FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
		Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator


Contents:
  Liquid .vs. dry yeast (matth)
  Re: Priming Sugar (Aaron Birenboim)
  Re: Pure Dry Yeast? (Aaron Birenboim)
  Re: Homebrew Digest #837 (March 05, 1992) (Andrew McMichael)
  Yet another Wyeast problem (Brian Smithey)
  fruity lager (Scott Murphy)
  Re:  Homebrew Digest #837 (March 05, 1992) (Richard Childers)
  This list don't need no flames (Robert Bradley)
  re lagers v ales (Chip Hitchcock)
  Whitbread yeast questions (Paul Yatrou)
  Rodney Morris' RIMS and other automated mash tuns (Xcaret Research)
  Growing hops (Ed Westemeier)
  The flames are back! (S94WELKE)


Send submissions to homebrew at hpfcmi.fc.hp.com
Send requests to homebrew-request@ hpfcmi.fc.hp.com
[Please do not send me requests for back issues!]
Archives are available from netlib at mthvax.cs.miami.edu


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 05 Mar 92 07:20:17 EST
From: matth at bedford.progress.COM
Subject: Liquid .vs. dry yeast


  Greetings all.

  The past couple of digests have had Jack indicating he doesn't feel liquid 
yeasts are [ usable | worth it | insert word here ].  Other HBD'ers indicated,
in their opinions, that Jack can't be brewing *great* beer without using liquid
yeasts.

  My question ( I'm still new at this... )

  *Why* is using a liquid yeast *soooooo* much better? 

  If you make a strong starter, is there really a difference?  

  Thanks.

 -Matth

          Matthew J. Harper ! Progress Software Corp. ! {disclaimer.i}         
   God created heaven and earth to grow barley and hops. Now he homebrews !-)  


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 5 Mar 92 07:32:43 MST
From: abirenbo at rigel.hac.com (Aaron Birenboim)
Subject: Re: Priming Sugar


  Chris Shenton suggested that dried malt extract was an "ideal"
priming substance.  I disagree.  I find that you can really
taste dried malt extract in the beer.  Now, while i like the
daste of Dried malt extract (i often eat some while brewing)
it detracts from the "clean" finish i like in a beer.  Perhaps
this is due to addition of trub which is not broken down/racked
off/driven off by fermentation.  I think corn sugar is far
superior for priming.

  Chris also mentions that uses saved wort (krauesening (sp?)).
I hear that this method usually wins double blind taste tests.
I do worry a bit about stability with this method, however,
since it may introduce some (less than Dried ME priming) trub.
Nontheless, i will be bottling my first krauesened beer this
weekend. (its a porter, ,so i will most likely not be able to
tell how it effects flavor under all that molasses and choclate
malt.)

          aaron

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 5 Mar 92 07:40:29 MST
From: abirenbo at rigel.hac.com (Aaron Birenboim)
Subject: Re: Pure Dry Yeast?


  Bob Jones asked why not start making pure, dry yeast?  Basicly...
why do brewers pay up to $4.00 for yeast in inferior packaging?

  Well.... drying yeast will select the yeast most capable
of surviving drying.  This is seldom related to which yeast
produces good beer.  In drying you will be selecting "mutants"
capable of survivingthe kiln.  Wyeast can culture up from a single
cell, test if it made good beer, and the culture up more
for market.  Selecting yeast with good fermentation
properties.

  On package breakage:  I hav never busted one.  I place my
palm gently over the inner pouch, then place the other hand
on top, and lean into the package CPR style.  I also try to
concentrate my weight as much as possible on a small area of the
inner pouch, so that the outside of the pouch is not shock-
pressurized.  This is especially important for me since
i brew at an altitude of 5000 feet, and most Wyeast packages
are slightly swelled to begin with here because of the pressure
differential with sea-level.

   (well.... i do not know that for a fact, having never seen
wyeast at sea level.... but our packages do come slightly inflated
here.)

        aaron

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1992 11:44:44 EST
From: amcmicha at gmuvax2.gmu.edu (Andrew McMichael)
Subject: Re: Homebrew Digest #837 (March 05, 1992)

please cancell my subscription, as i get the digest on r.c.b anyway. thanks.


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 5 Mar 92 09:56:22 MST
From: smithey at rmtc.Central.Sun.COM (Brian Smithey)
Subject: Yet another Wyeast problem

On 4 Mar 92 15:22:30 EST (Wed),
GC Woods <gcw at garage.att.com> said:

[ starting Wyeast ]

GC> packet. At one point I had my entire weight (140lb) on the packet and
GC> nothing happened (I was impressed that the outside packet held), so then
GC> I tried to isolate the inner packet at one end and squeeze, but the
GC> outside packet broke. Unlike Ray I used the inner packet in a starter -
GC> hope there is enough nutrient to get it going!

GC> 					Geoff Woods
GC> 					gcw at garage.att.com


Maybe now the debate can finally be settled -- is the yeast in
the inner packet or the outer?  Geoff, let us know in a few
days whether or not your "yeast" ferments your starter.

Brian
- --
Brian Smithey / Sun Microsystems / Colorado Springs, CO
smithey at rmtc.Central.Sun.COM


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 05 Mar 92 09:11:50 PST
From: scott at gordian.com (Scott Murphy)
Subject: fruity lager

after reading some comments on the differences between lagers and
ales, I have a question.  I kegged my first lager in January.  It 
fermented at 48 degrees for three weeks.  I lagered it for two months
gradually reducing the temperature to ~42 degrees.  The beer has an
amazing apricot flavor and taste.  Given that I didn't add any fruit 
to the brew, can anyone tell me how these fruit esters where 
produced?

Recipe:
6-7 pounds alexanders pale malt extract
1/4 lb crystal
2 ? oz. saaz hops
M & F dried yeast

this yeast is not a real lager yeast, but I have not noticed alot of
fruity esters in my ales...


thanks

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 5 Mar 92 10:06:51 PST
From: Richard Childers <rchilder at us.oracle.com>
Subject: Re:  Homebrew Digest #837 (March 05, 1992)


"Date: Wed, 4 Mar 92 11:40 PST
 From: gummitch at techbook.com (Jeff Frane)
 Subject: Re: Lager, Kitchen Aid, Wyeast, Plastic,

"Jack Schmidling writes: 

"> I would like to hear from anyone who can describe the difference between a 
 > lager and an ale, in terms of the taste."

Actually, I think you have the attributions mixed up here. This is the person
Jack was replying to. Why are you being so derogatory towards another person ?

"Probably you ought to try drinking some good lagers; it's as difficult
 explaining the difference between ale and lager to someone who clearly
 doesn't understand it as explaining color to a blind man."

"If you're ignoring liquid yeast, you can't be looking too hard."

"Yes, it's pretty obvious from all the evidence, that WYeast was
 responsible for your contaminated beer.  Although you don't believe in
 using liquid yeast, so clearly this wasn't the problem with *your* beer.
 Hmmmm. "

"It really gets your goat that somewhere someone is doing something right
 and making a living at it, doesn't it?"

				-=*=-

Please, keep your personal disagreement(s) with Jack Schmidling out of the
Digest, Jeff. If you have to argue with him, do it offline. He's entitled
to be suspicious of trendy behavior if he wishes to be ...	(-:

Personally, I haven't had any problems with dried yeasts, either. So far, I've
been using Canadian ale yeasts, and am about to try recycling some of the
precipitated yeast. According to what I just read in this Digest, yeast that's
sitting on the bottom is less exposed to stray infections, so this would seem
to be just as 'effective' as buying Wyeast - although Wyeast does seem to have
a wide array of variations, and this would be worth exploring.

Remember, it's that 'do it yourself' attitude that made America - and the rest
of the world - what it is today. That applies to the people who created Wyeast,
and the people who recycle yeasts, and the people who breed them, too, since
their successes may some day end up retailed by Wyeast. And every person who
has made the choice to stop buying beer and start buying brewing materials. I
don't see how any of us are necessarily better or worse than any others.

<< flame ON >>

Which reminds me ... why must a person be a beer judge to subscribe to the
beer judge mailing list ? Isn't that a tad elitist ? Perhaps the beer judges
should unsubscribe from the homebrew mailing list, since we have so little
to contribute to their omniscient perspective ... ( sorry, but that sort of
attitude really ticks me off. the mason digest is unrestricted ... why should
the beer judges be any less free with their discussions ? )

<< flame OFF >>

- -- richard childers


Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 5 Mar 92 14:24:36 -0500
From: bradley at adelphi.edu (Robert Bradley)
Subject: This list don't need no flames

I thought hbd837 was one of the greatest HBDs ever.  The beer judging
guide, Tony's clear delineation of ale vs. lager, useful postings on
IBU vs. HBU -- all great.  Needless to say, it held my interest until the
end (this doesn't always happen).  It's almost a shame that I made it to
the last posting -- that was the sort of thing this list needs like a hole
in the head.  Allow me to share some private mail with the list:

**********************
[March 5, 1992]


Dear Jeff Frane,

Cut the ad hominem.  If your opinion can't be voiced without taking
cheap shots at the person (as opposed to what he says) it probably
isn't worth the bandwidth.  Whatever problems people may have had
with Jack in the past, his letter was inoffensive and provocative.
Tony at spss (and others) responded to the provocation with a well-
reasoned presentation of useful information.  We all have a lot to
learn from them.

Rob Bradley (bradley at adx.adelphi.edu)

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 5 Mar 92 14:10:57 EST
From: cjh at diaspar.HQ.Ileaf.COM (Chip Hitchcock)
Subject: re lagers v ales

> >arf:
> > Breweries spend zillions to lager so I presume there must be a reason but
> > as most of what they make, isn't worthy of the name beer, I can't help but 
> > wonder why they bother.
>
>korz:
> As noted by Miller, modern fermentation techniques can reduce the need to
> lager as long, and filtering also reduces the need to lager, so modern
> breweries don't need to expend gobs of money to make lager.  

   The techniques reduce, but don't eliminate the need for more capital
equipment for lagering (to say nothing of the capital that's tied up in
beer that isn't ready yet). At Olympia and at Budweiser(Nashua,NH) it
seemed as if half the space was devoted to lagering tanks; Carlsberg has
the tanks outdoors (I guess 500 tonnes of beer has enough thermal inertia
that they don't worry about the effect of Danish winters).

   The direct answer to arf's question comes from the same place as "Why
does Wonder Bread sell?". The American public has been conditioned to
accept the lowest (least-flavorful) common denominator with regard to many
food products ("food products"---that's a hint itself) because that makes
it easier for giant corporations to mass-manufacture a uniform product that
they can sell without regard to regional or personal variations in taste
and with less concern over spoilage. Note that bread and tomatoes are
longer-term examples; beer got a shock treatment called Prohibition, which
flushed most of the brewers, leaving only the strong and the giants (who
ate most of the merely strong).
   Actually, this isn't just a lager/ale question; there are lots of
microbrewed lagers in this country that are drinkable. But lagering makes
it much easier to produce a beer with no noticeable flavor, which is what
the marketroid suits are after as a way of keeping "share" in the uniformly
blah "market" they've managed to create.
   I suppose it's paranoid to write this as if there were an active
conspiracy to level ALL our tastes, although it's visible that many firms
develop cheap lowest-common-denominator crud then try to convince people
that it's really more desirable ("Wonder helps build strong bodies twelve
ways!"). Just think of commercial food as analogous to TV, and remember
what happened to the Smothers Brothers....

Return to table of contents


Date:    Thu, 5 Mar 1992 16:23:35 -0500 (EST)
From: YATROU at INRS-TELECOM.UQUEBEC.CA (Paul Yatrou)
Subject: Whitbread yeast questions

Hi all,

Last week my buddy and I picked up a shipment of Whitbread
ale & lager dry yeast from our homebrew shop. Each one
came in a 700g -- that's right, a total 1.4 kg of yeast!!! --
vacuum sealed foil package (sort of looked like freeze dried Nabob
coffee package). We did this because we can't find Whitbread
dried yeast in our area (only EDME, Coopers, RED STAR are
available). We divied up the yeast and put it in air
sealed plastic containers to be stored in the fridge.

Now, is this a reasonable thing to do, or will we end up
with 3 lb of mutants? I assume that active dry yeast can
be stored in a sealed container in the fridge for a long
time without any infections taking place.

My other question is how would you rate the Whitbread
ale yeast compared to, say, EDME or Coopers.
How about the lager yeast compared to RED STAR lager.
(Notice I didn't mention RED STAR ale...)
The Zymurgy yeast special issue has a favourable review
of Whitbread and I think so do most of the posts i've
seen on the digest, but now that i've got industrial
quantities of the stuff I'd like some reassurance!


Paul (no more pitching rate problems) Yatrou.

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1992 17:33:00 -0700
From: Xcaret Research <xnf at csn.org>
Subject: Rodney Morris' RIMS and other automated mash tuns


I am looking for information on building a, automated mash tun.  I have
seen Auto-Mash and it is quite expensive.  Not being a SS welder,
I can't try to duplicate it.  I saw the Zymurgy on Morris' RIMS and
have heard some HBD readers have built this.  Any ideas or suggestions
would be helpful.  Someone at the AHA said he has recently automated
the RIMS with some electronic controls, that sounds like fun.

I have a couple of concerns: heating the water, rather than the grains
to increase mash temp. could destroy enzymes; and can you get a 
good, quick temp. increase by heating the water rather than the grains.

An auto decoction system would be great, but appears to be quite
a difficult engineering feat.

 -JSKG
 xnf at csn.org

Return to table of contents


Date: Thu, 5 Mar 92 19:43:13 EST
From: homebrew at tso.uc.EDU (Ed Westemeier)
Subject: Growing hops

Rob Winters asked in 837:
> I'd be very interested in trying out growing my own hops.
> Could anyone post a primer? Sources? Sage advice?
I've read two good books on the subject:
"Homegrown Hops" is a little 98-page self-published paperback
by David Beach, a retired Army lawyer in Oregon.
It is (IMHO) simplistic, opinionated, wrong in parts, and
incomplete, but it gives you all the basic information anyone
would need to start growing hops at home, and for just $8.00.
"Hops" is a scholarly 233-page hardback reference book by
R.A. Neve, Director of the Dept of Hop Research at Wye.  It tells you
everything you could ever want to know about the crop at $59.95
A nice 3rd alternative is the 1990 Special issue of Zymurgy.
It contains most of the information you want at $8.50.
Probably your best bet, in fact.
I've had excellent luck with the hop rhizomes I've ordered
from Freshops in Oregon.  The Cascades took off like crazy, but
the Hallertauer, Northern Brewer and Saaz were no slouches
either, all in the first year.  Can't wait to see what happens this
year!  Give them a call at 503-929-2736.  There are probably
other good sources, but that's the one I've had experience with.
This month (March) is definitely the time to be planting your
hop rhizomes, so don't delay.  Don't know where you're
located, but the only caveat I'm aware of is that hops usually
don't do their best below 40 degrees of latitude.  I'm at 39 and
no complaints.
One last point:  there is nothing like the feeling you get
when you use your own hops in your own beer.  Good luck!
Bottom line:  plant rhizomes now, give them plenty of sun,
keep the bugs down, and enjoy the results.

Return to table of contents


Date:     Thu, 5 Mar 92 21:21 EST
From: <S94WELKE%USUHSB.bitnet at VTVM2.CC.VT.EDU>
Subject:  The flames are back!

Jeff Frane writes in HBD #837:
> ...it's difficult explaining the difference...to someone who clearly doesn't
> understand it as expalining color to a blind man.
> ...It really gets your goat that somewhere someone is doing something right
> and making a living at it, doesn't it?

I'm not a long-time veteran to this digest, but after half a year I know
it's good when it's above board, and it's bad when it sinks to the level
you see in this quote.  Jeff, there are PEOPLE on the receiving end of
your messages, and although Jack Schmidling has dished out his share of
flames, he didn't deserve that.  The rest of this issue was excellent, and
both Tony Babinec and Al Korz found a way to explain the difference
between ales and lagers (I understood it, and I'm not blind!).  So next time
you get ready to flame someone like that, keep it private!

P. S. Brett Short---I tried to email you directly and failed (I may need some
internet help).  I'd like to trade some of my homegrown hops for your PoR...
send me a note if you're interested.

And finally, a question...I have gotten on to the Wyeast bandwagon myself lately
but I have to wonder about the point Jack made...just what are the advantages
of liquid vs. dry yeast?  I only made three batches before switching, but they
were all great tasting.  I'm sure purity is the main point, but are there any
other advantages?  Send me your responses and I'll post a summary.
- --Scott Welker, USUHS Med School

Return to table of contents



End of HOMEBREW Digest #838, 03/06/92