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


Contents:
  GOTCHA JOURNALISM, Belgian Malt (Jack Schmidling)
  clarification regarding Wyeast California and Belgian (Marc Michaud - 264-2703 - MVDS02::MICHAUD  09-Oct-1992 0908)
  plastics (berthels)
  Brewpubs in Baltimore (Hal Laurent)
  S.F. info request, malt liquor? (Rob Winters)
  Cider on Yeast & Guinness (Peter Bartscherer)
  Re: Potato Beer (Mike Zentner)
  re:Sam Adams AltBier! (jim busch)
  Cane sugar starters ("BOB JONES")
  John Harvard brewpub (Charlie Hamilton)
  Re: Great American Beer Fest (Aaron Birenboim)
  re: GABF results (mcnally)
  Pellet Hops vs. Whole Hops (Jon Binkley)
  More crap from Sam Adams (gkushmer)
  Looking for homebrewers (Peter Nesbitt)
  Yeast Cycles (George Fix) (George J Fix)
  Battle Brewing in Boston (Bob Gorman)
  Hop Pellets vs. Cones (Norm Hardy)
  Caramel vs. Crystal (Joseph Nathan Hall)
  Eating crow (Rob Bradley)
  GABF, Belgian Malt (Jack Schmidling)


Send articles for __publication__ to homebrew at hpfcmi.fc.hp.com
  (Articles are published in the order they are received.)
Send UNSUBSCRIBE and all other requests, ie, address change, etc.,
  to homebrew-request@ hpfcmi.fc.hp.com
Archives are available via anonymous ftp from sierra.stanford.edu.
    (Those without ftp access may retrieve files via mail from
    listserv at sierra.stanford.edu. Send HELP as the body of a
    message to that address to receive listserver instructions.)
**Please do not send me requests for back issues!**
*********(They will be silenty discarded!)*********
**For Cat's Meow information, send mail to lutzen at novell.physics.umr.edu**


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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 00:16 CDT
From: arf at ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: GOTCHA JOURNALISM, Belgian Malt

 
 To: Homebrew Digest
 Fm: Jack Schmidling
 
 >From: whg at tellabs.com
 
 >Sorry Jack but I just couldn't resist.  It seems to me that back when you
 were trying to get people to define the difference between an ale and a lager
 (sort of like trying to describe the difference between apples and oranges 
 BTW) you just wouldn't buy it when people describe a lager as cleaner. You 
 wanted to know what that meant.
 
 Don't you see the difference between wanting to know "what it meant" and not 
 buying it?   I am making a lager now to experience it myself.  I don't know 
 if I will ever know, other than by definition, but I am giving it a try.
 
 > Well, what to my wondering eyes did appear in yesterday's digest? Jack S.  
 describing the taste of his first lager as "cleaner" than any of his previous 
 beers. Don't knock a description till you've tried it I always say. ;-)
 
 I suppose even the World's Greatest Brewer could make a typo but the word was 
 supposed to be CLEARER as would be explained by the following sentance, 
 wherein I stated that, I would have expected a bottom fermenting beer to be 
 more turbid near the bottom.  The opposite of turbid is clear, not clean.
 I was referring to the optical transparency which I can appreciate and not 
 the taste which I have trouble appreciating.
 
 ............
 
 Just picked up 11 lbs of the Belgian Pale Ale malt and ran a quick extract 
 test on it and got exactly the same number I get with my regular malt.  This 
 is a 400 ml batch size, using 60 grs of malt, that I use for various and 
 sundry tests.  When converted to pts/lb/gal, the result is 29.
 
 What blows my mind is that after the usual test, I sparged out another 400 ml 
 of wort and boiled it all down to 400 ml.  I left it settle out after 
 chilling in a tall graduated cylinder and poured off the clear stuff on top 
 to test the gravity again and it went from 1.036 to 1.030.  I poured it back 
 with the trub and measured it again and it read, 1.038, about what I expected 
 but I did not expect to need the trub.
 
 What's going on here?
 js
 
 p.s.  I received a lot of mail asking for the source of the malt.
       It's : Tim Norris 312 545 4004
 
 
js


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 06:13:46 PDT
From: Marc Michaud - 264-2703 - MVDS02::MICHAUD 09-Oct-1992 0908 <michaud at mvds02.enet.dec.com>
Subject: clarification regarding Wyeast California and Belgian


In yesterdays (October 8, 1992) digest Phil Hultin requested confirmation 
regarding Wyeast California and Belgian yeasts. Here is the information from 
Wyeast "fact sheet".

2112 - California Lager Yeast - Warm fermenting bottom cropping strain,
       ferments well to 62 F while keeping lager characteristics. Malty profile,
       highly floculant, clears brilliantly. Apparent attenuation 72-76%.

1214 - Belgian Ale Yeast - Abbey style top fermenting yeast suitable for high 
       gravity beers, doubles, triples, and barley wines. Medium floculant 
       strain which clears well. Apparant attenuation 71-75%.

hope this helps you,
Happy Brewin!

Marc Michaud

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 09:20:21 EDT
From: berthels at rnisd0.DNET.roche.com
Subject: plastics

> A quick note on polymers:
> The solubility of most polymers one encounters in beverage containers in
> ethanol is very low (you can buy some cheap vodka in plastic).  However, most
> polymer formulations contain additional compounds designed to impart special
> properties to the polymer, such as luster, softness, flexibility, etc.  These
> compounds, often refered to as "plasticizers" can be leached from the polymer
> with solvents such as alcohol, acetone, and petroleum distillates (and in
> some cases even water!).  I think that food quality plastics should be safe
> to use with beer, however I would avoid any really soft plastics, since they
> are the ones most likely to contain a lot of plasticizers.  Fortunately most
> of these plasticizers have a detectable odor and flavor, so if it tastes bad
> don't drink it!
> Steve Berthel

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 09:26:57 EDT
From: Hal Laurent <laurent at tamdno.ENET.dec.com>
Subject: Brewpubs in Baltimore

Someone asked about Baltimore/Washington area brewpubs.  I can help
with the Baltimore part.

The two brewpubs in Baltimore of which I am aware are:

    Baltimore Brewing Company (on Albemare St. just north of Little Italy)

    Sissons (on Cross St. in Federal Hill)

Personally, I think BBC's beer is better, but Sissons isn't bad and they
have *wonderful* Cajun food.

There are also a number of bars that, while not brewpubs, carry a good
selection of beers, including local ones.  A couple that I'm personally
familiar with (both in the Fells Point area) are Bertha's (on Broadway)
and the Wharf Rat (on Ann St. -- don't confuse it with the Wharf Rat
at the Inner Harbor).  Bertha's carries Oxford (made somewhere on the
outskirts of Baltimore), Wild Goose (made in Cambridge, Maryland), and
lately have been carrying some BBC stuff (the brand name is DeGroen, I
think).  The last time I was there they had a wheat beer from DeGroen.
The Wharf Rat also has a good selection.  I don't remember it in detail
(I'm more likely to go to Bertha's 'cause I like the bar better), I do
know that they tend to carry the DeGroen Marzen(which is very good).

I guess I should also mention the Cat's Eye (Thames St. in Fells Point).
They carry a number of British Ales and also Olde Heurich lager from
Washington D.C.  The Cat's Eye also has a rather eclectic selection of
musical entertainment in the evenings and on weekend afternoons.  You
might see anything from Jazz to Blues to Country to Bluegrass to Irish
to Rock.

Oh yeah, one more thing... Sissons (see above) also has monthly 
homebrewing meetings, as well as occasional homebrewing classes.

 -Hal Laurent


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 10:00:42 -0500
From: rwinters at nhqvax.hq.nasa.gov (Rob Winters)
Subject: S.F. info request, malt liquor?

There seems to be a strong precedent for this type of request, so here
goes:

I will be in San Francisco from October 25 through November 5, including a
whole weekend that I will have to myself 8-)

So, where to go, What to do, to imbibe lots of great brew?

Thanks for any info, via e-mail or post!

 .flame on

While I'm posting, does anyone know why the GABF has decided to give
exposure to malt liquor? This "Olde English" stuff is making teens
and others all over the country dead and brain-dead in 40 oz. increments,
and they give it a category and a gold medal!? Who produces the GABF
anyway? Is it just a sinkhole for commercial brewery money, or is there
a chance that they would consider suggestions to ban certain categories
and entrants until they stop killing people? Sorry if this is a 
re-hash of an old topic, but that Olde English gold medal really got me!

 .flame off

Rob (slammin' back a forty -- NOT) Winters


Return to table of contents


Date:         Fri, 09 Oct 92 09:41:02 EDT
From: Peter Bartscherer <BARTSCHP at DUVM.OCS.DREXEL.EDU>
Subject:      Cider on Yeast & Guinness

This weekend I plan to brew a Belgian style ale, and although I've never
tried it, I'm intrigued with the idea of racking the beer off the yeast
and adding fresh wort for a second batch using the same yeasties. I've
seen a number of posting regarding this, and have been following the
cider thread with interest. Now here's my question: has anyone tried
pouring a few gallons of cider onto the yeast instead of new wort? If I
do, should I add anything else (yeast nutrient, tannin, ...). And
speaking of tannin, a friend suggested I could make a very strong tea
(just plain old teabag type tea), let it cool and add it as my source of
tannin. Suggestions? Reactions?

Secondly, any of you in the Great Guinness Test Markets know the success
of the nitrogen capsule Guinness? Does anyone know if I can expect it
anytime soon in a store near me?
 -------------------------------------------------------------------
  Peter Bartscherer  215.626.7714           Design & Imaging Studio
  BARTSCHP at DUVM.OCS.DREXEL.EDU          Drexel U / Philadelphia, PA
 -------------------------------------------------------------------

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 09:16:01 -0500
From: zentner at ecn.purdue.edu (Mike Zentner)
Subject: Re: Potato Beer


Is that potato beer or potatoe beer?  Maybe I can't tell you how to make
it, but I can give you a name for it---Red Quayle Ale?

Mike Zentner

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 10:32:09 EDT
From: jim busch <busch at daacdev1.stx.com>
Subject: re:Sam Adams AltBier!

In the last digest, Chris McDermott <mcdermott at draper.com> inquires about 
Sam Adams Stock Ale/Altbier.  Here's what I was going to post to usenet
when my server gets unjammed, but I'll just do it here instead.

OK, so I read the GABF results for the last few years and while the
results raise numerous questions about the categories, one in 
particular jumps out. 

How does Sam Adams Boston Stock Ale win so many medals in the *ALT*
category???  Dont get me wrong, I enjoy this beer (as well as the 
lager), but what the hell makes it an *ALT* beer?  This beer is 
dry hopped with fuggles and goldings, right?  It is especially 
strange to find a classic english-hopped beer repeatedly winning
medals in a German ALt category!  Whats next, a dry hopped 
hallertaur and saaz beer winning in English traditional bitter?
How about Sierra Nevada Stout as an Irish Stout??  Anchor Wheat as
a Bavarian HefeWeizen......I guess the "Professional Tasting Panel"
knows something us stupid brewers dont :-)
Sheesh....

Jim Busch
busch at daacdev1.stx.com



Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 07:39:51 PST
From: "BOB JONES" <bjones at novax.llnl.gov>
Subject: Cane sugar starters

OK, before you all either jump on Micah (afterall he is already down) for 
 his cane sugar starter suggestion, or you lay off of him because you feel 
 sorry for him, I would like to add my 2 cents. When Micah and I first meet 
 and he told me he was using cane sugar for starters I told him YOU CAN'T DO 
 THAT! He said he gets bigger yeast yields and it's cheaper and more 
 convenient. But I said, does it make better beer? Well after challenging 
 him and knowing that most great discoveries are accidents, we got some text 
 books on yeast and discovererd that this is close to how the yeast 
 manufacturers build large quntities of yeast, They use beet sugar. Well, 
 I'll leave all the details to Micah to expain, afterall he started this 
 thread. My results with using powdered cane sugar for starters have been 
 good. I have not seen any difference in the lag times, attenuation or 
 flavor profile of yeast grown up this way. Ok now that you all have at 
 least one more data point, I'll ask Micah to give more data on this matter. 
 His responses are usually alittle later, due to his non access to the net 
 (we can't trust him).


Bob Jones

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 11:07:47 EDT
From: hamilton at roadrunner.pictel.com (Charlie Hamilton)
Subject: John Harvard brewpub

I went to the John Harvard brewpub in Harvard Square last night,
and tried all of their available beers. They have the following
beers all the time:

Cristal Pilsner
Bock
Light Ale
Pale Ale - draft
Pale Ale - cask conditioned
Irish Export Stout

The special that they had was a Nut Brown Ale.

For some reason their lagers were not available, so we tried all
the ales. My overall impression of the beer was not very good. The
Light Ale didn't taste fresh. The cask conditioned Pale Ale was the
best (IMO), but was a little sweet with not much hop flavor or aroma.
The stout and nut brown ale both had a slight burnt taste, and were
OK, but again, there was not a lot of character to them.

I didn't get a chance to talk to anyone who knew how they made their
beer, so I don't know how long they age their beer, whether it's
filtered, or what ingredients they use, etc.

The atmosphere was nice and the food was OK, but the service was lousy,
however, it was Thursday night, and very crowded.

In general, the beer was OK, but it seemed that they put more effort
into making the place look nice than making the beers taste good, but
hey, this America, the home of Form-Over-Substance(TM).

I think I'll stick with the Cambridge Brewing Co. as my brewpub of
choice. What do the rest of you think?

Charlie (hamilton at pictel.com)

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 09:27:29 MDT
From: abirenbo at rigel.cel.scg.hac.com (Aaron Birenboim)
Subject: Re: Great American Beer Fest


  I'd like to share some of my GABF experience in response to Michael Howe:

  The "Pumpkin spice" was (i think) Adler Brewery, Appletown Wisc.
(corrections anyone?)  I tried about 5 of his beers, and each and every
one of them was absolutely world class.  I feel that he deserves some mention
since he was probobally the best brewer across the spectrum from hefe-weizen,
to bock, to porter, to lager, a damn impressive pilsner, and of course
the pumpkin spice.

  Celis White (from the brewmeister of Hoegarten Wit) totally knocked me out.
I went right out and bought "belgian ale" from the classic beer series.

  What suprized me most was that I had 3 infected pale ales from far away micros
or brewpubs.  I will not mention names (even if i remembered them ;-)
but i was shocked that somebody would try to pass off these severely incevted
beers to the mostly sophistocated drinkers at the GABF.  All three were
lactic acid bacillus infected.

   What were some of the classics that i missed?

             aaron

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 09 Oct 92 08:49:25 -0700
From: mcnally at wsl.dec.com
Subject: re: GABF results


Under the IPA category, the brewer of "Banty Rooster" should be
"Seabright" not "Starbright".  Seabright is a wonderful place,
nearer to the sea than the stars.

_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
Mike McNally                                           mcnally at wsl.dec.com
Digital Equipment Corporation
Western Software Lab

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 10:07:18 -0600
From: Jon Binkley <binkley at beagle.Colorado.EDU>
Subject: Pellet Hops vs. Whole Hops

HULTINP at QUCDN.QueensU.CA wrote:

>Offhand, I can't think of ANY situation in which pelletized hops would
>be better than whole flower (NB: it is the flower, not the leaf, that we
>use!).  This is, of course IMHO.

>Perhaps some of you out there can suggest advantages for pellets I am
>unaware of?

I use pellets exclusively.  There is only one objective criterion
where pellets out perform whole hops, and that is alpha acid
% utilization. It's up around 30% for pellets (the best you can
hope for) and somewhere in the mid 20's for whole hops.

The reason I use pellets is convenience: you don't need to filter
them out when you chill your wort (they cone up nicely at the
bottom of the pot if you whirlpool the wort), and they're much
easier to use for dry-hopping than whole.

I view all of these reasons as preference only, and would never argue
pellets are better than whole.

Jon Binkley


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 12:21:00 EDT
From: gkushmer at Jade.Tufts.EDU
Subject: More crap from Sam Adams


At the risk of duplicating this with someone else, I am sending 
this electronic reprint from the Boston Globe (from last
week) describing yet another attempt by Sam Adams to squash
out a microbrewery.

A number of people here in Massachusetts (and its subset - Southern
New Hampshire :-) are back on the boycott of Sam Adams products. If
the following article angers you too, the forward it to friends and
call or write Sam Adams - or don't drink their beer.
 
 --gk
 
BATTLE BREWING IN BOSTON
 
by Matthew Brelis--Globe staff
 
 
Concerned that beer lovers searching for their product will
be left with a bitter taste in their mouths, Boston Beer
Co., maker of Samuel Adams lager, has filed suit in US Dis-
trict Court against Commonwealth Brewing Co. complaining of
trademark infringement.
 
In the multimillion-dollar world of Boston beers the suit is
more than frivolous froth according to Norman Soloway, the
lawyer who represents Boston Beer.
 
"If someone goes and buys a bottle of beer from Commonwealth
Brewing with Boston on it, thinking it is ours and they
don't like it , we have no control over that," Soloway said.
"You never even know that you lost a customer, you don't
know if you are being injured."
 
According to the suit, Boston Beer has had more than $2 mil-
lion in sales in the Boston area in each of the last two
years and more than $15 million nationally each year.
 
But Joe Quattrocchi, co-owner of Commonwealth Brewing, a
restaurant and microbrewery on Portland Street in Boston
said that while a label on the neck of its bottled beers
says "Boston" his labels would not be confused with the
labels of the Boston Beer Co.
 
"We've been bottled some beers since 1986 and you can't
trademark a geographic location,"  Quattrocchi said.  "Bos-
ton is a very common name in these parts"  [[[[good line!]]]
said Commonwealth Brewing manager Jim Lee.
 
Trademark lawyer Kenneth Plevan said geographic names are
more difficult to protect as a trademark, but they can be
protected.
 
Soloway said Boston Beer has a registered trademark for
"Boston Ale" and has applied for a trademark for "Boston
Beer."
Quattrocchi said Boston Beer was a giant picking on small
business with its suit against Commonwealth and an earlier
action against Boston Beer Works, another microbrewery in
Kenmore Square.
 
"We recently found out that Commonwealth Brewing was offer-
ing a couple of beers with the Boston family trademark on
them, and if we failed to police it we could lose our
trademark, Soloway said.  "We asked them to stop and they
said no."
 
The case has been assigned to US District Judge Douglas P.
Woodlock.
 
 
        Boston Globe  October 2, 1992  Business section


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 19:02 GMT
From: Peter Nesbitt <0005111312 at mcimail.com>
Subject: Looking for homebrewers

If you are a homebrewer, or know of a homebrewer in the Fairfield, Vacaville,
Suisun, California area, please contact me.  I'm interested in meeting other
brewers who are a little more local to me than the Bay Area or Sacramento.

Thanks


Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 15:45:43 CDT
From: gjfix at utamat.uta.edu (George J Fix)
Subject: Yeast Cycles (George Fix)

There has been a lot of interesting discussion concerning yeast
cycles on HBD, and I can not resist inserting my two cents worth.

I have really enjoyed the insights Pierre Jelenc has shared with 
us. He is absolutely correct in asserting that the classic division
between aerobic respiration and anaerobic fermentation greatly
oversimplifies what is actually going on in individual yeast cells.
Nevertheless, the aggregate behavior, where the total collection of
cells is viewed as an enzyme system, does display regular behavior.
In fact, the differential equations of enzyme kinetics are derived
from such models much in the same way thermodynamics is derived from 
particle models via ensemble averaging. It is important to stress
that the equations of enzyme kinetics are valid only as a description
of the system as a whole. They do not predict the behavior of individual
yeast cells, since the eccentricies of the latter have been averaged
out.

The kinetic models give the following picture of the fermentation. In
the early stages there is a net consumption of dissolved O2 as well as
a reduction of wort lipids such as oleic and linoleic acids. There is a
net increase of metabolic energy, which can be characterized as an
equivalent amount of ATP (adenosine triphosphate). This is accompanied
by a net increase in the cell density N(t) with time t. The biochemistry
is involved, but the associated mathematical description is simple, since
the kinetic equations are linear in this regime. Solution of these equations
shows an exponential growth in N(t) with time t, which is usually written
in terms of logarithms as follows:

          log(N(t)) = C*t,

where C is the growth constant. I feel it is valid to call this regime
the aerobic respiratory growth phase, even through individual cells may deviate
from the aggregate behavior.

As the cell density increases and the dissolved O2 level decreases, the 
nonlinear regime is approached. Things get really interesting here from a
mathematical point of view. Ironically, the biochemistry is straightforward.
What happens in the aggregate is carbon splitting of elementary sugars such
as glucose (G) and fructose (F) followed by formation of pyruvic acid and
then acetaldehyde. The final step is the reduction of acetaldehyde to
ethanol by yeast enzymes. Since O2 is not involved and since alcohol is formed,
I feel it is valid to call this phase anaerobic fermentation. It is important
to note that there is a net expendure of metabolic energy during this phase.
This is why the ATP buildup in the aerobic phase is so crucial to obtaining
a complete fermentation. Also the curve for N(t) vs. time flattens out.

There are a number of mechanisms that have been identified for inducing the
transition to the nonlinear regime (i.e., from respiration to fermentation).
One of the most important as far as practical brewing is concerned is the
Crabtree effect. It has been shown that a sufficiently high cell concentration
of G and F sugars will strongly induce anaerobic fermentation. Brewing yeast
take G's and F's directly into the cell. Sucrose (G-F) is broken up outside the
cell, and then the G and F fractions are then transported inside. In contrast,
maltose (G-G) and maltotriose (G-G-G) are taken intact into the cell, only 
later to be broken down into G units. In an all grain wort, maltose is the
major fermentable sugar followed by maltotriose, the others being under 10% of
the total. This has important practical implications for respiration, for
the maltose concentrations will not induce the Crabtree effect (at least in
the levels that exit in normal beer wort) until the maltose is broken into G 
units. At this point a proper respiratory cycle will have occured, assuming
of course that a sufficient amount of O2 is dissolved at the start of the
fermentation.

Because of this, I am in complete agreement with the general principles put
forward in Micah Millspaw's post on yeast propagation. I am less inspired by
the use of dextrose (which is the same as glucose) and sucrose as a substrate
for propagating yeast. The reason centers on the Crabtree effect. I am not
suggesting his methods will not work. Micah has a wall full of ribbons to prove
the contrary. I am suggesting, however, there may be a better ways to go.

Over 85% of commercial propagation and those done in research labs involved
with brewing strains use dilute wort (SG ~ 1.020). Paul Farnsworth has an
excellent discription of this procedure in his article that appeared in the
yeast issue of Zymurgy. I belong to the minority that propagates with full
strength hopped wort. The reasons for this and a description of the procedure
can be found in my article that appeared in Vol. 6 of BREWERY OPERATIONS 
published by Brewers Publications. I also use an O2 feed during propagation
to induce the Pasteur effect, which is the exact opposite of the Crabtree
effect. Here fermentation is repressed in favor of respiratory cell growth.

I was working only with half a voice during the AHA conference in June, and 
likely many points I was trying to make did not get across. I hope this is not 
the case with the point about the practical value of testing yeast that have 
been aerobically propagated. Minor technical errors can lead to major problems,
not only with aerobic bacteria but with mutation as well. Both should be 
checked. Interestingly, the Wyeast strain 1056, which is the same as Siebel's
BRY-96, does particularly well with aerobic propagation. In fact, I have found
the much discussed tendency of this strain to mutate (something that has 
happened with samples from both Wyeast and Siebel) is closely related to the
lack of a proper respiratory cycle. Thus, brewing procedure is the culprit,
not screw ups in Chicago or Portland.

George Fix

George Fix





Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 14:02:22 EDT
From: bob at rsi.com (Bob Gorman)
Subject: Battle Brewing in Boston

        Boston Globe  October 2, 1992  Business section
 
BATTLE BREWING IN BOSTON
by Matthew Brelis--Globe staff
 
Concerned that beer lovers searching for their product will be left with a
bitter taste in their mouths, Boston Beer Co., maker of Samuel Adams lager,
has filed suit in US District Court against Commonwealth Brewing Co.
complaining of trademark infringement.
 
In the multimillion-dollar world of Boston beers the suit is more than
frivolous froth according to Norman Soloway, the lawyer who represents
Boston Beer.
 
"If someone goes and buys a bottle of beer from Commonwealth Brewing with
Boston on it, thinking it is ours and they don't like it , we have no control
over that," Soloway said.  "You never even know that you lost a customer, you
don't know if you are being injured."
 
According to the suit, Boston Beer has had more than $2 million in sales in
the Boston area in each of the last two years and more than $15 million
nationally each year.
 
But Joe Quattrocchi, co-owner of Commonwealth Brewing, a restaurant and
microbrewery on Portland Street in Boston said that while a label on the neck
of its bottled beers says "Boston" his labels would not be confused with the
labels of the Boston Beer Co.  [This is true]
 
"We've been bottling some beers since 1986 and you can't trademark a
geographic location,"  Quattrocchi said.  "Boston is a very common name in
these parts" said Commonwealth Brewing manager Jim Lee.  [Good line!]
 
Trademark lawyer Kenneth Plevan said geographic names are more difficult to
protect as a trademark, but they can be protected.
 
Soloway said Boston Beer has a registered trademark for "Boston Ale" and has
applied for a trademark for "Boston Beer." Quattrocchi said Boston Beer was a
giant picking on small business with its suit against Commonwealth and an
earlier action against Boston Beer Works, another microbrewery in Kenmore
Square.
 
"We recently found out that Commonwealth Brewing was offering a couple of
beers with the Boston family trademark on them, and if we failed to police it
we could lose our trademark, Soloway said.  "We asked them to stop and they
said no."
 
The case has been assigned to US District Judge Douglas P. Woodlock.

===

Well, you all get the idea.  Jim Koch is once again trying to trademark
the words "Boston" and "Beer".  Can Jim say the word "Boycott"?

Thanks to Eric Haas for typing it in.

- -- Bob Gorman                   bob at rsi.com           Watertown MA US --
- -- Relational Semantics, Inc    uunet!semantic!bob    +1 617 926 0979 --

Return to table of contents


Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 16:06:59 PDT
From: polstra!norm at uunet.UU.NET (Norm Hardy)
Subject: Hop Pellets vs. Cones

Simply stated, hops are more practical when pelletized due to storage concerns
and long term stability.  Heck, I've got some 3 year old Saaz double sealed
in the deep freeze that are still making a great aroma used with Urquell
yeast and decent malt.  

Hop cones are aesthetically better.  I remember the Redhook people here in 
Seattle saying that they used cones when they started, partially for the
good P.R.  I believe they use mostly pellets nowadays.

Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 11 Oct 92 15:13:48 EDT
From: joseph at joebloe.maple-shade.nj.us (Joseph Nathan Hall)
Subject: Caramel vs. Crystal


In his Vienna book, George Fix makes a distinction between "caramel
malt" and "crystal malt."  But he doesn't say what that distinction
is.  The rest of the 1-1/2 dozen or so books on brewing that I have
state that "caramel malt" and "crystal malt" are synonyms.  Exactly
what hair is it that George is splitting here?

uunet!joebloe!joseph   (609) 273-8200 day   joseph%joebloe at uunet.uu.net
2102 Ryan's Run East        Rt 38 & 41             Maple Shade NJ 08052
- -----My employer isn't paying for this, and my opinions are my own-----

Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 11 Oct 92 19:25:22 -0400
From: bradley at adx.adelphi.edu (Rob Bradley)
Subject: Eating crow

I am guilty of spreading false information in HBD987.  As has been
pointed out to me in e-mail, Wyeast California is 2112 not 1212.
(Dislexics of the world untie!)

Seriously, I began this thread when I was given the wrong yeast package
on a recent visit to Kedco on Long Island.  When I followed up on the
phone I was given false information which I passed on to this list
(properly credited).  I apologize for wasting the HBD space.  I think
I may go back to my old mail order source. :-)

Cheers,

Rob (bradley at adx.adelphi.edu)

Return to table of contents


Date: Sun, 11 Oct 92 22:42 CDT
From: arf at ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: GABF, Belgian Malt

 
 To: Homebrew Digest
 Fm: Jack Schmidling
 
 >From: Robin Garr <76702.764 at compuserve.com>
 >Subject: GABF '92/Winners
 
 I note that Lowenbrau Dark took several medals and my first reaction is to 
 conclude that the GABF must be a farce.  I fell in love with the stuff in 
 Munich and spent years trying to duplicate it.  When Miller bought out the 
 rights to make it here, one glass told all.  It was rubbish and not even an 
 attempt to duplicate.  It tasted like Miller with caramel color.
 
 I have not tasted it since that first one. Did something change or is the 
 GABF a farce for serious beer drinkers?
 
 >From: R_GELINAS at UNHH.UNH.EDU (Russ Gelinas)
 
 >  Jack S.: You're concerned about nitrosamines which are found in malt
 which has come from gas-fired kilning.  Do you have any numbers wrt. the
 amount of these chemicals in such malt, as opposed to the amount found
 in say, a grilled hamburger, or toast?
 
 Good question, the answer to which is yes/no.   However, I do not eat grilled 
 hamburger and if I make toast, I don't let it get very dark for exactly those 
 reasons.
 
 I suspect backyard barbecues kill far more people than beer but I don't do 
 that either.
 
 I also roast my own barley and stop when it is friable and crunchy, not when 
 it gets black.  
 
 The bottom line is, I avoid carcinogins to the extent that I have control or 
 am willing to sacrifice.  If I can get a malt with none, I exercise that 
 control with little sacrifice..
 
 >From: thomasf at deschutes.ico.tek.com (Thomas D. Feller)
 
 >So your you describe in more detail how you make and use yeast starters.
 
 I find it hard to understand why people have to "make" yeast starters.  Why 
 not just save a bit from the current batch for the next?
 
 js
 

Return to table of contents



End of HOMEBREW Digest #988, 10/12/92