Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Mead Lovers Digest #1195
Subject: Mead Lover's Digest #1195, 30 June 2005
From: mead-request@talisman.com
Mead Lover's Digest #1195 30 June 2005
Forum for Discussion of Mead Making and Consuming
Dick Dunn, Digest Janitor
Contents:
Re Buckwheat Mead ("Charles Gee")
Buckwheat mead ("Spencer W. Thomas")
SG computation ("Spencer W. Thomas")
Re: New Method of Monitoring Specific Gravity (Kathleen Koch)
Re: New Method of Monitoring Specific Gravity ("Dan McFeeley")
NOTE: Digest appears when there is enough material to send one.
Send ONLY articles for the digest to mead@talisman.com.
Use mead-request@talisman.com for [un]subscribe/admin requests.
Digest archives and FAQ are available at www.talisman.com/mead
A searchable archive is available at www.gotmead.com/mead-research/mld
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re Buckwheat Mead
From: "Charles Gee" <cgee@mhtv.ca>
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2005 16:00:58 -0700
Some three years ago I purchased 15 kilogram of Buckwheat honey, dark
rich and with that unforgetable taste. I created 15 imperial gallons of
high gravity mead from this using if my memory serves me correctly some
grape, apple and orange frozen concentrate juice. Being a sort of
organic type I tend to look for a way to get around the chemical stuff.
I blended all three carboys and have bottled the results after a year of
bulk aging. The stuff is great and getting better all the time. A deep
rich taste reminescent of a fine sherry with a colour somewhat the same
a dark golden brown. It is very much an aquired taste and I like it a
great deal. Sipped slowly with some crackers it is perfect for
conversation around the wood stove.
I used some other Buckwheat for a herbed braggot. I grow the noble herb
for pain relief and I used the twigs and stems which were all sticky as
the herb, some black stout malt extract and the Buckwheat Honey. Got the
A/V to around 8.0% and let her go. I think I overdid the herb because
this stuff is potent but delectable. I just make sure that I get home
from the studio fairly quickly after enjoying just one, used as a reak
relief from the interminable sciatica discomfort when it gets really
bad.
I must admit I really like the Braggot with Black Malt turns into
something very special with a great creamy head very fine and long
lasting. As you can gather I prime my Braggot just my choice.
Charles Gee
------------------------------
Subject: Buckwheat mead
From: "Spencer W. Thomas" <spencer@spencerwthomas.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 11:21:43 -0400
Not all buckwheat meads/honeys need taste of "wet dog". I have had some
excellent buckwheat meads. In fact, the 1995 Mazer cup winning "Show"
mead (just honey and water) was a buckwheat mead (brewed by Brian
Ehlert, if he's listening).
In 2003 (MLD 991), Matt Maples wrote:
Buckwheat honeys vary WIDELY!! There are several varieties of the buckwheat
plant. Some produce a dark rich honey that has massive flavor that tend to
run in the malt like flavor range and then there are some that run in the
molasses flavors that also include an acrid smell and taste. Just like
eucalyptus honeys there are different buckwheat honey so be careful. My
friend Trevor is bound and determined to make a 100% buckwheat mead, after
we had sampled some of the more mellow varieties of buckwheat. I agree that
it had great potential but some of the buckwheat honey I have tasted didn't
seem fit for consumption.
=Spencer in Ann Arbor
------------------------------
Subject: SG computation
From: "Spencer W. Thomas" <spencer@spencerwthomas.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 11:32:00 -0400
"William" suggests that the "weighing" method of computing SG is not
taking into account the mass of the CO2 that is lost to the atmosphere.
In fact, it's exactly that loss of CO2 that causes the weight loss and
(most of) the lowered SG. If the resulting mixture of water and alcohol
had exactly the same volume as the original mixture of water and sugar,
then all the SG change would be attributable to the lost CO2. In fact,
I believe that the volume will change slightly (in the absence of
evaporative loss of water and alcohol), although I'm really not sure in
which direction.
Experiment time: What is the volume of 1 liter of water + 100g of
dextrose vs 1 liter of water + 51g of ethanol? (Figuring that 51g of
ethanol is produced by the fermentation of 100g of sugar.)
William has also ignored the increased yeast mass (although someone else
in this thread mentioned it.) My recollection is that you actually get
something like 48g of CO2, 50g of ethanol and 2g of yeast from 100g of
sugar under "normal" fermentation conditions.
William shows a misunderstanding of the definition of specific gravity
with this statement:
>The specific gravity can be calculated based on your reasoning by removing a
>known volume from the carboy and weighing it. The value you get is
>sufficiently near to the measured specific gravity for most purposes.
>
In fact the mass of a known volume, divided by the volume, is exactly
the *definition* of specific gravity. All other measurements of
specific gravity are an approximation of the true specific gravity
measured in this way. So your second sentence should really say "the
measured specific gravity is sufficiently close to the value you get [in
this way] for most purposes."
=Spencer in Ann Arbor, MI
------------------------------
Subject: Re: New Method of Monitoring Specific Gravity
From: Kathleen Koch <remclave@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 09:25:54 -0500
>
> Subject: Re: Mead Lover's Digest #1192, 19 June 2005
> From: Mark Ottenberg <mark@riverrock.org>
> Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2005 15:58:43 -0600
> I wouldn't want to use this method until I figured out just how much weight
> gets accumulated in the lees on the bottom of the carboy. It could be
> significant, or it might not. Simply one of my first guesses at factors
> that might throw off the accuracy of a reading. Especially as the lees are
> not a constant, but accumulate with time.
>
> Peace,
> -- Mark
I feel the theory is sound but the lees would probably have to be weighed
separately to verify the sum total at the end of the process....
Subject: Re: New Method of Monitoring Specific Gravity
> From: Erroll Ozgencil <errollo@gmail.com>
> Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2005 18:00:53 -0700
>
> Thanks for sharing. This might be one of those great ideas that seems
> simple and obvious *after* someone else thinks it up and explains it!
>
> > progresses, the more an error factor creeps in. This is
> > because of volume shrinkage from CO2 and water vapor
>
> It's tempting to think that the shrinkage from CO2 is related, maybe
> even directly proportional, to the weight loss that you are measuring.
> In your example then, instead of dividing by 50.45 lb each time, you
> would divide by ( 50.45 - f(delta weight) ). The function f() would
> determine the amount of weight loss from volume shrinkage and return
> water weight of that volume. Do I have the right idea, or am I
> overlooking something?
>
> Back in school I was often on the wrong side of, "... this is left as
> an exercise for the reader." So Dan, are you up for a little exercise?
> :)
>
> Erroll
Erroll, check out this professor's website.
http://www.cavemanchemistry.com/cavebook/chmead2.html
I'll stick with using an hydrometer. Less fuss and muss.
- --
Kathleen Koch aka "Remclave"
Soul Gazer Sundries
------------------------------
Subject: Re: New Method of Monitoring Specific Gravity
From: "Dan McFeeley" <mcfeeley@keynet.net>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 12:04:47 -0500
Thanks for the feedback -- I'll try to respond below.
It was pointed out, both on the digest and on back
channels, that the accumlation of lees would also
throw off the reading over time. Good point! Thanks.
Erroll pointed out:
>t's tempting to think that the shrinkage from CO2 is related, maybe
>even directly proportional, to the weight loss that you are measuring.
>in your example then, instead of dividing by 50.45 lb each time, you
>would divide by ( 50.45 - f(delta weight) ). The function f() would
>determine the amount of weight loss from volume shrinkage and return
>water weight of that volume. Do I have the right idea, or am I
>overlooking something?
>
>Back in school I was often on the wrong side of, "... this is left as
>an exercise for the reader." So Dan, are you up for a little exercise? :)
Nope! :-) :-)
CO2 loss is the major factor in the weight loss, but there's also
some from water vapor, volatile fermentation byproducts, maybe
some alcohol as well. Way too much detail for me to work with!
William -- thanks for the additional technical background. I
was skimping on details, trying to make it fairly simple. A
bit more fill in is always helpful.
I want to emphasize that this is only a dynamic means of
monitoring gravity changes, and doesn't replace the
accuracy of hydrometer readings. You can check the
gravity on a daily basis without a lot of effort, aside
from lifting a full carboy on to a digital scale. Supplementing
this with periodic hydrometer readings would help bring
the drifting calculations back in line.
Of course, simple is best and easiest. The hydrometer is
still the meadmaker's best friend. :-)
<><><><><><><><><><>
<><><><><><><><>
Dan McFeeley
------------------------------
End of Mead Lover's Digest #1195
*******************************
