HOMEBREW Digest #4476 Mon 16 February 2004

[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]

		Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org


                  Beer, Beer, and More Beer
      Visit http://morebeer.com to show your appreciation!

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

  Link of the week - Feb 13, 2004 (Bob Devine)
  Cidery beers ("Fredrik")
  Light and Dark Munich Malts (Robert Sandefer)
  Clinitest ("Dave Burley")
  Clin*test ("A.J deLange")
  Critique my Amber recipe? ("Pat and Debbie")
  malt source ("D. Clark")
  Five Star Ph Stabilizer ("Val J. Lipscomb")
  Reinheitsgebot it's not - part 2. ("-S")
  Reinheitsgebot it's not - part 1 ("-S")
  Re: dip tubes & Goodbye glass ("C.D. Pritchard")

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * The HBD Logo Store is now open! * * http://www.hbd.org/store.html * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Suppport this service: http://hbd.org/donate.shtml * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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. HAVING TROUBLE posting, subscribing or unsusubscribing? See the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org. 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@hbd.org or read the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org. JANITOR on duty: Pat Babcock and Spencer Thomas (janitor@hbd.org)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 23:41:00 -0700 From: Bob Devine <bob.devine at worldnet.att.net> Subject: Link of the week - Feb 13, 2004 Want to know more about malted barley in the US? Visit the American Malting Barley Association's website: http://www.ambainc.org/ If your knowledge of barley stops at "two-row" versus "six-row", take a look at their "know your barley" page: http://www.ambainc.org/pub/kymbv/2003_KYMBV.htm Bob Devine Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 10:07:50 +0100 From: "Fredrik" <carlsbergerensis at hotmail.com> Subject: Cidery beers > Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 09:59:46 -0500 > From: "Dave Burley" <Dave_Burley at charter.net> > Subject: Cidery beers > Fredrik does some experiments and speculation on the origin of cidery taste in > high sugar beers. Hello Dave, thanks for your response! > Lacking the experimental details, I have to ask Fredrik was the sugar in your > experiment dissolved in boiling water first? Sugar has various bacterial > cultures no doubt. I always boil a sugar syrup before I use it in a > fermentation. Yes I definitely boiled sugar in water first. I add it 15 minutes before end of boil. 1) I wonder if low temperatures may magnify the cidery notes? I did one brew, which didn't turn out cidery at all. That was my first brew with coopers kit + sugar. It was done at 76F :) However it turned very high in ethylacetate, and diacetyl, but no cidery notes that I recall. Also my brews so far has been fairly low range of the yeast temp range. 2) I am not yet clear on what the distincion between fructose and glucose would be in this case, but I am assuming they both end up in the same bin in this case? So I've plotted 3 of my own brews, boldly assuming the acetic acid does determine the pH (bold I agree but, I have to make something up). Plotting acetic ppm against Plato sucrose, fructose, glucose then I get this picture. http://hem.bredband.net/frerad/beer/cidery_ppm_P.jpg It is interesting that the honey beer lies over the line, which has already converted g and f. The other ones have sucrose, which is expected to be a bit slower then as it has to be converted first? I don't doubt I am making things too simple here, but I have to start somewhere. I think for sure temperature and strain probably also has a large impact, and maybe the buffering capacity of the wort. All my testing so far has been with nottingham dry yeast. Temps has varied, but I generally stay and the low end of the temp range. I have a feeling that there is a balancing between ethyl acetate and acetic acid depending on the range. But the first yeast I used with the coopers kit was the coopers dry yeast. That brew is not in the plot btw, because I didn't measure pH in my first batch :) I didn't even own a gravity meter. /Fredrik Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 06:20:46 -0500 From: Robert Sandefer <melamor at vzavenue.net> Subject: Light and Dark Munich Malts I have spent a week or so diving through the archives and exploring various topics: alt grists, oktoberfest recipes, Munich malt brands, etc. Unfortunately, I have not seen an answer to the following question: What are the differences (if any) between the taste and usage of light (8L) and dark (16L) Munich malts? A little background: The only German Munich malt carried by my current supplier is 8L Weissheimer. Over the next few months, I am planning on brewing two alts, an oktoberfest, a bock, a dunkelweizen, and a weizenbock. My research (archival and book-derived) leads me to believe dark Munich malt is best (for flavor and color) in alt and bock and is perfectly fine in dunkelweizens. What affect would using 8L Munich malt with roasted malt (to adjust color) have on taste of a bock or an alt (especially one following Al Korzonas' recipe: 9 pounds Munich malt and 1 pound aromatic malt)? Is the lighter Munich lighter in flavor as well as color? Should I order a dark Munich malt (e.g., 16L Durst from Northern Brewer) for the alt, bock, and weizen grainbills? Answers, guesses, experiments, and suppositions welcome. Robert Sandefer Arlington, VA Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 07:16:47 -0500 From: "Dave Burley" <Dave_Burley at charter.net> Subject: Clinitest Brewsters: Andy asks where he can find Clinitest kits . I order the Clinitest tablets from the pharmacy. The box contains the color chart and all you have to supply is the testube and an eyedropper also available from the pharmacy. Glad to see Clinitest is still being used other than in my brewery. Keep on Brewin' Dave Burley Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 13:32:43 +0000 From: "A.J deLange" <ajdel at cox.net> Subject: Clin*test Clin*test is (was) a compact realization of the Munson - Walker method of determining reducing sugars. The sugars reduce Cu(II) from copper sulfate to the cuprous oxide and the oxide is (in Munson-Walker) weighed. In Clin*test you compare the depth of the reddish brown color produced (Cu2O) to a chart and get rough quantitative information from that. In the related Lane-Eynon you titrate Soxhelet modified Fehling solution (copper sulfate and rochelle salt) with beer and monitor the end point with methylene blue (which goes clear when the oxidation state becomes low enough). The reagents aren't by any means in the $9 range but they aren't too bad either. You also require a bunsen burner, burette, beaker etc, It's not a particularly easy test to do (timing is important and it's hard for color blind AJ to detect the disappearance of the blue against the red of the oxide) but it does give a quantitative answer. Details in ASBC MOA Beer-12 or DeClerk Vol II p 165 et seq. A.J. Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 13:13:17 -0600 From: "Pat and Debbie" <reddydp at charter.net> Subject: Critique my Amber recipe? Without getting into the details of my mash, in general, what do you think about my grain bill? Any comments are welcome. According to ProMash, I get the exact color and gravity I'm after but I'm a little worried that this recipe will yield too much malty sweetness. Thanks for any help/suggestions. Amber Ale - 10 gallons - 75% Efficiency 10 lb. 2-row 4.75 lb. pale 1.75 lb. honey malt 1.3 lb. crystal 60L .85 lb. crystal 40L .85 lb. Munich .05 lb. chocolate malt 90 minute boil Willamette 18.8 IBU at 60 min. Cascade 1.7 IBU at 30 min. Tettnanger 4 IBU at 30 min. Tettnanger 1.6 IBU at 10 min. Tettnanger 0 IBU at Dry 12.3 SRM 26.1 IBU American Ale II yeast SRM 12.3 SG 1.052 Thanks in advance! PMR - --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.587 / Virus Database: 371 - Release Date: 2/12/2004 Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 10:14:18 -0500 From: "D. Clark" <clark at capital.net> Subject: malt source Hi group, I have been an infrequent poster, but I am a daily follower of the digest and have several beers and a couple of wines going most of the time. Occasionally a recipe will be offered by someone, and the list of ingredients will include malts that are not always available in my local homebrew stores.( I am fortunate enough to have 2 stores within 45 minutes of me ) This is frustrating, especially when something sounds really good. North of where I live is a wholesale malt distributer who has finally put out a pricelist for homebrewers, and their list of available malts and hops is truly impressive. Their address is: www.northcountrymalt.com . I have no affiliation with them and I haven't ordered yet, but I've spoken with them a couple of times and the feedback has been very helpful. I recently made a clone of Magic Hat # 9 (recipe from "Clonebrews") that turned out very well. It's a tasty pale ale with apricot flavoring added in the secondary. It's available on tap locally and mine was almost dead on except with a much better head. The beer was great but the apricot flavor faded gradually as the keg was emptied over several weeks. Why does this happen? Is there a way to stabilize the flavor? I like wit beers with a lot of coriander and they also lose their flavor over time. I haven't bottled anything for a while, everything goes in the kegs, would bottling help preserve the flavors? Anyone have any thoughts? Later. Dave Clark Eagle Bridge, New York Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 22:50:22 -0600 From: "Val J. Lipscomb" <vlipscomb at satx.rr.com> Subject: Five Star Ph Stabilizer Greetings All, I recently received an e-ad from Williams Brewing that featured the subject product,described below: "This product from Five Star Chemicals will stabilize your mash water and lock in a pH of 5.2 regardless of your brewing water. A proprietary blend of food-grade phosphate buffers, adding one tablespoon of pH Stabilizer per 5 gallons of strike water will ensure a starting pH of 5.2, optimizing the enzymatic activity of your wort. This one pound jar will treat over 48 five gallon batches." While I have a lot of faith in Williams and use other 5 Star products,I am a doubter on this one. It would be truly great if it does work. Are there any users out there? Comments, A.J,-S,Dave B., Jeff R. or any of the others who remember Chemistry class??? I asked Customer Service at 5 Star for comments-no reply. Val Lipscomb-Brewing in San Antonio-where the sun spends the winter,but not today! Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 14:15:27 -0500 From: "-S" <-s at adelphia.net> Subject: Reinheitsgebot it's not - part 2. continued Dave Burley writes ... > Good >biologically stable beer was a major factor in the Hanseatic League > trading, the German reputation for good beer and the beginning of > organized international market development and trade since the Fall > of Rome. The paragraph above mixes results from 5 centuries into an erroneous mish-mash. The Hansa traded beer from Hamburg, not Munich, mostly in the 1600s. The concept of biological stability awaited French L.Pasteur and especially the Danish Emil Hansen of the Carlsberg brewery. This work was performed as the Hanseatic league ceased to practically exist in the 1860s and 1870s. In the era of Hansa beer trade, biological stability was not even understood ! Also Hansa didn't ship beer to distant points, like it's trade fort in London (the Steelyard) . Instead they brewed German style beers at the fort for sale to the English. Most likely these were the non-RHG styles of Hamburg. The Hanseatic League deserves it's own book, but in brief it's something of an inter-city and international trading guild which began around 1250 and only completely ceased in the 1870s ! It primarily involves cities of the Baltic and North Sea, but in the south Munich's Hansa controlled trade in salt (fm Salzburg) wine from Austria I assume, and fabric. The Hansa was in serious decline by 1500, but had a revival in the 1600s and very slow death finalized ~1870. Hamburg was the Hansa beer trade city not Munich and Hamburg was never controlled by Reinheitsgebot till after unification. Munich developed into the premier beer center later too. In 1741 Bavarian Benno Scharl writes a text on lager brewing, and in 1807 Gabriel Seylmeyer took over Spaten and he and later Gaby2 use steam power to make made large scale brewing and beer transport a reality. The Bavarian Cloister brews were certainly respected, but not, I think, the object of international trade. Bavaria was a hold-out but joined the German national union ~1870. The Union had to make several concessions, including the general acceptance of RHG. This act destroyed many non-Bavarian beer styles and breweries, caused many complaints, and gave Bavaria a beer trade advantage within Germany. It's roughly akin to the US prohibition in terms of damaging the state of German brewing. Today the RHG cannot be enforced in Germany by EEC regulation, so all that is needed is a German Jeff Renner-type (or even a real Jeff Renner ) to revive these non-Bavarian non-RHG German beer style from their 135year slumber. Here is a very interesting East German oriented critical view of RHG in which he claims that the beers of the East under non-RHG Communism were/are better than the tame RHG counterparts ! He includes the modern and highly revised RHG text. http://www.xs4all.nl/~patto1ro/reinheit.htm I agree with his POV that RHG is about excessive control, not quality and that it has destroyed a large part of the history of creative quality brewing. Please be sure to click on his link about "Extinct German Beer Styles". http://www.xs4all.nl/~patto1ro/gerstyle.htm Northern German herb and fruit beers and all manner of top fermented German beers from various regions are documented from a 1784 source. Jeff Renner are you reading this ? Someone needs to resurrect this important part of beer history which was buried by the stupid excessively restrictive Reinheitsgebot. Hey - I love a great RHG compliant all malt lager, but I also like a lot of other styles too. I have absolutely no a appreciation or romantic attachment to bad-old laws like RHG. We have too many bad-new laws that require our attention. -S Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 16:06:56 -0500 From: "-S" <-s at adelphia.net> Subject: Reinheitsgebot it's not - part 1 Dave Burley writes ... >Subject: Uberflussigereinheitsabout Overflight is an understatement - it runs history together like a river of beer on your grandmothers paisley shawl. >Reinheitsgebot was invented to allow the local princes to control the tax >collection by taxing malt production of which they could easily determine >the throughput. Hogwash - the original Reinheitsgebot(RHG) doesn't even mention malt - just barley !!! There was no unified Germany until the 1860s 3.5 centuries later. Bavaria from at least the 1470s to 1700, as today, encompasses the region around Munich but not including Augsberg or Salzburg. Here is a translation of the complete text of the *original* 1516 RHG. A mere 7 or 8 sentences http://brewery.org/brewery/library/ReinHeit.html There is absolutely no mention of taxes just price caps and penalties. You will also note it only require beer to be made of water, hops and BARLEY ! There is no mention of malt until a revision in the 1600s. Wheat ?malted? was also added to the acceptable list of RHG later. Many other *MAJOR* revisions followed. Clearly the original intent of the RHG has nothing to do with taxes, has nothing to do with malt and has little enough to do with quality aside from restricting the ingredients at penalty of forfeiture. It's about price ceilings and limiting ingredients. It's argued that the restriction to barley is reserve wheat for baking, but there are other forces at work too. >But so did bean beer [...] arsenic and mercury beer and [...] roosters > So, Reinheitsgebot had a dual purpose. Heavy metals, vegetables and poultry don't belong in quality beer, but somehow others had no problem eliminating these w/o the RHG. The folks in N.Germany, Flanders & Burgundia were able to develop styles that include raw grains, sugars and various 'spices' beyond hops and there is no lack of quality there. RHG stifles creativity but does not result in demonstrably better quality ! >The good news is the Duke got the taxes which helped him regionalize the >government and develop currency ( which hadn't been around since Roman > times).[...]. I'd give that explanation a huge ?MAYBE?. Currency was not at all new; Bavaria minted it's own (or copies of those from other regions) since from about 1100 on, and Charlemagne tried a common currency earlier. Perhaps Dave is referring to the new(1495) German "common penny" which failed as a common currency. A little context is needed. By 1516 - the year RHG was enacted, there were huge and revolutionary forces at work. Gutenburg's new printing presses were multiplying like rabbits and aside from the classics, calendars and almanacs, the stuff coming off the presses was full of cynical satires of politicians, princes and the Church. 'Praise of Folly' by Erasmus, 'Ship of Fools' by Brandt, 'Letters of Obscure Men' Hutten and many less known works. One year after RHG, Luther in 1517 posts his 95 theses in Wittenberg to the north - condemning the Church for much the same reason as these satires. At about the a same time in Zurich ?and Geneva? the Anabaptists are formulating their complaints against the Church. The regrettable German history of religious intolerance in this era includes blaming Jews for nearly everything and suggestions that all their writings be burned appear in early publication. The last wave of plague is lifting in 1516. In 1517 Munich celebrates the end of the last round of the plague at Marienplatz with Schafflertanz (coopers' dance). Plague has hit Munich 12 times between 1349 thru 1497, (and the Jews of Munich are blamed with attendant severe hate campaigns). The "Holy Roman Empire" (not holy, Roman nor an empire according to Voltaire) is an odd political creature which encompasses almost all Germanic city-states and little else. It's headed by MaximilianI1 out of Austria. HR.Empire is a supra-governmental body above the level of the city-state. By 1100 or 1200 it's actually called the HR.Empire of the German nation (Heiliges Romisches Reich deutscher Nation) with a Kaiser(Caesar); the 1st Reich. By the late 1400s the HRE is falling apart, and then reconstituted with more power to the city-states when the Reichstag conference of Dukes and Electors meet at Worms in 1495 (Diet of Worms - more effective than Atkins ;^) where they formalize their relationships in new ways and establish a "common penny" for trade use. Max1 takes actions against the Turks and N.Italy and rebellious Swiss much of his impact is in introducing the Italian Renaissance to Germany which is reflected in Munich architecture. Tho' central Europe is considerably wealthier with the population decrease and increased trade after the worst of the plagues - it is also increasingly humanist and rejecting of centralized power and the costs of government. The guild system create middle class of sorts that insists on power. Some tax revolts occur in this era. At this time Munich was a considerable city, tho' a village by modern standards (pop 13,500 in 1505). Albert4 ruled Bavaria till 1508. He made Munich the duchy capital ~1503 and residence of the rulers and started the building of the official residence which was based in style on the Florentine Palazzo Pitti. His successor Wilhelm4 enacts the RHG in 1516. There is probably a tax connection for RHG, but it's very complicated. Cloisters traditionally were the brewers and this was still very common ~1500, and the Cloisters are immune to taxation on beer. Secular commercial brewing was also common. Spaten brewery traces it's origin to a small 1397 Munich brewery for example. Most skilled production outside cloisters in this era involved guilds which divided workers in to classes of professionals, craftsmen and laborers. These class based systems inevitably lead to social unrest. The guilds also wield tremendous political power and a monopoly over the goods. Was Willy4 trying to extract more taxes from beer by limiting it's price ? Hard to believe that would work. It's a price ceiling! Maybe he was trying to discourage the Cloisters from making super-premium exotic beers and charging more for these than for common beers ! Maybe he was trying to limit the alternate use of wheat and such. I don't know but it makes little sense without much more detail on the competition & pricing. In general Cloister brewing was discouraged and disadvantaged by government in this era since it paid no tax ... so few Kloister brews survive. >With fewer ingredients to control and centralization of beer production > [...] the beer quality improved. >As a result of the stabilization of the product and the organization to brew >it, beer brewing became predictable. The brewing industry was the origin of >modern process technology and developments in biology and chemistry. 3 centuries after RHG perhaps, but I don't believe it.. Modern control of the malting and kilning process didn't appear for centuries after RHG, and nonRHG regions IMO developed equally high quality product contemporaneously or even before RHG territory. Also modern lager beers didn't exist widely outside Bavaria till the mid-1800s when this magical yeast was 1/ understood to be necessary for fermentation and 2/ this trade-secret yeast was extracted from a Bavarian Cloister. Modern Bavarian styles cannot generally be said to have coalesced till 2+ centuries after RHG ! BTW lager yeast is said to have come to Bavaria from Bohemia in the 1500s - after RHG ! -more to follow Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 16:52:53 From: "C.D. Pritchard" <cdp at chattanooga.net> Subject: Re: dip tubes & Goodbye glass Chris Mikkelson asked how to cornie shorten dip tubes. A Dremel MotoTool fitted with a cut-off wheel makes quick work of this. Finish the end with a grinding wheel then a buffing wheel/SS compound. I second Chris' recommendation on using cornies as secondary fermenters. A cornie with a shortened dip tube and the plastic tip from a racking cane fitted to its end makes a nice secondary fermenter. the keg can still be used later as a dispensing keg by fitting a piece of 1/4" ID vinyl tubing on the end of the dip tube to restore it to normal length. It's a tight fit, so, heat the end of the tubing in hot water before fitting it on the end of the dip tube. A smidgen of keg lube helps. - ----- Bev Blackwood asked about alternatives to glass carboys. I use modified 5 gal. cornie kegs as primary fermenters. They are fitted with a 1/2" blow-off port, an adjustable depth racking tube and an internal temperature sensor and heat exchanger for cooling (or heating). Details are at: http://home.highertech.net/~cdp/kegferm/kegferm.htm The only things I've missed after switching from glass carboys to cornies is watching the yeast work in the primary and the brew clear in the secondary. Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 02/16/04, by HBD2HTML v1.2 by KFL
webmaster@hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96