HOMEBREW Digest #74 Sat 11 February 1989

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

		Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator

  re: What is your extract efficiency? (Darryl Richman)
  re: What is your exctract efficiency?
  re: Wyeast #2042 (Danish Lager) (Darryl Richman)
  Re: bittering hops (a.e.mossberg)
  Dr. T. Andrews (a.e.mossberg)
  jammin and right on (Reed Wade)
  Several ???'s (Reed Wade)

Send submissions to homebrew%hpfcmr at hplabs.hp.com Send requests to homebrew-request%hpfcmr at hplabs.hp.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 10 Feb 89 08:07:48 PST From: Darryl Richman <darryl at ism780c.isc.com> Subject: re: What is your extract efficiency? In the Feb 09 digest, lbr at gatech.edu writes: Subject: re: What is your exctract efficiency? "In the Feb 07 digest, Darryl Richman <darryl at ism780c.isc.com> replies ">Part of the problem here is the 100% extract numbers. I've got Noonan, and ">he suggests one set of numbers; I've just bought Dave Miller's new book, ">and he's got another (higher) set. I'd like to see some brewing industry ">book that actually discusses this and gives a baseline. " "I've got Noonan, Miller's first book, and Line's Big Book. Is there any "reason for me to buy Miller's new book? I'd have to mail order it; I "can't leaf through it in the store to see if I like it. )-: I have just gotten his new book, "The Complete Handbook of Home Brewing". I find that the emphasis is right (of 31 chapters, 3 are on extracts), but the focus is fuzzy. It is a useful book, but even taken with Noonan, I still don't feel like I've got a complete picture. I'll write more about it below. "> I don't usually worry about percentage efficiency for this reason. I do look "> at my extract per pound of grist per gallon of water. As my technique has "> become more refined, the numbers keep creeping up. For recipe formation, "> I used to just lump everything but any black grains together and figure "> 1.030 per pound per gallon.... Lately I've been getting 1.032 out of beers "> with no dark grain. " "I get 1.030. After reading the initial posting I got out Noonan's book "and figured that this was .65 pounds per pound of malt: 65%. I hadn't You are correct, and perhaps I'm the one who didn't understand what was going on. I was looking at table 20, pp 179-180, which give the extract efficiency numbers and a specific gravity figure. Under the table, Noonan says that "the quoted extract potentials ... are maximum yields possible". So I assumed that these were 100% numbers. But these must be from his experience or from other homebrewing sources because I'm getting 1.032+ from a mixed mash of 2 row and crystal malts, which certainly implies >1.032 per lb. per gal. (Noonan's number for infusion) for 2 row alone. In any event, I now see even less use for the extract efficiency number since I get the same kind of information from sg lb/gal, and it is of use to me when designing a recipe. "extract per gallon. But mostly (pet peeve) his formulas are written "like IRS forms. What brain dead editor thinks that persons who buy "a book this technical can't deal with simple formulas expressed in "algebraic terms? He gives a formula for computing the volume of a "cylinder that's 8 or so lines long! ("Multiply line 3 by 3.14" etc.) Yes, well, Noonan is not a complete handbook, but I do like the sharp focus he has. If you don't like decoction, at least you know what you have to filter out. In Dave Miller's tCHoHB (sure looks a lot like tCJoHB!), he has a number of bugaboos and writes them as if they were law. He still doesn't like iodine, for example, prefering to rely on having carried on the mash long enough. He also still likes the grain bag sparging method, and I don't recall him even mentioning the picnic cooler/copper manifold setup. His water examples are pretty parochial, and the only real life example is his own St. Louis water, which is very strange stuff (pH 9.5!). On the other hand, his recipes look very good, and a lot of the discussion is very detailed and interesting. The book is more frustrating than Noonan because you aren't as certain about his biases. ">Don't you find it interesting that most books (Dave Line, Greg Noonan, and now ">Dave Miller) mention to check for conversion after an hour? I, too, get quick {I should mention that Dave Miller's new book doesn't recommend a starch check, he just supplies a schedule and you can hope that you'll be done on time.} ">conversions. Sometimes I have gotten a negative response within 10 minutes ">of achieving saccharification temperatures. " "Me too. Though of course I leave it longer to get that maltose I need. "Miller's first book said don't use this test since husks can react and give "a false positive reading. I do the test (it's trivial to do) but I "consider it worthless. :-) Then you and Dave will get along here well. I find that the iodine check is very interesting to watch as conversion nears completion. The time it takes for the iodine to produce a reaction indicates the starch level left and as it asymptotically approaches 0, I get an idea of how much further to go. [...] "Did I compute this wrong? I computed 1.030 as .65 lb extract / 1 lb malt, which "is far lower than the .80 Noonan says I should get. My reading of his "book is that you're getting in the high 60s, nowhere near 80. You are looking at Noonan's decoction number, for infusion he quotes 70%. (Are you doing decoction?) "Noonan's book reads like it came from industry sources. Their extracts have "got to be better than ours: better equipment and procedures, and more "incentive, too. I don't really care if I throw a little sugar out with "the spent grain. As far as Noonan's plaint that the lauter tun should be deep, my microbiologist friends say that they use very long columns to filter protiens and DNA. But they are also interested in getting the most out of the minute quantities produced. A deep filter bed will eventually pack under its own weight, so a compromise is needed. I would like to get more extract if I could, but based on what recipes I see go by in zymurgy, I'm getting a better return than 7/8s of the brewers out there. That's what prompted me to look at when I was ending my sparge. I was concerned that perhaps a lot of the sg efficiency I was getting was in fact pulling tanins from the husks. But I don't think so, and my beer doesn't taste so. Anyway, to get back to the original issue, getting 1.030 sg/lb./gal. seems to be above average in homebrewing circles and is nothing to be worried about. --Darryl Richman Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 11 Feb 89 07:05:16 PST From: Darryl Richman <darryl at ism780c.isc.com> Subject: re: Wyeast #2042 (Danish Lager) In the Feb 10 digest, Pete Soper <soper at maxzilla.encore.com> writes: "Speaking of Wyeast, I just pitched some #1098 ("Whitbread", a newly "released strain) into a starter. I sure hope it is better than #1028. "That stuff got pulled by Wyeast and I had the misfortune to discover "why - it didn't flocculate properly! Another bit of disillusionment, "this Wyeast. But #2007 is great stuff! Old reliable! In recent months we've been having a "Troubleshooter's Corner" after the Maltose Falcons meetings and they've been a tremendous success. I participated in the last one, and a very curious thing happened: we had along the way three Brittish Ales with an exceptionaly fruity character. They were all made with Wyeast 1098, and two of them were fermented rather cold (I believe they were between 60-65). I'm very interested to hear about the results obtained from the different yeast strains, as you probably are. I'd be very interested if you could confirm or deny our experiences when your beer is ready. Which one is 2007 (the American Ale?? == Sierra Nevada)? And how did your supplier find out that the Danish yeast was less attenuating? I want this kind of info, and I'll pester the fellow who runs the shop to find out. advTHANKSance, --Darryl Richman (The Falcon's Nest homebrewing BBS sysop 818 349 5891) Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 11 Feb 89 16:04:54 EDT From: a.e.mossberg <aem at mthvax.miami.edu> Subject: Re: bittering hops In Homebrew #73, Pete Soper sez: |A while back I asked if any flavor or aroma was contributed by hops |boiled for 90 minutes or more. Here is a summary of what I I've learned. [...] |Dave Line's "The Big Book of Brewing" (p 70): | 90% of aroma lost with boil, no mention of flavor effects I don't have the book here to give any exact quotes, but my recollection was that he considered a long boil of hops more important than any benefits from dry-hopping or putting in hops during the last few minutes of the boil. -- a.e.mossberg aem at mthvax.miami.edu MIAVAX::AEM (Span) aem at umiami.BITNET (soon) The proletarian is, therefore, in law and in fact, the slave of the bourgeoisie, which can decree his life or death. - Friedrich Engels Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 11 Feb 89 16:34:50 est From: a.e.mossberg <aem at mthvax.miami.edu> Subject: Dr. T. Andrews ...is mentioned on page 92 of the Feb 6 issue of Digital News talking about Dec Rainbows. aem Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 11 Feb 1989 19:20:20 EST From: Reed Wade <wade at utkcs2.cs.utk.edu> Subject: jammin and right on Howdy- Just to let you know. My last digest was received w/out it's twin. Thanks, Reed "Bud & Twinkies" Wade wade at utkcs2.cs.utk.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Sat, 11 Feb 1989 20:00:58 EST From: Reed Wade <wade at utkcs2.cs.utk.edu> Subject: Several ???'s Hi- Several ???'s 1st. Why do instructions keep telling me not to stir my yeast? I do it anyway. I can't remember what Papazian says on the subject, but all the Brit. books say not to. BTW- I normally start it going in the sticky can that the extract came in w/a bit of water. 2nd. regarding root beer- I just picked up a little bottle of Zatarain's (New Orleans) root beer extract and tryed it out. I used a generic ale yeast I had laying around and I'm wondering why after brewing this stuff there appears to be no appreciable alcohol content. I didn't take notes as I went but I know I added plenty of sugar. Do yeasties need malt to make alcohol? I'm not complaining, it's nice and fizzy, just curious. Also- on arriving home I was disappointed to see that all the ingredients listed on the bottle were artificial.(What do you want for $0.99?) Anybody got a good sassafras source in E. Tennesseee? 3rd. regarding plastic bottles- I know of one brewery in Ontario that sells all their stuff in 1 liter green bottles but they also include a drink by: date on the label and tell you to consume the contents within two days of opening (not a problem, Conners makes great beer). Several Toronto homebrew shops sell these bottles as well as the caps. I was told by one employee that the bottles could be reused, just buy new caps. Reed "Bud & Twinkies" Wade wade at utkcs2.cs.utk.edu PS- just realized that I sent my previous note re: the fact that I am now getting one copy (instead of two) to the not- prefered address. Sorry. Return to table of contents
[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