect seems somehow elusive to many brewers and I'd guess there is(are) a
reason(s)

First, is that we must treat oxidation like we do an infection. Any
oxidation at any point of brewing will impact the final results. So if a
brewer is oxidising ( or infecting) his brew at other points, simply
comparing one change in a technique may not indicate any effect. So, it is
important to know that a brewer can produce unoxidised beer before he can
reliably compare two different techniques and say aha!

Another thought on HSA has bubbled up sort of sideways here in recent
discussions and comments by me and other brewers ( Jeff R I think) and in
my private correspondence that perhaps it is the specialty malts ( and I
will extend an extrapolation here) containing melandoins or are roasted (
my observation about coffee)  and perhaps not the lower kilned pales which
cause the observations about HSA.  British pale malts which are higher
kilned pales may be more sensitive than European and US pale malts, for
example. Munich malts and crystals may be suspect.  Roasted barley and
chocolate malts and such. 

It may be that wort composition differences is the source ot the "yes it
is". "no it isn't" nature of these discussions on the effect of  air on hot
wort. This sort of thing might explain why Bud ( low specialty malts)  can
blow air into hot wort with impunity and why this may not be a good example
for all homebrewers.  It is counterintuitive, but that's why we do
experiments.  Any thoughts or observations along this line?

My earliest observations in the late 1960s of the bad effect oxygen had on
beer was with pale ales ( as I was living in Britain) but on returning to
the US,  gross oxidation of hot wort by filtering boiling wort through a
collander to remove hops also produced horrible effects even with lager
styles. These early observations were with extracts, the composition of the
wort and such were unknown. Stopping this practice and chilling before
filtering off the hops made such a remarkable improvement in beer quality
that I have absolutely no doubt of the effect. As I have observed before,
had I not discovered this, I would likely not be brewing today.

Keep on Brewin'

Dave Burley


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 10:09:31 -0400
From: "Nathaniel P. Lansing" <delbrew at compuserve.com>
Subject: re: the brew-ha-ha

William protests (rightfully so):
>>Bill, pissed off that I read all of these discussions, and now I won't
know how it ended up.<<

I was really wasting a lot of my time, and bandwidth with the months long
debate. It was not cowardice but a request from a friend that made me drop
the discussion. So, with discretion being the better part of valor, it
 As to the results; you see today that Steve says it is meaningless no
matter
how I kept the variables the same and neutral. So what would be the point
in posting my results to start another feud on line? I have more fun
helping
with specific questions. 
 I tried to weigh the interest of some readers against the disgust of
others.
I thank you for showing interest at least.

N.P. Lansing



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 10:09:35 -0400
From: "Nathaniel P. Lansing" <delbrew at compuserve.com>
Subject: re: cream ale yeast

Dave Sapsis points out: >>Wahl and Henius clearly define both Cream Ale and
>Sparkling Ale as *top* fermented beers.  <<
  I opted for the top fermenting yeast in my recommendation, but I was
totally mislead by the BJCP guidelines that say, "A variation on American 
light lagers fermented at ale temperatures." in their 'History'
description.
 >>Jeff Renner and I both gave editorial comments to Ben Jankowski's
article on
>Cream Ale in BT,<<
  That is one issue I sorely miss due to a lapse in my subscription :-(


N.P. Lansing
 


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 10:43:38 -0400
From: "Pannicke, Glen A." <glen_pannicke at merck.com>
Subject: Polyclar / cornies / HSA

Nathaniel P. Lansing wrote about Polyclar:

>There are many grades, A, AT, V, and VT, and more. Some must
>be filtered, some do not need filtering. Polyclar A, most commonly
>available does not require filtering. Polyclar A is no longer produced 
>but its' replacement will also not require filtering. 

Thanks for the response.  I've gotten a few others stating that filtration
is not required either (assuming the larger particle sizes here).

>Rumour has it that Polyclar fits into German
>Rheinheitsgebot (sp?) because after filtration there is zero (nada) added
>to the beer.

Someone asked me about this one yesterday and I couldn't remember where I
saw it.  As dumb luck would have it, I stumbled on this while flipping
through Fix's AOBT book to get to the filtration section.  I does seem to
make sense.

>Excessive amounts will remove hop bitterness, follow the label
>directions as to dosage. 

This would be good for making those Schaeffer, Schlitz, Bud, Genessee,
Rolling Rock clones.  Use 2 filters for a Bud Light clone ;-)

===========
Mark in Kalamazoo asked about keeping the  at #$% diptube from rotating as the
tank plug is torqued:

I torques me too!  When I'm impatient, I just stick my beanpole arm in the
bloody thing and hold the tube in place with my hand as best as I can
(allowing for some rotation).  When I can take the time to track down my
RoboGrip (tm) pliers, I use them.  RoboGrips (or similar) will allow you to
grab something like a tube and minimize the torquing.  The jaws clamp on
with enough force to grip, but not crush the tubing.  I say minimize because
I pad the toothed jaws since they might scratch the tube.  That allows a
minimal amount of slippage to occur.  Now that you've gotten your arm into
the thing, try getting it out!  ;-)  Since I'm gonna run sanitizer through
it afterwards, so I don't care if I stick my arm in there.

===========
Ronald La Borde doesn't trust CO2 flushing:

>When I get around to it I would like to try pulling with a vacuum into the
>next keg, but I still would use the racking out of the fermenter. I like
the
>vacuum idea because it would help remove the oxygen out of the receiving
>keg.  I just don't trust CO2 flushing.

I used to pull a light vacuum (maybe 15 - 20 psi) with a faucet aspirator in
the lab.  I don't know where to find one, but would like to for various
reasons. I don't believe that they're very expensive.  The aspirator
attaches to the faucet and you run water through it into the sink.  The
running water causes a vacuum to be built up in a port on the side of the
contraption (Bernoulli principle).  The port will accept a hose which you
can attach to whatever vessel you want to create the vacuum in.  You can use
the aspirator to vacuum out a container or pull a liquid (such as sanitizer)
through it.  

As for CO2 flushing, you probably couldn't vacuum out ALL of the air, just
reduce the amount.  Probably at a less efficient rate than displacing with
CO2.  But it couldn't hurt to try it out.  I'm also unsure about the amount
of vacuum these kegs can handle.  They were designed to handle  high outward
pressures.  I have no idea about how they handle vacuum and you could wind
up damaging or stressing your equipment if the vacuum is too strong.

==============
Lynne O'Connor commented about or favorite thread: HSA

>Since brewing scientists can't reach a consensus on the importance of hsa,
>I'd be disappointed if homebrewers did.

This is the only sensible comment I've heard on HSA so far!  All this
postulating, formulating and experimenting... it's fakakta!




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 11:09:32 -0400
From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net>
Subject: re: an open apology

Nathaniel P. Lansing writes ..

>Apologies to all for the long running debate inre-mashout/foam.
>I let someone push my button. 

Same here, it went far beyond topic.

My "Oh Del, not again" note was a response to Del's earlier post,
was posted before Del's apology, and would have been retracted
had I been aware of this.  It was not intended to continue the matter
on HBD or "throw the last punch".  Sorry about that Del.

As I said a week ago in #3347
>'nuff said, needs to go offline or die.
I'm glad we now agree on this at least.

Steve Alexander




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 11:46:57 -0700
From: Ted McIrvine <McIrvine at ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Liquid vs. dry yeast (for newbies)

Yes, liquid yeasts are usually a cleaner yeast culture with less
contamination.  (I'm told that dry yeasts have improved greatly, but I
haven't used a dry yeast in years.)  I think it is great that you went
right for the liquid yeast as a Newbie Brewer.  Using liquid yeast and a
wort chiller are the two easiest things a newbie can do to make better
beer.

White Labs claims that you don't need to step up the yeast with a
culture.  It is possible to make fine beer pitching from a swollen
W-Yeast pack or a fresh White Labs pack, but one gets better results if
the yeast only has to multiply by a factor of 10.  Practically speaking,
this means one should step up the yeast twice, with about 7 ounces of
wort the first time followed by 64 ounces of wort the second time.  And
if one can time it to pitch at high krausen (when the yeast is bubbling)
you get a fast ferment.  Dropping a W-Yeast smack pack into a 1/2 gallon
starter isn't as effective.

Cheers
Ted at the Prohibition Park Brewery, Staten Island 

"Jay Hummer" <jayhumm at zdnetonebox.com> asks
> 
> What's the deal with liquid vs. dry yeast?  I've read that liquid yeasts
> are pure strains and produce better beer.  So, for my first batch (brown
> ale), I pitched White Labs liquid yeast directly into the primary and
> it came out fine 
<snip>
> I used Wyeast -- pitched with no starter.  I racked it to a secondary
> last night, and it was well fermented.  The Wyeast directions said you
> should prepare a starter if the recipe's O.G. is over 1.060 (or something
> like that).
<snip> 
> What's a newbie to do?
> 
> - --
> Jay Hummer


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 16:38:54 EDT
From: Prestoniam at aol.com
Subject: archives

what's the website to pick up the hbd archives for 1/1/99---to present?


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 18:13:20 -0700
From: "derek scott" <derekscott at ebtech.net>
Subject: 10 gallon cornies

In the process of lurking I've caught some talk about 10 gallon cornies and
how they're rare.
It occurs to me I've got one in the garage that I've never used, prolly
never will.  Anyone interested in it ? What I propose is a trade- I am about
to buy an easymasher for my ss pot, and get some more carbonator caps.
Alternatively can anyone suggest the best places to buy these online ?



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 20:00:51 PDT
From: "Foster Jason" <jasfoster at hotmail.com>
Subject: Wyeast 1084 question

I have a question for those familiar with Wyeast 1084 (Irish Ale)

Last week I smacked a pack of this yeast in preparation to brew an Oatmeal 
stout. I dutifully waited a couple days, and then a couple more and then a 
couple more. No growth. Nothing.

Fearing the worst, and with brew day fast approaching, I borrowed a 
different strain of yeast from a friend who happened to have some going. The 
brew session went fine.

Now, after about 8 days of sitting at room temperature (all conditions have 
been fine with the package - from purchase to today), I finally see the 
package expand. What I thought was dead yeast was simply slow.

Here is my question. I have another brew day scheduled for a week or so from 
now. It is going to be a light-bodied honey ale. Will the Irish ale yeast be 
a decent yeast for such a light-bodied ale? Or will it create an odd taste? 
(I have only used 1084 for stouts and have been happy with it).

Should I run and pick up new pack for the next session and scrap the 1084? 
Or will it work?

Thanks for any help.

Jason Foster
Edmonton Alberta, Canada
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



Return to table of contents


Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 13:32:08 +1000
From: "Graham Sanders" <craftbrewer at cisnet.COM.AU>
Subject: My deliberate mistake, photos, BdG, fermenting in cornies, those new to the HBD

G'day all

I wrote
>Back to Beer.  Just to give an idea on fermenting in soda kegs, I do
>something very similar to take advantage of the SS, and the room saving in
>the fermentation fridge. I brew 38 litre (10 gallon to the heathens).  I
use
>two 22 litre soda kegs (if your maths are up to date thats 18 litres per
>keg) as my fermenters.  This gives me the necessary head space, but I
>modifly the kegs differently.

Now, did anyone pick up the deliberate mistake.  I know a number did, hence
the E-mails that flew accross the pacific telling me.  My we're quick on the
uptake!Buts thats the point heathens, metric is soooo easy.  Why not come
aboard to the rest of the world, why you can even follow a real mans game
like rubgy (Mr Edwards, take note you didn't cop my full abuse,thanks to the
janitor.)  Speaking of which, Phil wants to be careful, or he is going to
cope a blast from me, janitor or not.  Some things should not be said -
cockroach.

Back to beer for a moment.  Those requesting photos (shit there are a few of
you out there) they are coming.  And here am I, thinging Americans love
glass carboys, not a chance.  Now what is the number of the patents office?
If the photos are not in a format that works let me know.  I'm going to have
to get a web site and update my photo collection (a Bit out of date).

A number of people have asked for more detail of my BdG receipe.  Well its a
copy (I hope ) of a La Chollette Ambre.  Whether you go the wood and HSA is
a matter of choice, but I the caramelisation is a must.

19 litres
SG 1073
Pale Malt 2.5 kg
Munich Malt 1.0 kg
Cara-Vienna 0.2 kg
Cara-Munich 0.4 kg
Special B 0.2 kg
Medium candy sugar 0.5 kg

Mash 68c
28 IBU  (17g Target FWH)
Yeast was my problem.  This I was not sure on.  Many said to go with a Wit
for its the same as a BdG, which is what I did.  Culture of Blanche de
Chambly.  Its producing a mild fruitiness I think is about right.

Further to my suggestion about the glass plate on the corny keg in the
fridge.  Many have asked (this was expected) "a fridge is not sterile
environment" .  Well of course its not, but there are a couple of points
about a fridge HBDers should consider.  Being sealed the amount of
contamination from outside air currents is limited to only when you open the
door.  Not often I would think.  The air inside the fridge is fairly still,
so the chances of contamination are very low.  Low humidity inside is also
not very inducive for airborn contamination, in fact its works against it.
Finally, the glass plate extends beyond the rim of the lid.  Like a
petre-dish, any contamination has to get under and up under the lid.  very
difficult.  By the time any bug has got thru that the beer has finished
fermenting and its own properties protect it from the odd stray bug.

I know this has been said before, but I think a reminder is in order to
those new to the HBD.  You are going to see a lot of talk, and the odd
disagreement a times, on all sorts of technical things, Mash-outs, foam
retention, pitching rates, hot side airation etc.  You'll find most of the
arguments are about small differences overall.  I get particularly annoyed
when they say - The big Boys (commercial breweries) do this.  I love these
discussions as it improves my knowledge, but to the average home brewer, a
lot of these argument are for the big boys in brewing, and dont apply in any
great deal to most. The big boys are right at the extreme of brewing, any
error will be disasterous, the most minor of variation can make or break.

If you want to brew a beer with 40% sugar, fermented in 4 days, lagered in
two weeks and drink, well yes these discussions are relevant, but we home
brewers have a much larger margin of error, and will still get excellent
results, even if we do not mash-out, or not pitch at comercial levels or are
not as sterile as them and so on.  To the newies, enjoy the discussions, but
put it in perspective.  Most of us do.

Shout

Graham Sanders



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 23:48:40 -0400
From: "Pat Babcock" <pbabcock at hbd.org>
Subject: RE: Wyeast 1084 question


Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager...

"Foster Jason" <jasfoster at hotmail.com> writes of Wyeast 1084 question...

> I have a question for those familiar with Wyeast 1084 (Irish Ale)

> Last week I smacked a pack of this yeast in preparation to brew an Oatmeal
> stout. I dutifully waited a couple days, and then a couple more and then a
> couple more. No growth. Nothing.

<SNIP>

> Now, after about 8 days of sitting at room temperature (all conditions
have
> been fine with the package - from purchase to today), I finally see the
> package expand. What I thought was dead yeast was simply slow.

This isn't really going to be pertinenet to your question as much as it is
pertinent to the situation you find yourself in, but I'll continue anyway
:-)

Interesting! I just had the identical experience with an Irish Ale (1084)
with a May 2000 crimp. Took absolutely forever to swell (OK, it took a
week), and the starter is, well, "apathetic", for lack of a better term.
Enough so that I delayed the brewing of the target beer until I can
determine whether this yeast is viable. In contrast, the "Lazarus" starter
from the 5 year old slant is quite a performer - but, again, I need to
verify just what's going on there. Could be a contaminant.

In contrast, about two days prior, I popped a Wiehenstephan with a November
'99 stamp, and it  nearly jumped off the counter top, it swelled so fast.
Popped it before I went to bed, and it was all plump and voluptuous by
dinner the next day (all told, around 13 hours). The only "odd" thing about
my treatment of smack packs is that I usually put them under my wife's
aquarium pump after the smacking. I've found the slight heat coupled with
the vibation of the thing stimulate a faster swelling of the pack.

Still, I mirror your experience with the 1084. Just seems awfully sluggish.
Unusually sluggish. Not how I remember the yeast at all.

 -
See ya!

Pat Babcock in SE Michigan         pbabcock at hbd.com
Home Brew Digest Janitor           janitor@hbd.org
HBD Web Site                       http://hbd.org
The Home Brew Page                 http://hbd.org/pbabcock

"The monster's back, isn't it?" - Kim Babcock after I emerged
                                  from my yeast lab Saturday



Return to table of contents

---