HOMEBREW Digest #713 Fri 30 August 1991

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

		Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator

  State Regulations (Rob)
  What does your club do? (Nik Subotic)
  2nd generation yeast & heresies (dbreiden)
  yeast slurry (Russ Gelinas)
  re enzyme temperatures (Chip Hitchcock)
  Contacting Norm Hardy and Rick Larson (flowers)
  Re : heresies (Darryl Richman)
  Fruit beers (John Freeman)
  zip city pub ("KATMAN.WNETS385")
  Re: HBD #712 Crown Caps on twist off bottles (larryba)
  Re:  Homebrew Digest #712 (August 29, 1991) (Bill Spikes)
  Sassafras (Andrew Lawson)
  Re: heresies (Ken Giles)
  Attention Chris Shenton (MIKE LIGAS)
  mail delivery error (Network Mailer)
  Furry Things (MIKE LIGAS)
   (Clarence Dold)
  Screw-on caps (Carl West)
  Nature's Way (C.R. Saikley)
  Conn's heresies (hersh)
  Attention Ross (MIKE LIGAS)
  Un-natural? (korz)
  Yeast Caking, Aluminum, and "Oh no not AGAIN!" (FATHER BARLEYWINE)
  Chlorine/pH meter, Mashing pot (Darren Evans-Young)
  Beer Tasting (Rob McDonald)
  Infection (Jack Schmidling)
  Remove me from this list (George Zengin)
  Re: DMS  (Darryl Okahata)

Send submissions to homebrew at hpfcmi.fc.hp.com Send requests to homebrew-request@ hpfcmi.fc.hp.com [Please do not send me requests for back issues!] Archives are available from netlib at mthvax.cs.miami.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 03:06:29 CDT From: bliss at csrd.uiuc.edu (Brian Bliss) > I brewed 3 batches over the entire summer. None in August. > They were drinkable but not up to my usual cooler weather > standard. All were pale ales (mjas o menos) done with London > Wyeast. Is (are) there better yeast for the hot times of the > year? I have AC and kept it at 75F, and kept a water bath around my fermenter; my friend had none and the temps varied but his basement probably averaged 85F. I kept accusing him of using too much sugar in his brews, but finally realized that temperature was the actual culprit. He used various kinds of dry, unattenuative ale yeasts, but all the brews had a distinctive, hard to explain, pseudo-cidery flavor. Some of mine certainly had esters (banana), but nothing near what his did. His spring brews had no such flavor. draw your own conclusions. - ------------------------------ > I've been wanting to try an oatmeal stout, but as I haven't been > able to start brewing yet, could anyone tell me a good one to try? Sam Smith's! - ------------------------------ > Several months ago I talked with the Kemper head brewer) > and he said that the sassafras extract comes from only a few > licenced processors since the raw stuff is apparently quite > carcinogenic. I've got 3 ounces of sassafras root from the grocery store, and it's sure not imitation! should I throw it out? bb Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 06:39:52 CST From: Rob <C08926RC at WUVMD.Wustl.Edu> Subject: State Regulations >Missouri 3.2% by weight. Exception: 5% or "malt liquor" Now I'm confused. Is that saying that 5% beer must be labeled as malt liquor? As far as I know, 5% beer (not malt liquor) is available everywhere, but on Sundays only 3.2% beer can be sold - and I don't know how true this is, since I've seen some 7-11s advertising 5% beer on Sunday... Rob C08926RC at WUVMD Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 09:10:29 EDT From: subotic at erim.org (Nik Subotic) Subject: What does your club do? Hi Bill, In the last Homebrewer's Digest you asked about some club activities. Two interesting ones come to mind that our club (Ann Arbor Brewers Guild) has sponsored. One was called "bad brew." In this one, a series of additives was introduced into beer that approximated some brewing artifacts (large amount of esters, fusils, ethel alchohol, etc.) such that people can correspond tastes to these artifacts. This is an ongoing program and it has been very informative. Another activity that has been interesting is for the whole club to brew a specific recipe. We have done this with a number of recipes (an extract, partial mash, and full mash) such that everyone can get involved. We end up tasting the end product(s) and try to ascertain the differences in taste of the (presumably the same) beers. We then try to understand the differences in brewing techniques and see how they forment these differences. This has caused alot of good brewing technical interchange since one variable (the recipe) has now been fixed. Hope this helps, Nik Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 08:50:30 -0500 From: dbreiden at mentor.cc.purdue.edu Subject: 2nd generation yeast & heresies 1. I made one of my finest beers using yeast I cultured from a friend's homebrew (thanks again, Ralph). Of course, he started with good yeast, but I am still amazed at how well the yeast stays in the bottom of the bottle even with a somewhat careless pouring. The only thing about such an operation is that there are more chances for the stuff to get infected while you are culturing. But for me, culturing off finished brew (drink the beer, reculture the dregs), is far more efficient than trying to save slurry. No disrepect to Father Barleywine, but I can't imagine what effect the trub and spent gunk has on the next batch. It just doesn't sound natural. 2. Our local heretic posed the question of why the often benevolent (and equally often malevolent) Mother Nature would design a natural system that only occurs at unnatural temperatures. I suspect that our extracting sugars from the barley is UNnatural. That is, our Mother Earth intended for little baby plants to get the goodies inside the barley -- not a bunch of beer swilling humans. Thankfully, She is looking the other way while we work our own version of alchemy. - --Danny Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1991 10:04:22 EDT From: R_GELINAS at UNHH.UNH.EDU (Russ Gelinas) Subject: yeast slurry I guess I was a little unclear in my wording about saving the slurry from the primary. I realize that you can always culture a starter from the conditioned bottles. I also realize that you can stir up the slurry and save that. I've done both of those. There are a couple of parameters in this case that make me want to handle it differently. The yeast has not flocculated very well, and I believe there is quite a bit of trub. So stirring up the slurry may give me a low yeast-to-trub ratio. Also, the most recently active yeast is still in suspension, not in the slurry. It seems to me the way to get the cleanest and most active yeast is to save a couple of pints when I rack to a new carboy before bottling. Now the real question is why doesn't this yeast, Wyeast Chico Ale, settle out very well? Certainly Sierra Nevada Ales have a solid pack on the bottom of the bottle. *Someone* published a test report on Wyeast yeast, and Chico ale was said to be a low-medium floculator, which seems to be the case. How does Sierra Nevada do it? Russ Gelinas Oh yeah, I'm going to IOWA for a vacation. Are there any restaraunt supply shops there? };-) Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 10:12:42 EDT From: cjh at vallance.HQ.Ileaf.COM (Chip Hitchcock) Subject: re enzyme temperatures > speculate on the reasons why mother nature invented an enzyme system which > functions most efficiently at decidedly un-natural temperatures. Stephen Jay Gould has written extensively on various aspects of this fallacy, and given it at least one elaborate name; you should definitely read as much of his work as you can find if you are trying to figure out "why nature invented" anything. His basic observation is that nothing in nature is deliberate, or maximally efficient. Among the reasons for this are: - evolution is accidental. Natural selection culls some traits and strengthens others, but not very strongly unless there's a massive [dis]advantage---ordinary variations generally aren't strong enough to be subject to selection. Populations drift and mutate, and often we can't even make a good guess at why selection pushed in a certain direction (we don't \know/ that giraffes evolved long necks to eat high leaves; there could have been some other force, or even accident, that let them fill this niche). - nature has to cover a wide variety of conditions. A machine shop can be precise because everything is controlled; biology has to survive extremes of temperature, food, and water. An organism that can survive extremes is more likely to be around after a few decades than one that is very good at filling a narrow niche. Another factor is simple thermodynamics: most chemical reactions go faster when heated. The better the enzymes can survive serious heat, the more likely the grain is to reproduce (see above); that they will actually work faster at this temperature is incidental. In fact, high-temp activity could be unhelpful, breaking down the starch faster than the resulting sugar can be assembled into cellulose---have you every seen your mash sprout? Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1991 10:13:00 -0600 From: flowers at csrd.uiuc.edu Subject: Contacting Norm Hardy and Rick Larson Please excuse the interuption. I am soory Rick, but I cannot seem to reach you by direct email. I will try again with the help of the local email guru. Norm, mail to you did not come back to me. Did you receive a copy of your Germany series? Did I screw it up and now you won't talk to me? If you did not receive anything, I will contact said guru about your address also. Maybe someone can put the series in the archive? -cf (flowers at csrd.uiuc.edu) Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 08:33:20 -0700 From: darryl at ism.isc.com (Darryl Richman) Subject: Re : heresies Conn V. Copas enhances his heretical position by adding a new heresy to ones he's already espoused. However, I don't find anything heretical, nor even more than mildly controversial about what he says. I believe the key to profficient and successful brewing is an understanding of the processes involved and what parts the brewer wants to manipulate and why. The actual how of it isn't particularly important, and can employ whatever the brewer has available or can buy or fabricate. Conn's newest heresy seems to revolve around the question of why would an enzyme system evolve that is most efficient at unnatural temperatures. The answer, to my mind, is that the definition of "most efficient" is different for us as brewers than for the barley plants that make those enzymes. Their concern (if plants have concern) for efficiency is with the enclosing system that provides energy for growth from starch without benefit of sunlight, which is a plant's primary energy pathway. In this sense, "most efficient" is probably defined as that which provides the breakdown of starch at a pace that closely matches the rate of sugar consumption. The plant throttles this rate by generating the right level of enzyme concentration for about 60F to match this pace. That's why there's an ability for brewers to convert unmalted adjuncts at the higher temperature--the balance at 60F is a very high level for 150F. On the other hand, a plant can't make use of all that sugar in a matter of an hour, and it would be subject to rotting and vigorous consumption by animals. --Darryl Richman Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 10:55:28 CDT From: jlf at poplar.cray.com (John Freeman) Subject: Fruit beers > Papazian > recommends adding the fruit when the wort has ceased boiling to achieve some > level of pastuerization but avoid the pectin problem. OK, I can handle that. > But, how much fruit do I add? I'll most likely wind up using juice, I haven't > looked to see what's available yet, and lemons are no problem. I would like > some recommendations so I don't overdo it the first time around. I have > one remaining bottle of my "light American" brew that I plan to use as the > base for this next brew, and I thought of adding a little fruit juice until > I got something reasonable, but I'd still like to know what the boundaries > are. Any help out there? > > -phil duclos If you're going to buy fruit to flavor your beer, I'd recommend you buy fruit juice. What I did recently was to add one quart of blueberry juice to one gallon of pale ale - the rest of the ale was bottled as usual. I did this in the secondary fermenter, not the primary like you would have to do to sterilize fruit. Specifically, I added the juice when I racked off the rest of the ale for bottling. It then fermented a couple more weeks. The only deficiency is that the blueberry flavor does not come out without a little sweetness. So, when I serve Bluebeerd, I add a teaspoon of sugar to each glass in the form of syrup. As far as proportions, with blueberry I think it's hard to overdo the fruit. At 25% juice, it is barely noticeable as a blueberry flavor - I taste something, but can't identify it as blueberry till I add the sugar. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 16:06 GMT From: "KATMAN.WNETS385" <6790753%356_WEST_58TH_5TH_FL%NEW_YORK_NY%WNET_6790753 at mcimail.com> Subject: zip city pub Date: 29-Aug-91 Time: 12:05 PM Msg: EXT01780 Hi, I called Zip City Brewpub, and also got the answering machine. I had heard that they weren't going to open until late August, but you know how starting businesses goes :) If they aren't open by October or November, then I'd worry. RDWHAH until they do open. Lee Katman == Thirteen/WNET == New York, NY =Do not= use REPLY or ANSWERBACK, I can not receive mail in that fashion. Please send all mail to INTERNET katman.wnets385%wnet_6790753 at mcimail.com OR MCIMAIL EMS: wnet 6790753 MBX: katman.wnets385 Return to table of contents
Date: Thu Aug 29 08:47:54 1991 From: microsoft!larryba at cs.washington.edu Subject: Re: HBD #712 Crown Caps on twist off bottles |>From: eisen at kopf.HQ.Ileaf.COM (Carl West) | |I understand that it takes a certain kind of luck to get crown |caps to work on twist-off bottles and ordinary mortals shouldn't |even bother trying. In my past life as an extract brewer, I always used recycled twist off bottles and capped them with regular crown caps. After the 4-5th bottling the edges of the threads started chipping and they became a bear to twist off (gee, i had to use a church key). So I would tossed them and get another batch. Big deal. Nowdays I use soda kegs for regular consumption and shorty seltzer bottles ( styrofoam wrapped, platic screw caps) for transporting beer to social functions. The bottles seem infinitely reusable and the styrofoam sides keep the beer at temp longer. Plus a pint bottle is soo compact! I have not conditioned beer in one of these, but I can't see any reason why it wouldn't work just fine. Be careful boiling polyethylene caps: they might warp. Cold sanitization (bleach) might be better. Yes, the lights are off in my fridge as well when the door is shut. Cheers. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 10:28:22 pdt From: Bill Spikes <spikes at sc.hp.com> Subject: Re: Homebrew Digest #712 (August 29, 1991) Please delete me from the Homebrew Digest. Thank You, Bill Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 12:48:08 EDT From: Andrew Lawson <lawson at ra.nrl.navy.mil> Subject: Sassafras > Can anyone document the carcinogenic aspect of sasafrass and > what if anything is done to mitigate it? The carcinogenic ingredient in sassafras is safrol. It is confirmed to be carcinogenic, though I forget what type of cancer it is implicated in. It can be removed from the extraction, but I don't know how. > I have a hard time believing that anything that > require so little for such a powerful taste can be natural > or non-toxic. Try tabasco :-) +-------------------------+--------------------------------------+ | Drew Lawson | If you're not part of the solution, | | lawson at ra.nrl.navy.mil | you're part of the precipitate | +-------------------------+--------------------------------------+ Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 11:19:47 PDT From: keng at ic.MENTORG.COM (Ken Giles) Subject: Re: heresies In HBD #712, Conn Copas <C.V.Copas at loughborough.ac.uk> says: > Apologies if I gave anyone the impression that I posted my heretical > thoughts for the sake of being frivolously controversial. I think most people would agree that it's healthy to question the necessity of dogmatic procedures. Hopefully the dogma will be replaced with scientific principle. However, there will always remain some subjectivity as to the effect of the application of those principles. > d) By implication, I was encouraging more experimentation in homebrewing. > As someone said recently, they preferred to brew 'empirically'. In other > words, if the technique can't stand up to the scrutiny of a double-blind > tasting comparison, it is questionable. Agreed. However, you can't blindly rely on the double-blinds of others. I know plenty of beer enthusiasts who just can't distinguish certain flavors. I consider phenols in a pale ale to be a fault. Others will never notice it. > Oh, and I have dreamt up another heresy, which is that mashing temperatures > are not as critical as we are often led to believe (once again, it helps to > know what you are doing if you intend to mash cool). It's interesting to > speculate on the reasons why mother nature invented an enzyme system which > functions most efficiently at decidedly un-natural temperatures. About the > only natural situation I can think of is when a heap of grain is composting > on the ground. Any thoughts ? When brewers and brewing textbooks say 'enzyme efficiency', aren't they really saying 'enzyme efficiency during mashing'? The temperature of the mash is partially intended to destroy (gelatinize) the kernal and dissolve its carbohydrates. This is not the same goal as the life-processes for which the enzymes were intended, where less mechanical action is involved. So, I don't find it odd that the mash efficiency temperature of enzymes would be different from the life-process efficiency temperature of those same enzymes. And I suspect that if you go ahead and sparge the contents of your compost heap, you will get a fermentable fluid. :-) kg. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1991 14:22:00 -0400 From: MIKE LIGAS <LIGAS at SSCvax.CIS.McMaster.CA> Subject: Attention Chris Shenton ****************************************************************************** First an apology to all HD readers for using up some bandwidth for a personal letter but I'm unable to reach Chris via E-mail so this is my only option. The good news is that the discussion to follow is mostly about beer. ****************************************************************************** >From: Chris Shenton <chris at asylum.gsfc.nasa.gov> (personal communication) >Thanks for all the info... The blue spot is surrounded by a white furry >perimeter, and it's at the edges of the plate; the plate has condensation >in it so I've inverted it to keep the water off the agar; is this wise? My >guess is that the condensation absorbed something from outside, then >dribbled onto the edges of the agar. I sterilized the agar-filled plates by >steaming for 30 minutes; this seems to have worked as the center of the >agar is infection-free. Next time I could try pressure cooking. >My stock email address is chris at asylum.gsfc.nasa.gov. You should be able to >replace asylum with endgame with identical results. Other machines which >forward to me include condor, falcon, xorn, dragon, and gryphon. Failing >all those, you can send to my home unix box, but I don't read there as >often: uunet!media!thanatos!chris. If you go that last route, could you >also send me a copy of your bounceback message? Well Chris, I tried to respond to this via the asylum and again my message was spooled back. The following is the bounceback message containing my reply. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From: IN%"MAILER at SCFVM.BITNET" "Network Mailer" 29-AUG-1991 12:05:30.62 To: LIGAS at SSCvax.CIS.McMaster.CA CC: Subj: mail delivery error Return-path: <MAILER at SCFVM.BITNET> Received: from SCFVM.BITNET (MAILER at SCFVM) by SSCvax.CIS.McMaster.CA with PMDF#10660; Thu, 29 Aug 1991 12:05 EDT Received: from SCFVM.BITNET by SCFVM.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 4243; Thu, 29 Aug 91 12:05:28 EDT Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 12:05:28 EDT From: Network Mailer <MAILER at SCFVM.BITNET> Subject: mail delivery error To: LIGAS at SSCvax.CIS.McMaster.CA Message-id: <81189DEDE0C4538F at SSCvax.CIS.McMaster.CA> X-Envelope-to: LIGAS Batch SMTP transaction log follows: 220 SCFVM.BITNET Columbia MAILER R2.07 BSMTP service ready. 050 HELO SSCvax.CIS.McMaster.CA 501-SSCvax.CIS.McMaster.CA is bogus for a file with RSCS origin MCMASTER LIGAS 501 050 TICK 0001 250 0001 ... that's the ticket. 050 MAIL FROM:<LIGAS at SSCvax.CIS.McMaster.CA> 500 Command ignored due to a previous error. 050 RCPT TO:<chris at asylum.gsfc.nasa.gov> 500 Command ignored due to a previous error. 050 DATA 354 Start mail input. End with <crlf>.<crlf> 451 Request aborted: command out of sequence 050 QUIT 221 SCFVM.BITNET Columbia MAILER BSMTP service done. Original message follows: Received: from SSCvax.CIS.McMaster.CA (LIGAS) by SCFVM.BITNET (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 4242; Thu, 29 Aug 91 12:05:28 EDT Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1991 12:04 EDT From: MIKE LIGAS <LIGAS at SSCvax.CIS.McMaster.CA> Subject: Furry Things To: chris at asylum.gsfc.nasa.gov Message-id: <80F1240880C45E98 at SSCvax.CIS.McMaster.CA> X-Envelope-to: chris at asylum.gsfc.nasa.gov X-VMS-To: IN%"chris at asylum.gsfc.nasa.gov" Chris: I'd avoid anything furry. Sounds like the white stuff is also mold. Another suggestion is to get more of the yeast slurry from the Weizenbier and add 2-5 mls of it to 50 mls of sterile wort. See if the yeast can get going in this environment and then streak out a few plates of this culture. The one problem I foresee is that most authentic Weizens are naturally conditioned with a lager yeast which is added at the time of priming. You may be wasting your energy if that is the case with the beer from which you are getting the yeast. Send me your snail-mail address and I'll mail you pure S. delbrueckii when the weather cools down at bit (to ensure viability when the vials arrive). Take care, Mike PS: Incubate your plates upside-down from the beginning. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 10:37:56 PDT From: Clarence Dold <dold at tsdold.Convergent.COM> Subject: From: eisen at kopf.HQ.Ileaf.COM (Carl West) Subject: Screw-on caps > How about using the real screw-on/screw-off caps and their bottles? In Australia, most beer is in screw-top bottles. They have very few of our 'long necks'. Homebrewers use a thinner cap, labelled 'twist off' on the package, which is pressed on with a standard bench press capper. I have tried some of these on American screw top bottles. It requires a lot of pressure to put them on, but they do work. - -- - --- Clarence A Dold - dold at tsmiti.Convergent.COM ...pyramid!ctnews!tsmiti!dold Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 11:28:14 PDT From: grumpy!cr at uunet.UU.NET (C.R. Saikley) Subject: Nature's Way Conn Copas writes : >It's bemusing to >read posts in which people describe how they have conscientiously chilled >the wort, then pitched the yeast straight in on top ! OK, I'll bite. What's unusual about chilling wort and putting yeast on top?? >It's interesting to >speculate on the reasons why mother nature invented an enzyme system which >functions most efficiently at decidedly un-natural temperatures. Mother Nature would not have optimized the enzyme system for grain to make beer. She would optimize the system such that grain could best make more grain. As far as the unsuspecting little barley kernels are concerned, that enzyme system is what will allow it to nourish itself during the early days of spring while it begins to sprout. The little bit of starch in the grain must sustain the fledgling plant until it is able to photosynthesize. Thus it must be doled out slowly - not converted all at once as we brewer's strive for. It follows that the strains best adapted to survive the germination phase would prevail. (Until, of course, man steps in and mucks around with everything.) As brewers, we are very fortunate that our goals require only a small, easily achieved deviation from nature's course. In fact, we should be grateful that some deviation is necessary. For if the conditions required for making beer were too "natural", then all the grains would be turning themselves into beer in the fields, and then where would we be??? :-) Cheers, CR Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 14:38:03 EDT From: hersh at expo.lcs.mit.edu Subject: Conn's heresies Regarding Conn's heresies part d) >In other words, if the technique can't stand up to the scrutiny of a double-blind tasting comparison, it is questionable. Conn it depends a lot on whose doing the tasting. If your palatte is untrained, or insensitive or both, then obviously off flavors deriving from brewing technique don't matter. Then again perhaps neither does recipe formulation (in the extreme, see my signature) so why not brew Miller clones?? We do Dr. Beer trinaing sessions (me & Steve Stroud) and find that some people just aren't sensitive to certain substances. Others just don't know what to look for or how to sort out and identify what it is they're tasting. My personal experience is that after trainign my palette some I began to detect off flavors in beers I was making that I hadn't recognized for what they were previously. Adjustment of my brewing technique eliminated these. Also in d) you say >It's bemusing to >read posts in which people describe how they have conscientiously chilled >the wort, then pitched the yeast straight in on top ! What do you mean by this?? I'm not sure what youre describing and/or criticizing here. - JaH - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ assume that you are moderate in everything. you now have an eXcess of moderation, a contradiction. eXcessiveness is clearly the way to go... Return to table of contents
Date: 29 Aug 91 12:09:11 EDT (Thu) From: GC Woods <gcw at garage.att.com> For the NJ area folks, a new supply store is scheduled to open around August 15th. The Home Brewery of New Jersey 118 Fort Lee Road Teaneck, NJ 07666 1-800-426-BREW They also have locations in CA, MO and NV. A quote from the catalog, "We do not sell beer or wine ingredients to minors. Its not illegal, it's just not right; so if you are under 21, please don't order". The founder (Sam Wammack) is an ex-cop, so watch out if you visit the Ozark, MO store. Just out of curiosity, do many of the under 21 HBD readers ever have any problems ordering supplies? Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1991 14:54:00 -0400 From: MIKE LIGAS <LIGAS at SSCvax.CIS.McMaster.CA> Subject: Attention Ross Sorry again HD readers but I've lost an address to which I need to reply to and this is the only route I can use to retrieve it. Ross...I got your letter about lager yeast. Are you out there??!! Send me your E-mail address ASAP. Mike Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 16:47 CDT From: ihlpl!korz at att.att.com Subject: Un-natural? Conn writes: >Oh, and I have dreamt up another heresy, which is that mashing temperatures >are not as critical as we are often led to believe (once again, it helps to >know what you are doing if you intend to mash cool). It's interesting to >speculate on the reasons why mother nature invented an enzyme system which >functions most efficiently at decidedly un-natural temperatures. About the >only natural situation I can think of is when a heap of grain is composting >on the ground. Any thoughts ? Nature never meant for the enzymes to change the starch to sugar as quickly as we do. It meant for the starch to be converted to sugar only at the rate at which the growing barley plant can use it. Nice try, but I'm just too relaxed to get short-circuited at this point in time. Al. P.S. I'd like to propose that the Homebrew Digest recognize the Baltic states as independent republics. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1991 17:47:23 EDT From: FATHER BARLEYWINE <rransom at bchm1.aclcb.purdue.edu> Subject: Yeast Caking, Aluminum, and "Oh no not AGAIN!" This one is for all of you who groan every time you see a Father B. posting... It has been a while since I proclaimed again my heretical belief in the brew without sanity philosophy. There has been a lot of discussion of using yeast from the bottom of the fermenter, and to keep my dirty fingers in the discussion I'd like to raise a few points: 1) Try racking off your beer for bottling just as you finish the preparations for your next brew, and within 20 minutes of uncovering the yeast cake, pour in your next (cooled) batch of wort. Close your eyes if necessary so you won't see the brown ring of scuzze on the walls of your fermenter. Pray to your favorite deity or just stare at a spot on your wall. Stick on the fermentation lock and don't even look at that carbouy until tomorrow. I guarantee that a good yeast batch will produce a couple (I've tried 11) sequential batches of beer, and that the dried dead yeasties on the walls of your carbouy will not be (detectably) detrimental. Some final suggestions: ferment as cold as possible, and use a good yeast. 2) Be really careful when storing trub in your refrigerator unless you really enjoy cleaning dried malt substance/yeast off your refrigerator/vegetables/catsup bottles. Just a warning 3) Try keeping a culture (adding yeast cake to fresh wort) instead, using about 1/2 - 1 cup yeast of good texture to about 3/4 gallon wort. This will last a while, and you don't need to worry too much about catching the yeast in log phase (i.e. 2 - 3 days old). 4) Please don't sanitize everything (anything!). Keep your equipment clean, free of deposits, and above all dry in storage. I know you don't want to hear it from me again, but you really don't need to bleach/boil/Campden/irradiate items used in typical brewing. Culturing yeast is an entirely different ball game. The "Oh no not AGAIN" was in reference to the Great Aluminum Debate. There have been many many MANY postings about whether aluminum will discolor wort/beer, cause Alzheimer's Disease, and everything else that our diverse collection of posters could blue-sky. Aluminum will dissolve into aqueous solutions, particularly acidic ones (like beer), but my personal philosophy is that aluminum exposed to beer (wort) before fermentation will dissolve in it and then be efficiently sucked up (chelated) by the hordes of yeasties which pass the total wort volume through themselves many times over during the course of a brew. Admittedly, you are drinking some of these yeasties too in your final beer, but most sit languidly on the bottom. Relax, use aluminum, and worry about the carcinogenic compounds you run into at high concentrations at work every day. Ah, another diatribe smoking out of the keyboard! Please, flame me! I thrive on abuse. Father Barleywine Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 18:47:39 CDT From: Darren Evans-Young <DARREN at UA1VM.UA.EDU> Subject: Chlorine/pH meter, Mashing pot Chlorine/pH meter: I came across a catalog that contained a combination chlorine/pH meter for use with swimming pools. It's about $50. Has anyone tried one of these? Are they accurate enough? Seems like it would be real handy. Mashing pot: Has anyone tried mashing pot? ...just kidding... Seriously, what size pot is needed to mash, say, 10 lbs of grain? I already have a 10 gal SS pot to boil in. Is a 5 gal SS pot large enough for mashing a maximum of 10 lbs of grain? Darren E. Evans-Young The University of Alabama *---------------------------------------------------------------------------* | Darren Evans-Young, Sys Prg BITNET: DARREN at UA1VM.BITNET | | The University of Alabama Internet: DARREN at UA1VM.UA.EDU | | Seebeck Computer Center Phone: (205)348-3988 / 5380 | | Tuscaloosa, Alabama 35487-0346 (205)348-3993 FAX | *---------------------------------------------------------------------------* Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 23:29 EDT From: rob at maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Rob McDonald) Subject: Beer Tasting I have decided to invite a few homebrewing acquaintances over for a "Beer Tasting Session". To the best of my knowledge this is a first for all of us. I intend to ask each participant to bring two bottles, preferably homebrew, but possibly a favorite commercial product for comparison. How do _you_ conduct tastings? What might you suggest that would contribute to the event? One person has suggested that I provide score sheets so that we can rate the brews, then compare, and have a record for the future. Does anybody have a sample of such a rating sheet? (Preferably electronic, though you could fax it to me, we are in the midst of a mail strike right now). What about munchies, anything special you recommend? (nothing too mouth numbing for obvious reasons :-). All suggestions welcome, if you are within reasonable distance of Burlington, Ontario, Canada, and wish to attend (no date set, probably mid to late September) send me an email message. .....rob EMAIL: rob at maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca <<< Standard Disclaimers Apply >>> ARCHAIC: Digisonix, 2326 Redfern Rd., Burlington, Ontario, Canada, L7R 1X3. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 10:54 CDT From: arf at ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) Subject: Infection To: Homebrew Digest Fm: Jack Schmidling RE: MIKE LIGAS <LIGAS at SSCvax.CIS.McMaster.CA> Subject: Re: Yeast infection? (agar plate culture) >All wort & wort/agar must be pressure sterilized either in an autoclave or a home pressure cooker (minimum 15 psi for 20 mins). The petri dishes must be obtained sterile (irradiated plastic or baked glass). Aside from the environmentally unfriendly use of throw-away petri dishes, I would like to point out that I have been sterilizing glass petri dishes in a microwave oven with good results. A few drops of water in the bottom create steam and, I suppose, limit the temperature but I supect the critters get "nuked" directly. Has anybody done any research on this technique? My work is strictly amateur and I have not the equipment nor inclination to test it thoroughly. jack ZZ > Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 91 08:16:41 +0300 From: George Zengin <s1638090 at techst02.technion.ac.il> Subject: Remove me from this list It's been the n-th letter that i've sent you to just say : "Please, remove me from this mailing list." I've sent this to homebrew-request@ ... but an auto-answering program always tells me that i'm accepted to this list, etc. Sorry, guys on the list, but i have to do this this way. Thanx in advance. George s1638090 at techst02.technion.ac.il Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 91 22:46:53 PDT From: Darryl Okahata <darrylo at hpnmxx.sr.hp.com> Subject: Re: DMS > I believed that while chilling the wort became infected with dimelhye > sulfide (DMS) before pitching. [ Just to clarify things, DMS is a chemical, and not a living organism. However, a bacterial infection of the wort could cause "large" amounts of DMS to be produced. ] > Does it have an effect on the taste or > smell on the final product? I've been told that, in high concentrations, DMS can give beer a hint of "cooked vegetables" or "shellfish". Perhaps someone who knows more can give a better description. If you're interested in finding about what causes various off-flavors, you may want to get a copy of the 1987 special issue of Zymurgy, which is entirely dedicated to "troubleshooting" problems with beer flavor. The special issues of Zymurgy seem to get periodically reprinted, and should be available at your local beer supply store (if not, mail-order places have it). However, note that they're not cheap, being about $8.00 for a 64-page magazine (in the case of the 1987 issue), but I think that they're worth it if you plan to do any serious beer-brewing. -- Darryl Okahata Internet: darrylo at sr.hp.com DISCLAIMER: this message is the author's personal opinion and does not constitute the support, opinion or policy of Hewlett-Packard or of the little green men that have been following him all day. Return to table of contents
End of HOMEBREW Digest #713, 08/30/91 ************************************* -------
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 06/29/00, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96