Lambic Digest #0338

Published in

· 7 months ago

From postmaster at longs.lance.colostate.edu Mon May  9 03:07:12 1994 
Received: from longs.lance.colostate.edu by goodman.itn.med.umich.edu with SMTP id AA13405 
  (5.65b/IDA-1.4.3 for spencer at hendrix.itn.med.umich.edu); Mon, 9 May 94 03:07:10 -0400 
Received: from localhost (daemon at localhost) by longs.lance.colostate.edu (8.6.5/8.6.5a (LANCE 1.01)) id AAA24094 for reallambic at longs.lance.colostate.edu; Mon, 9 May 1994 00:30:07 -0600 
Message-Id: <199405090630.AAA24094 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 #338 (May 09, 1994) 
Date: Mon, 9 May 1994 00:30:07 -0600 

Lambic Digest #338                             Mon 09 May 1994 

        Forum on Lambic Beers (and other Belgian beer styles) 
                Mike Sharp, Digest Coordinator 

Contents: 
  Re: sherry flora (Conn Copas) 

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: Mon, 9 May 1994 12:09:46 +0930 (CST) 
From: Conn Copas <cvc at itd.dsto.gov.au> 
Subject: Re: sherry flora 

I have played a bit with sherry flora in order to introduce some controlled 
oxidation, a la Old Browns, but so far without success. The dried product I  
used was labelled Saccharomyces something-or-other, so it was a yeast, no? 
It was described as a flor yeast and the instructions suggested adding to the 
secondary. Added to a normal ale which had fermented out, it seemed to do very 
little, at least up to 12 months. Used exclusively in the primary, it resulted 
in a very slow starting, filthy ferment, which ultimately made me sick after 
one taste. My suspicion is that this flora prefers acidic, aerobic and/or high 
alcohol conditions, but I haven't tested this yet. I did plate it out on 
solidified ale, with the alcohol retained, and got yeast-like growth. Once 
again, this growth didn't seem to cause any noticeable fermentation in 
fermented ale, under either aerobic or anaerobic conditions.   

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

End of Lambic Digest 
************************ 
-------