Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Lambic Digest #9311
Lambic Digest #9311 Mon 01 Nov 1993
Forum on Lambic Beers (and other Belgian beer styles)
Mike Sharp, Digest Coordinator
Send article submissions only to: lambic at longs.lance.colostate.edu
Send all other administrative requests (subscribe/unsubscribe/change) to:
lambic-request at longs.lance.colostate.edu
Back issues are available by mail; send empty message with subject 'HELP' to:
netlib at longs.lance.colostate.edu
A FAQ is also available by netlib; say 'send faq from lambic' as the
subject or body of your message.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 93 11:49:05 EST
From: Scott Leno <scottl at merlin.dev.cdx.mot.com>
Subject: Re: C.R.'s trip to Belgium
> 1) I ALWAYS bring beer to Belgium. ........
> ......................... If you want a hot tip, bring over several
> sixes of Celis beers. I did this during our trip and every bottle was
> very well received. I brought them for brewers and specialty store
> owners, all of whom know who Celis is and why he bailed out; they're
> quite curious as to what he's up to, and you'll usually get a very good
> reception if you offer this as a small gift.
This is no longer (or soon will) be worth the effort. I was talking
to his son in law a couple weekends ago. They are opening a new brew-
ery in Belgium as we speak. You will probably get in before his product
hits the streets, but for anyone going after the new year, I doubt it
will be worth the effort (at least for the Celis).
peace, love and good karma,
Scott
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1993 13:48:18 -0400
From: Ed Hitchcock <ECH at ac.dal.ca>
Subject: Oud Bruin
First of all thanks for the Belgian Beer Hunting series, it was very
illuminating... The point about Liefman's beer simmering all night not
because the style called for it, but because the heating elements were
inadequate, was interesting. I fell in love with this style not long ago
and just made my first attempt at it this weekend. The recipe was
straightforward, 3.7kg Canada Malting 2-row, .3 kg british crystal (~80L),
150g each flaked wheat and flaked oats. I did a protein rest for 30 min,
then an overnight mash (something I do on occasion to split the brewing so
I don't use all of one day...). Instead of simmering all day as Rajotte
recommends, I did two things to mimic this: first, I did not stir the brew
until the end of the boil, so that some wort may have caramelized on the
bottom, and I did 4 caramelization decoctions of 200mL each. The colour
was a lovely rich brown with just the faintest hint of copper/red.
I fermented with the yeast cultured from a bottle of Blanche de
Bruges. I am operating under the assumption that this yeast is not a
separate bottling strain due to a taste sample of the starter, and the
presence of a small proportion of lactobacilus.
I will report further when it's fermented out.
____________
Ed Hitchcock ech at ac.dal.ca | Oxymoron: Draft beer in bottles. |
Anatomy & Neurobiology | Pleonasm: Draft beer on tap. |
Dalhousie University, Halifax |___________________________________|
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1993 11:24:00 -0600 (CST)
From: tony at spss.com (Tony Babinec 312 329-3570)
Subject: celis article in ny times
One of the interesting points in the article is that Celis beer
will be available in Belgium. As the costs of exporting from
the U.S. to Belgium would be high, Celis beer will be contract-
brewed by a Belgian brewery. The article left one with the
impression that Pierre is somewhat tickled to see his beer in
Belgium, and that no one (read Interbrew) can stop him.
------------------------------
Date: 1 Nov 1993 10:39:52 -0800
From: "Larry Lynch-Freshner" <Larry_Lynch-Freshner at taligent.com>
Subject: Re: FAQ
RE> FAQ
Hey! This is the Lambic digest! These things take time... The FAQ (such as
it is) is still brewing, I should have a dartboard version ready to send to
the digest in a week or so (I hope!)
Larry
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 93 11:18:33 -0500
From: swh at ll.mit.edu (Sarah White)
Subject: Celis in Belgium
The beers will be contract-brewed in Belgium, and the label will have
a cowboy (a la Texas). I'm carrying 10 six-packs (3 bottles White,
3 bottles Grand Cru) to various brewers and friends in Belgium over
Thanksgiving week. It should give them a chance to compare the Austin
product with the domestic stuff.
I was surprised to learn from Peter Camps (Pierre's son-in-law) at the
NEBFF that the White is, in fact, flash pasteurized. This was not
what we were told when we visited the partially-constructed brewery a
couple of years ago. Okay, we were told that the bottle-conditioning
takes place in the fermenter. It may have been a matter of translation.
Pierre always says that the yeast is responsible for the sour flavor in
his beer. We distinguish between yeast and bacteria in English. He may
not.
Without yeast in the bottle, my Belgian friends will not want to conserve
Pierre's beers. I wonder if the Belgian product will have live yeast in
the bottle.
I hope that we will have Celis White on tap in Boston soon.
Sarah.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 93 09:52:10 PST
From: msharp at Synopsys.COM
Subject: distribution lists
To those of you keeping local redistribution lists:
Who has forgotten to take CLARKE71 at syncorva.cortland.edu off their list?
(I'm getting _really_ tired of receiving a mailbox full of can't deliver
messages from this address every morning)
--Mike
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 93 13:09:38 EST
From: Greg Roody - MCS Prod Srvc Mgmt O/S Domain - 508-496-9314 <roody at stowoa.enet.dec.com>
Subject: Cellis in Belgium, Cellis recipe request,
While attending the dixie cup in houston this year, Piere himself showed
up and had many interesting things to say about his new venture in Belgium.
Two quick points of interest here are a) his packaging and labeling of the
Belgium (contract) beers will have a cowboy with lasso on the label, and b) the
reason he stayed in Belgium after Interbrew bought his company was because they
made him stay on as a term of the purchase; the only reason he isn't still
there is because of mandatory retirement.
Another thing he claimed when asked point blank (and well into the pub crawl)
was that there is NO SECRET INGREDIENT! He claims the yeast itself adds that
final distinctive character. He said he thinks it's kind of funny everybody
beleives there is a secret ingredient, and his staff may be telling people
this to add mystery. He claimed as well that the wheat content is 45%.
Who knows if any of this is the truth or not.
Also, I am about to come into possesion of a lacto d culture and what is
reported to be the actual Cellis white yeast, and now I need a good guess on
the the rest of the recipe.
I realize this was discussed a lot recently, but I have a very small
disk quota and can't save back info so..., if anyone can send the best concensus
of the group from those discussions, a brewin I will go.
Thanks,
/greg
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1993 10:56:04 -0400
From: Ed Hitchcock <ECH at ac.dal.ca>
Subject: oops
I grew suspicious of the way my Oud Bruin was fermenting, and took a sniff
at the airlock. Well, it smells like a fabulous...pilsner. Unless Blanche
de Bruges uses a lager yeast to ferment, it looks like they use a separate
strain for bottling.
Oh, and a note on Duvel bottling yeast: MJ says in his new book
that Duvel uses two strains of yeast to ferment, then filters, and uses one
of these same strains (but not both) for bottling.
____________
Ed Hitchcock ech at ac.dal.ca | Oxymoron: Draft beer in bottles. |
Anatomy & Neurobiology | Pleonasm: Draft beer on tap. |
Dalhousie University, Halifax |___________________________________|
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 93 10:00:17 -0400
From: "Phillip Seitz" <p00644 at psilink.com>
Subject: Celis and info from Belgian brewers
It's interesting to read the reports of what Pierre said, because I've
heard him say the direct opposite at other times. In general I've
found the brewing info I've gotten from Belgian brewers to be rife with
strange inconsistancies, and of course they're ALWAYS doing things the
right way, as opposed to the guy down the road.
This isn't a condemnation, really. Secrecy in professions is much more
of a tradition in Europe than it is here, where people are SUPPOSED to
support the free exchange of information. However, it does add an
element of sport to the whole thing, and I'd urge people to give more
creedance to what they actually see or make than to assume that what
they hear is gospel.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1993 15:00:24 -0500 (EST)
From: smag at echonyc.com (Stefan Smagula)
Subject: RE: Yeast in Celis White?
Last night dusted off my microscope and looked at the sediment from a
bottle of Celis White. It was pretty turgid, so I thought there must be
some yeast in there. I saw only few cells which might have been yeast.
Mostly there were ball- and rod-shaped bacteria, with a few clumps of
tangled stuff. Perhaps someone can tell us what types of bacteria these
might be?
I also looked at the Celis Grand Cru under the microscope, and saw tons of
perfectly symmetrical 8 sided crystals like this:
/\
/ \
< >< >
\ /
\/
(well, not exactly like this--the horizontal and vertical
dimensions were even in reality, but that's as close as I can get here)
Does anyone know what kind of crystals these are? What creates them? How
do they affect flavor? If these crystals have anything to do with the way
Celis's Grand Cru tastes, I might just start believing in this new age
stuff about crystals having healing powers ;-)
Smag smag at echonyc.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 93 07:41:41 CST
From: nfarrell at ppco.com (Norman Farrell)
Subject: Yeast in Celis White
As was noted in a recent Lambic Digest, Mr. Celis made himself available to
all interested participants at the Dixie Cup pub crawl. He told more than
one member of the tour that he had heard many claims that "I have the Celis
yeast". He seemed quite skeptical of these claims. He then said with NO
prompting from the studio audience, that he would gladly make yeast
available to homebrewers who made an appointment and came by the brewery
in person. How about an Austin area subscriber giving this a try?
Regards,
Norman (nfarrell at ppco.com)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1993 09:19:10 -0500 (EST)
From: bickham at msc.cornell.edu
Subject: Re: Yeast in bottled Celis White
Stefan Smagul writes:
> From: smag at echonyc.com (Stefan Smagula)
> Subject: RE: Yeast in Celis White?
>
> Last night dusted off my microscope and looked at the sediment from a
> bottle of Celis White. It was pretty turgid, so I thought there must be
> some yeast in there. I saw only few cells which might have been yeast.
> Mostly there were ball- and rod-shaped bacteria, with a few clumps of
> tangled stuff. Perhaps someone can tell us what types of bacteria these
> might be?
I read somewhere recently (I think in M. Jackson's new book, "The Beer
Companion," that Celis undegoes a primary fermentation, after which it
is filtered a lactic-acid producing yeast (or bacteria?) is then added.
Before bottling, it is then flash-pasteurized and more of the lactic
acid producer added for bottle conditioning. I can look up the exact
wording tonight if it would help.
Cheers,
Scott
------------------------------
Date: 4 Nov 1993 10:05:44 -0400
From: "Daniel F McConnell" <Daniel_F_McConnell at mailgw.surg.med.umich.edu>
Subject: hop/pertotale questions
Subject: Time:9:43 AM
OFFICE MEMO hop/pertotale questions Date:11/4/93
Regarding the Jim and Phil's excellent post. No mention was
made of hops in the Lambic section. Did you get a chance to
see, feel, smell, taste the gracefully aged cones?
I have a batch of E.Kent Goldings currently aging on the top
of my brewing refrigerator. They are now at the *strong
cheese phase* and I am a little hesitant to toss them in a
batch until the aroma dissipates. I could bake them I
suppose to hasten the process.
I also have some Cascade from 1992 that stayed on the vine
too long and turned about 30% brown (100% my fault). These
were intended for Lambik and have never been used for
conventional brewing, or lambik for that matter. They never
became cheesy. I know Cascade is not a traditional hop, but
Hey, I've got lots of these (they grow very well here).
I have reserved about 6 oz of this year's crop for my 1995-6 lambiks.
I guess that now is the time to purchase the last of the 1992
hop harvest at your local brewstore before the 1993 crop
comes in. Good prices for bottom of the barrel tired old
hops. BTW GWKent just had a huge bale of 1993 Oregon Bullion in
their packaging room (small room: ca 75 sq ft). With the door
closed the aroma was almost intoxicating, outrageous!! Not that
Bullion hops have ANYTHING to do with lambik brewing.
Questions:
1-Has anyone used cheesy hops in their lambik brewing, and
did the cheesyness carry over to the beer? Was this good or
bad? Is cheese part of the aroma we usually refer to as
horsebarn?
2-Has anyone intentionally allowed hops to overripen on the
vine and used them in Lambik brewing? Heresy in conventional
brewing, but maybe an efficient method to reduce the
bitterness.
3-What does Pertotal, as in Boon Faro, mean? *almost* total?
DanMcC
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1993 13:17:11 -0600 (CST)
From: "Bill Kitch" <kitchwa at bongo.cc.utexas.edu>
Subject: Celis info/mis-info
I have visited the Celis brewery a number of times and visited with
Peter Camps--head brewer, Kim Blackmon--micro-biologist, and Greg
Springer--Operations mgr both at the brewery and at brewclub meetings.
I have also been on the generic tours given at the brewery. The information
I get depends a lot on the source and context in which it is given.
I agree with Phil Seitz' general comments on accuracy of info received
from brewers. Better consider the source and take it all with a grain
of salt. My general impression of Celis is not that they intentionally
mis-lead the public, but rather they want a lot of the details of their
brewing to stay within the brewery. In this spirit they seem happy to
let rumors and half truths fly and are very careful how they answer direct
questions especially from other brewers. I personally don't begrude them
any of this corporate secrecy.
That having been said, here what I believe it the truth about their
pasturization techniques. This comes from piecing togther what the above
folks have said, comments from Dr. Fix, and what I've seen at the brewery.
I believe all their beers are flash pasturized. There is certainly nothing
useful living in the bottles when you buy them. I believe the white may
be pasturized twice, once after lacto bacilus fermentation and once after
the final yeast fermentation. All but the white are filtered before kegging
or bottling.
Sante' WAK
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 93 14:19:22 MST
From: abirenbo at redwood.hac.com (Aaron Birenboim)
Subject: duevel yeast
Ed Hitchcock mentioned:
>
Oh, and a note on Duvel bottling yeast: MJ says in his new book
that Duvel uses two strains of yeast to ferment, then filters, and uses one
of these same strains (but not both) for bottling.
This agrees with my experience. A friend brewed a deuvel knock-off
from a bottle culture. It did taste very belgian and deuvel-like, but
was not as complex and robust as the original. This guy is a very
careful meticulous brewer, so i feel pretty confident in making statements
based on a single brew of his.
aaron
------------------------------
Date: 4 Nov 1993 15:17:18 -0800
From: "Larry Lynch-Freshner" <Larry_Lynch-Freshner at taligent.com>
Subject: Lambic FAQ / Dartboard
Lambic FAQ / Dartboard
Well, here it is at last, the Dartboard Lambic FAQ. Please EMail all
comments (throw darts) to(at) me at LarryLF at Taligent.Com when the darts stop
flying, I'll edit the FAQ and try to find some place to put it that will be
generally available. Warning! this is seven (7) pages long!
Lambic Beer FAQ
This FAQ contians information culled from the (defunct) Lambic mailing list
archives, the Lambic Digest archives, and discussions with some of the more
frequent contributers.
Please keep in mind that this style, more then any other, is more Art then
Science. That means that no matter how authoritive anyone sounds, they only
_really_ know what has worked for them so far. Several PhD thesis have been
written on aspects of this process, and more are certainly to come. Even
comercial Lambic brewers only really know that it works, not _how_ it works.
We, as homebrewers, can only try to achive an aproximation of a Lambic.
In summery: This FAQ, and the Lambic Digest in general is just a discussion of
ideas that have (or have not) worked for others. It is mearly a starting
point, and guide, for your own experiments. This is no `One True Way', or
gospel of Lambic production. Good Luck to you! and if you succeed, please let
us know how you did it. Oh - and please don't take `Judges Comments' about
your beer too seriously, unless you _know_ the judges know what they're
talking about. This is such a different style that most judges don't know
what they are tasting.
1) What good books exist on these beers?
For Brewing:
'Lambic' by Jean-Xavier Guinard, Brewers Publications.
This is a very good book on brewing lambic beers, though expect longer
maturation times then he presents.
'Belgian Ale' by Pierre Rajotte, Brewers Publications.
This book is a bit sketchy, but still a good buy. Reactions vary, but general
consensus seems to be mild disappointment. Coverage of strong ale and
specials is better than things like Wit's and 'oud Bruin's.
`Just Brew It: Beer and Brewing V.12, 1992 AHA conference notes', edited by
Tracy Loysen, Brewers Publications. This book has a good article on Lambics &
Browns by Michael Matucheski, and an even better one on Lambics by Mike Sharp
and Martin Lodahl.
Lambic Digest & Lambic Mailing List archives. While I tried to distill these
into this FAQ, they remain a good source of information. Do go through them
all though, as opinions change over time.
For tasting:
Michael Jackson (surprise!)
World Guide to Beer.
Pocket Guide to Beer.
Great Beers of Belgium.
2) How are all these funny words pronounced?
First thing, remember that Belgium has two major languages spoken within its
borders. This means that the are often two pronounciations, if not two
spellings for a lot of words.
Lambic is pronounced 'lom-BEEK'.
Gueuze can be pronounced variously as 'goozuh', 'geuzuh', 'gooz', 'geuz',
'gerz', or 'gerzuh'. Most people seem to have settled on `gooz' or `geuz'.
Kreik is 'kreek'.
Framboise (Frambozenbier) is 'fram-boze', or 'fram-bwah'.
3) What makes a Lambic so different?
Several things. Generally, the first thing that a taster notices is that the
beer is sour. In the case of a good, traditional Lambic, like those made by
Cantillon or Frank Boon, the beer can be extreamly sour. Lambics usually have
a very complex aroma and flavor that is caused by the assortment of wild
yeasts and bacteria present. Lambics also have no hop character at all, only
aged hops are used. Beyond that, the best thing is to taste a few.
4) Where do I find aged hops?
Sometimes a homebrew supply will have some old hops sitting around. Health
food stores are known for having sometimes very old hops. You can age them
yourself (2.5-3 years is good). A few brewers have had good success with
artificially aging the hops by baking them at 200-300 degrees (F) for 1/2 to 1
hour, then leaving them in the open for a few days.
5) How can I get sour beer?
There are several methods that have been used to achieve sourness in beer.
a) Sour Mash. This is the method described by Charley Papazian in his book.
Basically, it relies on bacteria sometimes found on grain to sour the beer
before mashing.
Pro: When this works, it allows the brewer very good control over the degree
of sourness.
Con: This method is problematic. Several brewers have tried this with
disastrous or disappointing results. Also, for Lambic's, the sourness
achieved will lack the complexity of the real thing.
b) Add lactic acid. This method has been used by many people fairly
successfully.
Pro: Allows good control over sourness.
Con: Most sour beers have more to them then their sourness. Adding acid only
gives a one dimensional flavor. This might be a good method for a Berliner
Weiss though.
c) Culture relevant bacteria/wild yeasts. This is the preferred method.
Pro: Can achieve the most complexity possible.
Con: Difficult to culture, takes a long time to mature.
6) Won't fermenting Lambics infect my other beers?
If proper care is taken to clean and sterilize equipment, then this has not
proven a problem. Recommendations: Once the special cultures are in the
lambic, it should only be held in glass. If cooperage is used, it should be
in a separate area. More problems might be expected in a larger brewery then
a home brewery, as there are more places for the bugs to hide.
7) I want to show respect for Belgian Lambic brewers and their products.
Since a true Lambic can only be produced in Payottenland, by spontaneous
fermentation, what should I call my humble attempts?
Technically, we should not use the word 'Lambic' at all, but because not doing
so is to difficult, many use 'pseudo-Lambic', `pureculture Lambic' or pLambic
for short. The phrase 'Lambic-style' is also used.
8) What cultures do I need?
For Lambic, you should have at least Pediococcus Damnosus(sometimes given as
P. Cerevisiae) and one of either Brettanomyces Lambicus or Brettanomyces
Bruxellensis (using both adds more complexity). B. Bruxellensis seems to have
more `horsy' character. There are others, mentioned in 'Lambic', that can
also be used.
For Berliner Weiss (not Belgian, not a lambic, but because it is sour, it is
associated) uses just 'Lactobacillus Delbruckii'.
For a Flander's Brown or Belgian Red, unknown. How about some more research
here?
9) Where can I get the beasts?
Cultures for pLambics can be had from a couple of different sources. Remember
that there is as much variation in `Brettanomyces Lambicus' (or Brux., or
Pedio...) as there is in `Saccaromyces Cerevisiae' (unless you think Whitbread
is the same as, say, that used in Baverian wheat beer) - only almost no work
has been done in isolating and idenifing these strain variations. Try
cultures from different sources, experiment!
Yeastlabs (Dist. by G.W. Kent) produces a Pediococcus Damnosus culture and a
Brettanomyces Lambicus culture. These cultures were isolated from Cantillon
Gueuze by Mike Sharp and Shari Almeda, and have been through both lab and
brewing tests.
Sheaf & Vine sells the Pedio. culture and both Brett. cultures (S&V is no
longer operating as a mail order business, but as a special service to pLambic
brewers is still offering these cultures, call (708-430-HOPS) or write Sheaf &
Vine Brewing Supply, PO Box 1673, Bridgeview, IL 60455)
Wyeast will be selling a Brettanomyces (Lambicus?) culture soon.
Brewers Resource sells a Brettanomyces Lambicus culture now, and will be
adding a Pediococcus culture soon.
You might also check with the Yeast Culture Kit company.
There are also University & National level yeast collections, but these are
usually difficult to get cultures from as a homebrewer, and very expensive.
10) How do I culture these bacteria/wild yeasts?
For basic information on yeast culturing, see the yeast issue of Zymurgy, the
Yeast FAQ in rec.crafts.brewing, or any of the other good articles on
culturing that have been published. In general, develop skill at culturing
regular yeasts before even attempting these.
For culturing Pedio., it has been found that it does better in a liquid
culture then on agar. Also, use MRS broth (from Diffco) or add a little
(about 10%) tomato or apple juice to the wort. The media should me autoclaved
(pressure cooked) at 15psi for 20min. Simply boiling will not work, as it
doesn't kill off things like mold spores. Also, a Pedio. culture should _not_
be aeriated, as it is an anaerobic bacteria. For both Pedio. and Brett., the
medium should have a little (.5%) Calcium Carbonate as a buffer. Cheap agar
can be had from a health food store or Chinese market.
Both Pedio. and Brett. take quite a bit longer to grow then common beer
yeasts, so give them time. They also will look differently. They will not
get bubbly, or develop a kreusen on top. Pedio. will sometimes develop a
wrinkly pellicle on top that has been described as 'stringy' or like a 'brain
cross section'. Brett. will sometimes develop a waxy looking pellicle,
sometimes with large bubbles in it. These pellicles are normal, but not
always present. Don't expect a pellicle sooner then a few months, even if one
is going to develop.
When making starters, allow a week for the starter to get going. Possibly two
or three for Pedio. Remember, _do_not_ aeriate the Pedio. starter!
11) How do I make a Lambic?
Again, the book `Lambic' by J-X Guinard is recommended reading before making a
Lambic, though a brewer should use more aged hops, and expect longer
maturation times then he gives.
In general, the grist consists of:
60% Pale, 2-row malted barley.
40% UNmalted, soft white wheat.
(Can often be found at a health food store)
Hops - Should include 'a lot' of hops in the kettle.
(Guinard says 2.5lbs per 100lbs grain,
which is 4oz for 5 gal, 10lb batch.)
Hops should be aged about three years! They
should have _no_ bitterness or aroma.
Typical varieties: Brewer's Gold, Northern
Brewer, Fuggles, Styrian, Hallertauer, etc.
Decoction Mash:
mash in at 113-120f and rest for 10min.
step to 136 for 15 min.
step to 149 for 15 min.
step to 162 for 20 min.
step to 170 for 20 min.
mash out at 170f
Start sparging at 173f and increase to 190-200f by the
end of the sparge. Yes, you want the tannins.
Infusion Mash:
mash in at 95f and hold for 15 min.
increase to 113 for 15 min.
increase to 131 for 15 min.
increase to 149 for 15 min.
mash off at 162 to 164
boil it, grain & all. Just get it started.
Sparge at 200f
Boil for 2-3.5 hours. Hops go in at the beginning.
After wort has cooled, transfer it to (preferably) a oak cast that has either
been used for wine for a couple of years, or has been treated to remove
tannins. A regular fermenter is OK, but should be glass once before anything
other then a normal beer yeast is added. Start primary fermentation with a
regular, highly attenuating ale yeast, preferably without much flavor. Chico
works well. Inoculate with Pedio. & Brett. cultures. Wait. Wait. Wait.
After a few months you have a young Lambic. This can be aged further, mixed
with fruit, bottled, etc.
Not everyone follows those exact steps of course. Remember, this is an Art,
not a science.
Here are a few recipes:
Martin Lodahl - Batch#1, All Grain
7# 2-row pale
3.5# flaked wheat
.5# crystal
1/3 oz Chinook*
1/3 oz Willamette*
1/3 oz Northern Brewer*
* - Special Process - See Below.
Wyeast 1007 (German Ale) Yeast
Pediococcus Damnosus culture
Brettanomyces Bruxellensis culture
1 tsp yeast nutrient
3/4 cup dextrose for priming.
process:
Hops were fresh hops, treated by baking for 1 hour at 300f,
then left for 3 days in open air.
Mash in water: 14 quarts at 130f w/1 tsp gypsum
hold 5 min.
Protein rest: 20 min at 140f
Conversion: 60 min at 158-155
mash out: 10 min at 170
Sparge: 5 gallons at 170f rising to 190f, pH 5.7
Boil: 2 hours, hops added near start.
Fermented in glass.
Notes:
4/30/91 started
5/10/91 Added Pedio.
The primary yeast strain (Wyeast 1007) produced sulfery notes. Should
probably not use again.
5/20/91 Added Brett.
Batch is ropey (Pedio. pellicle), starting to get a sour flavor.
10/25/91 Ropey again.
Mike Sharp - Batch#2, All Grain
(No Recipe given for batch #1 - Many comments on oakiness though, due to the
use of a new oak cask)
2#, 6oz Malted wheat
6#, 10oz Pale Malt
5oz Crystal (40 lovibond)
2 oz Perle, aged several years.
Process:
Step infusion mash, all grains mashed with 3 gal at 130
130 for 15min,
140 for 15 min,
158 for 45 min,
170 for 10 min,
run off wort, recycle 1st gal. through bed
sparge with 3 gal at 170
sparge with 2 gal at 180
Yeald: 7 gal.
Boil for 2 hours, hops added at start.
Pitched Wyeast 1338.
Notes:
5/10/91 Started.
5/24/91 Added Pedio.
? Added Brett.
9/11/91 Going well.
Mike Sharp - Batch #3, Extract
6 Cans (3.3lb ea) M&F Wheat Extract (55% wheat, 45% malt)
3oz aged Perle hops
15+ gal water
Chimay Red yeast culture
Boil for 1 hour, hops in at start.
Notes:
7/15/91 Started
? Added Brett / Pedio
9/11/91 Going well, very acid.
9/26/91 Pellicle changing from 'ropy scum' to thin and whitish as the Brett
takes over.
12/16/91 Mixing with 15 lbs frozen raspberries.
Al Korzonas - Batch #1, Extract
For 15 gallons of base pLambiek
6.6# Northwestern Weizen Malt Extract
6.6# Northwestern Gold Malt Extract
3.3# Northwestern Amber Malt Extract
1.5# Dextrose
3.0oz Hallertauer Leaf Hops
(1.5 years old + baked 20 min at 250F)
15gal Palos Hills Tapwater (quite soft)
8gm Gypsum
6gm Sodium Chloride
24 floz starter from Sierra Nevada Pale Ale
(same as Wyeast #1056)
16 floz starter of Brettanomyces Lambicus
(two weeks in starter flask)
16 floz starter of Pediococcus Cerevisiae
(two weeks in starter flask)
Boil: 2hrs
OG: oops!
SG after 20 days: 1019
SG after 3 months: 1012
After 3 months in a white, 20 gallon HDPE Brute, the batch was split into four
sub-batches:
sub-batch A: 15 lbs dark, sweet cherries + 4.25 gallons of p-lambic,
sub-batch B: 13.5 lbs dark, sweet, pitted cherries + 4.25 gallons of p-lambic,
sub-batch C: 12 lbs red raspberries + 1 gallon boiled/chilled water (result of
the fruit sanitation) + 3.25 gallons of p-lambic, and sub-batch D: 3.25
gallons of p-lambic (destined to be pseudo-gueuze).
Sub-batch A was bottled after six months on fruit, the other three are still
in the secondaries (now 17 months since starting the batch). Sub-batch A was
entered in the 1993 AHA Nationals and made it to the second round. Judge's
comments primarily pointed out that the Brettanomyces character horsey,
sweaty) were not strong enough. I plan to combat this problem by pitching
both Brettanomyces Lambicus and Bretanomyces Bruxellensis along with the
Pediococcus Cerevisiae in my next batch. I am considering delaying the
pitching of the Saccharomyces until the Brett and Pedio have had a head start,
but this may be an invitation for molds, acetobacter and unwanted (phenolic)
wild yeasts, so I'm still unsure if I will delay or not.
12) What about the Brewferm Kits?
Well - they work. Follow all the usual kit rules. I.E. Don't use sugar, throw
away the yeast and use a better brand. With the Kriek kit you must be careful
_not_ to boil the extract, as that will destroy the flavor. You still need to
pitch Pedio & Brett if you want real lambic flavors. In fact, if you are
going to wait that long, and do all that culture work, why use a kit? Go for
it! Better success can be acheived by using bulk extract as in recipe #3
above.
13) Is a cask required.
No, in fact, not using one makes area sanitation easier. However, results
seem to indicate that using a cask produces more complexity and more 'real'
lambic flavors. There is some evidence to indicate that Brettanomyces has
some affinity with wood, and produces more flavor when in contact with it. If
you use glass fermenters, add some French oak chips - they will help.
I hope this answers more questions then it creates...
Larry Lynch-Freshner
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 93 11:12 CST
From: korz at iepubj.att.com
Subject: Comments on FAQ
First off, great job, Larry.
Just a few comments:
>Wyeast will be selling a Brettanomyces (Lambicus?) culture soon.
Good news... it will be Brettanomyces Bruxellensis!
> mash out at 170f
> Start sparging at 173f and increase to 190-200f by the
> end of the sparge. Yes, you want the tannins.
Ahem... are you sure, Larry? I've never tasted a tannic astringency
in any commercial lambieks -- what's your source on this? Could it
be that the gobs of protein from the unmalted wheat need additional
tannins to haze-up and settle out during the three-year aging period?
>12) What about the Brewferm Kits?
>Well - they work. Follow all the usual kit rules. I.E. Don't use sugar, throw
>away the yeast and use a better brand. With the Kriek kit you must be careful
>_not_ to boil the extract, as that will destroy the flavor. You still need to
>pitch Pedio & Brett if you want real lambic flavors. In fact, if you are
I tried the Brewferm Kriek kit and was very disappointed. I used two cans
instead of one, ommitted the sugar they recommended and did not boil. There
was virtually no cherry flavor, a tiny bit of cherry aroma (certainly not
$34 worth!) and the sourness was provided by citric acid (I believe) mixed
into the extract. For $34+ you would do much better doing it yourself with
real fruit. I think the Kriek kit is a ripoff. The other Brewferm kits
seem to be better, but this is the lambiek digest.
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1993 12:25:07 -0600 (CST)
From: "Bill Kitch" <kitchwa at bongo.cc.utexas.edu>
Subject: White beer report
Well, having started the wit thread in September, I'd like to
report on my resulting brew.
The grain bill I settled on was:
54% DeWolf-Cosyns pils malt
40% soft white wheat
6% oats
I crushed the wheat and grain in a motorized Glatt mill at my
local brew store, thus avoiding all those horror stories about
hand milling raw wheat (I really like the Glatt mill by the way).
The wheat was only broken into 3 or 4 large pieces per kernel.
This did not seem to adversely affect my extraction rate.
For hopping I was shooting for 15 IBU, which for my operation I
calculated to be about 4.25 HBUs. I split this between US Saaz
and Styrian Golding because that's what I had. At this level I
can't see that the variety is tremedously important.
>From Todd Enders' and Phil Seitz' advice I used
21 g Corriander
17 g Orange peel
The orange peel was from Fontier Herbs and is reported to be
Spainish. No variety given This looks very much like what I
have seen at Celis.
The mash schedule I chose was a compromise between Phil Seitz'
schedule and the one I took off the temperature recorder at
Celis. The schedule I used (not necessarily what I planned--I
mashed based on my childrens' temperament) was:
Temp (F) Time (min)
105 60 dough-in/acid rest
130 60 protein rest
152 90 sacrification
160 30 Celis rest
168 10 mashout
Had a stuck sparge after first runnings. Reset the grain bed and
didn't have any more problems. Boiled to OG of 1.048. Added
corriander and orange peel at end of boil. Pitched 500 ml
starter of Texas white yeast :). Single stage fermentation for
two weeks at 70F. Final gravity 1.011. Bottled w/ 2/3 cup
glucose and 14 ml of 88% lactic acid. I added the acid to taste,
by compairing to fresh Celis.
Tasting 2 weeks after bottling, comparison to Celis.
Color: about same lovibond but mine is noticably more amber than
Celis. Celis is yellow not amber.
Carbonaton: Mine slightly under carbonated. Next time use 3/4
cup priming sugar.
Nose: Both have strong corriander nose. Mine is more angular and
harser than Celis. At first I thought maybe I used too much
corriander, but it's not the level of the flavor, just that the
Celis nose is softer than mine. There is a noticeable hint of
orange nose in Celis--none in mine.
Taste: Both have nice lactic wheat balance. Not suprising since
I added lactic acid to taste by comparing to Celis! Mine is again
much sharper not as mellow as Celis. Both finish with some orange
bitterness again mine is harsher. The big difference is in body.
Celis has smooth filling (but not heavy) body that mine lacks. Mine
seems a bit thin in comparison. Overall mine's a bit rough and a
bit thin. The roughness might mellow with a bit more age.
What would I change? Definetly more priming sugar. I'd sure
like to get that silky smoothness of Celis. I don't know if a
different wheat would help. Peter Camps told me they use hard
red winter wheat not soft white wheat. First I'd shorten the
rest at 152 and go up to 158 sooner, hoping to get some more
complex sugars left behind. I'd really like to try a
lactobacillus instead of added food grade lactic acid but that's
a ways off for me.
Sante' WAK
------------------------------
Date: 5 Nov 93 12:18:00 EST
From: "Anderso_A" <Anderso_A at HQ.NAVSEA.NAVY.MIL>
Subject: HDM malted barley
Message Creation Date was at 5-NOV-1993 12:18:00
Greetings,
I've recently come across some Begian grain from a
company (?) called HDM. I'm familiar with Dewolf-Cosyns,
but not with HDM. Could somebody clue me in: Is this
really Belgian grain? How is the quality? Any caveats I
should know before using it?
TIA,
Andy A
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 93 13:15:59 EST
From: Spencer.W.Thomas at med.umich.edu
Subject: Lambic FAQ / Dartboard
"Larry Lynch-Freshner" writes:
> Framboise (Frambozenbier) is 'fram-boze', or 'fram-bwah'.
^^^^^^^^^^^
This bugs me every time I hear it. Framboise is a French word, and as
such, I would expect it to be pronounced as a French person would say
it. If it did not have the 'e' on the end, the pronounciation you
give would be correct. But, with the 'e' on the end, the correct
French pronounciation should be 'frahm-bwahz'. Does anyone here know
how the (French) Belgians actually say it?
------------------------------
Date: 5 Nov 1993 10:30:36 -0800
From: "Larry Lynch-Freshner" <Larry_Lynch-Freshner at taligent.com>
Subject: Re: FAQ
RE>FAQ
Good! People are reading the FAQ - I know this because many of you have
caught the 'Framboise' mis-pronounciation. I did this, of course, to make
sure I got some feed-back, and it worked! (thats my story and I'm sticking to
it! :-) )
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1993 13:57:45 -0800 (PST)
From: Jeremy Ballard Bergsman <jeremybb at leland.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: lambic cultures
FYI: The beverage people mail-order brewing supply store now has lambic
cultures. They have Brett. Lambicus, Ped. Cerevisiae, and "MCW MaloLactic".
(Their Phone number is 800-544-1867. Just a customer....)
Questions from a first time lambic brewer, but a long time lurker and
reader of today's FAQ:
1) Does anyone know the source of these?
2) What is the third? A lactobaccillus?
3) Might I attempt a lambic using small inocula of these alone if my
sterile technique is good?
TIA Jeremy Bergsman
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1993 16:45:56 -0700 (MST)
From: Jim Liddil <JLIDDIL at AZCC.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Lambic FAQ and Brett Sources
In regards to the yeast FAQ, I have some questions comments.
% 9) Where can I get the beasts?
%
% Yeastlabs (Dist. by G.W. Kent) produces a Pediococcus Damnosus culture and a
% Brettanomyces Lambicus culture. These cultures were isolated from Cantillon
% Gueuze by Mike Sharp and Shari Almeda, and have been through both lab and
% brewing tests.
%
% Sheaf & Vine sells the Pedio. culture and both Brett. cultures (S&V is no
% longer operating as a mail order business, but as a special service to pLambic
% brewers is still offering these cultures, call (708-430-HOPS) or write Sheaf &
% Vine Brewing Supply, PO Box 1673, Bridgeview, IL 60455)
%
% Wyeast will be selling a Brettanomyces (Lambicus?) culture soon.
%
% Brewers Resource sells a Brettanomyces Lambicus culture now, and will be
% adding a Pediococcus culture soon.
%
% You might also check with the Yeast Culture Kit company.
%
These sources are all fine and good, but how do we know that what we are buynig
from these companies is the real thing? As the archives indicate and I know
fron personal experience these yeasts strains are difficult to grow and
maintain.
Myself and others have examined some commercial cultures from soem of the above
listed sources and have found that they don't appear to be the real thing.
Without getting into details of the experiments it seems that the cultures
examined don't show the characteristics of true brettanonmyces. They grow
fast, dont grow on lysine or cylcoheximide and microscopically don't look
anything like known brettanomyces yeasts. And I know this is far from
conlusive evidence but it does suggest there are problems out there and they
need to be resolved. Do you want to spend all day brewing a p-lambic only to
pitch it with yeast that is not what you think it is. Just some food for
thought.
Jim Liddil
------------------------------
Date: 8 Nov 1993 10:50:59 -0800
From: "Larry Lynch-Freshner" <Larry_Lynch-Freshner at taligent.com>
Subject: Re: Just the FAQ's
RE> Just the FAQ's
Just a few comments on comments:
>Al - Mash schedule details.
No Al, I'm not sure. As I said in the intro, none of us is an expert. The
mash schedule refered to comes from very early in the Lambic Mailing list
archives. It is almost identical to the mash schedule given by Guinard
though. I double checked (p63), and he does say the that the higher temps are
desired at the end of the sparge, mostly to get the remaining starches. He
goes on to talk about how the higher carbohydrates are broken down over time.
> On the Kits.
I thought I tried to discourage these kits without ragging on them too much.
It seemed from the archives that they wern't _that_ bad.
>Jim Liddil - Yeast comments
You are absolutely correct Jim. I tried to get some of this across in the
paragraph right after the question posed in item 9, that you cut out in your
post. These are the sources available to most of us however. If a brewer has
bad results with any of these sources, this Digest is the place to talk about
it. Please post the results of your experiments! The FAQ is not _my_ wisdom,
but the wisdom of the Digest readership, collected. And, collectivly, we know
very little about these yeasts and bacteria. Your posts, and those of others
who know their microbiology help us understand things better and better. I
will continue to maintain the FAQ, and as we know more about the cultures, the
knowlage will go into the it. Maybe you, Mike, and the others who have the
facilities to test the critters can start using some form of un-official
variety labling (I.E. Brett. Brux. v.Cantillon or some such) so that we can at
least talk about them less generically.
Thank you all, and keep those darts flying!
Larry
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1993 09:25:56 -0500
From: tmgierma at acpub.duke.edu (Todd Gierman)
Subject: the Brettanomyces question revisited
In LD #205, Larry Lynch-Freshner writes:
> These are the sources available to most of us however. If a brewer has
>bad results with any of these sources, this Digest is the place to talk about
>it. Please post the results of your experiments! The FAQ is not _my_ wisdom,
>but the wisdom of the Digest readership, collected. And, collectivly, we know
>very little about these yeasts and bacteria. Your posts, and those of others
>who know their microbiology help us understand things better and better.
Right. I am backing Jim on this one, as I am the one who sent him the
three yeast samples. I became suspicious of them early on. If you go back
a few issues to the "Brett: the mini-series" you will find Mike Sharp
addressing many of the questions that I had concerning the criteria for
identifying true Brett. Using Mike's suggestions, along with descriptions
available in the literature, I became more convinced of the cultures'
"unauthenticity".
Actually, these are wonderful yeasts, but they are not Brett. They don't
even remotely resemble Brett, in hindsight. However, if the Samuel Smith
Brewery wanted to make a butterscotch lambic, they would certainly use one
of these guys. And I suspect that Jim Koch used one of the others to make
his famed Cranberry Lambic.
The moral of the story: know your supplier and his tactics. Mistakes can
happen and they happen throughout various levels of competence. Because
these guys (Brett, anyway) are so difficult to maintain, it is important
that you as a buyer have confidence in the ability of the supplier to
provide you with an authentic culture. The only way that you can do this,
short of running the tests that will determine the taxonomy of the culture,
is, armed with the knowledge of how Brett should be maintained and tested,
to ask the supplier about his efforts at quality control. Suppliers cannot
be expected to reimburse you for failed attempts at p-lambics. However,
they should supply you with new authentic cultures in the event that it is
clear that you have received a culture whose authenticity is questionable.
Some suppliers clearly need to get their acts together, and most likely,
they will.
Todd Gierman
Dept. of Microbiology
Duke University Medical Center
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1993 10:50:07 -0700 (MST)
From: Jim Liddil <JLIDDIL at AZCC.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Brett and My Opinions
Larry wrote,
%
% >Jim Liddil - Yeast comments
% You are absolutely correct Jim. I tried to get some of this across in the
% paragraph right after the question posed in item 9, that you cut out in your
% post. These are the sources available to most of us however. If a brewer has
% bad results with any of these sources, this Digest is the place to talk about
% it. Please post the results of your experiments! The FAQ is not _my_ wisdom,
% but the wisdom of the Digest readership, collected. And, collectivly, we know
% very little about these yeasts and bacteria. Your posts, and those of others
% who know their microbiology help us understand things better and better. I
% will continue to maintain the FAQ, and as we know more about the cultures, the
% knowlage will go into the it. Maybe you, Mike, and the others who have the
% facilities to test the critters can start using some form of un-official
% variety labling (I.E. Brett. Brux. v.Cantillon or some such) so that we can at
% least talk about them less generically.
%
% Thank you all, and keep those darts flying!
% Larry
Well you aksed for it :-)
As mentioned previously I obtained 3 cultures, 2 of which were labeled as
Brettanomyces Lambica and one labeled as Brettanomyces Bruxellensis. I took
these cultures and examined the microscopically. They did not look like the
known brettanomyces cultures which I currently have. I have a large number of
brett strains so I have a resonable base with which to compare these 3 culutres
to. Also when grown on YM agar the 3 questionable cultures did not exhibit the
same growth characteristics as my known cultures. Granted YM agar is not the
perfect media for grwoth characterization but it works forwidely different
yeasts such as saccharomyces and brett.
I then washed cells in water and plated them on YM agar, cyloheximide and
lysine agar. The 3 questionable cultures grew up overnight as did a known
sacharomyces. My known brett cultures were not confluent overnight eeven
though they were plated at roughly the same density. Brett yeast tend to show
slow growth as others have reported in the past. After 5 days the questionable
cultures did not show growth on cycloheximide or lysine agar. The known
saccharomyces culture also did not grow on lysine or cylcoheximide. The known
brett cultures grew to confluence. They also show pseudomycellia where as the
questionable cultures on Ym showed no such structures.
Again this is not conclusive rock hard evidence, but it suggests that these
yeast are not true brettanomyces. IMHO it demonstrates a lack of QC/QA on the
part of the people selling these culutres. How are people without the
facilities I have available going to be able to know if they are buying the
real thing or not? Are any of these outfits even doing QC/QA or have a clue as
to what is required to maintain pure yeast cultures? One of the outifts is even
trying to have the ATCC characterize their cultures or so they say. The ATCC
(American Type Culture Collection) charges $750 to do this so I think I was
getting a line. And I think they are running scared. Does anyone have an
opinion on this or are we trying not to step on toes since some of the people
who sell these cultures are on this forum?
Jim
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 93 12:17:04 TZ
From: Pat Lasswell <patl at microsoft.com>
Subject: Q: Yeast Autolysis and Lambics?
Surely, during a lambic ferment, the initial population of
saccharomyces settles out undergoes some autolysis. How is it that
this <blech!> flavor is not present in the finished beer? Has anyone
tasted a young lambic with this flavor? I presume that it is the
bacterial component that absorbs and eliminates these flavor
components. Any guesses, or is this just another piece of the Great Mystery?
Thanks
patl
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 93 16:50 CST
From: korz at iepubj.att.com
Subject: Brettanomyces Cultures
A few days ago, Jim Liddil posted about some cultures, that were being
commercially sold as Brettanomyces, but did not appear to be behaving as
expected (i.e. were probably only a strain of Saccharomyces).
I have since discovered that the Brett cultures distributed by
Sheaf & Vine Brewing Supply (my store), are some of those questionable
cultures.
It appears that my meager "laboratory" may be insufficient for the care
and propagation of the tempermental Brettanomyces yeasts. Perhaps at
some time in the future, I may again endeavor to provide these or other
yeasts (probably commissioning a proper microbiologist to maintain and grow
the cultures), but especially in light of B. Bruxellensis being available
via Wyeast, the need for my providing a commercial source of B. Bruxellensis
is quite diminished.
I am immediately pulling all existing cultures from the shelves, suspending
further sales of Brett yeasts and offering a full refund to anyone who
purchased the questionable Brett yeasts from Sheaf & Vine Brewing Supply.
Please send a copy of your receipt to the PO Box on the receipt and please
make sure your name and address are clearly readable.
Thanks to Jim and Rick for the work they did in discovering this problem
and bringing it to our attention.
I apologize to everyone who purchased the questionable cultures. I
sincerely would not have sold them had I known that they were suspect.
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 93 07:20:50 EST
From: John DeCarlo <jdecarlo at homebrew.mitre.org>
Subject: Dentergem Wit
Anyone know what is in the bottle of Dentergem Wit? I can see a thin white
sediment at the bottom of a bottle someone brought me from Belgium. Is it
worth trying to use this for my next Wit?
John DeCarlo, MITRE Corporation, McLean, VA--My views are my own
Fidonet: 1:109/131 Internet: jdecarlo at mitre.org
If I were you, who would be reading this sentence?
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1993 09:48:03 -0500 (EST)
From: bickham at msc.cornell.edu
Subject: Celis White correction and lactic sourness
Last week I posted what I thought was a correct description of the
way Celis gets a controlled amount of lactic sourness into the White.
I rechecked my source (Michael Jackson's new book) and learned that
I was slightly wrong. The White is fermented with a typically Belgian
ale yeast in the primary, and lactobacillus is added during a 7 day
period in the secondary. The beer is then pasteurized and the same
yeast is added for bottle conditioning. It's unclear which yeast
Jackson means here, but in any case, I haven't seen much sediment in
any bottle of Celis White.
This brings me to the question of controlling lactic sourness in both
the White and Lambic Styles. I brewed a white that did very well in
AHA competitions last year, but most judges said it lacked sourness,
which was exactly right since I only used the Wyeast Belgian Ale strain.
Many homebrewers add lactic acid to correct this, but I'm a little bit
of a purist, so I experimented using starters made from the sediment
in bottles of Dentergems. I don't have any experience culturing, so
I don't know if this is lactobacillus or a special yeast strain that
produces lactic acid. In my latest batch, I added equal volume starters
of this and Wyeast 1214, and to my dismay, the wit turned out to be
very dry and acidic - the final gravity was 1.008. Are there any methods
by which I can controll the sourness/attenuation? I've thought about
adding the lactobacillus to the secondary, as Celis does, but even if
this reduces the sourness, the beer would still be very dry since I can't
pasteurize to get rid of the lactobacillus. Or can I?
Thanks,
Scott
bickham at msc.cornell.edu
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 93 08:56:37 MST
From: abirenbo at redwood.hac.com (Aaron Birenboim)
Subject: fermenter calrification
I just want to get something perfectly clear. Is the current wisdom
to do a 6-month to 1 year single fermentation?
For fruit (which i have yet to try) shall I just add it at 6 months,
or rack onto it?
aaron
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1993 10:05:58 -0600 (CST)
From: BAN5845 at tntech.edu
Subject: Re: Lambic Digest #206 (November 10, 1993)
Hello everyone. As a recent addition to the lambic digest, I hope I am sending
this mail to the correct place. I would like to comment about the lambic
yeast debate, ie Brettanomyces. I am a Microbiologist. I have been culturing
Brett. for 3 or 4 years. The key is to have an authentic culture from the
start. This culture is verified authentic, then frozen and/or freeze dried
(like coffee). When needed, a new culture is started from this "freezer-
stock". Special precautions are needed to culture Brett. It is both alcohol
and acid sensitive. So the common method of growing Brett in a little malt
and shipping it to customers often results in a dead culture. So I guess what
I am saying is that the culture originator, ie. who grows the culture for
distribution is the key. He should be the one to authenticate the culture he
sells.
I would also like to comment about the reliance of selective media. Often many
strains can grow on media they are not supposed to. Even the slightest
contamination of lysine agar with another source of nitrogen will allow Sacc.
to grow. This is only a word of caution.
Dr. Brian Nummer
Tennessee Tech Univ.
Aeonbra"u Co.-Head Start Brewing Cultures
ban5845 at TnTech.edu
------------------------------
Date: 10 Nov 1993 10:40:54 -0800
From: "Larry Lynch-Freshner" <Larry_Lynch-Freshner at taligent.com>
Subject: Culture Shock
Culture Shock
Whew! It's getting a little hot in here...
I am having a little of a hard time with the implications that suppliers are
trying to rip us off though. I think Al is good example of a small business
person with an interest in Lambics trying his best to supply something hard
for most of us to get. I think his post shows he has integrety and I hope
this setback doesn't keep him away.
Keeping this in mind, does anybody have an analysis of Brewtek's cultures?
When I last talk to them, they claimed to be able to grow Brett. on their
special agar without any additional buffering. When I asked about Pedio., I
was told that they were setting up to distribute it as a liquid culture, but
that they were still using their normal medium. Normally, this would make me
doubt their cultures, but they do have a pro microbiologist on their staff
doing their lab work.
Larry
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1993 15:20:51 -0600 (CST)
From: "Bill Kitch" <kitchwa at bongo.cc.utexas.edu>
Subject: Celis yeast
Bad news from Austin. I spoke w/Peter Camps today re Pierre's offer
of yeast cultures. He said they would not provide cultures citing
liability concerns!? He said Pierre had not thought out all
the issues involved and apologized for not being able to fulfill
Pierre's offer.
He was very polite but cagey, as usual. I can't possibly see any
liability issues, but there you have it. Take it as you wish.
Sante' WAK
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 93 12:37:15 PST
From: grumpy!cr at uunet.UU.NET (C.R. Saikley)
Subject: Young Lambiks
From: Pat Lasswell <patl at microsoft.com>
>Surely, during a lambic ferment, the initial population of
>saccharomyces settles out undergoes some autolysis. How is it that
>this <blech!> flavor is not present in the finished beer? Has anyone
>tasted a young lambic with this flavor? I presume that it is the
>bacterial component that absorbs and eliminates these flavor
>components. Any guesses, or is this just another piece of the Great Mystery?
I've tasted a number of unblended lambiks, ranging in age from about 3 weeks
to 5 years. I've never been able to detect flavors attributable to yeast
autolysis in any samples. As to why this is, I haven't a clue.
The 3 week old sample was a summer lambik. It was brewed during the summer
months when most breweries shut down due to the over zealous nature of the
local microflora at this time. These beers are seldom made today, and are
intended to be consumed shortly after brewing. It was a very hard brew,
especially considering its youthfulness. It seems that therein lies some clue
as to how we can get a true lambik character without waiting months or
years.
On another note...
Sorry to take up BW, but I've been trying to respond to Dan McConnel via
private email with no success. Dan, if you're listening, could you drop me
another note? Thanks.
Cheers,
CR
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 93 10:02:17 EST
From: Spencer.W.Thomas at med.umich.edu
Subject: Celis White correction and lactic sourness
The latest Zymurgy has an article by Greg Noonan on sour mash
techniques. People have "debunked" Papazians sour mash method in this
forum before, but Noonan seems to have made it work "in practice", in
that he regularly sours some of the beers his brewpub makes.
Maybe worth looking at again (not for Lambic, of course, but maybe for
Wit).
=S
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1993 11:20:05 -0500
From: tmgierma at acpub.duke.edu (Todd Gierman)
Subject: Brett fracas elaborated
Larry Lynch-Freshner writes:
>Whew! It's getting a little hot in here...
>I am having a little of a hard time with the implications that suppliers are
>trying to rip us off though. I think Al is good example of a small business
>person with an interest in Lambics trying his best to supply something hard
>for most of us to get. I think his post shows he has integrety and I hope
>this setback doesn't keep him away.
Okay, then, let's get this fire under control. Perhaps, the irony was
being laid on a little to thickly. So, let me try to put this in
perspective using a straight-forward, bottom-line format.
Q: Was anyone implying that vendors were intentionally ripping off
unsuspecting customers?
A: No, way. Besides being potentially libelous, this idea was rejected
from the beginning. Clearly, the gut reaction anyone has, when they feel
that they have come out on the short end of a transaction, is one of "Hey,
I've been ripped off!" However, no such assumptions have been made on this
end. I still stand by my statement in LD#206: "The moral of the story:
know your supplier and his tactics. Mistakes can happen and they happen
throughout various levels of competence." However, "tactics" should more
accurately read: "procedures" (sorry, about the loose choice of words).
The only assumption here is that some honest mistakes have been made.
Q: What was the process for determining the authenticity of the
questionable cultures?
A: I think that much of the analysis and criteria involving the definition
of what is true Brett has been layed out quite nicely within this forum and
there is little to add at this point. However, I would like to emphasize
that this was not a matter of just deciding "Hey, this isn't Brett! Let's
tell everyone about it." This process has really been going on for well
over a month with numerous discussions and consultations involving a number
of individuals. We have presented the information as it stands. We have
offered an interpretation. However, we expected that you would draw your
own conclusions once you had the information in hand.Q: Is this analysis really the final word?
A: Well, is there really such a thing? No. But, we would not have raised
the issue had we not felt a high level of certainty. However, if doubts
about this level of analysis persist, we could take this to another level
and look at spore formation and genetic fingerprints. This seems
unnecessary, though.
Q: Why raise the issue at all?
A: Is anybody really asking this? Well, it definitely was not to
humiliate or embarass any individuals. We became aware of a situation,
namely that some vendors were having difficulty delivering legitimate Brett
cultures to customers. I think that it would have been irresponsible to
just let it go. Besides, we were also dealing with individuals who had
purchased cultures. They were upset and were going to raise the issue
themselves. It had the potential to get even uglier. There are already
enough pitfalls in producing p-lambics.
Q: Which vendors were involved?
A: Well, you know one of them, who,IMHO, came forward very commendably and
did the right thing. This gesture should keep him in the good graces of
the HB community. I certainly hope that it has not tempered his enthusiasm
for participating in the various forums. We are reluctant to just "out"
these suppliers in public. Some contacts have been made through back
channels, and we suspect that they will move to correct the situation. It
really is up to the supplier to assess the situation and decide what should
be done. Mike Sharp is clearly reluctant to promote his commercial ties in
this forum (commendably so), but I would like to say that he is in no way
connected to the cultures that we have looked at.
Q: So where do things stand?
A: Well, obviously, we have all learned some interesting and useful things
from this. If any of us weren't already aware of the pitfalls in handling
some of the more fastidious microbes involved in lambic production, we are
now. With this knowledge everyone becomes not only a more informed, and
thus better, customer, but a more informed, and thus better, homebrewer, as
well.
Hope this clears up a few things.
Todd Gierman
Dept. of Microbiology
Duke University Medical Center
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 93 09:42:47 MST
From: abirenbo at redwood.hac.com (Aaron Birenboim)
Subject: food grade lactic acid
I was at a little beer judging course last night, and one doctored
beer had lactic acid. He used a food-grade lactic from GW Kent. It
came in liquid form.
This is of note to brewers who were looking for food grade lactic. The only
drawback is that they made no note of the conventration of lactic acid.
Any idea of how to calculate this from my "wine titration kit" which
has directions for "percent acid as tartatic" on it. My chemistry is VERY
rusty, and I have no idea waht they mena by "percent acid as tartaric"
anyway. is this w/v, w/w or molar? What is the molecular weight of
tartaric acid?
what is the molecular weight of lactic acid?
aaron
------------------------------
Date: 11 Nov 1993 13:10:51 -0500
From: "Daniel F McConnell" <Daniel_F_McConnell at mailgw.surg.med.umich.edu>
Subject: spont. ferment report
Subject: spont. ferment report
Spontaneous fermentation report
Last PM I broke out the old wine thief and tasted my 100%
spontaneous fermentation. Two months ago I allowed some wort
to cool uncovered, overnight in the garage, then racked it.
It took 10 days to start fermenting, but then produced what
appeared to be an absolutely normal fermentation. Rocky head
etc. Fermentation slowed after about a week.
In retrospect, I may have made an error because I carried the
cold wort into my basement and THEN racked to the primary. I
could have picked up a yeast lurking in my basement rather
than the outdoors. Lots of fermentations have been done in
that particular basement area!
The taste was under attenuated (slightly sweet) and very
slightly sour, there was no indication of phenolics or other
undesirables. We will see what develops. Thus my initial
impression is that this area has a rather benign (which may
be good or useless) flora but there is some indication of a wild
(unattenuating) yeast and a possible bacterial component. I
will report what grows out on the plates. I'm selecting for
bacteria, yeast and (hopefully) wild yeasts.
I am encouraged with these results and may try another, dedicated
batch, but I'm running out of dead hops.
Dan(wildly fermenting in Ann Arbor)McC
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 93 11:42 CST
From: korz at iepubj.att.com
Subject: Culturing Brett
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1993 10:05:58 -0600 (CST)
From: BAN5845 at tntech.edu
Subject: Re: Lambic Digest #206 (November 10, 1993)
Dr. Brian writes--
>stock". Special precautions are needed to culture Brett. It is both alcohol
>and acid sensitive. So the common method of growing Brett in a little malt
>and shipping it to customers often results in a dead culture. So I guess what
>I am saying is that the culture originator, ie. who grows the culture for
>distribution is the key. He should be the one to authenticate the culture he
>sells.
And then Larry writes--
>Keeping this in mind, does anybody have an analysis of Brewtek's cultures?
>When I last talk to them, they claimed to be able to grow Brett. on their
>special agar without any additional buffering. When I asked about Pedio., I
>was told that they were setting up to distribute it as a liquid culture, but
>that they were still using their normal medium. Normally, this would make me
>doubt their cultures, but they do have a pro microbiologist on their staff
>doing their lab work.
I'm not a pro microbiologist, but from my discussions with Mike Sharp, I
learned quite a bit about the Bretts and Pedio before trying to culture
them. I was using a 1020 wort buffered with 5% Calcium Carbonate to keep
them from killing themselves. I have never tried growing these beasties
without the CaCO3, so I don't know if it will work. Actually, no, I did
do a 14 day starter with unbuffered 1020 wort for the Pedio and B. Lambicus
for my 1992-1993 pLambiek and the beer definately is getting both lactic
and horsey character (*lots* of sourness, a little bit of horseyness).
The Pedio in this batch was the same strain that I used for the seed in
the ones I was selling, but the Bretts were different. I must admit that
I stored the Bretts for 11 months in a normal fridge before starting, so
I can't even blame the source -- it was my fault for not testing them
or at least having them tested. I take full responsibility.
Regarding companies that have pro microbiologists on staff, I believe
that there are a great number of areas of specialization in the field
of microbiology and being an expert in one area (say, human cells) does
not guarantee knowledge in another (say, yeast). I'm not saying that
these people don't know yeast, but I've spoken with a number of micro-
biologists from homebrew supply companies and one, in particular, I thought
was quite a bit wrong on a number of topics which we discussed.
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1993 13:21:55 -0800 (PST)
From: gummitch at teleport.com (Jeff Frane)
Subject: Eric, where are you?
Sorry to waste the bandwidth, but I've lost Eric Urquardt's address (and
how to spell his name!). Please contact me.
- --Jeff
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 93 10:05:41 CST
From: stmckenna at amoco.com (Stephen T. McKenna)
Subject: Re: food grade lactic acid
> Any idea of how to calculate this from my "wine titration kit" which
> has directions for "percent acid as tartatic" on it. My chemistry is VERY
> rusty, and I have no idea waht they mena by "percent acid as tartaric"
> anyway. is this w/v, w/w or molar? What is the molecular weight of
> tartaric acid?
> what is the molecular weight of lactic acid?
"Percent acid as tartaric" means that one measures the total moles of
titratable acid in the sample, assumes it's all due to tartaric acid, and
calculates what weight of tartaric acid that corresponds to. It is most
likely reported as weight tartaric acid per volume of solution, though the
terminology is vague on this point. Weight per weight would only differ by a
factor (the specific gravity).
Lactic acid is CH3-CH(OH)-COOH, MW 90.08. Tartaric acid is
HOOC-CH(OH)-CH(OH)-COOH, MW 150.09; unlike lactic, it has two carboxylic acid
groups. Your kit probably titrates both carboxyl groups of tartaric, so this
introduces a factor of 2 into the equation (effectively each lactic acid
molecule looks like half a tartaric acid molecule for this purpose). So to
convert the "percent acid as tartaric" indicated by your kit to "percent acid
as lactic", multiply by 1.20, which is 2*90.08/150.09.
Steve McKenna
Amoco Research Center
Naperville, IL
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 93 09:58:12 -0700
From: Kelly Jones <k-jones at ee.utah.edu>
Subject: Lactic acid calculations
In LD #208 Aaron asks about lactic acid calculations...
First of all, what does "percent acid as tartaric" mean? Well, there
is a mix of acids in wine, including tartaric, citric, malic, and a few
others. Unfortunately, we don't know what the ratio is. When we
measure acids by titration, what we measure is how many moles of acid
we have. To convert moles into a weight percent (which is the usual
units which industry uses to measure concentrations) we need to know
the molecular weight. But what is the molecular weight of an unknown
mixture of several different acids? Well, we don't know. So we make
an assumption that all of the acid is tartaric (even though we know
this is not the case), and calculate the weight percent of acid as
though it were all tartaric ). Thus, "percent acid as tartaric" is
simply a weight percentage, in which we have determined the moles of
acid and used the MW of tartaric to calculate the weight of the acids.
Now, the MW of tartaric is about 150.1, but it is diprotic (yields two
moles of protons for each mole of acid). Also, the MW of lactic acid
is about 90.1. So, if you calculate the percent acid as tartaric
using the formula which came with your kit, the percent acid as
_lactic_ is T * 90.1 * 2 / 150.1 or 1.2 * T, where T is the calculated
percent acid as tartaric.
BUT...
This assumes all of the titratable acid in your beer is lactic. But
won't the alpha acids throw this caclulation off? Lets see... If your
hopping rate was 20 IBU, and an IBU is a milligram per liter of alpha
acids (is this right?) then the concentration of acids is .002
percent. Probably negligible compared to the amount of lactic acid.
Can anyone else comment on this? Are there other acids present in beer
which will throw off this measurement?
To be on the safe side, I would calculate total acid (as lactic) in
the _non_ lactated :) beer and compare it to the lactated beer.
Kelly
------------------------------
Date: 12 Nov 1993 20:14:44 -0500
From: "Daniel F McConnell" <Daniel_F_McConnell at mailgw.surg.med.umich.edu>
Subject: In defense of Al K
Subject: Time:8:08 PM
OFFICE MEMO In defense of Al K Date:11/12/93
Larry Lynch-Freshner writes:
>I think Al is good example of a small business
>person with an interest in Lambics trying his best to supply something hard
>for most of us to get. I think his post shows he has integrety and I hope
>this setback doesn't keep him away.
In defense of Al K, I would agree wholeheartedly with the above
statement. I purchased a culture from him at the Chicago 1st round
judging last June. I added it to a batch of already fermented
(fermenting?) pLambik that already had both Pedio and Brett. L
innoculated. No starter, I just dumped the vial in the barrel for
a low level pitch as soon as I got home. My goal was to add another
organism to the resident flora of the barrel. This beer is still in
the ropey state resting happily. Recent tastes indicate no off flavors
(can we say THAT with pLambiks?) other than *OAK*, so I feel that
the beer was not harmed in any way and indeed may have been IMPROVED with added
complexity.
Al is clearly a lover of this style and ment to do no harm.
No, I don't want my money back.
DanMcC
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1993 12:18:08 -0500 (EST)
From: Rick Garvin <rgarvin at access.digex.net>
Subject: Re: Lactic Acid additions
In the recent discussion on Lactic acid some very interesting chemistry
points were raised. I wonder "What will it taste like?" and "How can I
make it taste that way?" I like the approach that Phil Seitz takes on
his very tasty Wit beers. Add food grade 88% Lactic Acid at bottling
time until it tastes right.
Another empirical approach is going for a particular Ph. At bottling
time just keep adding Lactici Acid until that Ph is acheived. I remember
Jim Busch's first attempt at a Wit beer last spring. He had
gone for a particular Ph. At first this beer was SweetTart juice. After
a few weeks it mellowed.
I am not a Wit brewer, nor do I play one on the net. However, I am a Wit
drinker. The more Wit brewed the better for me as a drinker. The
addition of Lactic Acid is SO MUCH easier that more people are likely to
try it. Of course, compared to pLambik using lactobacilli fermentations
is save and easy.
What is the net wisdom on the best places to get Lactic Acid? I have
never used it to adjust sparge Ph (I have good Potomac water). I have
seen it in the James Page Brewing mail order catalogue for $4.95 for 4
oz.
Cheers, Rick
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 93 09:31:41 MST
From: abirenbo at redwood.hac.com (Aaron Birenboim)
Subject: geueze report
I finally bottled my geueze last night. It fermented for some 14 months.
It developed some brett character rather quickly (horsey??? smell), and it
took 7ish months for what may be a pedio "rope" to develop.
After 14 months there was still a thin, wrinkley white-light brown pellicle.
I bottled. At bottling the primary aroma was sour. I tasted the stuff,
and it was "thin" tasting. Primary flavor was sourness... very little
alchahol or other flavors to back this up. Not the "spicy" (horsey?) aroma
it had several months ago. I added a little boon culture at bottling,
and i'll report again once it has conditioned.
I head about brett coming along to break up the pedio rope. It seems
to me that my ferment got brett first, then pedio... a dis-orderly
lambic ferment. Would it be fair to guess that having pedio take over
AFTER brett will scrub away brett character?
Has anybody looked at boon yet? My boon culture took off like
Sacc. yeast. fast. lots o gas.
I'm thinking of making my next batch in a couple of months, hoping
it will be ripe and ready for next summer's rasberry harvest.
aaron
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 93 13:04:33 EDT
From: wslack.UUCP!wrs at mv.mv.com.MV.COM (Bill Slack)
Subject: Berliner Weisse
Recently, I made a Berliner Weisse generally following the recipe in
Warner's book:
Grains:
2.5# DeWolf-Cosyns pale malt
3# Ireks wheat malt
Mash:
10 min. at 104F
35 min. at 122F
10 min. at 144F
20 min. at 147F
20 min. at 162F
5 min. at 169F
Boil:
60 min. 1/2 oz. 2.5% Saaz
30 min. 1/2 oz. 2.5% Saaz
Yeast:
Pitched 8 oz. of Weihenstephan W-184 Alt Yeast starter and a 2 oz.
starter of Lactobacillus Delbrueckii from Seth Cohen. Huge krausen
the next day. Primed with 3/4 cup corn sugar and 1/8 cup cane sugar.
Just before priming the beer wasn't as tart as I had hoped so I threw in
another 2 oz. of the lacto starter that had been in the refrigerator
since brewing. At six days in the bottle the beer was carbonating
nicely but the sourness was still less than desired. At 25 days the
sourness did not seem to have increased at all although the beer was now
nicely carbonated. I took it to Mike Fertsch's house where we let it
stand open for a few hours at room temperature and then measured the pH
with Mike's digital meter. 4.14, not very sour, as we knew. Kindl , for
example, is around 3.1 or 3.2.
My questions:
Will the L. Delbrueckii eventually sour the beer? I know that
Schultheiss is aged for 18 months.
Is there something I could have done (or still can do) to correct this
problem?
Do I need a higher storage temperature? The lacto took forever to grow
up at room temp.
Mike Sharp, you said you knew the origins of Seth's L. Delbrueckii. Any
ideas?
I really want to brew this beer the natural way, not add lactic acid.
Comments, please.
Bill
__
wrs at gozer.mv.com (Bill Slack)
------------------------------
Date: 16 Nov 1993 08:37:37 -0500
From: "Daniel F McConnell" <Daniel_F_McConnell at mailgw.surg.med.umich.edu>
Subject: lactic acid %
Subject: lactic acid %
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 93 09:42:47 MST
From: abirenbo at redwood.hac.com (Aaron Birenboim)
Subject: food grade lactic acid
> I was at a little beer judging course last night, and one doctored
>beer had lactic acid. He used a food-grade lactic from GW Kent. It
>came in liquid form.....[edit].....they made no note of the conventration of
>lactic acid.
I stopped by GWK on saturday (had to pick up a case of Premier
extract that I won as a prize....what use it is is unknown) and
mentioned the lactic acid bit. It is 88% w/v. The fact that it
was unlabeled is unfortunate and a mistake I am told. MY bottle
is clearly labeled 88%. It looks like some went out underlabeled.
FWIW, better formula for calculating %acid is as follows:
%acid= 7.5(V1)(N)/V2
Where V1 is the volume of the base, N is the normality of the base
and V2 is the volume of sample. This formula allows you to use
any sample volume, and any concentration of base. Usually 0.1N
NaOH is used. A quick calculation.......if 20 mL of 0.1 N NaOH was
used to titrate 15 mL of sample:
7.5(20)(.1)/15 = 1.0% acid as tartaric
DanMcC
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 93 09:29:54 MST
From: abirenbo at redwood.hac.com (Aaron Birenboim)
Subject: more geueze notes
the geueze that i remembered as just sour and thin a few days
ago seemed different at the homebrew meeting.
sourness is low, yet it is prominent in aroma. The beer
(bottled with boon culture) seems mostly fruity with
green apple (acetaldehyde). Its quite good, and i like it,
but it is nothing like any lambic i ever had. One friend who
has been to belgium said that some lambic was rather fruity
there. sourness and horseyness seem low. It had a little fizz,
but was far from carbonated.
NON-LAMBIC NOTE...DO NOT READ IF YOU HATE GERMAN BEER ;-)
Tabernash brewery in denver just opened. Brewmeister Eric
Warner of the AHA series "German Wheat Beer" fame. He has
delivered some kegs of his "Weiss" (as he calls it. us home
brewers might call it a bavarian style weizen mit hefe).
Quite excelent. Smooth in the extreme (which suprized me)
with banana over clove notes. head like you can not immagine,
and VERY VERY opaque. It looks like diluted skim milk in the
beverage lines, but attains a yellow cast in the glass. If you are in
the CO fromt range, ask for it by name. He is lagering his
light and dark lagers, and they will hit the market december
or so (after they lager!).
aaron
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1993 11:08:25 -0600 (CST)
From: BAN5845 at tntech.edu
Subject: Culture request
A colleague of mine at the French Brewing school-"IFBM" has asked me for a
Berliner Weisse yeast culture. Unfortunately my culture has not survived
my recent move. Does anyone have a such a culture either yeast or yeast
L.delbru"ckii mix that they can send me. I have many cultures I can exchange
for this favor.
Thanks
Dr. Brian Nummer
Tennessee Tech University
BAN5845 at TNTECH.edu
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 93 12:46:02 -0800
From: Tony_Quinn at f1004.n202.z1.fidonet.org
Subject: Slow Death in San Diego
I have searched far and wide in the San Diego Area and it appears that
the best one can do is Trappist Grand Reserve and Hoegarden White.
While man can live on Grand Reserve alone, does anyone have any other
sources of lambic/kriek/etc in the near vicinity.
Thanks
Tony
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1993 11:01:46 -0600 (CST)
From: "Bill Kitch" <kitchwa at bongo.cc.utexas.edu>
Subject: That Bay Area Belgian Beer Tasting
This this idea die a young death? I'm still interested in getting
some of the better Belgian palates to sample, enjoy, and give me
feedback. Am I the only one?
Sante' WAK
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1993 13:33:23 EST
From: Matthew Evans <matt at cadif.cornell.edu>
Subject: Boon lambics?
Just got a hold of three varities of lambics from the Boon Brewery out in
Belgium. A couple nights ago I popped open the Gueze, but was not as
thrilled as I might have been. This beer didn't taste anything like the
Goudenband (I think made by Liefman's) that I have tried in the past. It
tasted like the beer was skunked. I know that lambics are supposed to have
a sort of horsey flavor, but this just tasted unpleasant. Anyone else try
them? Also I was very surprised to see no sediment in the bottom of the
bottles. Both Lindemann's and Liefman's have the sediment which I like, and
also consider to be a good beer.
Please, someone set me straight on this brewery, but unless the Boon Kriek
and Framboise are much better, I don't think they are worth the money.
Also, anyone out there have a good recipe for making a cherry beer without
the extra yeasties and bacteria? I like Kriek beer, but at this point I
don't think I have the time or resources to do a Kriek pLambic. Thanks for
your help!
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 93 10:39 CST
From: korz at iepubj.att.com
Subject: Re: Slow Death in San Diego
Tony writes:
>I have searched far and wide in the San Diego Area and it appears that
>the best one can do is Trappist Grand Reserve and Hoegarden White.
>While man can live on Grand Reserve alone, does anyone have any other
>sources of lambic/kriek/etc in the near vicinity.
I checked with the managers at Mainstreet Deli and Liquors and they said
they would be willing to UPS beer anywhere in the US. They have all six
Chimay's, F. Boon Gueuze, Kriek, Framboise and Faro (Pertotale), Scaldis,
Rodenbach, Westmalle Dubbel, Grimbergen Dubbel and Tripel, Orval, Liefman's
Goudenband, Kriek and Frambozenbier, etc. etc. Well over 300 beers, I'll
bet. I'll suggest that they put together a catalog of beers that they
have, but in the meantime, if you have something particular that you want,
then feel free to give them a call, maybe ask to have them send you a
catalog when it's ready. Their number is 708-354-0355 and they do take
Visa/MC/etc.
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 93 10:48:59 PST
From: msharp at Synopsys.COM
Subject: Bay Area Belgian Thing // F. Boon
"Bill Kitch" <kitchwa at bongo.cc.utexas.edu> writes:
> Subject: That Bay Area Belgian Beer Tasting
>
> This this idea die a young death?
Sort of.
> I'm still interested in getting
> some of the better Belgian palates to sample, enjoy, and give me
> feedback. Am I the only one?
Well I know that C.R. Saikley has just left for Belgium for two weeks.
Since Martin & I can probably be convinced to get together with him
shortly thereafter (to drink whatever he brough back -- me? inviting myself?
never!) the timing might be right to get a few of us together to do this.
So how many people who actually want anything to do with this?
Matthew Evans <matt at cadif.cornell.edu>
> Subject: Boon lambics?
>
> Just got a hold of three varities of lambics from the Boon Brewery out in
> Belgium. A couple nights ago I popped open the Gueze, but was not as
> thrilled as I might have been. This beer didn't taste anything like the
> Goudenband (I think made by Liefman's) that I have tried in the past.
Maybe thats because Frank Boon makes Lambics and Liefman's makes
Flanders Browns. The styles have some common points but they're far
from the same.
> It
> tasted like the beer was skunked. I know that lambics are supposed to have
> a sort of horsey flavor, but this just tasted unpleasant. Anyone else try
> them?
All the more gueuze for us... 8-)
> Also I was very surprised to see no sediment in the bottom of the
> bottles. Both Lindemann's and Liefman's have the sediment which I like, and
> also consider to be a good beer.
The sediment is there. I know 'cause I've just isolated another Brettanomyces
strain out of the soup that David Klein cultured out of a Boon gueuze.
You're right that its not as heavily sedimented as Liefman's though.
> Please, someone set me straight on this brewery, but unless the Boon Kriek
> and Framboise are much better, I don't think they are worth the money.
You might like the kriek and framboise from Boon. They're much more like
Lindeman's. (long time readers know that I'm restraining myself here
WRT Lindeman's 8-) ) Everyone has their own tastes. From my point of
view its the kriek and the framboise that bring the line down because they
are like Lindeman's (well, not quite that sweet/artifical, but getting there).
No, I don't expect everyone to view the world as I do.
--Mike
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1993 11:01:27 -0800 (PST)
From: malodah at pbgueuze.scrm2700.PacBell.COM (Martin Lodahl)
Subject: Boon, Yet Again
In Lambic Digest #215 there were a couple of items that caught my eye.
First, Bill Kitch:
> Subject: That Bay Area Belgian Beer Tasting
>
> This this idea die a young death? I'm still interested in getting
> some of the better Belgian palates to sample, enjoy, and give me
> feedback. Am I the only one?
Having an interest in it and the time to do anything about it are, alas,
two altogether different things ...
Then Matthew Evans resurrected the old debate:
> Just got a hold of three varities of lambics from the Boon Brewery out in
> Belgium. A couple nights ago I popped open the Gueze, but was not as
> thrilled as I might have been. This beer didn't taste anything like the
> Goudenband (I think made by Liefman's) that I have tried in the past. It
Possibly because they're completely different styles of beer.
> tasted like the beer was skunked. I know that lambics are supposed to have
> a sort of horsey flavor, but this just tasted unpleasant. Anyone else try
> them?
The Boon Gueuze I've had has been superb. This is the real thing, without
a doubt. It's possible the sample you had was one that had been mishandled
before you bought it. I'd hate to think that Boon is sending us something
different from what I tasted in Portland last summer. The "unpleasant"
taste may be due to the fact that Boon Gueuze is quite "hard", too much
so for many palates. For many of us, though, it's right on.
> Also I was very surprised to see no sediment in the bottom of the
> bottles. Both Lindemann's and Liefman's have the sediment which I like, and
> also consider to be a good beer.
The Boon products sent here are reputedly filtered, though the last Boon
Gueuze I had may not have been (I can't remember). I'll agree that
Liefman's is a good beer, but it isn't a lambic. The Lindeman's that's
sent here is not what I look for in a lambic. Some flavors are clearly
artificially sweetened, and others have clearly been pasteurized before
fermentation is complete. The result is an unnaturally sweet, cloying,
soda-pop-like beverage that isn't much like a lambic. I've heard
rumors of a new, more traditional line of Lindeman's products to be
imported here, but haven't seen even a single bottle of it yet. I've
also heard that Boon makes a thinner, sweetened line for distribution
through a UK department store chain, and the samples I've had of the
US-market Boon Kriek and Framboise fit that description, and are
not at all like what Boon sells in Belgium.
> Please, someone set me straight on this brewery, but unless the Boon Kriek
> and Framboise are much better, I don't think they are worth the money.
Whether they're worth it or not depends altogether upon what you like.
The Belgian samples I've had of Boon's products are among the finest
beverages it has ever been my privelege to sample, and the samples of
his American-market Gueuze have been just as good. The American-market
Kriek and Framboise, though, were almost as insipid and sweet as
American-market Lindeman's, and while that may make them more acceptable
to a wider market segment, it also means that they lack the character
of the "real thing," which to me is a significant disappointment.
- Martin
= Martin Lodahl Systems Analyst, Capacity Planning, Pacific*Bell =
= malodah at pacbell.com Sacramento, CA USA 916.972.4821 =
= If it's good for ancient Druids runnin' nekkid through the wuids, =
= Drinkin' strange fermented fluids, it's good enough for me! (Unk.) =
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1993 10:31:53 -0400
From: Ed Hitchcock <ECH at ac.dal.ca>
Subject: Lindeman's
Sigh. When the only other option is Morte Subite Framboise, the Lindeman's
ain't so bad...
____________
Ed Hitchcock ech at ac.dal.ca | Oxymoron: Draft beer in bottles. |
Anatomy & Neurobiology | Pleonasm: Draft beer on tap. |
Dalhousie University, Halifax |___________________________________|
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 93 08:48:58 MST
From: resch at craycos.com (David Resch)
Subject: Re: Boon, Yet Again
> The American-market
>Kriek and Framboise, though, were almost as insipid and sweet as
>American-market Lindeman's, and while that may make them more acceptable
>to a wider market segment, it also means that they lack the character
>of the "real thing," which to me is a significant disappointment.
While the Kriek and Framboise from Boon are certainly less "hard" than the
Gueuze, I feel that they still have a lot more Lambic character to them than
do the Lindemans product. I held a Lambic/Flanders Brown Ale tasting the
other night for our homebrew club. Our selection of Lambics is limited here
in the Rocky Mountain region, so I put together the following selection based
on availability and because I wanted to contrast the extremes in the style.
Lindemans Gueuze
Boon Gueuze
Liefmans Goudenband
Lindemans Framboise
Boon Framboise
Liefmans Frambozen Bier
Lindemans Kriek
Boon Kriek
The Boon Gueuze was very hard, more so than I remembered from the last time I
tasted it at the AHA conference. Some of the group was a bit turned off by
this one and I can understand as it was extremely "horsey" and assertively
sour. We collectively thought that the Boon Kriek and Framboise still had a
good deal of Brett character, but felt that it was married quite well with the
fruit. They are somewhat sweet, but with a good deal of sourness to balance.
We tasted the Boon Kriek and Lindemans Kriek side by side and what a difference!
For the Lindemans, the common comment was "syrupy, soda pop aroma and flavor".
We all felt that the Boon Kriek had a very nice fresh cherry aroma and flavor,
but that a lot of the character we tasted in the Gueuze came through the fruit.
The Boon Kriek was easily the most popular beer of the night. (Goudenband, a
close second).
Dave
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 93 09:44:46 MST
From: abirenbo at redwood.hac.com (Aaron Birenboim)
Subject: geueze
The p-geueze i bottled with the boon gueuze culture is taking on something
strange. A real fluffy looking cloud near the bottom of the bottle, easily
disturbed. It looks a bit like the wild acetobacter i have in my kitchen...
hence it could be infection. (My attempts at vinegar have had my commercial
mother taken over by this beastie)
Comments on this creature?
Also... I hear all this talk about boon geueze without sediment.
Is is true? Is he starting to filter the Geueze? Aargh!!!
aaron
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 93 11:15 CST
From: korz at iepubj.att.com
Subject: Cantillon variability
Virtually every month, the Chicago Beer Society holds a "style meeting"
at which we discuss and taste a particular style and all bring
representative beers. I brought some of my homebrewed Orval-clone `93,
pKriek `92-93 and two bottles of Cantillon Gueuze. I've had six or
seven bottles now, all from this same case and the club members at the
meeting will concur with me in saying that every bottle of Cantillon
tastes just a little different. Now, I can understand cask-to-cask
differences and surely year-to-year variability, but bottle-to-bottle?
Could the porosity of the cork (Cantillon seems to use the crappiest
corks I've ever seen!) make each bottle taste a little different or is
there something else at work, something that I haven't considered?
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 93 11:48:14 PST
From: msharp at Synopsys.COM
Subject: Bay area stuff
Hi,
Apparently a lot of folks though I was talking about holding an open tasting
in the Bay Area somewhere. That will teach me to be clear.
The issue, as I understand it, is that some folks on the digest would like an
evaluation of their beer. I was talking about this and _not_ a tasting.
If there is any interest in sending beers to be judged I need to know
so I can determine if there really is enough interest. I also need to know
if there are any judges _experienced_ in the various Belgian styles that
would like to help with the judging.
Why the emphasis on 'experienced'? My understanding is that this came up
as a result of the average AHA judging of the Belgian category. In particular
the lambic and brown category. (they do a good job of strong, & abbey).
People are looking for usefull comments, not "it smells like a dead horse.
you have rampant infection. total score 02"
So how do we make experienced judges if we don't give them a chance?
That sounds like a topic for another time. Certainly it would require
a lot of time & energy to get proper samples from Belgium to train
their pallate.
--Mike
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 93 09:51:48 EST
From: Spencer.W.Thomas at med.umich.edu
Subject: Goudenband bottle age
Recently, I bought a 750ml bottle of Goudenband with a "1991" cork.
This appeared to be the last bottle of this vintage at my retailer,
and had presumably been sitting on the rack (under the fluorescents)
for quite some time. We opened it at our homebrew meeting the other
night. There was absolutely nothing wrong with it, and it was quite
delicious. Despite the fact it was a 750ml bottle, it all disappeared
almost immediately. So, it appears that suboptimal aging conditions
don't damage this beer as much as some others, and it may be worth
searching out old stock, if you can find it (usually cheaper, too).
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1993 10:08:04 -0500 (EST)
From: Jim Busch <busch at daacdev1.stx.com>
Subject: Re: Experienced Belgium Judges
> From: msharp at Synopsys.COM
> Subject: Bay area stuff
>
> The issue, as I understand it, is that some folks on the digest would like an
> evaluation of their beer.
I also need to know
> if there are any judges _experienced_ in the various Belgian styles that
> would like to help with the judging.
>
Unfortuneately, Mike and I live on opposite coasts (I'm on the Right one!),
but I can volunteer to give honest evaluations of Belgium beers. Phil Seitz
and I are still struggling with the concept of a Belgium only AHA sanctioned
event, but these things take a lot of time, so *if* one occurs, it wont
be before August '94. It also wont be a one day event, as I dont think we
have enough experienced folks to do it justice in one day.
Good brewing,
Jim Busch
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1993 09:04:44 -0800 (PST)
From: gummitch at teleport.com (Jeff Frane)
Subject: A Little Data Goes a Long Way
Forgive me if this stuff has appeared here before, but I ran across this
in DeClerq's 1956 brewing text while looking at something else. First
is a sketch of some of the Belgian beers either disappearing or gone at
the time:
"The only other old-fashioned beers brewed in Belgium besides
Lambic, are the Louvain beers, which are, however, very out of
date.
These Louvain beers are brewed from a grist consisting of 50% raw
wheat and 50% "wind malt" and the method of brewing is extremely
complicated. The mashing of "Peeterman", for example, lasts 17
hours and only a third of the wort is boiled with hops.
Very little old hops are added. The beers are pitched with poorly
attenuative yeasts which are highly infected with rods and
sometimes "sarcinae". They are fermented in up-ended casks and the
attenuation is only 50%. The cask is bunged up after a few days
and the beer is carbonated by secondary fermentation. These beers
are not clarified and are drunk hazy.
Tehre are two of these old type Louvain beers still in existence:
"Blanche de Louvain" for which a 5% addition of raw oats, besides
wheat, is made to the grist and is only given a short boil in the
copper, and "Peeterman" in which the wort is given a long boil with
the addition of lime to increase colour. Both beers are mild,
"Peeterman" having a very mellow palate and "Blanche" being a very
refreshing drink in summer. The original extract is 10.5-11%
Balling.
Other types of old Belgian beers which eitehr have disappeared or
are very rarely seen today are: "Blonde", "Uytzet des Flandres", to
which lime was also added in the copper, "Saison" of Liege, which
was only 50% attenuated, "Hoegaerde", with a very acid palate, and
"Zoeg" of Tirlemont, which was very sweet. . . . A number of brown
blended beers coloured with caramel are brewed near Oudenaarde.
The essential feature of these blended beers is the addition of a
good aromatic Lambic. [!!!]
And there is this paragraph on "Mixed Mashing Methods":
Mixed mashing methods are traditional in Belgium for the brewing of
Lambic and other old types of beer (e.g. Peeterman and Blance of
Louvain) in which a high proportion of unmalted wheat is added to
the mash. The wheat is boiled separately in a copper and the hot
mix is then cooled by the addition of cold liquor and a diastatic
extract added to saccharify the starch. The malt, on the other
hand, is mashed by the infusion process in a mash tun provided with
a false bottom. After the wort has been run off from the spent
grains, the wheat mash is pumped over and the extract filtered
through the bed of spent grains. This method of mashing is
employed for the production of Peeterman and Blanche beers in
Louvain. In the case of Lambic and other traditional Belgian
beers, mashing is carried out by a process called "a[`] mou[^]ts
troubles" (turbid worts). Malt and wheat are mixed in a mash tun
at 50C, allowed to stand and the turbid supernatant liquid run off
into a copper. This is the "mout trouble". Hotter liquor is now
run into the mash tun and a second lot of "mout trouble" run off
and added to the first wort. This process is repeated two or three
times up to the final temperature of saccharification. The
combined worts are heated to 70C, allowed to saccharify, collected
in the copper and later filtered. This method of mashing never
gives completely saccharified worts; but turbid worts are
apparently necessary to give Lambic beer its characteristic
flavour."
The final remark, about Lambic flavour, doesn't mean DeClerq doesn't
understand the peculiar fermentation. In fact, he discusses it briefly
and reports that attempts to artificially produce Lambics by
innoculation have met with failure.
- --Jeff
------------------------------
Date: 23 Nov 1993 09:33:39 -0500
From: "Norman Dickenson" <norman.dickenson at Sonoma.EDU>
Subject: Bay Area Stuff
Subject: Time:8:35 AM
OFFICE MEMO Bay Area Stuff Date:11/23/93
I'm new on Internet. Amazing! I'm a member of the Sonoma Beerocrats.
Amongst our group are a number of people experimenting with Belgian
style beers, including strong ales, wits, abbey beers, dubbels, trippels,
Flanders style red and brown sour beers, Scotch Wee Heavy's and .....
most recently, lambics in wood. I was the organizer for the Sonoma County
Harvest Fair Homebrew Competition this year which drew 185
entries from throughout the US, including fifteen entries in the Belgian
Specialty class. The competiton BESt Of Show was taken by a Belgian Trippel
in 1992 and a Belgian Strong Ale in 1993, both by members of the Beerocrats.
Beerocrat Paddy Giffen
who is the AHA Homebrewer of the year won with a smoked Scotch Wee Heavy. He
also won the best of show at the 1993 HWBTA competition with a Belgian Wit.
There certainly is interest in brewing the Belgian styles. Obviously, to
brew these styles requires experience tasting and
evaluating them as well. There is a core group of four or five people here
who can be considered experienced enough both in the Beer Judge Certification
program and the Belgian styles to perform with style. Martin Lodahl from the
Sacramento area is very knowledgeable of the styles and an experienced
judge. One
thought I have is to modify the 1994 Harvest Fair Competition and
turn it into a sort of priemere Belgian style competiton nationwide. I
certainly am interested in knowing of sources to purchase the more
unusual Belgian beers in the Bay Area. I also am interested in others'
successes or failures in using G.W. Kent's Pediococcus and Brett cultures
and who knows of other sources of pure culture strains.
-Norman-
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 93 21:35:05 EST
From: zen at hophead.north.net (Nick Zentena)
Subject: What happens when fruit is added to fruit p-lambics
Hi,
I split the batch and added the fruit to the two
fermenters. Now 3-4days later fermentation is well
underway with the framboise. The kriek is a little
slower. Now I'm guessing that what is doing the
ferment is basically the ale yeast? If so will this
cause any problems with either the brett or the
pedio cultures? Should I repitch fresh cultures when
the ferment drops off?
Thanks
Nick
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I drink Beer I don't collect cute bottles!
zen at hophead.north.net
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 93 10:41 CST
From: korz at iepubj.att.com
Subject: Acetobacter
Aaron writes:
> The p-gueuze i bottled with the boon gueuze culture is taking on something
>strange. A real fluffy looking cloud near the bottom of the bottle, easily
>disturbed. It looks a bit like the wild acetobacter i have in my kitchen...
I suspect it is not acetobacter if it is near the bottom of the bottle.
Acetobacter is an aerobe and thus would be at the top, near any air that
may be in the bottle, no? Comments?
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1993 16:43:35 -0500
From: tmgierma at acpub.duke.edu (Todd Gierman)
Subject: archaic Belgian styles
As long as the subject of old Belgian styles has come up (see:
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1993 09:04:44 -0800 (PST) From: gummitch at teleport.com
(Jeff Frane) Subject: A Little Data Goes a Long Way), here's something I
came across:
One Hundred Years of Brewing, A Supplement to the Western Brewer, 1903.
(Published by H.S. Rich and Co., Chicago and New York, 1903).
Chapter III, Brewing in Belgium and Holland
Native Beers
The brewing industry of Belgium is of great importance and of ancient
origin, beer being manufactured in Brussels in the twelfth century. In the
fifteenth, the varieties known as "walgbaert" and "hoppe" were white beers,
being made of a mixture of wheat and oats: there were also "roetbier"
(red) and "zwartzbier" (black). All of these, however, with others, were
gradually displaced by the "lambic", or strong beer, the "mais", or small
beer, and "faro", a mixture of each. Belgian beers are like those of
France, rather vinous in their nature, and are often known as barley wine.
To particularize as to localities, Flanders has become famous for the
"uitzet", Antwerp for the "arge" and the Walloon provinces for their
"fortes-saisons." The white, sparkling, refreshing summer beers of Louvain
have also become well known, as the "bieres-brunes" of Malines and the
"saison" of Liege.
Todd Gierman
Dept. of Microbiology
Duke University Medical Center
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 93 15:11:00 -0640
From: bill.batzer at travel.com (Bill Batzer)
Subject: Brewtek Yeast
Has anyone ever used the Brewtek Wit beer yeast?
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 93 18:58:37 -0400
From: "Phillip R. Seitz" <p00644 at psilink.com>
Subject: A flash of Wit
I was walking down Spring Street in Soho yesterday (that's in New York
City), and stopped into a deli to look for some beer. The had one
called Wit, which claimed to use an original 1444 Belgian recipe for
their authentic American wit beer. (Excuse me, I prefer biere blanche, but...)
I was particularly surprised to look at the label, which announced
"Spring Street Brewing Co." However, this turned out to refer to St.
Paul, Minn. I suspect this is a contract brew, possibly from Summit or
August Schell?
Anyway, the beer is basically a cloudy wheat beer with a healthy shot
of coriander in it. I wouldn't say it tasted exactly like the Belgian
versions but it was actually quite good.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 93 23:50:34 EST
From: Spencer.W.Thomas at med.umich.edu
Subject: Sam Adams Cranberry L*****
A friend said to me that he detected a "Brett" note in SA Cranberry
L*****. I thought, "Sure..." But tonight, I opened one and I'll be
damned if it doesn't have a slight "horsiness" to it. So is Koch
really doing a p-lambic thing, or what? Is it from the Cranberries?
Or am I imagining it? Can someone with a more experienced Lambic
palate than me taste this stuff and give your opinion? Thanks.
=S
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 93 16:01:41 BD3
From: LUCIO%BRFUEL.BITNET at UICVM.UIC.EDU
Subject: subscribe
subscribe lucio at brfuel.bitnet
LUCIO ALBERTO FORTI ANTUNES
COORDENADORIA DE PESQUISA E POS-GRADUACAO
UNIVERSIDADE ESTADUAL DE LONDRINA C.P. 6001
FONE:(043)327-4171 TELEX (43)256 FAX : 55-43-327-4171
86051-970 LONDRINA - PR - BRASIL
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1993 15:04:01 -0500 (EST)
From: R_GELINAS at UNHH.UNH.EDU (Russ Gelinas)
Subject: RE: Lambic Digest #221 (November 27, 1993)
>A friend said to me that he detected a "Brett" note in SA Cranberry
>L*****. I thought, "Sure..." But tonight, I opened one and I'll be
>damned if it doesn't have a slight "horsiness" to it. So is Koch
>really doing a p-lambic thing, or what? Is it from the Cranberries?
>Or am I imagining it? Can someone with a more experienced Lambic
>palate than me taste this stuff and give your opinion? Thanks.
I'm no lambic expert (though I play one in my mind), but I was surprised
with said "cranberry flavored wheat beer". It was fairly sour, with
a "funky" aroma. I don't remember it as being "horsey" in the true
lambic sense, but it did get my attention as an unusual aroma for a
mass-market beer. My guess is that it's a combination of the wheat
beer yeast and the cranberries (what a surprise, eh?).
Russ Gelinas
eos
unh
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 93 16:20:58 -0500
From: Daniel McMahon <dmcmahon at blanche.acq.osd.mil>
From: dmcmahon
Full-Name: Daniel McMahon at pr
Subject: Unsubscribe
To: lambic at longs.lance.colostate.edu
Please unsubscribe me from the lambic digest. Thanks.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 93 19:32:11 PST
From: grumpy!cr at uunet.UU.NET (C.R. Saikley)
Subject: Frank Boon, the Real Deal
11/23/93
Frank Boon Beers, The Real Deal
OK Everyone, hold on to your hats, here is THE STORY.
There's been considerable discussion about the striking
differences between the FB Kriek imported by Vanberg &
Dewulf, and samples of the same acquired in Belgium. I
spent all afternoon and evening with Frank today, and
hope to shed some light on the situation.
First and foremost, the V & D version is *not*
adulterated in any way. Period. Frank has a very small
operation, and at a scant 2500 hectoliters annually, he
cannot make yet another type of beer for the American
market. The beer available here is *identical* to that
in Belgium.
Secondly, there are two ages of beers that Frank
releases. The "standard" version is released almost
immediately after bottling. On the other hand, The most
promising blends are bottle conditioned for several
months (Frank wouldn't say exactly how many), before
being released as "Marriage Parfait". V & D do not
currently import MP, but both Frank and Don Feinberg
are working on that. Thus the kriek and framboise that
we can get here has typically been in the bottle only 2-3
months. Time in the bottle is a crucial factor.
So far so good, but the FB kriek which I brought back
from Belgium that took both Martin & myself by storm was
a standard, not an MP, so what gives?
Well, the situation is further complicated by the
unknowns of retailing. How long has that bottle been on
the shelf? In this case we can get some insight because
Frank has changed labels in Belgium also. The afore-
mentioned standard kriek had Frank's old block letter
label. Any beer so labeled has spent a minimum of three
years in the bottle, MP or not, so even the standard
version can become exceptional under the right
circumstances. (Beerhunters note : this label change
applies to the 37cl bottle only, not the 75cl.)
OK, but the V & D gueuze is pretty hard core as it is.
What's the deal here?
At this point it's probably appropriate to bring in
Frank's explanation of the differences between the way
that a gueuze and a fruit lambik are produced and aged.
A young lambik destined to become a fruit lambik is
dosed with both fruit and a simple sugar. This is
because the Saccharomyces is relatively dormant at this
stage, and the addition of readily metabolized sugars
helps to "kick start" the yeast and thus assimilate the
fruit more readily. This assimilation takes quite a bit
of time. As a result, freshly bottled fruit lambiks have
the one two "punch" of fresh fruitiness, and unattenuated
simple sugars. This combination tends to make the freshly
bottled fruit seem rather Lindemanesque to the Cantillon
Acid Heads among us. As the beer ages, the sugars are
attenuated and the fruitiness diminishes to produce a
drier, more complex beer.
This is in striking contrast to a gueuze. The absence of
fruit and sugar allow the sharpness and hardness of a
young gueuze to stand out more readily. Anyone who's
tasted a young *unblended* lambik can certainly attest
to their hardness. While a young blended gueuze is not
exactly the same animal, it does retain much of the wily
character of a young lambik. Over time, some of the acids
in the gueuze soften and become esters. So here we have a
key difference in the ways that gueuze and kriek/framboise
age. A gueuze become less sour and more fruity, while a
fruit lambik becomes less sweet and more complex.
The reader who's tasted Frank's imported beers can
readily confirm that the gueuze tastes harder and more
complex, while the fruit beers are sweeter and fruitier.
The story doesn't stop here however. Before he was a
brewer, Frank was a gueuzesteker, or blender. He bought
his wort from other brewers, fermenting, aging,
blending, and bottling according to his own inspiration.
Even though Frank's been brewing for several years now,
it takes a few years for old worts to completely
disappear from a lambik brewery. Thus only his latest
bottlings are 100% Boon worts. This will no doubt change
the beer, but it's too early to be certain how things
will evolve.
In summary, the differences in Frank's beers boil down to
two things, age in the bottle and source of wort. We can't
be certain how his latest beers will age, but if it's the
taste of the old beers that one's after, then the best
advice is to lay them down. Put them on their sides in a
dark cool place and forget them for a couple of years.
Chances are you won't be sorry.
Skol,
CR
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1993 09:28:38 -0600 (CST)
From: BAN5845 at tntech.edu
Subject: corked bottles
Does anyone know of a method to bottle special beers in corked bottles.
I suppose I could bottle with champagne bottles, but all I can find are
plastic corks.
Does anyone know of a source of cork closures? I am trying to get the
traditional look of some Belgian beers or Biere de gardes. The bottle that
comes to mind first is Tres Monts, a Biere de Garde.
Brian Nummer
Aeonbra"u Co.
Tennessee Tech.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1993 09:58:15 CST
From: "John L. Isenhour" <isenhour at lambic.fnal.gov>
Subject: looking for Belgian food/brew in San Francisco area
I am headed out to S.F. at the end of this week (from Chicago, so I'll be
pretty clueless:) and I remember reading in the digest about a bistro(?) or
some restaurant in the area that has Belgian food and beers. I'm trying to
find out the name and location (I'll be right around Union Square), cause it
sounds really interesting. Any hints about this or beerrelated matters around
SF really appreciated!
tnx,
-john
- --
John L. Isenhour internet: isenhour at lambic.fnal.gov
Library Systems, et al NASA/NSF/ES/HEP decnet: lambic::isenhour
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory bitnet: isenhour at fnlib
home: john at hopduvel.chi.il.us
"When your work speaks for itself, don't interrupt" - Henry Kaiser
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1993 13:13:42 -0600 (CST)
From: "Bill Kitch" <kitchwa at bongo.cc.utexas.edu>
Subject: Celis White Mashing
I recently had conversations w/Peter Camps and Greg Springer of Celis
about the mash schedule for the white beer. It was in reference to the
schedule I gleaned from their temperature recorder and reported about
two months ago. As I noted in my original post, the times and temps
were approximate since I had only a few moments to decipher the scales
on the recorder. Among other interesting things, my original post
included a long rest at 165F. After talking w/Peter and Greg, I'm
convinced I had the duration of this rest too long and the temp too high.
Here's my best estimate of the Celis mash schedule based on all the
info put together.
Step Temp (F) Duration (min)
----------------------------------------
Dough in 100 However long it takes to dough it all in
Protien rest mid 120s 30
Sacrification 150 45
" 161 15 This is done to assure complete
conversion. Iodine test done during
this rest.
Mash out 170 very short
Greg Springer also said they use a Belgian 6-row barley malt for its
high enzyme power. Wasn't clear if this was just a part of the malt
use or wheter it all consisted of 6 row.
Sante' WAK
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 93 10:52:44 PST
From: art at art.md.interlink.com
Subject: questions
I am about to attempt Papazian's "Loysenian Cherry Kriek". The deeper I
get into this endeavour the crazier I think I am. In any case, I'm
interested in knowing if anyone out there has had experience with this
recipe. I could use any pointers that might be offered. The funny
thing about this is that I have had no trouble obtaining the yeast and
bacteria that I need. My local brew shop has everything. The cherries
have been a problem, though. Should I use cherry extract? How about
cherry juice? I am considering substituting cranberries, as they are
sour and tart enough, as well as being plentiful. I can get canned sour
cherries or fresh Bing cherries (at $4.00 a pound!). Any ideas about
fruit? I'd like to do this without going broke.
Thanks in advance for the info.
Art Tumolo
art at leo.md.interlink.com
p.s. If anyone has a better recipe, please let me in on that, too.
Thanks.
