HOMEBREW Digest #5302 Wed 27 February 2008

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

		Digest Janitor: pbabcock at hbd.org


                     Your Business Name Here
    Visit http://hbd.org "Sponsor the HBD"  to find out how!
    Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********

DONATE to the Home Brew Digest. Home Brew Digest, Inc. is a 
501(c)3 not-for-profit organization under IRS rules (see the
FAQ at http://hbd.org for details of this status). Donations
can be made by check to Home Brew Digest mailed to:

HBD Server Fund
PO Box 871309
Canton Township, MI 48187-6309

or by paypal to address serverfund@hbd.org. DONATIONS of $250 
or more will be provided with receipts. SPOSORSHIPS of any 
amount are considered paid advertisement, and may be deductible
under IRS rules as a bsuiness expense. Please consult with your 
tax professional, then see http://hbd.org for available 
sponsorship opportunities.

  Smoked grains (Nate Wahl)
  Re: oxygen and fatty acids and sterols for dummies ("steve.alexander")
  Brew Pub (Pete Limosani)
  RE: Duvel Yeast... (Jordan Wilberding)
  CARBOY Shamrock Open 2008 - Call for entries and judges (Mike Dixon)
  RE: Duvel Yeast... ("Tim R")
  Re: Smoked grains (stencil)
  Re: Digest #5301; Duvel yeast ("Alan Meeker")

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 05:20:55 -0500 From: Nate Wahl <oogiewawa at verizon.net> Subject: Smoked grains Tom Puskar asked about smoking grain. After several less than satisfactory attempts at it, here's what I came up with that worked. I was after an Alaskan Smoked Porter clone and had the recipe very close, but I tried smoking grain in the smoker, sans anything else in there. Nope, no smoke. In a bag, on a wire mesh, in shallow pans, didn't seem to matter. This last time I took one of my cheapie SS pots, the smallest, 1 gallon size, and put enough alder chips to cover the bottom about 1/2" deep. I then made 4 layered aluminum foil "false bottoms" for it, the first two large enough to snugly come most of the way up the sides of the pot. A fork was used to punch a bunch of holes through the foil on the bottom. It got filled with 3# of dampened base malt (out of a 22# grainbill for 10 gallons.) The pot went on a small propane grill, and I ran it on medium until some smoke started to come out from under the lid, then turned it way down just to keep the small whisps appearing, and held it there for about an hour. When peeked at, the smoke was coming up evenly throughout the grain, a key effect that I hadn't gotten before any other way. I scooped out about 3/4 of the pot until I got to where the grain had started to get some color, and carefully removed everything that wasn't beyond a medium brown; the dark brown and black bits were left behind. Almost no light passes through the beer the way the recipe is already, so I didn't need the color, and didn't want any scorched flavors. The grain I lost wasn't significant. The wood chips below were almost entirely consumed. The beer finished with a nice, definitely noticable, but not over the top smokey aroma and flavor, perhaps just a touch more smokey than the target beer, but its hard to remember since we can't get it here. I'd love to do a side-by-side. I'd shy away from making the malt with anything else in a smoker. Wetting the grain seems to help. Next time I think I'll somehow make more of a gap between the chips and the grain to keep the heat away and prevent scorching the bottom layer, like maybe a layer of crumpled foil nestled between the other layers. Please let us know what you come up with, Tom. Regards, Nate Wahl aka Oogie Wa Wa Oak Harbor, Ohio 64.3, 145.8 Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 05:33:11 -0500 From: "steve.alexander" <-s at roadrunner.com> Subject: Re: oxygen and fatty acids and sterols for dummies Raj B Apte notes ... > I've been mostly tuning out the discussions of adding oil > to higher gravity beers to provide UFAs because I thought > that they don't apply to open fermentation. > So, is it reasonable to assume my yeast can make what they > need from the oxygen available at the surface of the wort? > An open ferment (through the log growth period ~= krausen loss) is a less problematic approach than adding oils and sterols to normal and modestly high grav wort. I doubt that open fermentation would be sufficient for barleywine and stronger brews. Let's keep -S's first law of fermentation in sight; Making good beer and making healthy yeast are two different things ! We must always consider the flavor consequence and not just the yeast performance. Open fermentation, O2 addition or the addition of UFAs should dramatically reduce the ester level in the resulting beer. That may be good or bad depending on beer style. The sterols&UFAs or O2 from open fermentation, create better cell membranes so less of certain fusels result, which is universally a positive thing for flavor(IMO). Adding much oxygen once ethanol production begins runs the risk of creating staling aldehydes. Fortunately the actively fermenting yeast mop up residual oxygen rapidly and even drive some of the staling oxidation reactions in reverse. Yeast which have access to oxygen rapidly convert precursors to sterol and this seems to reduce the storage capability of yeast - they will autolyze sooner. I already mentioned that in studies yeast are very effective at mopping up fatty acids and n-acyl-glycerides in wort, but any residual UFAs from oil additions will ruin the head. Given all the caveats, I still think that open fermentation up until the fermentation slows can be used very effectively with little risk. WRT open fermentation procedures ... Wort is rapidly depleted of oxygen, often within minutes of pitching. It that point the you are dependent on small amounts of atmospheric oxygen diffusing across the air/anaerobic-wort interface. The rate is low, but this is good since we want the to get a little O2 to the yeast and not oxidize wort components. So total O2 ingress is a function of the wort open surface area and the yeast content is usually proportional to volume. For more O2 ingress we need to select shallower open fermenters. I wonder if very strong beers could be fermented in more shallow open fermenters. Matt Wallace (among others) ask about which sterols used to feed yeast. > A very cursory web search shows a few different sterol tablets for > sale, the only one I saw with a more detailed ingredient list was > pegged as "beta sitosterol with campesterol and stigmasterol" > Unsupplemented yeast contain <ergosterol,episterol,stigasterol,fecosterol, methyl-zymosterol,lanosterol> in order of concentrations. I have a paper from BRI that shows that these plant sterols extracted from malt are largely modified by yeast before being incorporated into yeast cell walls. The addition (mostly barley situsterol) resulted in yeast with a little situsterol (not present w/o the addition) but the other yeast sterol's relative concentrations were only moderately altered by the addition. Total sterol level was higher. Some true-anaerobic organisms must obtain all of their sterols from other oxygen consuming organisms. Yeast are facultative anaerobes and can live for several generations without access to oxygen. It makes sense for organisms like these to use any sterols in their environment. I wouldn't worry greatly about which plant source sterols you add to a fermenter to enhance yeast performance; yeast can *probably* use any of these. > All this does put me in a mind to experiment, though. > .... > Leave one fermenter as-is, add sterols to one fermenter, and add both > sterols and an oil/lecithin mix to the third, and see where it gets, > apparent attenuation wise... > Great idea. You do find similar/related experiments in the brewing lit, especially w/ UFA additions but you will have to determine the effectiveness of the specific sterol addition. > dried out yeast husks, might these be a source of sterols for yeast in > the wort? > Freshly autolyzed yeast are a variable source, and I have doubts about the content in yeast hulls. I have experimented with sterol, oil and magnesium additions to starter wort several years ago - and all are effective. Also adding amino acid additions to aerobic cultures(which is more promising for yeast mass accumulation). I would personally prefer to restrict additions of oils and significant amounts of free O2 to starter cultures where you can control the result. I am not an avid fan of "huge" beers and rarely brew above 15P, but you do need extraordinary techniques to attenuate a 20P or 35P monster. Even so, adding lots of "fat yeast" to the hi-grav fermenter may be a better approach than directly adding fat. You can do all sorts of things to a starter (like adding sterol, UFA, or more easily free-O2) that are great for making healthy yeast but potentially bad for beer flavor. Then you can discard the "starter beer" and pitch the healthy yeast. I am less concerned w/ the quality impact of a sterol or magnesium addition to a hi-grav fermenter. I'm not discounting the effectiveness of oil & sterol additions to the hi-grav fermenter on yeast performance, but I am concerned about the effect on beer quality. It requires experimentation. Bob Hall notes ... > I've never been a chemist (or pretended to be one), but this thread > reminded me of an off-hand comment made by Dr. Keith Villa of Coors during > his presentation in Denver last June ... something to the effect of 'if you > want to kick-start your yeast, toss in a dollop of peanut butter." ... > Is peanut butter a viable source of > fatty acids and sterols for yeast development? > I see peanut butter is about 0.1% sterol and 50% fat (40% UFA) by mass. So in the original ~28P, 20L~=5gal example you'd want the UFAs from ~100gm(3.5 oz) and the sterol from 500gm(1.1lb) of peanut butter ! Is that why Grants PA tastes that way ? In the dubious attempt to reduce the LDL choleSTEROL level in the human population, companies like Unilever are on they verge of marketing margerines consisting of PUFAs with plant sterol additions. These may be close to the ideal yeast supplement, tho' the hydrogenated solidified PUFAs are problematic. -S Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 07:03:55 -0500 From: Pete Limosani <peteLimo at comcast.net> Subject: Brew Pub Hi, Folks, What I'm about to discuss is commercial in nature and may not fit in perfectly with the tenor of this forum. So, being that I've been an HBD'er and occasional contributor for about 10 years, I'll ask your forgiveness in advance and move forward. If the collective feels that this discussion really doesn't belong here, I'll quickly take it off line. However, I believe that this may be the best place to find what I'm looking for, and I also believe the topic may be interesting as many home brewers have dreamed this dream. I'm a real estate developer in central Connecticut. Last year I bought a 20,000 square foot building and set out to create a community for performing artists, especially professional bands and aspiring musicians. In the building, we are creating 35 sound-controlled studios for bands to call home and rehearse in. We are building out a recording studio that I've rented to a professional outfit. We created retail space for a music store. And we created a performance hall with a nice stage. The performance hall was originally conceived as a place for young talent to begin their performing careers. It'll hold about 150 people in the audience. We started out renting for private functions, then I met a promoter. Now, I have three shows a week booked until September. Most of the shows are bands, but we also have comedy shows and some plays. Right now, the shows are BYOB. I keep thinking that, if I could brew a little more beer, I have a captive market! The mayor likes our project so much he told me he'd help me get a beer & wine license. My posse is now trying to convince me that I should open a brew pub in the performance hall. Needless to say, for a long-time home brewer, it's a very exciting prospect. However, I do not have the bandwidth to make that quantity of beer right now, nor do I have the experience to make sure that, every time a bartender opens a tap, great beer comes out. If I do this, I will need help. My questions are thus: 1) Could it make financial sense to open a brew pub that serves 150 people 3 nights a week? My insurance company has frowned on the prospect of putting a commercial kitchen in the building and we don't have a lot of space for it, so food service will be minimal. Also, my insurance agent has hinted that the premiums for liquor establishments are so high it might be tough for a place that is only open 3 nights a week. I asked why my premium wouldn't be 3/7ths of the normal premium, but I guess they don't think that way. Unlike a normal bar where folks come in and out all night, admission to these shows is with prepurchased tickets, so 150 will be the limit for patrons in a night, but they'll stick around for most of the night. 2) Are there home-brewers out there that took this step and succeeded? .. and failed? Would you be willing to tell me your story of why you succeeded or failed? 3) Are there Brew Masters out there who know how to make sure that every time a bartender opens a tap, good beer comes out? Are you willing to talk about your experiences with me? Again, sorry for the commercial nature of this post, but right now I'm looking for advice from folks who may have done this, know someone who's done this, etc. and I couldn't think of a better place to start. Thank you. /Pete/ Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 22:31:06 -0600 From: Jordan Wilberding <diginux at gmail.com> Subject: RE: Duvel Yeast... As far as I have found out, Duvel does indeed use a different yeast for bottling than for fermentation. According to the book "brew like a MONK", White Labs WLP570 and Wyeast 1388 are derived from Duvel's yeast. You just need to make sure to ferment at the correct temperature of the yeast. It is definitely possible to culture the yeast from a bottle of Duvel, but most people recommend using one of the two yeasts mentioned above. Also, the book mentions that the water is "quite soft and free of iron", which can of course also contribute to the flavor. On a side note, would you be willing to publish your recipe? I would be interested in brewing it. Thanks! Jordan Wilberding Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 07:38:43 -0500 From: Mike Dixon <mpdixon at ipass.net> Subject: CARBOY Shamrock Open 2008 - Call for entries and judges Judging will take place in Raleigh, NC on March 15, 2008. If you can judge, please sign-up via the online registration form. 13th Annual CARBOY Shamrock Open http://hbd.org/carboy/shamrock.htm Entries are $6 and must be registered by Saturday, March 1. Entries must be delivered by Saturday, March 8. Cheers, Mike Dixon Wake Forest, NC http://www.ipass.net/mpdixon/ Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 07:00:29 -0600 From: "Tim R" <trunnette at gmail.com> Subject: RE: Duvel Yeast... Wyeast 1388 got me close to Duvel. I just did a side by side between my Belgian Golden Strong and Duvel and the largest differences were carbonation (Duvel at 4 volumes; mine at ~3) and mine was a little sweeter with a slightly stronger pear note. Could be freshness or CO2 impact or recipe/yeast of course. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 10:01:23 -0500 From: stencil <etcs.ret at verizon.net> Subject: Re: Smoked grains On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 00:03:44 -0500, in Homebrew Digest #5301 (February 26, 2008), Tom Puskar wrote: > > >1. Soak some two row grain for a little while (???) in water. I figure the >grain would absorb more smoky flavor is it was a bit damp. > I would skip this. Most bacon- and fish smokers agree that it's essential to offer a dry product to the smoke to avoid a harsh, acrid flavor. It's primarily the husk rather than the kernel that's going to take on the aroma, and you will have more problem keeping the effect from being overdone than otherwise (opinion\.) If you're used to using Bamberger Rauchmalz you know how very little is needed to have a flavor impact; your product will be *much* stronger. > >3. Add these to my smoker the next time I'm doing some ribs or pork >shoulder/butt. > It would be better to have a dedicated session; the hot and humid smoke of smoke cooking is inappropriate to flavor smoking. If you run the grain up over ca. 150F you will degrade the enzymes; if you're going to do that, then don't waste good brewing grain: use rice hulls or dried spent grain from a previous mash. >4. Smoke the grains until they look dry again or until they taste smokey. > If you want repeatability you'd be better off setting out tinfoil boats with 2- or 3-ounce charges of grain, and removing them at 10- or 15-minute intervals. > >[ .. ] Would I be better off just doing them on >a gas grill and adding mesquite chips to a smoker box? > This would permit running a cooler drier smoke. The key thing is, as with everything associated with homebrewing, to Do It and take notes. gds. stencil Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 11:46:47 -0500 From: "Alan Meeker" <alan.meeker at gmail.com> Subject: Re: Digest #5301; Duvel yeast Jim asked about Duvel yeast, I did a lot of reading years ago while trying to formulate a recipe to get as close as I could to Duvel, one of my favorite beers. Concerning the yeast, my recollection is that reports were mixed as to how many strains were used, whether there was a separate "bottling yeast" and which, if any, of the commercially available strains was authentic Duvel yeast. There were rumors that Wyeast 1388 was the (or a??) Duvel yeast, but on the whole I never saw anything that gave me great confidence that the answers to these questions were really known. Perhaps someone else on the HBD has some more solid information on this topic? At any rate, I have a Duvel clone that I am happy with. Through a lot of trial and error, what I now use is a blend of White Labs WLP570 (Belgian Golden) and, believe it or not, Wyeast's 2565 (Kolsch) strain. I find that including 2565 provides some Duvel-like characteristics that seem to me to be missing when using just the 570 alone. As far as culturing yeast from bottles is concerned, I think this is a fun thing to try but there is a possibility that you may not get what you are looking for. Largely this is because if you do get something to grow from a bottle sediment you have no way of knowing just what it is you have cultured. (i) If the brewery uses multiple yeasts you may only be getting one of them or you may get all the ones used in the blend but in the incorrect proportion to achieve the desired flavor balance. Also, if different strains are pitched at different times by the brewery you won't be able to do this with your mixed culture. (ii) If the brewery uses a bottling yeast then you may only be culturing the bottling strain, which may have been selected for hardiness (autolysis-resistance) and the ability to carbonate well without influencing the flavor of the finished beer. (iii) What comes up in culture may actually be a contaminant (e.g. wild yeast, or worse still bacteria!) from the bottle sediment or a spurious contaminant that got in during the culturing process. While these are often easy to spot due to their appearance or nasty aromas, this is not always true; especially for some of the wild yeasts. The net result of all this is that whatever you end up culturing may not give you the characteristics you are looking for when used in the primary fermentation. If you go this route, I'd strongly suggest doing small batch pilot fermentations to check the yeast's behavior before committing to a large batch that just might need to be chucked. Cheers! Alan Alan Meeker, PhD Assistant Professor of Pathology and Urology The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions Department of Pathology Division of Genitourinary Pathology 1503 Jefferson Street Bond Street Building Room B300 Baltimore, MD 21231 Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 02/28/08, by HBD2HTML v1.2 by KFL
webmaster@hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96