HOMEBREW Digest #796 Tue 07 January 1992

Digest #795 Digest #797

		Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator

  Klages, Beer Hunter  (Jack Schmidling)
  Starters and thoughts on bittering hops ("Dr. Full-Time")
  cleaning copper tubing (Mike Zentner)
  Stove Mess Cleaning (Justin Aborn)
  homebrew in Sweden ("Spencer W. Thomas")
  clean boilover ("KATMAN.WNETS385")
  Oxygen and hot wort ("Rad Equipment")
  Oxygen and hot wort                   Time:9:35 AM     Date:1/6/92
  RE- MESS> Better living thr (Chris McDermott)
  Is boiling (water) really n (Chris McDermott)
  Hunter Monitors (Kieran O'Connor)
  an in-cider's view ("Knight,Jonathan")
  More International Supplier Questions (Jim Grady)
  Re: altbier (wbt)
  Re: MESS (larryba)
  Re: Coop Flaked Grains (larryba)
  Randy at rdr.com: Misc. questions (larryba)
  Re: Fermentation and surface area (korz)
  racking (Alan Mayman)
  Casks (korz)
  Re: Mashing questions/answers (korz)
  Re: Pitching at high krauesen (korz)
  misc comments (Bob Jones)
  Sour Mashing (Bob Jones)
  Mash/Lauter Tun Construction (Tom Bower)
  Spargin blues...... (Jim White)
  Temperature Calculations (Brian Capouch)
  All Grain Weizen (Jon Binkley)

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: Sat, 4 Jan 92 22:11 CST From: arf at ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) Subject: Klages, Beer Hunter To: Homebrew Digest Fm: Jack Schmidling Subj: Klages Conversion There has been a lot of discussion on the virtues of Klages malt and the following is my experience with my first Klages batch, mashed this weekend. My previous 7, all-grain brews have been made with 6 row and two different two row, barley types. I have used everything from the most complicated, partial decoction to straignt infusion. The iodine test has always indicated incomplete conversion and I concluded that, as long as the beer is good and the yield is acceptable, I would just not worry about the iodine test. This weekend I brewed up a batch using Klages from Minnesota Malting (.55/lb) and using a two step infusion, I achieved a neutral iodine test after 60 min at 155 degs. I did not test it before the hour, so I have no idea when conversion was complete. The process was 9 lbs malt and 4 gal doughin at 110 degs, followed by 60 min at 155 and 15 min at 175. This is of course, anecdotal and a sample of one but all science has to start somewhere. From: stevie at spss.com Subject: Comments on Beer Hunter Comments >Why not simply tape it? Good question, Jack. The reason is that the Discovery Channel is a commercial operation. If you want to tape the series, you have to edit out the commercials. That is a mighty strange bit of logic. The vast majority of the taping I do is so that I can zipp through the commercials later and not have to put up with them. > If you're taping as you're watching, this means you have to SIT through the commercials. I am utterly baffled as to why anyone would do that unless one were a pirate and selling copies. > The first runnings (har har) of the series were post-midnight Central Time. Sitting through all the ads for 900 party lines was far worse than watching the "fluffy" parts of the series (with suitable background music from Copeland or Dvorak or whoever). I thought that was the reason someone invented VCR's. > I broke down, ordered the tapes, and got the scenes back. So, if you cough up the dough and buy "Beer Hunter," you can be confident in the knowledge that you'll get more footage for your bucks. Far be it for me to suggest that people stop buying video tapes but I could never understand why people buy stuff that is broadcast and free. If nothing else, the broadcast quality and first generation copy is/can be, far superior to the copy you would purchase. js ~. Return to table of contents
Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1992 14:22:56 -0600 From: "Dr. Full-Time" <enders at plains.NoDak.edu> Subject: Starters and thoughts on bittering hops With all the talk about when to pitch starters, I'd like to add my own data point to the discussion. What I almost always do is pitch the slurry after the starter has fermented out (or almost so). While it is true that the dormant yeast cells have to wake up and start reproducing, I feel the sheer number of cells you dump into the wort wins out here. Fermentation is usually up and running within 6-8 hours (from a 500 ml starter). Also, I can taste the "beer" I decant from the starter, giving me a check on the health of the starter (one less thing to worry about :-). However, I do feel that exactly when to pitch depends somewhat on the yeast strain involved. Vigorous yeasts like Whitbread can stand up to waiting till the starter ferments out. On the other hand, Sierra Nevada (cultured fron the bottle) seems to be a little slow getting started again. My most recent batch (01/01/91) pitched with SN took about 16 hours to get up and running, so the pitch at high krausen crowd may have something here. Another thought I had whilst brewing this last batch: Is there *really* any difference in which variety you use for bittering hops? I mean, after 45-60 minutes in the boil, I doubt there are many aromatic compounds left, and as for flavour, I can't say for sure, but it seems to me that it doesn't make a bit of difference. What I've been doing is using whatever medium to high alpha hop I have on hand. Also, it seems to be a waste of good Halertauer, Tetnanger, Saaz, etc., to use them for bittering. Then again, I suppose you *could* taste the difference if you used 3 oz. of 3% alpha Halertauer for bittering :-)! What say, folks? =============================================================================== Todd Enders - WD0BCI ARPA: enders at plains.nodak.edu Computer Center UUCP: ...!uunet!plains!enders Minot State University or: ...!hplabs!hp-lsd!plains!enders Minot, ND 58701 Bitnet: enders at plains "The present would be full of all possible futures, if the past had not already projected a pattern upon it" - Andre' Gide =============================================================================== Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 92 08:31:13 -0500 From: zentner at ecn.purdue.edu (Mike Zentner) Subject: cleaning copper tubing Back when this came about, I think I was the main advocate of cleaning. My batch of tubing had a pretty bad case of "grease" inside, to the point where, when I let water (cold or hot) drain out of it, the leaving the last few drops to fall on the counter. Silvery specs appeared to be floating on these water drops, but this was really small pools of grease/oil. So, to tell how much, if at all, your tubing needs cleaning, take a Q-tip dipped in propanol or ethanol and stick it in the end of your tubing, swishing it around. If it comes out black, then you know you've got more than copper on the wort side of your tubing. Here's the bad news...If you've already built your chiller, it will be very difficult to clean. Here's a list of things I tried running through mine (a list of things that did not complete the job): many flushes with cold and boiling water (more than 10) combined with dishsoap, then bleach, alcohol, and, in desperation, Lysol. No amount of running anything through it would stop the grease "particulates" from dropping out. The Q-tip still came out black (have to stick it in a little farther each time you test). Finally, I took the thing out in the back yard, uncoiled it, and with much work and undiluted dishsoap, I was able to snake a stiff wire through all 30 or so feet of it (coming from both ends and hooking in the middle eventually). All the scraping, twisting, and pushing the wire combined with the dishsoap really loosened a tube full of black gunk. To one end of the wire, I hooked a very strong string and pulled it through. To wash out the soap, I hooked the whole thing to a garden hose and ran water through for a while. Then, to get the last of the crud out, I hooked cotton balls on the string, soaked them in alcohol, and pulled them through. At the other end of the tube, I replaced the cotton and worked my way back and forth several more times. It was finally clean! Anyhow, the lesson learned was to clean the tubing BEFORE you use it if it is dirty, because no amount of rinsing will get the stuff off completely, just like your dishes don't wash themselves without either severe agitation by your hands or a water jet (which you can't produce inside of tubing. What to use for sanitizers? Try an experiment. Cut off 1 inch pieces or tubing and soak each of them in 1 of your proposed sanitizers, using one in plain water as a control. When I did this with water, bleach, and B-Brite, I came to the conclusion that plain water caused the least deterioration. I usually boil 2 gallons worth of water to run through the chiller prior to the wort, and this seems to have worked fine so far (run the boiling water through before you've filled the other side of the chiller with cooling water). Of course, should anyone use this method, it's important to note that when you're done brewing for the night or day, you're not done until you run lots of hot water through the chiller to get out any remaining sugars, and then work it around in a circle to drain it and prevent mold. Sorry for the length, but this was a real pain when it happened to me and if it can save someone else the aggrivation, I think it's worth it. Granted, the fouling of my tubing may have been a severe case, but it is very worth checking. Mike Zentner zentner at ecn.purdue.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 92 9:34:56 EST From: Justin Aborn <jaborn at BBN.COM> Subject: Stove Mess Cleaning Dave, If you get one of those really bad messes, you can clean it off your stove with oven cleaner. Justin Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 92 10:53:48 EDT From: "Spencer W. Thomas" <Spencer.W.Thomas at med.umich.edu> Subject: homebrew in Sweden I'm not sure about Sweden, but in Norway (when I was there 12 years ago, anyway), it was definitely illegal to brew your own. Not that this stopped people from doing it (although more of the people I knew distilled their own, also illegal), but I would be surprised if there were good sources of HB supplies and equipment to be found. I do remember ads in the subway for a malt extract that said (in translation) "It is forbidden to brew beer from [brand] malt extract." Sort of like the situation here during prohibition. ("If you were to take this can of malt extract, mix it with so much water and sugar and add yeast, you would get an illegal beverage. So don't do it.") =Spencer W. Thomas HSITN, U of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 spencer.thomas at med.umich.edu 313-747-2778 Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 92 15:54 GMT From: "KATMAN.WNETS385" <6790753%356_WEST_58TH_5TH_FL%NEW_YORK_NY%WNET_6790753 at mcimail.com> Subject: clean boilover Date: 06-Jan-92 Time: 10:52 AM Msg: EXT02571 Hi HBDers - Dave asked about cleaning up after boilovers: to clean up old boilover stuff, you can wet it down, sprinkle baking soda thickly on it to make a paste, and let it sit (making the water you wet it with as hot as possible helps). You should be able to just wipe it off, if you let it sit about 30 minutes. You may need to do it more than once if the stuff is really crusted on. This also works well on barbeque grills and oven spills. 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: 6 Jan 92 09:48:14 U From: "Rad Equipment" <rad_equipment at rad-mac1.ucsf.EDU> Subject: Oxygen and hot wort Subject: Oxygen and hot wort Time:9:35 AM Date:1/6/92 In HBD 794, Jay Hersh mentions: >...many European Breweries, notably Pilsener Urquell among them, >use a system where the sweet wort that goes from the mash tun >into the boiling tank is drained from the mash tun via a number >of spigots. This arrangement of spigots is called a "grant". Anchor uses one in their system. I once inquired as to the reason for this step in the brewing and was told by the brewer on duty (Mike Lee, if I remember correctly) that it was "traditional, it came with the brewery" and he knew of no specific advantage to it. Nor was he aware of any problem with oxidation. He also told me it could be by-passed and was when they made Old Foghorn. I'll be over there later this week and ask again. RW... Russ Wigglesworth CI$: 72300,61 |~~| UCSF Medical Center Internet: Rad Equipment at RadMac1.ucsf.edu |HB|\ Dept. of Radiology, Rm. C-324 Voice: 415-476-3668 / 474-8126 (H) |__|/ San Francisco, CA 94143-0628 Return to table of contents
Date: 6 Jan 1992 13:39:31 -0500 From: Chris McDermott <mcdermott at draper.com> Subject: RE- MESS> Better living thr RE: MESS> Better living through chemistry >Date: Fri, 03 Jan 92 11:49:56 CST >From: DAVE <C05705DA at WUVMD.Wustl.Edu> >Subject: MESS > >BEING THAT I AM A NEW HOMEBREWING APPRENTICE, I HAVE ENCOUNTERED A PROBLEM >THAT HAS ME FLAT OUT STUMPED. I HAD THE MISFORTUNE OF A BOIL-OVER WHEN I >WAS DESTRACTED FOR A FEW SECONDS. NOW, I HAVE THIS NICE AND UGLY BLACK MESS >ON MY STOVE THAT I CANNOT GET OFF. DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY HELPFUL SUGGESTIONS >OTHER THAN BUYING A NEW STOVE? MY WIFE *REALLY* WANTS TO KNOW. Try using "Fantastic" cleaner. In my experience, that stuff will take off almost anything. Just spray copious amounts onto the stove top and leave it for a while (leave the room the stuff smells bad.) Come back, spray on a bit more and apply a little elbow grease with one of those plastic scrub pads. If this fails, you have no choice: keep the stove and buy a new wife. Chris McDermott, [homebrew, not just for breakfast anymore] <mcdermott at draper.com> Return to table of contents
Date: 6 Jan 1992 14:21:49 -0500 From: Chris McDermott <mcdermott at draper.com> Subject: Is boiling (water) really n Is boiling (water) really necessary? In HbD#795 (Subject: Re: oxidation) Al Korz <korz at ihlpl.att.com> implies that any cold water that is to be combined with bitter wort in the fermenter should be boiled. Is this really necessary, or will plain old tap water do? I can think of only a couple reasons why it would be a must. 1 - Your water is from a shallow well and rich in microflora. In this case I wouldn't even want to drink it, never mind brew with it. In this case boiling has an obvious advantage. 2 - Your water is high in temporary hardness. Boiling the water would remove some of the minerals that might give your brew an off-flavor. 3 - Your water is chlorinated or flourinated beyond an accepteble level (whatever that may be.) In this case boiling would drive off these ions. Now if your water does not fall into one of these three catagoies, I would say that boiling is a waste of time and energy. Please let me know if anyone has an other viewpoint. (like nobody does?, Right!;-) Chris McDermott, [homebrew, not just for breakfast anymore] <mcdermott at draper.com> Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1992 14:48 EDT From: Kieran O'Connor <OCONNOR%SNYCORVA.bitnet at CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU> Subject: Hunter Monitors I was looking at a friend's Hunter Energy Monitor and at an ad in Zymurgy. It seems they only go to 40 degrees f. How do you do efficient lagering--say around 32 degrees f? Does anyone know of a monitor out there that goes lower? Kieran O;Connor oconnor at snycorva.bitnet Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 92 14:25:01 cdt From: "Knight,Jonathan" <KNIGHTJ%GRIN1.bitnet at CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU> Subject: an in-cider's view Many thanks to those who responded to me via e-mail and in "print" about my problem with off-flavor. I have concluded that the cideriness of my beer is due to the fact that, having been too lazy/broke to pick up a carboy for secondary fermentation, I've been single-stage brewing in my beginner's bucket, and THAT's where the beer sat for a month. (Obviously there's a moral to be drawn here for the beginner, or maybe several) Interestingly, enough, I finally went out and picked up a carboy just before I sat down to read my mail. At any rate, assuming this is a correct analysis of my problem, it shouldn't trouble me again since I use only extract, and yeast hasn't been a problem for me. And, I'm VERY glad to hear that the odor will probably go away after long enough in the bottle. See - you really shouldn't worry, right? Jonathan Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 92 15:51:16 EST From: Jim Grady <jimg at hpwald.wal.hp.com> Subject: More International Supplier Questions In HBD #795 Ken Key asks if anyone knows how a brewer in Sweden can get supplies. Unfortunately, I don't have the answer. Instead, I have a German friend who has shown a little interest in homebrewing but does not know how he would continue the hobby when he moves back to Germany (probably later this year). Does anybody have any info on this? He will be in Baden-Wuerttenburg (near Stuttgart). I thought I had seen at least one person mention that he had brewed while living in Germany. Thanks! - -- Jim Grady | Internet: jimg at hpwala.wal.hp.com | "Better thin beer than an empty jug" Phone: (617) 290-3409 | - Danish Proverb Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 92 14:57:56 EST From: wbt at cbema.att.com Subject: Re: altbier > We may have to finish it off with some champagne yeast. It's probably > worth trying, since the beer is still very sweet but has a good taste. I can't see that yeast nutrient, as Ken suggested, could do anything for this all-malt brew. I observe that this same thing happened when we brewed the hi-test Christmas ale at Ken's. That started at 1.090 or 1.080, I forget, but is the closest thing to this batch at 1.078. Perhaps this slow fermentation is simply a characteristic of high-gravity ales. Options: 1) We could throw in some yeast nutrient. Can't hurt. 2) We could pitch some liquid yeast; Wyeast 1007 German ale, which has proven itself up to the high-gravity Christmas ale. Perhaps the dry yeasts aren't sufficiently alcohol-tolerant. 3) We could do nothing for a couple of weeks and see if the gravity changes. 4) We could rouse the yeast cake. I'm dubious, because this risks infection and oxidation, plus there's not that much cake to rouse. I suggest #3. It's the easiest. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Bill Thacker AT&T Network Systems - Columbus cbema!wbt Quality Engineer Network Wireless Systems wbt at cbnews.att.com Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 92 12:55:16 PST From: larryba at microsoft.com Subject: Re: MESS Try oven Cleaner (lye) to soften up those boil over messes. I thought I had trashed my SS stove top, but a half hour soak under Easy Off and then scrubbing with a copper scrub pad made it look pretty much like new. The longer the soak, the easier the scrubbing. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 92 13:14:35 PST From: larryba at microsoft.com Subject: Re: Coop Flaked Grains Glenn Tinseth: Yes, Health food and coop "flaked" grains are pre-cooked. The rollers are HOT and cook the grain as it squishes it. I stopped paying $1.55/lb for flaked barley, wheat and oats at the home brew store and now pay $.40-$.75/lb at my local coop. Sometimes I just cook the grains alone for my breakfast, although I would prefer to drink them in a special breakfast bock... :-) - Larry Barello Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 92 13:20:57 PST From: larryba at microsoft.com Subject: Randy at rdr.com: Misc. questions I, too, was unable to send this directly to Randy at rdr.com - ----- Modern american 2 row is almost equivilent to traditional 6-row in enzymatic power. Most american lager malts are fully modified. English malts are over-modified. Continental malts, i belive, are under modified. The protein rest is needed mainly for the latter. I do protein rests with Klages mainly as a sort of dough-in. I like seeing 15 min conversion when I step to 155. If you are adding a lot of unmalted barley or oats (for a stout) then a protein rest might be needed. I have made perfectly fine stouts w/o the protein rest and they cleared just fine. Conversion rates are dependent upon temp and calcium/pH. Appearently you can fiddle with these variables to get differing rates of extract and various qualities of the beer. High efficiency doesn't alway equate to high quality. I usually go for efficiency. In short, about a gram of gypsum/gal of water (assuming you carbonate levels are low) should make for rip-snorting conversions. I believe a tbls is about 5 grams. Rice syrup would be the converted rice (starch -> sugar). Since you can expect to get around .030 pt/lb/gal from flaked rice and around .040pt/lb/gal from syrup, i would guess that 10-11oz of syrup would be equivilent to 14oz of flakes. Cooked, mushed rice added to the mash would be equivalent to using flaked rice. Flaked anything is pre-cooked by passing the grain through heated rollers. You need to pre-cook it to gelatinze the starch (make it soluble in water). Malted grain is a little different in that the growing plant releases enzymes that break down the kernel structures and release the starch. I was pretty nervous when I did my first all grain beer. Don't. Things are much more flexible than most authors will imply. You may not get the exact same beer they did, but you will still be pleased with your results. Oh, use iodine. Why piss away an extra hour if everything is done in 20 minutes? Do the starch test just after the step to see what a positive reaction looks like. After conversion there should be little or no color change (no black granules). You might get a few if you let it sit around - that is the iodine reacting with the cellulose particles from the husks. An hour at 155 is roughly 2x overkill in my experience if you have sufficient calcium (above). Another test is to simply taste your wort every 10 minutes or so. When it is very sweet and smooth, you are done. Cheers! Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 92 15:07 CST From: korz at ihlpl.att.com Subject: Re: Fermentation and surface area Dan writes: >A few issues ago, Chris Shenton wondered why a brew in a full 5 gallon >carboy fermented at a different rate than one in a not-full 7 gallon one. > >I recall George Fix mentioning, maybe a month or so ago, that a study done >in the late 1940's showed that surface area bore a significant, (I think it >was significant), relationship to fermentation rate and quality. I seem to >remember he said th at a larger surface area, up to a point, was a good >thing. This would imply that a carboy that is not filled beyone the point >where the neck begins to narrow would produce a better quality >fermentation. Could it be the height-to-cross-sectional area aspect ratio and not necessarily the surface area? Maybe it has something to do with the depth of the fermenting wort? The extreme example of this is Samuel Smith's Old Tadcaster Brewery, which uses very squat, long and wide fermenters made from slate. They use open fermentation. I've read that this configuration is used to create a large amount of diacetyl, which is what they want. However, I don't think the diacetyl production is an issue here. >George, could you comment on this? Yes. George wrote: > 1.Geometry- In the late 1940's deClerck studied fermenter shapes and >concluded (for a long list of reasons) that it is desirable that the >surface area of the fermenting wort be sufficiently large compared to its >depth. What are some of the "long list of reasons" that deClerck suggests are most important, George? Where can I get a copy of deClerck's book? I've read its out of print. >If it is true that a not-full carboy produces better fermentation, then >those who believe in the blowoff method are faced with some dilemas. Having been a long-standing proponent of the blow-off method, I obviously have a vested interest in deClerck's findings and Dan's suggestion of a dilema. On the other hand, I'm very happy with the flavor of my beers and their fermentation times are reasonable, so why worry? I don't use a starter for my Wyeast, get active fermentation in 12 to 36 hours, depending on the yeast type, and have not had an infection in over four years (some beers sitting in the fridge, on-tap for over 9 months - no problem). The last infection I had, I could safely attribute to the dry yeast I used back then. My challenge still stands: if you think blow-off is a waste, I dare you to drink a glass of blow-off. I hope this doesn't sound too antagonistic. I don't mean it to. It's a friendly challenge and I'm always open to be proved wrong, as long as I learn something in the process. Comments? Al. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 92 16:36:14 -0500 From: Alan Mayman <maymanal at scvoting.fvo.osd.mil> Subject: racking Greetings, I am new to brewing and could use some guidance regarding racking. I have read two books so far to help me in my extract endevours. Millers is relatively rack-happy compared to Papazians (those are the two big two books in my library). Specifically, how important is it to rack your beer off the trub during primary fermentation as advocated by miller? what are the dangers besides infection? When exactly should you rack to a secondary fermenter and why? Thanks, -Alan Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 92 15:24 CST From: korz at ihlpl.att.com Subject: Casks A while back, someone (sorry) asked about what kind of cask they should buy: plain, charred or paraffin-coated. Yesterday, while studying for the BJCP exam next Sunday, I ran across what the Prazdroj Brewery uses to make Pilsner Urquell. According to Jackson in "The New World Guide to Beer," they use "pitch-coated oak fermentors" which are periodically sent back to the coopers for re-pitching when it becomes necessary. There's a bit more detail, but this is all I can remember now. Jackson's Beer Hunter video shows the coopers at work. I don't believe the voice-over gave any detail in the video, or recall how much could be learned from watching the coopers, but I wouldn't completely rule it out. Now, what can we learn from this? Apparently, the oak does not make significant contact with the Pilsner Urquell, so all of you adding oak chips to your Pils, may want to reconsider. Pitch-coated was not one of your options, but you may be able, with sufficient research (call some coopers), to coat the casks yourself. Al. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 92 16:09 CST From: korz at ihlpl.att.com Subject: Re: Mashing questions/answers Josh writes: >> 1) In Line's book, his procedure for a step mash suggests doing the >> "protein rest" or first stage at 55C (131F), but Papaizan suggests >> 50C (122F). Who's right? Does it really matter? > >Miller says that a 131 F rest will tend to produce more protease enzymes, so >that your larger protien molecules get broken into smaller ones. Result? >Less chill haze, more mouth-feel and head retention. He also says that he >never did a side-by-side 122/131 comparison, so he's not sure if the >homebrewer would notice the difference. My first batch was an altbier with >german 2-row, and I used 131 F. I also used Irish Moss, and the beer came out >quite clear. Just one correction. It's incorrect to say "tend to produce more protease enzymes." All the enzymes you will ever get to use are in the grain when you begin. You can add enzymes you puchase separately. I'm sure what you meant was something on the order of "activate." According to Papazian's New CJoHB, at temperatures ideally between 113F and 122F, one type of proteolytic enzyme cuts long proteins in to amino acids, which can subsequently be used by your yeast. Between 122F and 140F, other proteolytic enzymes break the long proteins into shorter proteins (I'm borrowing from Miller on this) which contribute, as Josh said, to mouth-feel and head-retention. If you leave the long proteins around, that will contribute to chill haze, which is partly why you would like to cut them up. >> 2) The recipe I'm using from Line's book (for a light pilsner, a >> Heinekin clone), he calls for 5.5 lbs of "lager malt". What kind of >> malt is this? 2-row or 6-row? Unmodified, modified, or highly >> modified? > >Lager malt is a color definition only. Line was British, and in both the UK >and Germany they only have 2-row, as, I believe, 6-row is a north american >species. All brewing malt should be highly modified. Undermodified malt is >usually a mistake. You can tell by chewing a grain. The test (according to >Miller is "chewy/steely". Chewy, edible malt is well modified. Undermodified >will chew like gravel. The "base" malts you'll use will usually be either >"lager" malt or "pale" malt. Use the pale for english style single temp >mashes, lager for everything else. I disagree again. Brewing malt can be 2-row or 6-row AND highly-modified or under-modified. Lager malt is less-modified than British pale malt. Undermodified malt has more starch available for conversion to sugars and more complex (long) proteins, but less amino acids. It requires a protein rest. Fully-modified malt, aka, British pale malt, has less starch available for conversion to sugars, less complex proteins and more amino acids. With pale malt, you can skip the protein rest and do a simple infusion mash. In the rest of Josh's post, I concur, but also cannot provide a documented conversion rate from "flaked rice" to "gelatinized white rice." Papazian, however says that flaked rice is simply "moistened" and "passed through rollers" which gelatinizes them. Later, he says that white rice needs to be cooked at least 30 minutes to gelatinize. Based on this, I would intuatively say that you should substitute 1:1 dry white rice to flaked rice and then make sure to gelatinize it before adding to the mash. Al. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 92 16:35 CST From: korz at ihlpl.att.com Subject: Re: Pitching at high krauesen Bryan writes: >Wort at high krausen has a lot of dissolved CO2 in it. So shaking it to >get the slurry off the bottom when pitching is not a very good idea. I have to agree, but not for the reason you state, Bryan. The amount of dissolved CO2 in wort at high krauesen is not very great, not compared to finished beer, at least. But dissolved CO2 really is immaterial when pitching your starter. The reason I feel that you shouldn't shake your starter (if it's really at high krauesen) is because the slurry is trub (hot break, cold break and dead yeast). If you've waited too long and high krauesen is over, then your slurry contains some dormant yeast but intuatively, I feel not enough to bother with -- again don't shake. If you've waited *way* too long, and your starter has cleared, then shake it up, and pour it into a new starter. At high krausen, there's nothing you really want in the slurry -- what you want is either on top or in suspension. Al. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1992 14:59 PDT From: Bob Jones <BJONES at NOVA.llnl.gov> Subject: misc comments !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Following is summited by Micah Millspaw. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I would like to thank Bob Jones for posting the recipe for his holiday ale. I have drank several bottles of the stuff and it is great! There is one problem, Bob's water is very, very soft and if your brewing water has even moderate calcium hardness you should back off on the amount of hops that you use. nuff said On the subject of bottle fillers. It has been my experience over many years of homebrewing that what works best is counter-pressure bottle filling from kegs. The C-P fillers make it possible to purge the empty bottle of normal atmosphere and pressure it with either C02 or nitrogen. Doing this can eliminate a lot of worry about oxydation. There are several adds in zymurgy's classifieds for counter-pressure bottle fillers at reasonable prices. I have one of the HIGH TECH bottlers it cost 49.95 and is by far the cleanest and easiest to use C-P filler I've seen. I am in the process of converting my draft beer system at home to nitrogen \CO2 from straight CO2. The mix is 85/15 this is a standard gas mix available from welding supply places. The advantage in this is the your beer will not absorb the nitrogen as it would the CO2 possibly altering the mouthfeel and flavour\bouquet profile of your beer. I have come up with a device that will make a soda keg beheive like the new guiness cans. It is very simple ,easy to install and remove and you can make it your self. Cost is about 3-5 bucks worth of SS and 15 minutes on a lathe (or bribe a machinist, they usually take beer). If anyone is interested Email Bob Jones and I will give him a DXF file with a nice drawing on it. Most any CAD system should be able decipher the DXF for you. Plus they are easy to transmit (I think?). A bit of info for those of you who subscribe to Zymurgy mag. and do not also recieve the Beverage People news from GFSR. It seems that the special issue on beer styles has some errors(besides Paddy Giffens picture). The munich helles article contains some gross mis- information. Byron Burch claims to have written and submitted it as a sort of joke, after mailing it in he says that he called the AHA editor to inform them of the nature of the article in question. But many months later it appeared in the '91 special issue, errors and all, and the best part is the author credited is CP. So read this article about helles for its humorous value and not its brewing advice. Micah Millspaw brewer at large 12\26\91 Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1992 14:59 PDT From: Bob Jones <BJONES at NOVA.llnl.gov> Subject: Sour Mashing !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Submitted by Micah Millspaw !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! SOUR MASH I've had great success with sour mash beers. I have used several different yeasts with the sour mash including Chico ale yeast, Chimay reculture, and S. Delbruki they all worked great. I haven't tried a lager yeast yet but am planning to make one. So as to be useful I'll describe my mashing (sour) technique. First I'll explain, I do my sour mashes as two separate mashes, one soured and one straight. The sour mash is 80% wheat the rest 2-row klages. This is mashed in with 32 oz. water per pound of grain, strike temp. is 180F this should be stable at 158-160F. I do this part of the mash in a picnic cooler with some duct tape around the lid to minimize heat loss. I start the mash the evening of the day before I intend to brew. The mash time is usually 12 to 14 hours. On brew day I do a normal straight infusion mash with a high percentage of 2-row klages usually a one hour mash. And now to the good part! Go, and open the lid of the cooler that has the 14 hour old mash in it. If the smell makes you want to vomit, it is done and its OK (the colour may be a little grey too). Take the soured mash and the straight mash and mix them together in your lauter vessel. Then do a mash out at 170F and hold it for 15 min. Sparge your brew length, then boil down to size and gravity desired. Hop as you wish. If you ferment in clear glass the wort may appear somewhat grey in colour, this will clear by itself. I've made high, medium, and low gravity beers with method and they have all turned out pale, clear and very tasty. The flavour is difficult to describe but as digusting as the process is the resulting beer taste is well worth it. Note: I also have done a alcohol removed sour mash spiced with coriander and CFJ90 hops as my contribution to responsable yet flavourful drinking. If anyone wants the recipe let me know. AND SOUR MASHING IS NOT A PART OF LAMBIC BREWING (to avoid confusion) Micah Millspaw BREWER AT LARGE 12\27\91 Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 92 15:40:48 PST From: Tom Bower <bower at hprnlme1.rose.hp.com> Subject: Mash/Lauter Tun Construction Being more of an ale than a lager fan, and wishing to enter the ranks of all-grain homebrewers, I've been trying to accumulate the necessary equip- ment to do single-temperature infusion mashes (and sparges) in an insulated container. I'd like to hear from the net on mash/lauter tun construction. Assuming some kind of picnic/water cooler to be adapted for this use, I've got some questions: +Which shape works better (and why?) - Cylindrical (water jug) or rectan- gular? What size works well assuming perhaps some barleywines as worst- case mash quantities, 5-gallon recipes in general? Any other good things to use besides insulated ice chests & water coolers? +What is the ideal arrangement for straining out the runnings? I've heard people describe slotted copper tubing, plastic bucket-bottoms with holes drilled or slots melted through with a hot knife, with or without the use of grain bags. If I could construct the ideal false bottom, what would the average size and geometry of the openings be, and what % of open area overall would there be? I'm thinking of getting some stainless steel screen/mesh. What are the consequences of the openings being too small? Too large? Too infrequent? How about the amount of space under the false bottom? Is there a type of construction that makes a grain bag unnecessary, or would it just be easier to make an over-permeable false bottom and rely on the grain bag for the straining effect? What say ye? Feel free to reply here or via e-mail, if there's interest I will summarize & post. Thomas G. Bower (bower at hprnd.rose.hp.com) Roseville, CA Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 92 20:34:38 EST From: Jim White <JWHITE at maine.maine.edu> Subject: Spargin blues...... Awhile ago I surveyed the all-grain brewers. The purpose of this survey was to determine why 'you brew the way you brew'. The results, (posted), ran the gamut from mysticism to economic necessity. Agreement was nearly unanimous, however, that the final brew tasted better. Thus I was motivated to invest in the equipment and give it a try. After about 7 batches, a few observations..... I like it. It's fun. I think the beer is tastier. I doubt I'll go back. I bought 55 lbs. of Munton and Fison 2-row pale for $.65/lb. For less than $10.00 one can make 5 gals of top quality all malt brew. Neat ! I try and do things simple. I use a single temp infusion mash with a cooler. I boil in a 33 qt porcelain on junk metal boiler. Wort chiller is a coil of 1/4 i.d. copper tubing inside my cooler filled with snow (when available). Things usually go fine, with one possible exception....... Yeah you guessed... Sparging is the downside of all-grain brewing. I can usually get a decently clear flow, and decent extract rate, but it's a pain, and this leads to a question. Why not just drain the sweet liquid from the mashing vessel, through a couple layers of chessecloth, and into the boiler..... once. No re-cycling! Then run the necessary amount of 170-180 F water through the same grain bed and cheesecloth, (again just once), to make 6 gals.... and be done with it. It'd take minutes, rather then 1-2 hours. I'll probably try this anyway in my next batch (call it an experiment) but I'd be truly interested in the opinion of the HBD'rs. Has anyone tried this, or something similar? Would you expect the grain bed to be a better filter bed? Would you expect the extract rate to suffer? I have tried both a 'double bucket' and a grain bag approach to sparging. I like the grain bag better, but mine (I guess) is too fine, and get's clogged. I find the double bucket too time consuming and I don't like the extra items to clean. Am still waiting for a better sparging system ....... Jim White The new auxiliary Wort chiller arrived on New Year's Day, but so far.... it's bust. When I needed it cold, it was about 40 F and raining. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 92 20:05:14 -0600 (CST) From: Brian Capouch <brianc at zeta.saintjoe.EDU> Subject: Temperature Calculations Excerpts from homebrew: 6-Jan-92 Homebrew Digest #795 (Janua.. Verify a. b. sending at hpf (44434) > > 1) Strike dry grain with enough 160F water to bring mash to 153F. > > Stir and let rest until conversion. > > > That will take 13 lbs of water (over a gallon and a half) for each > pound of grain. Here's the algebra. > Let g be pounds of grain at 60F > Let w be pounds of water at 160F > 60g + 160w = (g + w) * 153 > 60g + 160w = 153g + 153w > 7w = 93g > w = 93/7 g ie. about 13 1/2 pounds John, does this set of equations take into account the difference in specific heat between the two substances, or would that be significant? Most texts I've seen (particularly Noonan) seem to indicate that the malt has a higher specific heat than the water, which (and I'm sure the physics-prone amongst us will let me know) would mean that another coefficient has to be added in, one that I think would result in an even higher weight of water having to be added. . . . . Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 92 22:36:44 -0700 From: Jon Binkley <binkley at beagle.Colorado.EDU> Subject: All Grain Weizen I'd like to try to brew a 50-60% wheat beer. A while back I remember someone posted suggestions for dealing with the problems associated with mashing such high wheat porportions. Could this kind soul, or anyone else who has tried it, please email or post a synopsis of your wisdom? Many thanks, Jon Binkley binkley at boulder.colorado.edu Return to table of contents
End of HOMEBREW Digest #796, 01/07/92