---

	FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
		Digest Janitor: pbabcock at hbd.org


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

                  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 *********


Contents:
  Re: New Mashing Ideas (Fred Johnson)
  Racking tip ("Jason Pavento")
  Subject: Re: Drying green hops (John Oconnell)
  A Bear of Discriminating Taste (Tidmarsh Major)
  The hows and whys of salvaging a brew (Mike.Szwaya)
  Re: Listen to your yeast (Derric)
  CO2 Regulator Problems (Richard Feight)
  Re: New Mashing Ideas (from internet post) (Tim Howe)


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*           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.

LOOKING TO BUY OR SELL USED EQUIPMENT? Please do not post about it here. Go
instead to http://homebrewfleamarket.com and post a free ad there.

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.

JANITORs on duty: Pat Babcock (pbabcock at hbd dot org), Jason Henning,
                  and Spencer Thomas



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


Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 07:23:46 -0400
From: Fred Johnson <FLJohnson at portbridge.com>
Subject: Re: New Mashing Ideas

These are just a few  comments regarding Charles' (Boyer?) post of some 
controversial brewing practices discussed somewhere on the net.

First off, it would be appropriate for the author of the information 
quoted to be identified. Perhaps we could engage that author in some 
more discussion on the HBD.

The author addresses the source of the perception of "rich body" in 
beers, with the premise that dextrins have been believed (falsely) to 
be the source. He describes an experiment in which dextrins were added 
to beer and no one could detect a difference in body and states that 
the source of perception of body is unknown. But then the author 
concludes, "With the fully modified malts available to us today, it is 
pointless to do anything other than a single step infusion mash", to 
which I have one question. Who in the world believes that the ONLY 
thing step mashing does is produce more dextrins in the beer?  Granted 
the experiment may indicate that increased dextrins is not the source 
of the perceived "rich body", but to conclude that step mashing is not 
necessary to produce rich body based only upon the cited experiment is 
not reasonable. I'm not saying he is wrong. I'm just saying that there 
is little evidence to believe he is correct.

The author goes on to describe a simple, 20-minute, single infusion 
mash and contends that longer mashes can only be detrimental. Perhaps 
this is so, but the author's argument only begs the question of what 
causes the perception of "rich body" in beers, which the author admits 
is simply not known. Nowhere is  the recommended short mash compared by 
a taste test to the step mash.

Hey, I, too, want to believe I can reduce my mash time to 20 minutes, 
but please give me some data to convince me it works!

Fred L Johnson
Apex, North Carolina, USA



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 06:08:12 -0700
From: "Jason Pavento" <jpavento at entravision.com>
Subject: Racking tip

On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 in HOMEBREW Digest #4584 Steve Smith
<sasmith at in-tch.com> writes about racking when there's
floating fruit and/or hops:
"Several times I tried to rack, which resulted in continued
plugging of the racking cane, and I got tired of rinsing
out my mouth and lips with Maker's Mark (which is much
better sipped slowly) to lessen the chance of contamination
by mouth when restarting the siphon."

Hey, here is what I do to start a siphon without "having"
to resort to bourbon: Get a turkey baster. Take off the
bulb at the end and sanitize the body. You can then stick
the 'pointy' end in the end of your siphon tube and suck
through the end the bulb used to be on. Once there is
enough liquid in the tube you can pull off the baster and
point the tube into the fermenter/keg. This way the beer
never flows past tubing that has touched your dirty mouth
and all you have to sanitize is one end of a turkey baster.
Cool? Now, where is that Jack Single Barrel - I'm
thirsty...


Jason Pavento
Brewin' Rehab Homebrew at
The Boilover Brauhaus
Milford MA 01757


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 09:59:18 -0400
From: John Oconnell <joconnell at martinriley.com>
Subject: Subject: Re: Drying green hops

>>>I just finished watching an episode of Alton Brown's "Good Eats"
in which he dried fresh herbs using whole-house furnace filters and a box
fan.

Me, too.  I saw the episode last year and have done one dried batch this
summer.
I can't vouch for results in brewing yet (they're still in the freezer) but
even using plain woven filters, and setting one layer of hops out on each
filter face, the whole batch dried nicely after about 36 hours (more hops
dried in a more humid place).  They looked like all the dried whole hops
I've ever seen.

I plan on picking again soon.  The only complaint is that 30 minutes of
picking 
resulted in about two ounces of dried hops!  Obviously I'm not taking this
activity seriously enough.  

John O'Connell
Atlanta


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 10:20:33 -0400
From: Tidmarsh Major <tidmarsh at bellsouth.net>
Subject: A Bear of Discriminating Taste

A bear in California seems to have a distinct preference for Rainer
beer over Busch (Rainer's not available in these parts, so I can't 
comment on just how discriminating said bear is, however):

"He drank the Rainier and wouldn't drink the Busch beer," said Lisa
Broxson, bookkeeper at the campground and cabins resort east of Mount
Baker.

Fish and Wildlife enforcement Sgt. Bill Heinck said the bear did try
one can of Busch, but ignored the rest.

"He didn't like that (Busch) and consumed, as near as we can tell,
about 36 cans of Rainier."

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/186757_beerbear18.html

Tidmarsh Major
Tuscaloosa, Ala.




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 07:22:38 -0700
From: Mike.Szwaya at clark.wa.gov
Subject: The hows and whys of salvaging a brew

What a joy the HBD is back.  Much thanks to Pat & all others who helped out
to get the digest up and running.

I have a brew sitting in a carboy that pooped out early which I'd like to
salvage.  I'd like to not only know how to get things moving again but why I
should do the things I'll hopefully be recommended to do.

I have a 10 gal. all-grain batch of American Brown Ale  at  1.058 which was
pitched with 400 mL of Wyeast Kolsch.  The yeast is 2 generations old with
no prior ferment problems.  The 400 mL is unrinsed slurry from a previous
batch.  2 tsp. each of yeast energizer and nutrient were added.  It was
aerated for 1 hour using an aquarium pump, sanitary filter, and SS stone
imm. after knock-out.  It was then set in the basement where it took off
like a bomb within a few hours at 70-72F.  Within 1-2 days, activity stopped
and the fermentation head fell.  A week later I checked the gravity and it
was at 1.028.  It's been sitting there ever since doing nothing but getting
the stink eye every time I put my bike away in the basement.

I've read through some old HBD's that I've printed out and came up with more
questions than answers.

1. I obviously need to pitch more yeast.  How much more, assuming I have a
theoretical FG target of 1.014?  And do I need to do anything to it before
pitching?  How can I ensure that the yeast I pitch is up to the job?  I have
a healthy batch of lager yeast under lees that I can draw from another batch
I brewed that same day.  We're obviously not talking about a medal winner
here but something is better than nothing.  It's 90+ degrees in Portland and
I'm starting to get thirsty.

2. Any thoughts as to why it pooped out?  It had oxygen, nutrients, and
relatively ok temperatures.  Bad luck? Dumb luck?

3. Can anyone explain the difference between aerated wort and
aerated/oxygenated yeast that George Fix discussed?  I don't fully
understand how I can oxygenate my yeast, or even why I would want to.
However, in instances like this I suppose it would be useful since I can't
add O2 to the partially fermented wort/beer.

4. There was a discussion a while back in Nov '03 about flocculation where
Steve Alexander chanted "growing yeast never flocculate; flocculated yeast
never grow".  This was followed by a general statement that if growth
conditions are restored, both flocculation and attenuation will take care of
itself.  How can growth conditions be restored in a batch like this,
especially if I can't provide O2 to the existing yeast now settled on the
bottom?  Backing up a bit, something, and maybe it wasn't the O2, was a
limiting factor.  How can I tell what it was/is and correct it?

Thanks for reading.

Mike Szwaya
Portland, OR

"It's a dog-eat-dog world and I'm wearing Milk Bone underwear." - Norm


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 07:45:05 -0700 (PDT)
From: Derric <derric1961 at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Listen to your yeast


> Heard the end of an interesting report from NPR on
> the way home this evening. Scientists at UCLA are
> listening to the sounds made by yeast.
                                                      
                         > 
>  
http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=3859762
                                                      
                         
I heard the story too.  The interesting thing to me
was
that they said the noise increased when the
temperature
increased (ie. the yeast sped up) and that the yeast
"screamed" when a LOT of alcohol was added and the
noise
quit when a chemical was added that stopped yeast
activity (killed them?).




		


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 08:42:17 -0700 (PDT)
From: Richard Feight <richardfeight at yahoo.com>
Subject: CO2 Regulator Problems

Can anyone explain why my CO2 regulator pressure valve
hole near the screw regulating pressure blows CO2 out
when I turn the CO2 on to presurize my keg? 

Background: This occurred after I found my CO2 empty
one day due to a leak. After fixing the leak, i
pressured the kegs and became nervous about leaving
the CO2 on so I turned it off. The next time i went to
pressurize the keg....CO2 pressure blew out the CO2
regulator hole near the screw. I finished the kegs
quickly before they went flat ;) but am hesitant to
buy another keg until i figure out the solution to my
problem. Could it simply be because my keg has too
much pressure? If i buy another half barrell and
release the pressure, will it pressurize a usual
rather than release the through the hole?...Help!!!

Thirsty in Michigan
Rich


		


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 20:19:04 -0700
From: Tim Howe <howe at execulink.com>
Subject: Re: New Mashing Ideas (from internet post)

Very interesting post. While I can't comment on FWH as I've never attempted 
it, I will comment:

>1) First Wort Hopping:
>
>retention. The current technique is to begin hop charges 10 minutes after
>the onset of a vigorous boil. Weihenstephan's professors contend that if

Interesting point. I've recently adopted the idea of using the "boil" hops 
to calm the frothiness early in the boil. I've also recently noticed 
reduced head retention. Going forward, I'm going to adopt the 10 minute wait.

>2) Step mashing as a method of increasing dextrines to increase the
>viscosity (mouthfeel) of beer:
>
>achieved much faster than once believed. The current recommendations for
>all fully modified malts is a mash at 68~70C/154~158 with a pH of 5.3 for
>only 20 minutes prior to recirculation until the runnings are clear. Then
>sparge with 168 degree water, stopping the runnings at 2.5P/1.010SG. Then
>top up to kettle volume. Running beyond this gravity floor will only

I discovered the 20 min mash in a roundabout way. I adopted batch sparging 
earlier than most, and discovered that a rest was required after stirring 
the sparge water into the mash tun. While I never determined precisely how 
long a rest was required, I did discover that a 10 min rest was 
insufficient, while a 20 min rest was not, so it has been my practice for 
the last 6 years to rest my sparge 20 min. My theory, now apparently 
confirmed, was that when I stirred in the sparge water, I liberated more 
starches that needed time to convert. I will note, however, that I have not 
tried to back up the primary mash from 60 minutes, although I have been 
considering a rest at mashout.

>3) Wort Aeration:
>
>If possible, don't! The reason is that it is not the wort that needs the
>oxygen, it is the yeast. By oxgenating the wort instead of the yeast
>starter, it will cause an over production of cells due to the excessive
>oxygen presence. This then leads to the production of unwanted esters and
>higher alcohols that will compromise beer flavor.

I've had good results with the primitive "splash" method, for the first 
pitch of a yeast. Further discussion however is needed when it comes to 
re-pitching. It would seem to me that oxygenating a wort where the yeast 
has been re-pitched from a primary would be mandatory, unless you wanted to 
rescue a little yeast, and go through the starter routine again.

Cheers,

Tim Howe
London, Ont 



Return to table of contents

---