---

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


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

          Northern  Brewer, Ltd. Home Brew Supplies
Visit http://www.northernbrewer.com  to show your appreciation!
               Or call them at 1-800-681-2739

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


Contents:
  Refractometer vs. Hydrometer... And MORE! (Bev Blackwood II)
  Eating Hops (Thomas Rohner)
  Re: Rennerian co-ordinates (Jeff Renner)
  Re: Bicentenary All Grain Brew... (Jeff Renner)
  RE: Eating Hops ("Doug Hurst")
  Refractometers anyone ? ("steve.alexander")


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*           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: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 22:39:41 -0600
From: Bev Blackwood II <bdb2 at bdb2.com>
Subject: Refractometer vs. Hydrometer... And MORE!

So many interesting threads, so little time...

> Hydrometers are a cast-iron pain in the *ss to use.  I could never be
> bothered to take regular readings with one.  The refractometer is so
> much easier to use that it's no big deal to track gravity from pre- 
> boil
> to the keg.

I'll second that.
Although, what I do is use the Refractometer on brew day and double  
check with the Hydrometer at the end of the day.  My understanding is  
that once fermentation begins, Refractometers are pretty much  
useless.  I use hydrometers after day 1 of fermentation.  My freezer  
is sufficient to cool my samples to get accurate results and I always  
enjoy tasting the results after the gravity reading!

> Subject: Bicentenary All Grain Brew...
> Yes, the 200th all grain brew is coming up!  I started brewing in 1977

Hmmmm... I'm getting ready for brew #100, and I started in 1998... So  
I get to #200 in 2014... :-)

> Steve, I don't understand why you want to monitor the fermentation
> progress continuously at all, let alone with great precision and
> accuracy; it seems a very invasive activity to me.

I'd have to agree... the beauty of a clear fermentation vessel is the  
visual confirmation of the quality of the fermentation... If it's  
blowing the top off, you KNOW it's going to do well.  On the other  
hand, that 1/2 inch layer of foam that never grows could be a sign  
you need to be paying closer attention.  Granted, if you're keen to  
stop fermentation somewhere between OG and the yeast's notion of FG,  
you'll have to choose your moment by taking constant readings.  But I  
can't help but be concerned that every time the stopper comes out of  
the carboy to take a sample, you're inviting an infection.

 -BDB2

Bev D. Blackwood II
Brewsletter Editor
The Foam Rangers
http://www.foamrangers.com



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 11:45:55 +0100
From: Thomas Rohner <t.rohner at bluewin.ch>
Subject: Eating Hops

Hello All

in the hop producing regions like here around lake constance (Tettnang 
in Germany and Stammheim in Switzerland) it's a seasonal treat.
It's made in different ways, for example like asparagus tips. If you can 
read german, there is a very good cooking page.
http://www.chefkoch.de
You have to search for "Hopfensprossen". (hop sprouts)
There are a couple of recipes.
(We just made our second batch of "Sauerkraut" yesterday)

Cheers  Thomas



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 09:25:30 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <jsrenner at umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Rennerian co-ordinates

"simon vogel" <vogelsimon at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Jeff's new address noted -does this mean we've all moved as well ?

No, just a virtual move to a new email address for me.  I decided to  
take advantage of the University of Michigan's offer to alumni of a  
free email address (not an account).  It is just redirected to my old  
comcast address.   But I figure this should be the last address  
change for me (until they come up with something different from  
email).  If I change ISPs, I'll just change the redirection, and it  
will be transparent.

I've had a few inquiries asking if I were now teaching at U of M.  No  
 - I was lucky to manage a degree from them!

Jeff

- ---
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, jsrennerATumichDOTedu
"One never knows, do one?"  Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943
***Please note new address***






Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 10:42:43 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <jsrenner at umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Bicentenary All Grain Brew...

  "Cave, Jim" <Cave at psc.org> wrote from an undisclosed location  
(psc.org suggests Vancouver, BC?):


> Yes, the 200th all grain brew is coming up!  I started brewing in  
> 1977 when many of you were in diapers ... My first all grain brew was
> on March 28th, 1991
>

Congratulations.  I'm just about four years ahead of you on total,  
but managed all-grain as early as 1979, thanks to Dave Line's Big  
Book of Brewing.  There aren't too many of us who have stuck with  
this great hobby as long as we have.


> I would suggest that I would once again brew a barley wine.
>

A most logical choice.  You don't say why your 100th brew barley wine  
was a disappointment.  Perhaps if we knew, we could suggest  
ingredients better.  I once made a disappointing one from all pale  
malt, and have decided that with my water (I did remove the  
bicarbonates) and/or brewing techniques, I need a bit of dark malt in  
pale ales of whatever strength.  Otherwise, they seem flabby.  An  
exception was an all pale malt historic IPA  at 1.070 and a calculated  
100+ IBU in which I used my bicarbonaceous water without removing the  
bicarbonate but added a whole lot of gypsum.  This turned out fine.

Regardless of your grain and hop bill, consider your water, too.  I  
think that a barley wine can use a fair amount of gypsum, at least  
with my water.


> I will make a normal pale ale the week before and use much of that  
> yeast for the barley wine, so consideration of a
> starter in unnecessary.
>

I suggest that even with freshly repitched yeast that you rejuvenate  
it by feeding it, preferably with a low gravity (1.025) starter wort  
with added nutrients and continuous aeration with filtered air and on  
a stir plate if you have one.  It's my experience that this boosts  
the yeast's performance, which is especially important in a high  
gravity beer.

You might consider using some proprietary yeast supplement as well in  
the wort itself - Servomyces, Fermaid, etc.

But my main suggestion is that you consider brewing an English style  
bw and do a true secondary bottle fermentation using Brettanomyces  
claussenii, now available from WhiteLabs.  See my post http://hbd.org/ 
hbd/archive/4608.html#4608-9.

While Brettanomyces spp. are in general avoided like hell in wineries  
(N. Italian wines like Barolo are an exception), they are necessary  
for many Belgian beers (B. lambicus and B. bruxellensis) and were a  
part of the flavor profile of traditional English stock ales (B.  
claussenii) until about WWI.

I've appended some relevant excerpts from a paper about this wild  
yeast in traditional English stock ale below.  Try to get past the  
flavor descriptions in the first sentence. ;-)

Jeff

========

What is "Brett" (Brettanomyces) Flavor?

A Preliminary Investigation
J. L. Licker, T. E. Acree, and T. Henick-Kling,
Cornell University,
Department of Food Science & Technology,
New York State Agricultural Experiment Station, Geneva, NY, 14456
PRESENTED
American Chemical Soc. symposium , 213th National Meeting, San  
Francisco, CA, April 1997.
PUBLISHED
Chemistry of Wine Flavor.
A. L. Waterhouse and S. E. Ebeler, eds., ACS symposium series, volume  
714, 1998, 96-115
(c)1999 American Chemical Society.

Barnyard, horse sweat, Band-aid, burnt plastic, wet animal, wet  
leather:  all have been used to describe an aroma or flavor  
characteristics in some wines deemed "Bretty".  The organisms cited  
for the production of this character are the yeasts of the genus  
Brettanomyces and Dekkera.   In the literature, 4- ethyl phenol and 4- 
ethyl guaicol are the identified volatile phenolic compounds  
associated with this off-odor in wine.  Included in this report is a  
review of "Brett" flavor and results from our recent study on wines  
identified by their respective wine makers as having "Brett"  
character .  In wines with "Brett" character, sensory profiles showed  
an increase in plastic odors and a decrease in fruit odors.

I.  LITERATURE REVIEW

A.  The Beginning of "Brettanomyces"

N. Hjelte Claussen, then director of the Laboratory of the New  
Carlsberg Brewery, in Copenhagen, Denmark, introduced the word  
"Brettanomyces" at a special meeting of the Institute of Brewing in  
April 1904 (1).  Claussen proved that a type of English beer known as  
stock beer underwent a slow secondary fermentation after the  
completion of the primary fermentation.  The secondary fermentation  
was induced by inoculating the wort with a pure strain of  
Brettanomyces:  a non-Saccharomyces, Torula-like asporogeneous (non- 
spore
forming) yeast.  The flavors produced during the secondary  
fermentation were characteristic of the strong British beers of that  
time.  Claussen chose the name "Brettanomyces" for the close  
connection between the yeast and the British brewing industry.

In 1903 Claussen obtained a patent in England for his process of  
adding Brettanomyces yeast "to impart the characteristic flavour and  
condition of English beers to bottom-fermentation beers and for  
improving English beers" (3).  At that time it was unknown how the  
wine-like flavor developed in British beers.  Brewers used the method  
developed by Hansen in 1883 for the inoculation of pure yeasts in  
bottom fermented beers; however, they were unsuccessful in their  
attempts to use the method to recreate the flavors of well- 
conditioned top fermented English stock beers.  These were stored in  
cask, vat or bottle for more than a week after racking.

Unfortunately for Claussen's discovery, the strength of British beers  
began to decline, in large part due to excise tax increases (4-7) .   
Low attenuated beers that forgo storage after racking (running beers)  
replaced the stock beers along with the associated flavor  
characteristic of this British national beverage (7)   Claussen (1)   
noted a beer must reach a certain degree of attenuation to receive  
the benefits of a "pure flavoured product"; otherwise, the low  
attenuated beer "thus infected (with Brettanomyces) possesses a  
peculiar impure and sweet mawkish taste, whilst at the same time an  
English character becomes apparent to the nose and a very similar  
impure taste is the result" (1).

C.  Flavors Associated with Brettanomyces in Beer

"English character".  Claussen (1) stressed "a general rule cannot be  
given for all cases, but the quality of Brettanomyces to be added  
must be regulated by local circumstances, more especially by the time  
the beer has to be stored and by the temperature
of the storing room."  A Brettanomyces inoculation with a wort of  
1055 specific gravity and a room temperature of 24-27 C would achieve  
the "English" character.  Schimwell confirmed these conditions:  a  
1.060 specific gravity was essential to achieve a "vinous" wine-like  
flavour (6); in contrast, a beer under 1.050 would produce an  
unpalatable and turbid beer with an objectionable, insipid flavor and  
aroma (77).  As Shimwell (6) noted, Brettanomyces can behave "as a  
desirable organism in one beer and an undesirable one at one and the  
same brewery".


- ---
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, jsrennerATumichDOTedu
"One never knows, do one?"  Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943
***Please note new address***





Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 09:57:45 -0600
From: "Doug Hurst" <dougbeer2000 at hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: Eating Hops


Puterbaugh Farms (aka Hops Direct) sells pickled hop shoots:

http://www.hopsdirect.com/detail.src?SKU=HSPIHS&Category=Pickled%20Hop%20Shoots

I've never tried them but I can't imagine there really all that tasty, but 
who knows.  And what about those sharp prickly hairs that form on the hop 
bines?  Ouch!

They also carry various blends of hop tea.  That sounds more appealing to me 
as long as it's not steeped too long or too hot.  I bet the tea has a great 
aroma.

Oh, and of course I'm NAJASCYYY


Doug Hurst
Chicago, IL
[197.5, 264.8] Apparent Rennerian




Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 19:24:10 -0500
From: "steve.alexander" <-s at adelphia.net>
Subject: Refractometers anyone ?

Bob Tower wrote:

 >I'm surprised nobody's mentioned refractometers yet. They're cheaper
 >than you think (I bought mine from an eBay seller for ~$50 shipped, and

Only cheap refractometers are cheaper than you think.  Here's a word to
the wise - never buy an optical instrument based on a low price.   A good
tool is a joy to use, but a fussy cheap one with fuzzy line width  is a bane
till the day it hits the  trash bin.  The optics I've seen on some of 
the cheesy
Chinese instruments  are dismal.

> For beer, you want one that reads 0-32 deg. Brix, and has automatic
> temperature compensation.  Once you verify a 0 deg. Brix reading with
> distilled water (you can tweak it if necessary), you can pull a sample
> at any stage of the brewing process, drop it on the business end of the
> refractometer, and get a reading.  ProMash has a built-in utility
> that'll determine true specific gravity from refractometer readings
> taken at any point after the yeast is pitched, given an initial
> (pre-pitching) reading.



No - wrong - not really.   You are missing the whole issue.
Refractometers measure optical index of refraction - they DO NOT
and never can measure Brix.   You can *impute* a Brix value if you
*assume* you're reading .... a sugar solution, or wine must .. and you
have an appropriate calculation or scale.  This is what the "brix"
scale on your refractometer is - a calculation from IR to Brix based
on *assumptions*. ProMash must do this too - make up a calculation
under the assumption that you have maltose and ethanol or some other
simplified model of wort/beer.   That's swell until you add
fructose adjunct or something with some optical activity ....

Similarly hydrometers measure bouyancy and then - with recalculations
as demonstrated you can impute density, then gravity which at least
has a lot of characterization for wort extract.

As for refractometers - yes they are a nice tool, and happily only
use a drop of wort per reading.   Sadly the resolution of a $100
refractometer or even a $1000 one is just as dismal as a hydrometer
and they are reading a quantity (index of refraction) which is more
tenuously connected to fermentation than a hydrometers SG.  The $100
ATC refract's at Cole-Parmer have +-0.2 Brix accuracy/resolution
for the 32 Brix scale.  That's just a hair better than a +-1SG degree
accurate hydrometer.

I seriously doubt you could resolve 0.2 brix on most $100
refractometers, but then again my eyesight is crummy.

> Hydrometers are a cast-iron pain in the *ss to use.  I could never be
> bothered to take regular readings with one.


Right, but you are paying $100 for convenience NOT accuracy - and that's
not a bad deal, but it's not exactly what I am looking for.

 -S




Return to table of contents

---