HOMEBREW Digest #782 Mon 16 December 1991

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

		Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator

  Hello and Achtung
  Sam Adams.  The REAL story. (BAUGHMANKR)
  Single-step mashing of Klages (Don McDaniel)
  Artichoke Liquer (C.R. Saikley)
  grainmill idea? (krweiss)
  Thomas Hardy's Ale (C.R. Saikley)
  Re: Boiling Over (Bob Muller)
  Troooooooob (C.R. Saikley)
  Mash tun design (Bob Jones)
  Pasturization, Malt, Priming (Jack Schmidling)
  Three Cheers for Noel Damon! (Alexander R Mitchell)
  Re: Transporting Homebrew (Richard Stueven)
  BEWARE Guinness-in-a-Can! (Richard Stueven)
  Casks, decoction, wort chilling (Conn Copas)
  Re: Legal Imports (John DeCarlo)
  cold break advice/dissent (joshua.grosse)
  Sam Adams' sexy babes at GABF (Carl West)
  Liquid Starters ("John Cotterill")
  Half-coct decoct (Jay Hersh)
  Grain Mills (Brian Midura)
  grainmill idea? (krweiss)
  Cargo-hold pressurization (BREIN)
  Beer Places in Seattle (Katy T. Kislitzin)
  Ancient Beer (C.R. Saikley)
  lifetime of beers (gaspar)
  Wort Spoilage (George Fix)
  boiling (man)
  Beer Hunter ("CCVAX::HAPANOWICZ")

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
---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Rob Gardner (Digest Guy and Scottish Beer Imbiber) Date: Friday, Noon, GMT Subject: Hello and Achtung Hello everyone. I've got a few things on my mind. First, a reminder that requests, deletions, changes, and subscriptions (except automated ones) will not be handled until the end of December, as I am away until then. I'm in Scotland, and have been sampling lots of wonderful brews in the local pubs, and will be in London soon for a few more days. I was able to handle some requests this week (and send this message) courtesy of HP in South Queensferry, but I expect to have no network access between 12/14 and 12/24. Second, perhaps more important, I received the following ominous message from the system administrator at one of HP's main network gateways: > According to our records, mail from rdg at hpfcmi.fc.hp.com, routed via > hp-cv.cv.hp.com from hpfcrdg.fc.hp.com, accounted for over 400MB of the > Internet traffic arriving on hp-cv during November. This makes hpfcrdg the > second heaviest sender of packets to hp-cv -- right behind our *full* news > feed. > > This kind of volume tends to attract management attention, etc, etc.... In other words, digest traffic is getting out of hand, and people are noticing. I'm afraid that the time is coming where we're going to have to figure out how to reduce the volume. The problem is *not* with the content of the digest; The size of the digest is limited to 50k, 5 days a week, so please do not think I am asking you to submit fewer articles, as that would not do any good. The real problem is the number of addresses on the list, and how delivery is optimized (not at all). So, I will be thinking about how to distribute the load more efficiently in the next month or so. Perhaps just having more redistribution points would help enormously. I just wanted to make everyone aware of this situation, and get you thinking on how you can help. Relax and don't worry about it. I'll keep you informed. My goal is to keep the digest operating, no matter what constraints are imposed, and the first priority is to appease whatever administrators or bean counters necessary without impacting delivery of the digest. Rob Gardner Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1991 15:37 EDT From: BAUGHMANKR at CONRAD.APPSTATE.EDU Subject: Sam Adams. The REAL story. Sorry. I can't let the disinformation below pass without comment: >According to the tour guide at the brewery, Sam Adams didn't submit >an entry after winning three years straight in order to give other ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >(smaller/home) brewers a chance at the award. The following year ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ (Haven't seen such disingenuous prattle since Reagan claimed his policies were responsible for the destruction of the Berlin Wall.) >they did enter and win again, afterwards the award was phased out >for the new GOLD/SILVER/BRONZE medal system. Not only has Sam Adams >beer won three times in a row, but _EVERY_ time it has entered that >catagory. I don't want this to sound like a flame. I'm just speaking the facts. I attended the GABF the year Sam Adams won the first award. Let me describe the situation. First, Koch hired a couple of dozen GORGEOUS females, ALL wearing leotards, ALL sporting Sam Adams hats, ALL working the crowd with pitchers of Sam Adams, ALL coming up to the predominantly male crowd asking, "Here. Have you tried the beer with body?" Then, "How about a free Samuel Adams hat?" In case you haven't been to the GABF. Here's the set-up. It's in a huge room. You could put 3 or 4 basketball courts in there. Around the walls are the various booths, manned (personned?) by representatives of the small breweries, pouring out 2 oz samples to whomever stops by. The first thing to note, is that there is no way to hit them all. If you did, you'd be staggering drunk by the end of the night. If you drank a particular unknown breweries beer that night it's because you happened by that table at a time when your glass was empty. They don't run you down and pour beer down your throat. At least 99.9% of them don't. At the end of the night, as everyone stumbles out the door, you're asked to write down the name of best beer you drank that night. You get the picture by now. It's late. You have a GREAT buzz going. You're not sure about the best beer you tasted but you sure as hell remember the best boobs you saw that night! What was the name? Oh, yeah. I'll just look at my hat. Never mind. They're a couple hundred of them being worn at the moment. I'll look at the guy's behind me. Those folks sure are nice! And the women are so damned good looking. No doubt about it. Sam Adams is the best beer I drank tonight. It's plain and simple. Sam Adams keeps getting voted best beer in America because Jim Koch is a great marketer. Not because he brews the best beer in America. Obviously, the brewing community was a BIT upset by a couple of years of such shameful commercialism. Maybe he did skip a year. I don't know. But next in old Jim's bag of tricks was to hold his national beer distributors convention at -- guess when -- the same time as the GABF at -- guess where -- the same place where they have the GABF. Free tickets to all his distributors AND THEIR FAMILIES to attend the GABF. Guess who they vote for? With 2 to 300 different beers to choose from, you don't have to stuff the box long before you come out the clear winner in that kind of "democratic" election. So sure they phased out the popular vote and went to the gold, silver, bronze format judged by a panel of experts. They phased out the popular vote precisely because Jim wouldn't play by the rules, unwritten but categorically understood by the rest of the brewing community. The man has no shame. I was indeed touched to hear that Koch says he quit entering his beer to give the rest of the brewing world "a chance". The only chance he gave was the opportunity to have every beer stand on its own against the competition with no stuffing of the ballot boxes or his organized army working the crowd to an unfair advantage. In actuality, Koch is a pariah at that event and he "don't get no respect" from any of the brewers. He sells breasts not brew. I tip my hat to the man (cough! cough!). He's a good businessman. He and Donald Trump would bed well together. But remember, he doesn't even brew his blue ribbon beer. He CONTRACTS it. The BEST beer in America, 'brewed' by the Boston Brewing Company of Pittsburg, Pennsylvania. Say what??!! Isn't something missing from this picture!! Like a brewery?? It's better than Budmiller, no doubt. It's even as good as Heineken, St. Pauli Girl, Beck's and all the rest of the faceless-lagers-brewed- for-America-to-American-tastes-and-don't-taste-anything-like-their- European-counterparts that come in from overseas. Furthermore, it isn't offensive which is the key to selling anything in the mass beer market of America. Brew a beer that doesn't offend anyone, have a near-naked woman drink it in front of you and you'll sell millions of gallons of the stuff. Anyway, that's how he did it. I'm glad he gets people trying different beers. I'm glad he supposedly opens people's eyes to the alternatives to Budmiller et al. Me? I throw my hat into the ring with the honest small brewers of America. I don't buy Sam Adams products. I have limited amounts of money. And Jim Krook has more than his share. Sergeant Friday. Over and out. Kinney Baughman | Beer is my business and baughmankr at conrad.appstate.edu | I'm late for work Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 91 13:58:21 -0700 From: dinsdale at chtm.eece.unm.edu (Don McDaniel) Subject: Single-step mashing of Klages Dr. John's idea of usings Klages in a single step infusion has occurred to me as well. I have been using Klages in a two stage infusion for lagers and imported two-row pale ale malts in a single- step infusion for ales. The matrix recently posted for Redhook ales reveals that they use Klages as the base malt for all their products. They've got some fine products. This led me to wonder about switching to Klages for ales. Doing so would save me about $.20 per pound and more importantly require me to keep less malt in the garage. The question now is: does Redhook use tradiditional single-step mashing or do they find they need a protein rest. I suspect the former. Maybe the person who posted the matrix or some other resident of the Emerald City can find out for us. Certainly, if it's good enough for Redhook, it's good enough for me. Don McDaniel Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 91 12:57:50 PST From: grumpy!cr at uunet.UU.NET (C.R. Saikley) Subject: Artichoke Liquer From: gkushmer at Jade.Tufts.EDU > How would artichoke taste in beer? >Anyone have any experience in this? Any perceptions? Never tried artichoke beer, but a friend has a bottle of artichoke liquer. The stuff is so vile that I've actually seen grown men wipe their tongues on paper towels after tasting it! CR Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1991 12:55:48 -0800 From: krweiss at ucdavis.edu Subject: grainmill idea? I just had a stray thought... Has anyone tried rigging a hopper above the rollers on a cheap hand-cranked pasta machine to crack grain? The rollers are steel, and adjustable from pretty far apart to really close together. I just don't know if they'd "grab" the grains and run them through or not. If this works, it should provide a superior crush to a Corona at a similar or even lower cost. I've got a pasta machine, and next time I brew (soon, I hope, as Thanksgiving parties wiped out my inventory) I'll try cracking some crystal with the pasta maker and see what happens. - ------------------------------------------- Ken Weiss krweiss at ucdavis.edu Computing Services 916/752-5554 U.C. Davis 916/752-9154 (fax) Davis, CA 95616 Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 91 13:25:05 PST From: grumpy!cr at uunet.UU.NET (C.R. Saikley) Subject: Thomas Hardy's Ale There's been talk recently of how long barleywines will keep, so I thought I'd add my two cents. The Celebrator staff recently did a tasting of eight of the last nine vintages of Thomas Hardy's. The importer was kind enough to send them to us. (No Kidding. Free beer - in the mail! It's a tough job.....[gloat,gloat]) My notes aren't handy, but if memory serves, the 87 was the unanimous favorite. The 86 had soured (very nasty, undrinkable) and earlier batches were over the hill. This calls into question the brewer's assertion that TH will improve for 25 years. And now, at the risk of commercialism...... For a more complete account of this hedonistic event, see the Dec/Jan issue of the Celebrator. Please direct all flames to me personally, CR Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 91 10:46:44 -0800 From: objy!server!bobm at Sun.COM (Bob Muller) Subject: Re: Boiling Over I've been following this thread with real interest, and I think I'm beginning to see commonalities between the theories. First, my own experience. When I first started extract brewing about 10 years ago, I had boilovers about 1 batch out of every 3 (I won't tell you about the landlord's reaction to the drip pan on the stove when I moved out!-). Over time, I found a way that works and haven't had any boilovers since. I bring the water to a boil, then heat and dissolve the malt and other ingredients in the boiling water. Never had another boilover. So what's the deal? I think Jack's explanation makes sense--there's something about the rate of increase in wort temperature that reduces boilover. I think Eric's explanation makes sense--the dissolved gases (primarily oxygen/nitrogen?) make bubbles that foam. I think a prior post (sorry, don't have the name) makes sense--the proteins in the wort make a film that promotes the boilover. I think the posts about adding water to the boil and lowering the temperature briefly at the boil all make sense. How to reconcile all these? Food chemists please correct me. The boilover is clearly a foaming phenomenon, the same stuff that makes souffles soufle and gives brew a head. A foam requires at least two things, gas and liquid. The liquid forms a structure around the bubbles that allows the bubbles to persist in an ever-expanding structure that stabilizes to whatever extent the liquid's structure permits. Now, a nice protein foam like egg or malt proteins would seem ideal to promote a nice stable foam--and it does, both for souffless and beer. Complex carbohydrates may also be a good foaming agent, I'm not sure. Example: the new Guiness. This uses nitrogen to produce very small bubbles, which combine with the protein/carbs in the beer to form the smooth, creamy, stable head. My guess is that the rate of release of bubbles is important, the size of the bubbles is important, and the nature of the foaming agent is important in determining the stability of the foam. So, my theory is that (1) slowing the temperature rise to boiling in a wort produces bubbles at a slower rate, reducing the amount of foam (this is Jack's observation); (2) boiling the water before adding the malt extract drives off the gases that make the smaller bubbles that form the foam, thus reducing the malt's ability to cause foam; and (3) skimming off the coagulating proteins will reduce the amount of foaming agent in the wort, reducing the amount of foam; (4) dumping in cold water reduces the rate of bubble production and disturbs the formation of the protein film that promotes foaming, at least temporarily, but this is enough to destabilize the foam (and this applies to lowering the temperature when the foaming occurs, it lets the foam destabilize by reducing foam production). --Bob Muller Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 91 13:34:43 PST From: grumpy!cr at uunet.UU.NET (C.R. Saikley) Subject: Troooooooob >From: korz at ihlpl.att.com >Recently, I received a question via email that may be of interest to >other beginners. The question was "what is cold break?" >What's in cold break? Well, I'm not a chemist and have not researched >this too much, but I believe that it is mostly proteins and product of >tannins reacting with proteins. The tannins are from the husks of the >grains. The other source of tannins in beer is the hops. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1991 15:03 PDT From: Bob Jones <BJONES at NOVA.llnl.gov> Subject: Mash tun design ############################################### Following is another contribution from Micah Millspaw on mash tun design. These contributions are his alone. I am merely acting as a conduit for his ideas and opinions. Bob Jones ############################################### I've built IMHO a very efficient mash/lauter tun. This is the result of many years of brewing and four earlier mash tuns. I usualy do single temp. infusion or step infusion mashes so my equipment is set up accordingly. This mash/lauter vessel is made from a SS keg(15.5) and can easily mash and sparge 50# of grain. I have brewed at least 150 gallons using it and had no stuck mashes or any large problems at all. It is not insulated as SS is a poor thermal conductor and the grain is a large thermal mass,I lose about 3 degrees F over 2 hours. I've built into this mash tun some interesting features which might be of use to others who are planning on building or modifing their mash tuns. 1) the false bottom is a piece of 10 gauge perforated SS sheet metal with 3/32 holes in it. This is a pricey item but it is worth the cost. 2) the tun can be gravity filled with strike water from the bottom up. IMHO this makes for uniform heating of the grain without stirring, also dry pockets of grain are totally eliminated. 3) Spray sparging over the grain bed Bob Jones has come up with a flow control ( but I haven't installed it yet) that will maintain the level of sparge water over the grain bed. 4) most importantly, a vent tube that runs from the top (outside) of the tun to under the false bottom. I believe that this vent prevents a set mash caused by a sort of vapor lock, where the wort cannot flow out because no air can flow in. It has been my experience that venting under the false bottom works very well, this is my third mash/lauter tun to use this. However too finely crushed grain can still cause problems that no mash tun will fix. On the topic of boil overs, I have a hood with a two speed fan above my kettle. Since the installation of this hood I have had no boil over problems and have had much more vigorous boils. Micah Millspaw 12/11/91 Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 91 14:31 CST From: arf at ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) Subject: Pasturization, Malt, Priming To: Homebrew Digest Fm: Jack Schmidling EUREKA! Please note, multiple title. Thanks for all the helpful mail. Again we prove the value of honey over vinigar. From: Jeff Frane <70670.2067 at compuserve.com> >To Jack Schmidling: Are you under the assumption that 150 degrees of heat will kill many microorganisms, other than yeast? Yes, as a matter of fact it will kill MOST of them. That is why milk and many other products are pasturized at 150. > Remind me not to eat any of your home-canned foods. Home canned foods are processed for long-term storage, not overnight as in the situation we are here discussing. Most of the concern in canned goods is with botulism spores that can even survive an hour in boiling water. That is why pressure cookers are used. You may rest assured that whatever gets into a 150 deg batch of wort, will not be worth worrying about in the morning. If the big B spores get it, boiling won't help anyway. Fortunately, the ones I have talked to, say they don't like beer. From: florianb at chip.cna.tek.com Subject: grain cracking >Goshums, geewhilikers! At $10 per can, extracts are pretty expensive. At 80 cents a pound for grain, after about 8 brewings with all-grain the differential pays for the mill! At .55 per pound, it is paid for even sooner. Try: Minnesota Malting 25 lb bag $13.75 plus UPS I have made two batches so far and like it lots.... The contact is: Bob Jensen Minnesota Malting 918 N 7th St Cannon Falls, MN 55009 (507) 263 3911 From: korz at ihlpl.att.com Subject: Priming with dry malt extract Jack writes: >One of the problems I have found with dry extract is that >there is always some undisolved residue in the bottom of the >primer making me wonder what is in the last few bottles. <Putting dry extract in your priming bucket is not a good idea -- it is an invitiation for bacterial and wild yeast infection. I boil it in two cups of water or wort. That is why I was surprised to find undisolved or precipitated stuff on the bottom of the primer. js Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 91 21:42:32 EST From: Alexander R Mitchell <ARMITC01%ULKYVM.bitnet at CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU> Subject: Three Cheers for Noel Damon! Thank you Noel, for offering info on making a roller mill. That is part of the HBD-help-another-brewer-out spirit that makes this a good digest. You said no charge - can we help out with copying costs? Should we put an extra stamp on our SAS envelope? Once again, thanks. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 91 09:14:19 PST From: Richard.Stueven at Corp.Sun.COM (Richard Stueven) Subject: Re: Transporting Homebrew (This bounced thr first time. If it shows up twice, I owe you a beer.) In HBD #779, Steven J. Boege asks: >If I bring a case of homebrew in my carry-on, will I >be allowed onto a commercial flight? A couple of months ago, I carried on a case of my own brew. The security folks at SFO X-rayed it and didn't even raise an eyebrow. Several other members of this august forum have had the same experience at other airports, so it's probably a safe bet. If somebody balks, just bribe them with a bottle! Richard Stueven AHA# 22584 |----------| Internet: gak at Corp.Sun.COM |----GO----| Disclaimer: I'm not allowed to ATTMAIL: ...!attmail!gak |---SHARX--| have opinions. Cow Palace: Sec 107 Row F Seat 8 |----------| Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 91 09:10:10 PST From: Richard.Stueven at Corp.Sun.COM (Richard Stueven) Subject: BEWARE Guinness-in-a-Can! Shopping for Draught Guinness in a can is much like shopping for tomatoes. Squeeze each can before you buy it. If you can compress it at all, _don't_buy_it_ because it contains flat beer. Before I knew better, I bought and opened one of these compressible cans. Imagine my disappointment when no foam came up through the hole. Imagine my despair when I poured the beer into my glass and no head appeared. It was dead flat. One of the other ten cans in my refrigerator shows the same symptoms. At $1.89/can, I'm going to exchange it! In the meantime, I'm going to dissect the one I opened to see if I can find any obvious defects. BEWARE! Richard Stueven AHA# 22584 |----------| Internet: gak at Corp.Sun.COM |----GO----| Disclaimer: I'm not allowed to ATTMAIL: ...!attmail!gak |---SHARX--| have opinions. Cow Palace: Sec 107 Row F Seat 8 |----------| Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 91 0:52:53 GMT From: Conn Copas <C.V.Copas at loughborough.ac.uk> Subject: Casks, decoction, wort chilling >I have tasted oxidized beer and try to avoid it at all costs. I was musing >on the cask conditioning of British Bitters, and began to wonder how they >avoid oxidation of the beer in the cask after the cask is no longer full. >I mean, the stuff might be around for a few days. Any thoughts? Depends how well the cask is sealed and consequently whether oxygen fills the ullage space. Most casks have an inlet which is sealed by a wooden peg, and which is somewhat permeable. The short answer is that the beer does deteriorate and is better fresh. Apart from the problem of oxygenation, the brew also loses condition as dissolved CO2 transfers into the ullage. The brew is pumped out by hand, so dispensing pressure is not an issue. One solution to all this is to maintain a blanket of CO2 as the brew is drawn off. CAMRA objects to this practice on the grounds that it isn't natural/traditional, and there is a possibility of the brew becoming artificially overcarbonated. This is one of the few areas where I object to CAMRA ... Re decoction mashes, Hough et al talk about clarification benefits. Apparently, the theory goes that raising the grain to boiling extracts residual starch, which then becomes converted. Re using chilled water to hasten cold breaks, Wheeler throws cold water on this idea in his latest book :-). The theory isn't presented at all clearly, but I believe the basic concept is that trub formation involves an equilibrium, ie, wort at a given temperature can support a certain concentration of dissolved trub. By increasing the volume, a larger absolute amount of trub remains in solution. Conclusion : it is better to chill the smaller volume using a heat exchanger. Return to table of contents
Date: Friday, 13 Dec 1991 07:40:04 EST From: m14051 at mwvm.mitre.org (John DeCarlo) Subject: Re: Legal Imports * Forwarded Thu Dec 12 1991 21:32:26 by John DeCarlo at 1:109/131 I had heard that alot of German and British Beer is brewed at the brewery then shiped by tankers to the US and that then they are pasturized and have all the _Bad Stuff_ added, anyone else heard this? Mike Buckley [forwarded by me, as Mike has not direct net access] Internet: jdecarlo at mitre.org (or John.DeCarlo at f131.n109.z1.fidonet.org) Fidonet: 1:109/131 Return to table of contents
Date: Friday, 13 December 1991 10:42am ET From: joshua.grosse at amail.amdahl.com Subject: cold break advice/dissent In HBD 781, John Cotterill <johnc at hprpcd.rose.hp.com> wrote: > After I do my 5-gallon boil, I pass the hot wort thru my chiller and straight > into the fermentation vessel, where I immediately pitch the yeast (at about 68 > degrees). Is this undesirable? After the chill phase, should I let the > cold break settle out and then transfer the liquid into yet another vessel? Papazian sez that while commercial brewers remove hot/cold break material from the wort prior to fermentation, homebrewers need not worry. Note that C.P. recommends a blow-off tube. Miller recommends that you settle the wort and rack it, but you can pitch before racking the next day. Miller says that leaving the hot/cold break material will cause high levels of fusel alchohols to be produced, and says that this will occur during the respiration phase due to the yeast using the trub for oxygen instead of the oxygen from your aeration efforts. Note that Miller does not recommend blow=off tubes. His "beginner's guide" section has you rack from boiler to fementer, then to a carboy, then back to the fermenter. Too many steps, I think. Also, I use liquid yeasts and starters. With ale yeasts, this means I get a VERY short lag, if I waited until the next day, it would be far too late. Miller is a lager maker, where even with starters, the lag is long enough to pitch then wait for settling to occur. Papazian may be right, in that, the blow-off may expel fusel alchohols that are produced by fermenting on top of hot/cold break material. I'm for blending the two bibles together -- and here's what I do (or did) as of my last batch: I use an immersion chiller to get to room temp, in the open electric masher/boiler. Then, I remove the chiller and cover the boiler with a sanitized cover. After cleaning up everything else, I go get my carboy where the starter has been working. I remove the fermentation lock, pour off the used wort, leaving the slurry behind, and then rack the batch of wort from the boiler onto the yeast in the carboy. I cap, slosh around, then use a blow-off tube. Yes, I get some trub formation over the next few hours. But I've not left a fresh batch of wort sit around for bacteria and wild yeast to feast on. I use a blow-off tube to remove any excess fusel alchohols, and I don't worry. - ----------------------------------------------------------------- Josh Grosse jdg00 at amail.amdahl.com Amdahl Corp. 313-358-4440 Southfield, Michigan Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 91 11:59:19 EST From: eisen at kopf.HQ.Ileaf.COM (Carl West) Subject: Sam Adams' sexy babes at GABF I have this from the ex wife of one of SA's founders. They have a secretary/receptionist/girl-friday type named Rhonda who has a truly amazing figure. Rhonda was serving beer at their first GABF wearing something that was cut down to *there* and up to *here*. Apparently the guys were willing to drink anything so long as they got to watch Rhonda serve it. Carl West When I stop learning, bury me. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 91 10:16:13 PST From: "John Cotterill" <johnc at hprpcd.rose.hp.com> Subject: Liquid Starters Full-Name: "John Cotterill" I began using liquid yeasts about 5 batches ago. The first surprise was how long it took to get a serious fermentation started (over 2 days!). At first I thought it was just an older yeast, but the second batch did the same thing. Since then, I have been adding the liquid from the package to a little (very) sterile water and malt put into a bottle with an air lock on it. After a few days, I can pitch this into my batch and have a fermentation that starts within about eight hours. My process is very inexact, I just add, "oh, about this much malt to about this much water." My only real concern is not to put so much malt in the the final alcohol content in the starter kills the yeast. What do other people do? Do you boil hops into the starter mixture? Are there any rules of thumb for how much malt to use? By the way, my second surprise was how good beer tastes using liquid yeast and how it gives me another degree of freedom for keying in on the ideal recipe. JC johnc at hprpcd.rose.hp.com Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 91 14:06:10 EST From: Jay Hersh <hersh at expo.lcs.mit.edu> Subject: Half-coct decoct > Noonan does indeed >instruct us to boil the decoction, for up to 45 minutes in some cases, OK, but I wasn't actually basing my impressions on Noonan. I was basing it on what I had (perhaps mistakenly) thought to be traditional German and Czech decoction brewing. Darryl Richman had a more complete tour of the PU brewery, and I don't have his article here, so perhaps he can comment on his recollections. It is certainly possible that in my questioning of our tour guide and the museum curator at the Bamberg brewing museum (a former brewer who spoke no English, and I not enough German) that I didn't make my questions clear, or misunderstood the answers. BTW If you're in Bavaria make the trip to Bamberg. There is a great brewing museum in a monastery over looking the town. Lots of local brewpubs making tasty Racuhbiers, and a lot of other great local breweries. Unfortunately we skipped Kulmbach, though some Kulmbach beers were available in Bamberg. Also while not as great a brewing town Nurnberg is nearby and is quite a quaint little town with a hilltop fortress and old city walls dating from the medieval ages. Sorry I'm not Norm Hardy, and I don't have my notes handy. A bunch of people (Wort Processors) are after me for a complete tour write-up but I'm too busy. - JaH Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 91 13:44:50 EST From: Brian Midura <midura at ctron.com> Subject: Grain Mills I like my grain mill..... Grain mills are very helpful in the sense that you can bulk order grains for a significantly lower price and if you and all your friends order the price even goes lower... I have only had my grain mill for 3 batches but is has nearly paid for itself in the amount I saved ordering 5-10 lb bags of grain. A grain mill isn't necessary but is sure helpful and couldn't do without it now. .Brian Midura P.S. If you think they are too expensive and have friends that homebrew you can all pitch in and it is less of an economic burden on each person. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 1991 10:18:26 -0800 From: krweiss at ucdavis.edu Subject: grainmill idea? This message appears to have disappeared into the ether without landing in the Digest. Sorry if it turns out to be a duplicate submission... Has anyone tried rigging a hopper above the rollers on a cheap hand-cranked pasta machine to crack grain? The rollers are steel, and adjustable from pretty far apart to really close together. I just don't know if they'd "grab" the grains and run them through or not. If this works, it should provide a superior crush to a Corona at a similar or even lower cost. I've got a pasta machine, and next time I brew (soon, I hope, as Thanksgiving parties wiped out my inventory) I'll try cracking some crystal with the pasta maker and see what happens. - ------------------------------------------- Ken Weiss krweiss at ucdavis.edu Computing Services 916/752-5554 U.C. Davis 916/752-9154 (fax) Davis, CA 95616 Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 1991 10:22:03 PST From: BREIN at dsfvax.jpl.nasa.gov Subject: Cargo-hold pressurization mlevy at unssun.nevada.edu (Marcel Levy) writes: >. . . . . My one experiment with checked baggage and beer >suggests that either the cargo hold is pressurized, or that the bottles >can stand it. The question of cargo-hold pressurization comes up in various contexts both in and out of the HBD. The cargo-holds of all commercial jets are pressurized to the same pressure as the passenger cabin. This is why they can carry pets down there. In any case, even if you took your beer into the vacuum of space it would be the same as if the pressure inside the bottle increased by about 15 psi. I should think most beer bottles could manage this much pressure increment. Beer in space? Hmm... Has anyone sent some little yeastlies up in the shuttle to see if they'll still ferment? Barry Rein BREIN at gpvax.jpl.nasa.gov Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 91 10:39:43 -0800 From: ktk at nas.nasa.gov (Katy T. Kislitzin) Subject: Beer Places in Seattle Two *interesting* taverns in Seattle are Murphy's Pub and The Blue Moon. They are both on NE 39th, west of Univ of Wash. Murhpy's is really in Wallingford, The Blue moon is just the other side of I5 from campus. Murphy's is an Irish pub with excellent live music most evenings. They have Guiness and other British beers on tap. Don't remember which others, I haven't been there in at least 5 years (I don't live in Seattle any more). One of the local NPR/APR radio stations, KPLU does a Saturday morning live variety show from Murphy's with music, skits etc. Similar to West Coast Weekend on KQED in SF or Prarie Home Companion, but better than West Coast Weekend (IMHO) and more focused on Irish/Celtic music than PHC. The host(ess) of the Seattle show and several of the guests have appeared on PHC. Not relevant to beer, but Seattle has a thriving folk/bluegrass scene. Somewhat further in the same direction, between Wallingford and Ballard in Phiney Ridge is the new location of Red Hook, home of Ballard Bitter, Red Hook, Winterhook etc. I went on a tour in their old Ballard location when my sister was up visiting and had a wonderful time. They only had tours on Saturday mornings (they brew every other day) and you needed reservations. Don't know if policies have changed. You can get cool tee shirts like the winterhook shirt i happen to be wearing and they give you as much beer on tap as you can drink before noon. The Blue Moon is a funky, bohemian place that has been there for over 50 years. They have local micros on tap: the various red hooks and grants, probably many others by now but it's been a while ;-) They used to have different events on different nights: opera night, grateful dead night, free peanut night etc. i watched the reagan/mondale ferraro/bush debates there ;-) Near Boeing, Ranier brewery also has tours, although they HARDLY qualify as a micro! Have Fun! - --kt PS there is also an excellent homebrew supply store in pike place market, so your 'friend' could bring you back supplies ;-) Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 91 10:28:16 PST From: grumpy!cr at uunet.UU.NET (C.R. Saikley) Subject: Ancient Beer >From: "Dr. John" <JELJ at CORNELLA.cit.cornell.edu> >Ross Haywood: >I don't have the definitive answer, but suspect that brewing >predates the discovery of the "recipe" for stainless steel. I suspect >that your friend is mistaken, and that there are indeed quite a few >copper-only kettles in breweries around the world, and probably were >quite a few more in days gone by. I'm no anthropologist or metallurgy/historian, but I'd say we're on pretty safe turf to claim that brewing predates stainless steel. In fact, I think it's safe to say that brewing predates written language. The oldest known recipes come from the Sumerians and are written in Cunieform, the oldest known written language. They'd already figured out how to make beer by the time they'd figured out how to write about it. As far as I know, there are no "recipes" for stainless steel in Cunieform. :+} There are anthropologists out there who espouse the theory that humans made the transition from hunter-gatherers to an agrarian society in order to have a more reliable supply of grains for beer making. I guess they were the first to go all-grain! Chai Yo, CR "We brewers don't make beer, we just get all the ingredients together and the beer makes itself." -Fritz Maytag Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 1991 11:28:35 -0600 From: gaspar at wuchem.wustl.edu Subject: lifetime of beers It may be of interest to report that I recently drank a bottle of Gale's Prize Old Ale that had lain with my wine for 12 years. It was superb and was superior to but of kindred character to a Thomas Hardy's Ale. The Gale Prize Old Ale came in corked bottles of 9 3/4 fl.oz. capacity, and an old CAMRA guide described it as the last commercial beer in England to come in corked bottles. Can someone tell me if it is still being brewed, and if so, in what kind of bottles does it come. Mine is a lovely brown pressed glass with a charming inscription. Peter Gaspar Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 91 14:43:31 CST From: gjfix at utamat.uta.edu (George J Fix) Subject: Wort Spoilage (George Fix) Jeff Frane's comments about wort spoilage appear to me to be right on target. This is an area which many homebrewers take lightly since the damage to the finished beer is usually not as serious as it is with other types of infection. Nevertheless, problems from wort spoilage are apparently somewhat common. What is particularly frustrating is to be evaluating a beer in a competition where the brewer has clearly used a well designed recipe with high quality brewing materials, yet have the overall effect compromised by minor (but invariably unpleasant) effects of wort spoilage. The most dangerous wort spoilers are from a broad class of gram negative bacteria generally called coliforms. What they have in common (other than the Gram stain) is a strong propensity to produce various sulfur compounds (DMS, H2S, and misc. mercaptans). The effect is different from the malt derived DMS cited in other posts, and has the unmistakable aroma of cooked corn. (This flavoring is totally unrelated to the use of corn as a cereal adjunct). Most is scrubbed out in the fermentation, but residual flavoring recalling rotten vegetables can remain in the finished beer. Two points deserve emphasis. First, effects can occur with only moderate levels of infection. In experiments I did in preparing my book, it was found that infections as low as 1000 cells per milliliter can be relevant. (E.Coli from ATCC was used in these experiments). Recalling that there are roughly 10,000,000 yeast cells per ml. in a normal pitching, this amounts to one coliform to every 10,000 yeast cells, hardly a massive infection. The second point is that the sulfur compounds produced have very low flavor thresholds. For example, the DMS/H2S/mercaptan mixture produced by coliforms is typically detectable at 10-20 micrograms per liter (parts per billion if you like!). This is in striking contrast to esters, diacetyl, etc. whose thresholds are measured in milligrams per liter (ppm). Powerful stuff this. The coliforms are inactivated at 140F, so wort held at 150F is theoretically safe. Nevertheless, I feel that Jeff's concerns are well founded. First, 150F is cutting it close to the danger point. Second, there is always the possibility that bacteria will find thermal protection inside protein particles or in some other place. There is one other wort spoiler that is unwelcome in most beers, but is welcome in sour mashing. These are thermally resistant strains of lactobacillus. In fact, it is my view that the real challenge for sour mash brewers is to promote the lactos while keeping the coliform count low. If done well with the right recipe, this can lead to refreshing and snappy flavors a la Berliner weisse (when it is fresh!). In most beers, on the other hand, it will lead to an unacceptable sourness. As a practical matter, our best defense against wort infection is keeping our brewing equipment clean. A variety of cleaners work well (e.g., TSP, B-Brite, washing soda, etc.). What is apparently important is not the cleaner used, but rather making sure that the equipment is cleaned in a timely manner after use. I am very sympathetic to the "no chemical" approach to sanitation. Indeed, some of the flavors imparted by residual chemicals can make rotten vegetables sound pretty good! As a personal matter, on the other hand, I simply do not trust myself to do an adequate job at for example cleaning using hot water and a cloth alone. Moreover, enough is known about the chemical cleaners and sanitizers that they can be totally neutralized after use using the appropriate procedures. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 91 16:26 EST From: man at kato.att.com Subject: boiling Since I moved my brewing outdoors, I have had experiences that none of you have mentioned. When I brewed indoors, it took 1.5 hours minimum to boil down 6.5 gal of wort to 5.5 gal. So far, I have made 2 batches outdoors. One batch was 6.5 gal pre-boil and the other was > 8 gal pre- boil. In both cases, I boiled it to under 5 gal in 1 hour. I am using a King Kooker jet propane burner, but I keep it at a setting so it just does boil. Does anyone else experience this? My 8 gallon batch had an extra 1.5 gal of water added to the kettle after the sparge. I figured this would fix the problem, but I still had to add > .5 gal of water to make a 5.5 gal batch. Jack: On this intimidation theory. I don't but it, but then I don't know for sure, either. Why don't we do this: Will anyone who got a free copy under the pretention of posting a review please step forward and explain yourself? Now, give them a week. If Jack has a larger list than those who respond, I suggest he post them after the week is over. Then we will see who is fessin' up. Jack: On the STUFF postings. You said you didn't separate your posts to save bandwith (sic). But you continue to post ads and EASY MASH techniques and INTIMIDATION posts to both the HBD and rec.crafts.brewing. This is a terrible waste of bandwidth. You essentially send these posts to r.c.b twice. I suggest you only post these to one place (your choice, but HBD would let you get to everyone) and then with the extra bandwidth, you can separate your posts and keep the threads going with meaningful subject lines. Mark Nevar Return to table of contents
Date: 14 Dec 91 13:48:00 EST From: "CCVAX::HAPANOWICZ" <HAPANOWICZ%CCVAX.decnet at bigvax.alfred.edu> Subject: Beer Hunter Any word on when "The Beer Hunter" is to be shown on TV? Return to table of contents
End of HOMEBREW Digest #782, 12/16/91 ************************************* -------
[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