Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Lambic Digest #0329
From postmaster at longs.lance.colostate.edu Thu Apr 28 03:32:40 1994
Received: from longs.lance.colostate.edu by goodman.itn.med.umich.edu with SMTP id AA08932
(5.65b/IDA-1.4.3 for spencer at hendrix.itn.med.umich.edu); Thu, 28 Apr 94 03:32:34 -0400
Received: from localhost (daemon at localhost) by longs.lance.colostate.edu (8.6.5/8.6.5a (LANCE 1.01)) id AAA03321 for reallambic at longs.lance.colostate.edu; Thu, 28 Apr 1994 00:30:08 -0600
Message-Id: <199404280630.AAA03321 at longs.lance.colostate.edu>
Reply-To: lambic at longs.lance.colostate.edu (postings only - do not send subscription requests here)
Errors-To: lambic-request at longs.lance.colostate.edu
From: lambic-request at longs.lance.colostate.edu (subscription requests only - do not post here)
To: lambic at longs.lance.colostate.edu
Subject: Lambic Digest #329 (April 28, 1994)
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 1994 00:30:08 -0600
Lambic Digest #329 Thu 28 April 1994
Forum on Lambic Beers (and other Belgian beer styles)
Mike Sharp, Digest Coordinator
Contents:
strange starter/Verachtert paper (ROB THOMAS)
Hooegarden Recipe (Spencer.W.Thomas)
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 (to netlib at longs.lance.colostate.edu).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 1994 11:53:00 +0200
From: thomasr at ezrz1.vmsmail.ethz.ch (ROB THOMAS)
Subject: strange starter/Verachtert paper
Hello all,
A couple of points.
I've already pestered Dan M on the first one, but impetuous as ever,
and slightly worried about what I'll find when I get home tonight,
I thought I'd ask the group as a whole:
I made up a starter from a Mort Subite Gueze on saturday.
Last night I sniffed the still clear but slightly bubbling
liquid. To me it smelled lactic, but since I've got a cold,
I defered to my wife, who without prompting said it smelled
Belgian. Since I was hoping for a more specific description I
prompted with acidic? The answer: yes, maybe vinegary. I'm not
convinced, but I may be hoping. However, I got up this morning
to find the bottle full of what can only be described as trub.
It was at the bottom and top, though when I picked up the
bottle a fair amount sank to the bottom. The now not
insubstantial bubbling seems to bouy the stuff. It is sort
of cotton woolly, but finer (like a cold break). Any ideas
as to what this may be? Is this a very fast pellicle or is
it an unwanted guest? It doesn't look like any yeast I've ever
fermented with. Oh, we've had a warm spell over the last couple
of days. I'm extremely reluctant to taste this stuff due to its
unattractive appearance. I suppose the first thing I should do is
plate it. What then? What kind of magnification do I need on
a microscope to see the cell shapes?
Will I get home tonight to find my kitchen oozing with frothy bugs?
On a second note, I was reading a couple of papers by Prof.
Verachtert on bugs during lambic fermentation. The newer (1990?)
review type artical lead me back to an older paper from 1977.
In this I found a number of points that peeked my interest:
Firstly that "the very fast growth of enterobacteriaceae and
of Kl. apiculata results in a decrease of the pH from 5.1 to
4.6. This coincides with the synthesis of amounts of acetic acid
of the same order of magnitude as found in the final product."
Thus my question: in for instance Cantillon, are these enteros
and Kl. apiculata more prevelent than in lambics with lower
acetic flavour?
Another note: he describes the brett flavour in the earlier
paper as mousy? So which furry animal/farmyard setting best
describes it?
Third note: pedd infection coincided with the summer months.
Does thisindicate when we should do it?
Final point:
the samples taken were from the fermenting lambic, drawn from
the central end apperture only. Does anyone have data to compare
microbiological profiles at this part of the barrel to particularly
the top, where the pelicle etc forms? Presumable there could be
massive differences in a 650 litre barrel.
On a last point, my wife's taking me to Brussels for the weekend
on the 20 May (isn't she a dear?). Since we will be flying through,
first where should we go (Cantillon and where else), and
secondly, I guess I'll be able to plate some bugs. How amenable
are the brewers to giving VERY young samples?
Well, this was a massive post for so typing-challenged, so I'll
stop (was that a sigh of relief?).
Rob Thomas.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 94 12:02:54 EDT
From: Spencer.W.Thomas at med.umich.edu
Subject: Hooegarden Recipe
Here's a recipe Dan McConnell & I made recently that turned out (in
our opinion) very well:
45% UNMALTED wheat (soft organic wheat from the local food coop,
crushed together with the barley malt in a MaltMill. Unmalted
wheat will be a bit lighter in color than malted wheat, and
will contribute a different flavor than malted wheat)
5% flaked oats
50% PILSENER malt (both for the increased protein content & the light
color. We used Durst brand, others are probably fine.)
Total grain bill: 7.33 lbs/5 gal.
Mash-in at 40C, 10 min (beta-glucan rest)
Raise to 50C, 30 min (protein rest)
Decoct about 1/3, raise to 65C, hold 20 min, then to boiling, mix back
with main mash, raise to 65C, hold 45min.
Raise to 70C, hold 15 min.
Raise to 82C for mash-out (you WANT starch haze!)
A note: we had to acidify the mash with a bit of lactic acid to get
the pH down. I assume this is because of the high proportion of wheat
not contributing enough phytic acid.
Hopping/spicing:
about 20IBUs of bittering hops, NO finishing hops
11g/5gal bitter orange, pulverized, 30 min
11g/5gal coriander, crushed, 15 min
We made 15 gallons, and pitched this with 5 different yeasts:
Dentergem, Bruges, Steendonk, Hoegaarden, and Brewtek CL-90.
Of the ones I've tasted, the Hoegaarden yeast gave a very fruity
character; the CL-90 was bready/spicy/phenolic; the Dentergem was
phenolic/spicy. Dan says he liked the Blanc de Bruges sample the
best, and that the Steendonk was very phenolic (but expected to age
into more balance).
We did not add lactic acid to the beer, nor did we attempt to infect
it with any lactic bacteria. The Hoegaarden would probably be
improved by a little acid, as it's a bit too soft/fruity right now.
------------------------------
End of Lambic Digest
************************
-------
