---

	FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
		Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org


***************************************************************
       THIS YEAR'S HOME BREW DIGEST BROUGHT TO YOU BY: 

          Northern  Brewer, Ltd. Home Brew Supplies
        http://www.northernbrewer.com  1-800-681-2739

    Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********


Contents:
  HBD offline for a bit this Friday 5/24... (Pat Babcock)
  Re: Kleinisms ("Grant")
  First Wort Hopping ("John Adsit")
  Nigerian Cottage Industry... (Pat Babcock)
  Brauwelt Int'l (Rick)
  Siebel Reply - First Wort Hopping ("Kirk Annand")
  Siebel Reply - What is Siebel? ("Kirk Annand")
  Re: Sugar Fermentabilities ("Kirk Annand")
  Aventinus Wheat Dopplebock recipe ("Walker, Randy")
  Fwd: Free Bottles in Chicago ("Tom Viemont")
  RE: Siebel bashing, corks (Brian Lundeen)
  RE: National Homebrew Competition score sheets? ("Leonard, Phil")
  Siebel response - Jeff and Ellen Gladish Lactobacillus ("Tobias Fischborn")
  Beer humor ("Laura Barrowman")
  Siebel response: Ferm Nuts ("Tobias Fischborn")
  Fwd: Siebel week response - Lou Heavner ("Forbes Wardrop")
  re: homebrewer to microbrewer (Rama Roberts)
  Scottish Ale (Scott Perfect)
  Re: CAPS (Jeff Renner)


*
* Show your HBD pride! Wear an HBD Badge! 
* http://hbd.org/cgi-bin/shopping
*
* 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 cannot 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.

JANITOR on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)



----------------------------------------------------------------------


Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 21:55:15 -0400 (EDT)
From: Pat Babcock <pbabcock at hbd.org>
Subject: HBD offline for a bit this Friday 5/24...

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

Folks, the HBD will be migrating to its new set of IPs Friday,
5/24 at 3pm Eastern. We will DEFINITELY be offline for at least
an hour, but possibly for up to 12. Please do not flood the HBD
with queries after its status during this period as they will
simply bounce and PLEASE use the website to check if we're
online. Don't send "test" messages into the Digest. If you
haven't web access, then send the word "status" to
req at hbd.org. If we're up, it'll reply. If not, it won't.

See you on the other side!

- -- 
 -
God bless America!

Pat Babcock in SE Michigan         pbabcock at hbd.org
Home Brew Digest Janitor           janitor@hbd.org
HBD Web Site                       http://hbd.org
The Home Brew Page                 http://hbd.org/pbabcock
[18, 92.1] Rennerian
"I don't want a pickle. I just wanna ride on my motorsickle"
                                   - Arlo Guthrie






Return to table of contents


Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 20:14:05 +1000
From: "Grant" <gstott at primus.com.au>
Subject: Re: Kleinisms

James Sploonta wrote Klein's quote of :
5/6 Castlemaine XXXX Lager, "It is a bit hoppier than many of its
competitors, due to the use of whole hops, rather than the less flavourful
pea-sized compressed pellets sometimes used by brewers."

Yes slack research indeed, Castlemaine actually uses hops in the boil
whereas all the other Aussie megalagers use Isermerised hop extracts. So
it's the best of an unremarkable lot.

It's a pity that the average Aussie is convinced that VB is the best beer in
the world & so therefore there is no need to try the few local micro's let
alone any overpriced imports.

Grant  Stott
[9906, 260] AR (statute miles) or [15942.2, 260] AR [Km]






Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 00:01:46 -0600
From: "John Adsit" <jadsit at attbi.com>
Subject: First Wort Hopping

> From: "Kirk Annand" <kirk.annand at ns.sympatico.ca>
> Subject: First Wort Hopping
>
> That is the first time I have ever been called 'a God of Brewing'!

The reference was actually an allusion to Rob Moline's elaborate
introduction of your entire staff, which frankly set you up for that.  It's
not your fault.  My comment was flip and hasty, and I apologize for the
tone.

>Let
> me know what your definition of FWH is.

I provided an explanation to Kirk privately before I got the HBD tonight,
and since both Jeff Renner and Keith Lemcke have given good explanations in
the past few HBD's, I won't waste the bandwidth now.

I think I was bothered for a couple of reasons.

First, the concept is not that obscure.  It is in Fix and Fix, and George
and Laurie weren't making it up.  I have it on pretty good authority that
one of the largest microbreweries in our area--and we have a bunch--switched
completely to FWH nearly two years ago.  It is a process being used by some
professional brewers.  It should not have taken a lot of effort to find out
about the topic before responding as an expert.

Next, I think Kirk was a little careless in his reading.  The original
question clearly described a process that is different from the traditional
three step hopping process.  I misread many things myself, but if were
responding to something to which I was admitting that I did not have a lot
of knowledge, I think I would be especially careful.

Most importantly, though, I had been reading the Seibel replies to the
controversial questions with careful attention.  I really had been figuring
that I was getting expert replies, and I was planning to adopt my new
learning.  I was sincerely disappointed in that response, because it
honestly made me doubt everything else.

Still, my response was not in the spirit with which I prefer to participate
in discussions, and I am sorry for that.  I got caught up in the moment.
Kirk had the good grace to respond politely, and I thank him for that and
for the help he did provide for all of us throughout the week.

John Adsit
Boulder, CO
jadsit at attbi.com







Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 07:42:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: Pat Babcock <pbabcock at hbd.org>
Subject: Nigerian Cottage Industry...

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

With the explosion in the Nigerian Cottage Industry in email
scams, it has become necessary to introduce code to the HBD
processes to exclude their "pleas for help". From this point
onward, no posts containg reference to Nigeria will publish in
the HBD. If you are speaking of beer and need to include the
word "Nigeria" in your post, throw an asterisk, huyphenate, or
do something to break the pattern formed by the letters in the
word (ie, N*geria or Ni-geria or Nygeria will publish; Nigeria
will not.)

My apologies to any Nigerians participating on the list, but
blame your countrymen. (I actually have little pity in this
regard: I can't register on Microsoft Passport and other
services with my family name because it doesn't like the second
syllable...)

- -- 
 -
God bless America!

Pat Babcock in SE Michigan         pbabcock at hbd.org
Home Brew Digest Janitor           janitor@hbd.org
HBD Web Site                       http://hbd.org
The Home Brew Page                 http://hbd.org/pbabcock
[18, 92.1] Rennerian
"I don't want a pickle. I just wanna ride on my motorsickle"
                                   - Arlo Guthrie




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 05:14:28 -0700 (PDT)
From: Rick <ale_brewer at yahoo.com>
Subject: Brauwelt Int'l

Kirk Annand wrote:

>I think that 'Brauwelt International' is one of the
>best brewing magazines in the world.  I would like to
>read the German language 'Brauwelt' but since
>I don't speak or read German I am out in the cold.

Actually, Brauwelt does produce an English Language
version.  Check out:
http://www.brauwelt.de/englisch/index.htm

Rick Seibt
Mentor, OH



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 09:17:09 -0700
From: "Kirk Annand" <kirk.annand at ns.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Siebel Reply - First Wort Hopping

John:

What is referred to here as 'First Wort Hopping' I refer to as 'Single Hop
Addition'.  I use it as an example of different hopping techniques when I am
talking at Siebel.  I found the original article about it in Brauwelt
International very interesting.  As I recall from the article (through the
fog of time) the comparison of single hop addition versus the normal three
hop additions were done at a German brewery on 12 brews (6 trials and 6
controls).  The kettle size was over 300 hl (over 250 bbl) so they were
representative of a medium-sized German brewery.

All of the hops (both bittering and aroma) were added at (or near) the start
of the boil.  In all other aspects the trials and controls were treated the
same.  The resulting beers were then submitted to professional taste panels
and the results tabulated.  They also did extensive analysis of various
chemical components in the beers.

The results of the professional panel taste test were convincing in that
they preferred the single hop addition beer in TASTE and AROMA.  They gave
some theoretical explanations why this might be the case but it seems to fly
in the face of what brewers traditionally feel is important about late aroma
hop additions.  This is especially interesting when you consider how
seriously German brewers take the addition of noble hops near the end of
boil.

I think that the fact that the professional panel commented on and preferred
the 'aroma characteristics' of the single hop addition (FWH) trials over the
conventional addition is an indication that there is still lots to learn
about brewing.  Keep an open mind.  Fix comments on this well in 'An
Analysis of Brewing Techniques' but if you can get a copy of the original
article in Brauwelt it is revealing.

All of the world's large commercial breweries have done trials on single
(first wort) hop addition and some off them have adopted it as a procedure.
Others decided to stay with their more conventional routines because for
their beers there was no clear taste advantage or because they believe in
their brewing traditions.

Kirk Annand, S.I.T.


Kirk,

First wort hopping is explained briefly but well by Jeff Renner in the same
HBD in which I commented.  (Jeff is an expert on it.)  It is also described
in the last edition of Fix and Fix's Analysis of Brewing Technique.  As Jeff
explained, it is a very old technique that has recently been revived.  One
of the microbreweries in our area (Boulder) changed all of its recipes to
first wort hopping last year because they felt it gave better flavor.

Here's how it works.

The hops that would normally be the second hop addition in a three step
schedule are added to the sparge, long before the boil.  These hops stay
with the wort throughout the sparge and the preboil heating process.

At the boil, the boiling hops are added as usual.  People differ on whether
or not they still use the final hop addition.  In beers where hop aroma is
less important to me, I just use first wort hops and boil hops.

As I understand it, the hop oils are not boiled off but accomplish whatever
combination occurs (I dropped organic chemistry 30 years ago) during the
lower preboil temperatures.

In the article I read that led me to adopt this technique, tasters in a
blind taste test overwhelmingly preferred the flavors in the first wort
hopped beer.

I hope this helps.  As I said before, Jeff Renner is the one to talk to.

John Adsit
Jeffco Access
Jefferson County Public Schools
Golden, Colorado
jadsit at jeffco.k12.co.us




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 09:26:09 -0700
From: "Kirk Annand" <kirk.annand at ns.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Siebel Reply - What is Siebel?

Kelly:

Siebel Institute of Technology is the oldest brewing school in the United
States (founded in 1872) and is one of the oldest in the world.  For more
complete information on us and the courses that are offered there check out
our Website at www.siebelinstitute.com

Finally, a chance to get in a commercial plug!

Thanks,
Kirk Annand, Siebel Institute


Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 08:43:47 -0500
From: Kelly Grigg <kgrigg at diamonddata.com>
Subject: What is Seibel?

I've seen this in a bunch of the subjects of recent posts, but, I
can't from reading tell what Seibel is...

Can someone enlighten me?
:-)

K





Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 09:45:48 -0700
From: "Kirk Annand" <kirk.annand at ns.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: Sugar Fermentabilities

Mike:

Charlie's books are pretty good on these sugars as is 'Malting and Brewing
Science'.  Cane sugar, light brown sugar and dark brown sugar are all almost
100% fermentable.  All of the other things on your list can vary widely
depending on the process used to make them and the water content.

That is why you must get specs from the manufacturer as to the typical range
of fermentable and non-fermentable sugar in their particular product in
order to make a correct judgment on how much or each you can use by weight
(or volume) to make a consistent priming solution.  It is not as simple as
it seems because of the range of products available in the categories you
have listed.

Kirk Annand, S.I.T.


- ----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Dixon <mpdixon at ipass.net>
To: Kirk Annand <kirk.annand at ns.sympatico.ca>
Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2002 5:16 AM
Subject: Re: Sugar Fermentabilities


> Kirk,
>
> I really appreciate the time you guys put in on replying to our questions.
>
> The mention of books and the internet while a wonderful suggestion and
> direction towards the answer, it does not answer the question.
>
> The internet's information is varied to the point as to be fairly useless.
> While finding the average water contents of the fermentables I mentioned I
> did find many of the p/p/g for which I was searching. I have searched the
> internet for the actual fermentability of all the sugars I presented, and
> never came up with enough reliable information that I would risk passing
it
> along.  The ultimate plan was to make an accurate chart of the weight of
> different sugars necessary for priming to achieve near identical
carbonation
> levels.  Basically if I know at the temp I am priming I need X amount of
> Corn Sugar, then I would need Y amount of maple syrup.
>
> I do not have M&BS V1, but have plans to purchase it. Papazian is not a
> favorite of mine, so I gave his volumes away. Virtually every other
> homebrewing book is in my brewing library, and a few professional texts.
>
> Again thank you for the time involved in the reply and the opportunity to
> pose questions.
>
> Cheers,
> Mike
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Kirk Annand <kirk.annand at ns.sympatico.ca>
> To: <post@hbd.org>
> Cc: <mpdixon at ipass.net>; Kruger, Lyn <lyn_kruger at lallemand.com>
> Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2002 1:34 AM
> Subject: Sugar Fermentabilities
>
>
> > Mike:
> >
> > Many of these are much more commonly used by homebrewer's than
commercial
> > brewers, partly because of cost in some cases but also because of strong
> > flavor notes.  Most of them are covered quite well by Charlie Papazian
in
> > 'The Complete Joy of Homebrewing' and 'The Home Brewer's Companion'.  A
> more
> > detailed description of these adjuncts is given in 'Malting and Brewing
> > Science - Volume 1, Malt and Sweet Wort' by Briggs, Hough, Stevens and
> > Young.  If you refer to these books you will get the information that
you
> > requested.
> >
> > The 'Malting and Brewing Science' Volumes 1 and 2 are about twenty years
> old
> > but still some of the best books ever written in English on the subject
of
> > brewing.  They are 'exhaustive and technical' and fairly expensive but
> they
> > will be in a brewer's library forever.  On a personal note, I am a
brewing
> > book freak.  As my wife will attest I have every book on the subject of
> beer
> > and brewing that I can get my hands on.  It is important to get as many
> > viewpoints on any brewing subject as possible in order to have a
balanced
> > viewpoint.  It is also interesting to see the difference between the
> brewing
> > cultures of different countries.
> >
> > The last adjunct that you have on your list is 'treacle' which is what
the
> > British call molasses.  The water contents of the various items that you
> > list will also vary somewhat depending on the grade of adjunct that you
> > are interested in.  Suppliers should be able to provide you with
technical
> > information
> > on the particular adjunct that you want to include in your recipe.  The
> > Internet is also a rich source of detailed information since these are
> used
> > mostly in foodstuffs, not mainly beer.
> >
> > Kirk Annand, S.I.T.
> >
> >
> > Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 09:43:26 -0400
> > From: "Mike Dixon" <mpdixon at ipass.net>
> > Subject: Siebel Week: Sugar Fermentabilities
> >
> > Sometime back I tried to do some research on fermentabilities of
different
> > sugar sources and did not have much luck.  The sources I found were not
> very
> > specific on certain sugars and left out others altogether.  Some
"sugars"
> > would of course vary by water content so I added in some average water
> > contents, but the average fermentability percentage of each sugar is
what
> I
> > am after.  Also if you can tell me what the extract potential (p/p/g) is
> for
> > each sugar, and density of each sugar. Several of these I know, but I am
> > very interested to see what you have to say.
> >
> > Here is the list I am interested in knowing the fermentability
percentage,
> > extract potential, and density of:
> > Cane Sugar
> > Corn Sugar
> > Light Brown Sugar
> > Dark Brown Sugar
> > Invert Sugar (20% water)
> > Honey (17% water)
> > Molasses (25% water)
> > Maple Syrup (33% water)
> > Treacle (20% water)
> >
> > Thank you very much for this opportunity.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Mike
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 07:33:37 -0600
From: "Walker, Randy" <Walkerr at littongcs.com>
Subject: Aventinus Wheat Dopplebock recipe

I would like to make a clone of Schneider Aventinus Wheat Dopplebock.
Can anyone provide a recipe ( extract or all-grain ) or any opinions 
about malts, hops and yeast used? 
Thanks!

Randy Walker
Northrop Grumman
Salt Lake City, UT
801-539-1200, X-7484


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 09:16:38 -0500
From: "Tom Viemont" <t_viemont at hotmail.com>
Subject: Fwd: Free Bottles in Chicago

>From: Tom Viemont <t_viemont at HOTMAIL.COM>
>Reply-To: Tom Viemont <t_viemont at HOTMAIL.COM>
>To: CBS-HB at LISTSERV.UIC.EDU
>Subject: Free Bottles in Chicago
>Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 11:54:53 -0500
>
>Hey There,
>
>SWMBO has put her foot down.  In preparation for our upcoming move out of 
>state, I must get rid of my accumulated empty bottles.  I have 4 or 5 
>cases.
>  All are brown, most have had the labels removed and are clean.  I have a 
>mix of 12 oz. and bombers (22 oz.).
>
>I live in Forest Park, a near west suburb of Chicago.  Email me, if you're 
>interested in some or all.
>
>
>Best regards,
>
>Tom Viemont
>Email: t_viemont at hotmail.com
>



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 11:38:38 -0500
From: Brian Lundeen <BLundeen at rrc.mb.ca>
Subject: RE: Siebel bashing, corks 

John Adsit writes:

> Seibel tells us:
> 
> > The FWH schedule that you mention looks like a variation of this 
> > 'classic' hop addition schedule.  I see no harm or 
> advantage from it.
> 
> And the illusion is shattered.
> 
> These Gods of Brewing don't have the slightest clue what 
> First Wort Hopping is.  What a disappointment.  You have to 
> hold everything else they say suspect after an answer like that.

By that leap of logic, should we regard everything you post as the rantings
of a bitter, irrational man?

One guy at Siebel shows that he is not up to speed on something that might
not even be practised that widely in the professional circles in which he
works, and suddenly everything that various people from Siebel have written
becomes questionable? You've clearly got a bone to pick with this whole
arrangement and it is coming through loud and clear in your comments.
Somewhere along the way you seem to have picked up this notion that this is
the Gods coming down from Olympus to toss a few crumbs to the great
unwashed. Well, you are entitled to your opinions, but if you choose to
publicly broadcast those opinions, don't expect everyone to agree with you.

Now, maybe Kirk should have researched the FWH thing a bit better, but let's
not throw the baby out with the bathwater. I welcome the different
perspective that these people have to offer and I look forward to their
continued participation in this forum. I don't expect them to be in here all
the time, let's face it. This is their job, it's not a hobby like it is for
most of us. They have their own concerns, and their own forums for
discussion. I would be very surprised if more than a handful of professional
brewers are also homebrewers. I work in the IT field, but the last thing I
want to do for enjoyment is hang around with a bunch of computer geeks
whining about why Microsoft is more popular than Unix, or arguing over what
is the best firewall software.

Alright, enough ranting. The whole topic of musty corked beers has me
wondering something. With all the fuss in the wine industry about cork
taint, one must assume that any cork manufacturer must be taking
extraordinary precautions these days to weed out any TCA contaminated corks.
TCA being the compound that produces that musty cellar character in wines,
and I would assume, does the same in beer. One wonders whether the
sub-standard corks aren't being foisted off on the brewing industry? Maybe
they like cork taint. "Yes, our customers in America have come to expect
that classic mustiness. It's as much a part of Chimay as skunking is to
Heineken". ;-)

Cheers
Brian Lundeen
Brewing at [314,829] aka Winnipeg


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 12:54:10 -0500
From: "Leonard, Phil" <Phil.Leonard at dsionline.com>
Subject: RE: National Homebrew Competition score sheets?

Mine showed up yesterday (5/22).

Philip


>Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 10:02:00 -0500
>From: "Daniel Stedman" <playflatball at hotmail.com>
>Subject: National Homebrew Competition score sheets?
>
>Hi - has anyone received their scoresheets back from the first round of the

>NHC yet? Just curious - I haven't received anything.
>
>Dan in Minnetonka



- ----------  Internet E-mail Confidentiality Disclaimer  ----------

PRIVILEGED / CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION may be contained in this message.  If
you are not the addressee indicated in this message or the employee or agent
responsible for delivering it to the addressee, you are hereby on notice
that you are in possession of confidential and privileged information.  Any
dissemination, distribution, or copying of this e-mail is strictly
prohibited.  In such case, you should destroy this message and kindly notify
the sender by reply e-mail.  Please advise immediately if you or your
employer do not consent to Internet email for messages of this kind.

Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither
given nor endorsed by it.




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 18:42:50 +0000
From: "Tobias Fischborn" <fischborn at hotmail.com>
Subject: Siebel response - Jeff and Ellen Gladish Lactobacillus


Date: Sat, 11 May 2002 17:34:02 -0400
From: Jeff & Ellen <JeffNGladish at ij.net>
Subject: Siebel Week: lactobacilus
>I'm trying to perfect, or at least improve my technique for fermenting a 
>Berlinner Weisse. In three attempts over the past three years, I've added 
>the bacteria to warm wort a day or two before cooling and pitching the ale 
>yeast, added the ale yeast a day or two before the bacteria, and added a 
>mixed culture of yeast and lactobacillus at pitching time. I've talked to 
>brewers who have intentionally soured the wort before boiling and then 
>pitched ale yeast after cooling and to others who have soured the mash.

>My question is which is the most stable way to achieve a clean sourness in 
>the shortest amount of fermenting time?

Tobias:First of all souring the mash was probably done to shift the pH to 
the optimum of enzymes during the mashing process and not to produce 
Berliner Weisse. If the pH would be shifted down to 3.4 most enzymes would 
not work properly. The same for souring the wort before boiling. Here the pH 
is lowered to improve the protein koagulation.

The traditional Berliner Weisse is produced from a 7-8 % gravity wort made 
with 2/3 to 3/4 wheat malt and the rest barley malt. The wort is very light 
hopped (4-6 BU)because hop is inhibiting Lactobacillus.

The yeast and bacteria are pitched together in a ratio of 4-6 parts yeast 
and 1 part Lactobacillus. Depending on the fermentation temperature the 
lactic acid production will be reduced or accelerated. Temperatures higher 
than 20 C produce more lactic acid. Lactobacillus and the yeast raise 
together to the top during the fermentation and are harvested from there. It 
can be used for imidiate repitching. The yeast bacteria mix should not be 
stored for more than 2 days. The optimum storage temperature is 10 C.

The main fermentation lasts usually 4-5 days, although the original gravity 
is only 7-8 % but the lactic acid is inhibiting the yeast. After the main 
fermentation(most of yeast and bacteria are harvested)the beer is mixed with 
10 % "Kraeusen" (beer that just started to ferment) and bottled imidiately. 
The beer is then kept for one week at 15-16 C and then for another 2-3 weeks 
at 8-10 C. The beer will improve with longer storage.

It is also possible to ferment yeast and bacteria seperately. The lactic 
acid is produced from unhopped wort (see building upculture below) and then 
mixed with the yeast fermented beer. But the result/taste is not as good as 
the traditional way.

>Will the ale yeast be able to work in wort with a pH as low as it must be 
>when it is as sour as I want?

Tobias: Berliner Weisse has usually a pH of 3.2-3.4 and a lactic acid 
concnetration of o,3-0,8 %. Ale yeast will still ferment at these pH and 
lactic acid concentration but is inhibited and will ferment much slower and 
maybe not to the attenuation limit.

>Am I doomed to wait months for a milky film to appear on my beer before 
>it's done?

Tobias: As I mentioned above, your fermentation should be finished within 
4-5 days. If you have to wait for months to finish your fermentation there 
is something wrong. I also beleave that this milky film you are waiting for 
is caused by some other microorganism. A contamination with a fermentation 
time of one month or more is very likely.

>What is the best way to build up a culture of lactobacillus delbruckii?

Tobias: You can cultivate your lactobacillus on MRS as descriped in an 
previous answer. To build up a culture you can use a 10 % gravity unhopped 
wort at warm temperature. Optimum would be 45-48 C, but room temperature 
should work as well. Before pitching the culture the media/beer should be 
removed because it contains high concentration of lactic acid, which will 
inhibit the yeast. You can use this media/beer to adjust the pH of your 
mash.

Although lactobacillus brevis is a beer contaminent it is widely used for 
Berliner Weisse production.

>Or is this step necessary?

Tobias: I assume you are not producing Berliner Weisse on a regular base. 
So, yes you have to build up a starter because the harvested yeast bacteria 
mix can not be stored over a longer period.

>All three of my Berlinner Weisse beers have tasted very good and have done 
>extremely well for me in competitions, but I'd really like to streamline 
>the process. Thanks for your insight.
Jeff Gladish, Tampa, FL





Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 15:10:13 -0400
From: "Laura Barrowman" <llbarrowman at hotmail.com>
Subject: Beer humor

I got this from a friend and figured no male would post this and risk female
flameage. I thought it was hilarious, especially in light of the 'estrogens
& Esthers' leaching out of one poor sods plastic mash tun.

Ta!  -Laura, who can't spell beer

- --------------------------------------------------------------------------

LONDON (Reuters) Yesterday scientists for Health UK suggested
that,considering the results of a recent analysis that revealed the presence
of female hormones in beer, men should take a concerned look at their beer
consumption.   The theory is that beer contains female hormones (hops
contains (phytoestrogens) and drinking it makes men turn into women. To test
the theory, 100 men were fed 6 pints of beer each within a two-hour period.
It was then observed that 100% of the men:


1.  Gained weight


2.  Talked to much without making sense


3.  Became overly emotional


4.  Couldn't drive a car


5.  Failed to think rationally


6.  Argued over nothing


7. Had to sit down while urinating


8.  Refused to apologize when obviously wrong





     No further testing is considered necessary



Ale

Please visit www.homebrew.com



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 21:36:01 +0000
From: "Tobias Fischborn" <fischborn at hotmail.com>
Subject: Siebel response: Ferm Nuts


Graham asked.....

Date: Sun, 12 May 2002 08:50:31 +1000
From: craftbrewer <craftbrewer at telstra.com>
Subject: Siebel Week
G'Day All
Well the question from a mad North Queenslander
FERMENTATION NUTRIENTS
I have been researching various yeast nutrient suppliments and its 
corresponding effect on fermentation over the years and there is no doubt 
that additional supplimentation of yeast nutrition results in
improved fermentation performance in general.
But there can be problems as well. The problems I have read and experienced 
first hand include the increased production of medium chained fatty acids, 
increased acetaldehyde, more esters and higher alcohols. Some of these will 
give as you are aware very negative
flavour impacts on your beer. I myself have experienced a racid flavour from 
overdosing a wort with zinc.
There are three broad ways most craftbrewers use to add yeast nutrients
1. Adding specific nutrient(s) - mainly zinc on a specific need basis
2. Adding yeast extract of some sort - say dried yeast in the boil
3. Adding pre-package yeast nutrients - N, P compounds  at  micronutrient
While I can find plenty of evidence on the benefits of yeast nutrient 
addition, research on the negative impact on these additions, especially 
potential flavour inpacts, is very scare. What research I do find is at the 
"high to very high" end of nutrient addition,
especially with the use of zinc.
The evidence shows a linear relationship between say zinc addition and off 
flavour compounds. Basically the more you add, the more you get.
But I cant find any research on if that linear relationship extends back to 
the micro - addition range. One possibility is there may well be an 
expoential curve at these ranges, where there is a threshold limit where the 
off flavour compounds start to go into the linear
relationship. (similar to the growth curve of most organisms).
I myself have been getting good results with the following levels of 
addition.
1. a packet of dried yeast per 18 litre batch in the boil 10 minutes from 
strike
2. 0.2 mg Zn /Litre at strike (in the form of dilutes Zn salts).
I believe I am with these additions achieving optimum levels (as opposed to 
good levels)of all the nutrients necessary for good yeast performance. 
Nutrients like FANs, Amino acids, Vitamins and Micronutrients like Zn and 
Mn.
Still I would like to know more about off flavour production, even at these 
relative low concentrations. The producer of Servomyces has produced there 
own data, but I would like more independant advice. I found servomyces 
works, and works well, but I have also found my own formular for yeast 
nutrient additions gives the same results.
My Questions are

1. What is the latest research into yeast nutrition, especially Zinc.

Forbes:  Do we have time?  Zinc has long been recognised as essential for 
yeast growth and fermentation.  What is interesting is the perceived 
toxicity for this mineral and what is now being seen in certain 
applications.(see also reply on Lou Heavner question)

Tobias: More and more research is done nowadays on defining bio-availabilty 
and how to determine bio availability, in particular in medical research. It 
is clear now that various forms of zinc behave differently, but it is still 
not abolutely clear, which mechanisms are working here (chelating, 
isoelectric point, pH-shifts....)

2. Has there been any research at these lower levels of additions.

Forbes: The problem with lower levels is ensuring that you can accurately 
measure the amount you have added and the increase resulting from it.
Then you have to be sure that what you are adding is actually available to 
the yeast.

3. What is Siebels position on the addition of yeast nutrients.

4. What would they recommend are good combinations and levels of nutrients 
that should be added to a "typical" wort.

Forbes: Typical wort? Water source, malt types, equipment, boil length etc.
I think what we need to be aware of here is that the region you are brewing 
indictates your wort composition.
But you can find some minimum requirements for yeast in my answer to Lou 
Heavner.

5. Many claim yeast nutrients do not increase yeast numbers but only 
increase yeast performance. Yet I find unscientifically that they seem to 
increase my yeast mass. Which is true.

Forbes: I find it hard to believe that this is claimed.
I admit sometimes it does not seem like much more yeast growth but if you 
claim the yeast nutrient makes for better yeast performance then I believe 
more yeast biomass will also a consequence.  This may not be true for all 
nutrients.

6. Finally what is the mechanism that makes this so effective. What critcal 
enzyme, or chemical reaction, or whatever, that is affected by these 
additions.

Forbes: Not so much a chemical reaction or critical enzyme. What may be at 
work here is the bioavailability of the nutrients.
I have seen media for yeast fermentation where everything seems fine, 
Nitrogen, phosphorus, Magnesium Zinc etc.  But in most cases the analysis 
that states this is destructive analysis, especially for Mg and Zn.
This does not relate to availability to the yeast, unless you are in defined 
medium where everything is known and the interactions are understood.
In beer you have proteins, polyphenols, complex carbohydrates, phytic acid 
etc., most of which will happily interact with minerals like Zn and Mg.
If these interactions are chelation (as with phytic acid) then the mineral 
might as well be missing.  During the boil Mg and Zn can be removed from the 
wort
by protein entrapment in the trub.  Hence why some suggest leaving the trub 
in the wort.  Or add some trub back, in various forms.

Chemical reactions probably just means looking to provide enzymes with the 
co-factors they require.  So for alcohol dehydrogenase Zn is essential, for 
the
majority of the yeast energy reactions Mg is essential.  So it's probably 
about optimising the availability of these nutrients to the yeast, rather 
than looking
to boost a particular pathway or enzyme.  This is why with some nutrients 
you experience bad flavours.



Shout
Graham Sanders





Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 18:14:26 -0400
From: "Forbes Wardrop" <forbesrw at hotmail.com>
Subject: Fwd: Siebel week response - Lou Heavner


Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 09:10:14 -0500
From: "Lw Hiii" <feedfwd at hotmail.com>
Subject: Siebel Week
There have been recent discussions of the value/toxicity of micronutrients
like zinc and copper. Is there any guideline or published data for maximum
and minimum limits or optimum targets for any number of minerals or
micronutrients?

There is lots of published data on this subject.  The best sources tend to 
have been collected from defined media, and this can be misleading.  From 
personal experience I know that published figures for inhibition or killing 
of yeast in fermentation are generally conservative.  Yeast  have been 
described as being inhibited by Zn at 50ug/L, however this can be as high as 
6.5mg/L.  In my experience yeast are not killed by Zn levels as high as 
100mg/L, however, they do have a significantly longer lag phase, but will 
carry out the fermentation.  It also appears that Zn and Cu are also good 
examples of interactions.  Zn it appears antagonises the toxic effect of Cu. 
  So if you were aware you had a Cu problem (from water supply etc) then a 
zinc addition may help.  It may also give you the benefit of also improving 
Zn availability to the yeast.  Measuring mineral content of a medium like 
wort is one thing knowing if it will help/inhibit fermentation is another 
thing altogether.  I will give you established figures for required/optimal 
for yeast growth/fermentation and figures for toxicity/inhibition for the 
most relevant ions as a guide.  They are, I stress, a guide (these figures 
will include results based on defined medium, hence the wide ranges you may 
see..

Calcium:  40mg/L should be around optimal, maybe as high as 200mg/L 
depending on strain.  At 1g/L Ca you would expect lower ethanol and reduced 
growth.  Again this is strain dependent, and interestingly it appears that 
true lager yeast has greater requirements than ale yeast.

Magnesium:  25-100mg/L should be adequate, but will compete with Ca.  
Inhibtion with this mineral requires 24g/L.

Zinc: 25-100ug/L should suffice. However there are strains that require 
150+ug/L in order to operate fermentation optimally.

Copper: 6ug/L is needed may go as high as 20ug/L.  Inhibition at 50-150ug/L, 
again depending on strain and environment.

Potassium: 50-200mg/L, too little will cause significant reduction in 
ethanol production.  Growth is inhibited with 400mg/L+ with fermentation 
being totally inhibited by 100g/L.

Sodium: Not required by yeast, some strains will not tolerate 5g of sodium.  
others may go as high as 25g.  If you have one surviving higher than this, 
and fermenting well, you either have a very resistant yeast or it's not a 
Saccharomyces.

That would seem to cover the most important minerals.  Minerals like 
Potassium, Magnesium, Zinc, calcium and copper are all essential for yeast 
fermentation, sodium is not.  However, Zn, Cu and Ca are all toxic  to the 
yeast at quite low doses.  Mg and K are so essential it is really difficult 
to poison the yeast without making a huge error.

I would also suggest care be taken when using mineral salts.  In general 
most of these minerals are available in a variety of different compounds.  
Awareness of the second partners (eg chloride in magnesium chloride) 
influence on the yeast is also important.  Naturally-derived sources may be 
a more effective method (less troubling) of adding some of these minerals.

Hope this helps in some way.......


Forbes Wardrop and Tobias Fischborn
Lallemand Inc.
Montreal






Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 17:27:17 -0700 (PDT)
From: Rama Roberts <rama at retro.eng.sun.com>
Subject: re: homebrewer to microbrewer

>Roger- I'm catching up on old HBD's and saw your post about advice on
>stepping up to a micro from homebrewing. I found something through a
>search engine a while ago and haven't been able to find it again for you-
>it was such a good read, I'll do my best to describe it in hopes someone
>will recognize it and send a link:

I received a personal reply on this (from Guy in Los Gatos, CA)- it's not the 
text I was referring to, but has lots of good info on issues you may run into 
like obtaining a liquor license, zoning permits, etc:

http://www.sonic.net/~wwpints/  
Click on "The Saga" in the upper right corner for the story 

Rama Roberts
San Francisco bay area



Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 17:37:22 -0700
From: Scott Perfect <perfect at marzen.llnl.gov>
Subject: Scottish Ale

engwar proposes a scottish ale recipe - his first.

 engwar, your gravity calculation is reasonable.

 I would definitely not use smoked malt, however, unless

 you know that's what you want. Smoked malt is not

 an "authentic" ingredient as some sources would lead

 you to believe. And it can be very dominant.

 Finally, as Jeff would request, let us know who and where

 you are.

Scott Perfect
San Ramon, CA




Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 21:40:16 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <JeffRenner at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: CAPS

Tony Barnsley <tony.barnsley at blackpool.gov.uk> wrote of my CAP:

>He also was kind enough to send some back to me via some English friends who
>were visiting him

Always glad to spread the gospel of CAP.

You don't know how close you came to not getting it.  I made a 
quarter barrel (7.75 gallons) and took three gallons to MCAB in 
Cleveland, even though it had lagered only 3 weeks or so.  Then my 
sister and her family unexpectedly came for a week and they drank up 
a good bit more, still at lagering temperatures (32F).

Then our English friends came.  They are homebrewers and CAMRA 
members, so I made a very pale summer Bitter in their honor, which 
was perfectly nice if not outstanding.  We put it on a handpump for a 
dinner party for them and friends who knew them when they lived in 
the States back in the late nineties, but the rest of the time, they 
drank the CAP!  Still at 32F, although the thick mugs at room 
temperature tempered the chill.  I guess they had another liter or 
two the night before they left, then that day I filled a 1/2 liter 
poly bottle for them to send to you.  That evening I went to fill a 1 
liter bottle for the Ann Arbor Brewers Guild meeting that evening and 
the keg blew after about 250 mls.

Tony goes on to wax rhapsodic about the CAP:

>It was crystal clear, and a
>wonderful pale yellow colour, much paler than my poor imitation. Could I
>detect some blackcurrant in the aroma? Hmm interesting

That would be the Cluster bittering hops.  I used noble hops for FWH 
flavor and aroma at the end of the boil.

>It was Crisp and Dry, with a wonderful bitterness, as the beer warmed the malt
>profile became more evident. Given Jeff's mashing schedule I was expecting a
>much heavier, sweeter beer, which was my result. Needless to say I know
>which beer I prefer and what to aim for now.

My first CAPs were lower attenuated (~65-70%; this one was 80%) - 
perhaps more in the Bohemian Pils style than the German style.  I 
liked that richer style too, but I tasted some other crisper, drier 
ones in competitions and liked them a lot (Dave Sapsis' at MCAB2 
stands out, a runner up BOS), and higher attenuation is and was 
typical of commercial American Pilsners, even a century ago.  so I've 
been moving toward that.

My now standard mash schedule is 30 minutes or so at 145F (63C), then 
I add the cereal mash (and often heat) to boost to 158-160F (70-71C) 
for another 30-40 minutes, then mash off.  The 63C rest is, I think, 
important for higher attenuation,  I used to rest at 140F (60C), and 
this left more conversion for the 70C rest.  At least I surmise. 
This is a similar mash schedule to what I remember that A/B uses from 
our MCAB2 pilot brewery at A/B in St. Louis, and Bud is a well 
attenuated, crisp beer.

The other factor is to pitch a good amount of healthy yeast.

Jeff
- -- 
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, JeffRenner at comcast.net
"One never knows, do one?"  Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943


Return to table of contents

---