Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Lambic Digest #0568
From postmaster at lance.colostate.edu Fri Mar 24 03:47:54 1995
Status: O
X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil t nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
["7085" "Fri" "24" "March" "1995" "00:30:09" "-0700" "subscription requests only" "lambic-request at lance.colostate.edu" nil "166" "Lambic Digest #568 (March 24, 1995)" "^From:" nil nil "3" nil nil nil nil]
nil)
Received: by totalrecall.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.6.9/2.3)
with X.500 id DAA06769; Fri, 24 Mar 1995 03:47:52 -0500
Received: from goodman.itn.med.umich.edu by totalrecall.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.6.9/2.3)
with SMTP id DAA06763; Fri, 24 Mar 1995 03:47:51 -0500
Received: from longs.lance.colostate.edu by goodman.itn.med.umich.edu with SMTP id AA08186
(5.65b/IDA-1.4.3 for spencer at umich.edu); Fri, 24 Mar 95 03:47:49 -0500
Received: (daemon at localhost) by longs.lance.colostate.edu (8.6.9/8.6.5a (LANCE 1.01)) id AAA24055 for reallambic at longs.lance.colostate.edu; Fri, 24 Mar 1995 00:30:09 -0700
Message-Id: <199503240730.AAA24055 at longs.lance.colostate.edu>
Reply-To: lambic at lance.colostate.edu (postings only - do not send subscription requests here)
Errors-To: lambic-request at lance.colostate.edu
From: lambic-request at lance.colostate.edu (subscription requests only - do not post here)
To: lambic at lance.colostate.edu
Subject: Lambic Digest #568 (March 24, 1995)
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 1995 00:30:09 -0700
Lambic Digest #568 Fri 24 March 1995
Forum on Lambic Beers (and other Belgian beer styles)
Mike Sharp, Digest Coordinator
Contents:
Jim's retraction (Kelly Jones)
WYeast and Jim Liddell (Jeremy Ballard Bergsman)
Rant (dgmur at CAD)
Re: Apology to Wyeast Labs (Donovan Bodishbaugh)
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
Phil Seitz' series on Brewing Belgian Beer is available; the index
from the archives lists individual topics and the complete set.
Start with the help message above then request the index.
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: Thu, 23 Mar 1995 08:44:19 -0700
From: k-jones at ee.utah.edu (Kelly Jones)
Subject: Jim's retraction
Hmm... That doesn't sound like the Jim we know... I'm guessing there's a
gaggle of lawyers behind this! :(
When I read this, I had to go back to the archives to see exactly what was
said. Well, Jim isn't the type to pull his punches, but his comments can
hardly be called slanderous or libelous. He performed a test, and reported
the results of that test. It's that simple. True, he didn't do a
statistically valid, random sample, with large 'n', but then, he didn't
claim to, either. He left the reader to make his own conlusions.
What I can't understand is, if Wyeast or Logsdon or whoever feels that what
was reported here was in error, why didn't they post something from their
QA/QC people which would clear up the subject, or rebut Jim's findings?
Instead of clarifying the issue with some facts, they chose to throw their
lawyers at it in an attempt to shut Jim up. If there's no problem, why are
they trying so hard to cover it up? This looks like a PR debacle of major
proportions. I'm more concerned about Wyeast's handling of this issue than
I am about Jim's results!!!!
Finally, Jim says:
>I ... made a grave error in not carrying out my experiments with the
>consent >and guidance of Wyeast Labs.
Gimme a break. Since when does a homebrewer need Wyeast's "consent and
guidance" to look at their products under a microscope?
OTOH, this sounds like Jim and Wyeast are now working on a collaborative
study to investigate the quality of Wyeast's products! When can we expect
to see the results of this study reported here, Jim? :)
I was very upset when the study came out a while back that some malt
extract producers were selling products highly adulterated with corn sugar,
and yet nobody had the balls to name names, so that the consumer could have
some useful information to go on. I am just as upset that now, when
somebody tries to give us a data point on yeast quality, he is gagged by
what I assume is the threat of a lawsuit.
Kelly
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 1995 09:30:27 -0800 (PST)
From: Jeremy Ballard Bergsman <jeremybb at leland.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: WYeast and Jim Liddell
> From: Jim Liddil <JLIDDIL at AZCC.Arizona.EDU>
> Subject: Apology to Wyeast Labs
>
> This is a formal, public apology to Wyeast Labs and it's owner David Logsdon
> for the slanderous, libelous, inflammatory statements made by me in the past
> and present on this electronic forum with regards to Wyeast Labs, David Logsdon
> and Brewers Choice(TM) Brewers Yeast. I also want to retract all statements
> made by myself concerning the quality and compostion of various Wyeast
> products, particularly #3278.
Unfortunately I missed those statements. I bought this yeast from
WYeast in November and ruined about $40 in materials and wasted a hard
day's work because I broke my normal rule (about all yeast, not just
WYeast's) about going down to single colonies before use. I still
have a sample from the packet (100 microliters from the swelled packet
in 3 mL of YPD) if anyone is interested.
Jeremy Bergsman
jeremybb at leland.stanford.edu
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 1995 12:46:18 -0800
From: dgmur at cclink.fhcrc.org (dgmur at CAD)
Subject: Rant
Beginning of rant. Pull in your heads boys; the lawyers are
rampant. Has anyone interpreted Jim's information to be any
more than a warning? A move has been made to stifle debate
and sharing of information. Would a responsible business
man heed warnings of trouble and try to correct problems? I
would hope so, but that is not the American way. Caveat
emptor still and always will apply. Some just have the
means to be more wary than others. Anyone wanting to know
the results of unauthorized science will have to share
through a more private medium such as the slow mail. More's
the pity. End of rant. Keep up the good work Jim, but as a
professional skeptic I always have to doubt it.
Denny Gmur
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 1995 18:57:07 -0500 (EST)
From: Donovan Bodishbaugh <dfb at acpub.duke.edu>
Subject: Re: Apology to Wyeast Labs
> This is a formal, public apology to Wyeast Labs and it's owner David Logsdon
> for the slanderous, libelous, inflammatory statements made by me in the past
Huh, that's funny, I don't recall anything slanderous or libelous and I
read this digest every day. I do recall some discussions about the
problem that all homebrewers face when it comes to assessing the claims of
homebrewing culture vendors. I personally have purchased brewing cultures
that turned out to be something other than advertised (NOT FROM WYEAST).
The vendor, to his credit, admitted the problem and refunded my money.
Rather than fuel an utterly pointless discussion about freedom of speech,
or ranting about being a little guy at the mercy of big suppliers, how
about a call for data?
TO ALL BREWING CULTURE VENDORS: What are your quality controls, and who
has verified your culture typing? Staff microbiologist? ATCC? Thousands
of satisfied customers? This isn't some veiled attack. I really want to
know, and I bet other serious homebrewers do too. In a perfect world,
everything would be checked by professional independent sources. This is
done routinely for many consumer products. Are any culture vendors doing
this? Are some doing it better than others? Is it prohibitively
expensive? What is done in the commercial brewing industry? What
guarantees are vendors offering? What recourse does an individual have
who is dissatisfied with a culture? Let's hear from the guys selling the
cultures. Then we can decide for ourselves what is slanderous and what is
legitimate criticism.
Rick Bodishbaugh
------------------------------
End of Lambic Digest
************************
-------
From postmaster at lance.colostate.edu Sat Mar 25 03:32:57 1995
Status: O
X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil t nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
["7803" "Sat" "25" "March" "1995" "00:30:11" "-0700" "subscription requests only" "lambic-request at lance.colostate.edu" nil "210" "Lambic Digest #568 (March 25, 1995)" "^From:" nil nil "3" nil nil nil nil]
nil)
Received: by totalrecall.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.6.9/2.3)
with X.500 id DAA20414; Sat, 25 Mar 1995 03:32:55 -0500
Received: from goodman.itn.med.umich.edu by totalrecall.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.6.9/2.3)
with SMTP id DAA20409; Sat, 25 Mar 1995 03:32:54 -0500
Received: from longs.lance.colostate.edu by goodman.itn.med.umich.edu with SMTP id AA08880
(5.65b/IDA-1.4.3 for spencer at umich.edu); Sat, 25 Mar 95 03:32:52 -0500
Received: (daemon at localhost) by longs.lance.colostate.edu (8.6.9/8.6.5a (LANCE 1.01)) id AAA01345 for reallambic at longs.lance.colostate.edu; Sat, 25 Mar 1995 00:30:11 -0700
Message-Id: <199503250730.AAA01345 at longs.lance.colostate.edu>
Reply-To: lambic at lance.colostate.edu (postings only - do not send subscription requests here)
Errors-To: lambic-request at lance.colostate.edu
From: lambic-request at lance.colostate.edu (subscription requests only - do not post here)
To: lambic at lance.colostate.edu
Subject: Lambic Digest #568 (March 25, 1995)
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 1995 00:30:11 -0700
Lambic Digest #568 Sat 25 March 1995
Forum on Lambic Beers (and other Belgian beer styles)
Mike Sharp, Digest Coordinator
Contents:
advice? (Betsey_Dyer)
<blush> (Michael Sharp)
Re: Lambic Digest #568 (March 24, 1995) (Brian A Nummer)
Previous Rant (dgmur at CAD)
Wyeast ("Lee C. Bussy")
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
Phil Seitz' series on Brewing Belgian Beer is available; the index
from the archives lists individual topics and the complete set.
Start with the help message above then request the index.
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: Fri, 24 Mar 1995 14:44:38 -0500
From: Betsey_Dyer at acunix.wheatonma.edu
Subject: advice?
We are brewing a plambic for the first time and we have some naive sorts of
question. The fermentation is going nicely. We have not yet pitched the
pedio or the brett (both are waiting in broth). Do we wait for the
fermentation to settle down? How settled down? We are at room temp. and
assume we would pitch pedio and brett at room temp. At what point would we
consider putting it into the basement for a good long time? Oh and we have
the lambic book and we read the digest including FAQs. It is just that
(while the answers to this might be obvious to folks who do it all the
time) we would appreciate extra bits of advice about what we should watch
for in these early stages.
Betsey
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 1995 12:39:48 -0800
From: Michael Sharp <msharp at Synopsys.COM>
Subject: <blush>
<blush>
umm, err, ahh, it appears I broke something yesterday.
mailing to reallambic _is_ _REALLY_ bad. lets never repeat
this experiment.
My sincerest appologies to all who received my message 4+ times.
--Mike
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 1995 15:45:15 -0600 (CST)
From: Brian A Nummer <BAN5845 at tntech.edu>
Subject: Re: Lambic Digest #568 (March 24, 1995)
> about a call for data?
In response to all the hype about the Liddil/Wyeast affair:
With no direct correlation to Jim Liddil or Wyeast or anyone for that matter...
I have to say that some folks take the information printed on the net very
serious. Many less experienced brewers listen to what is posted to the net
without regard to its origin. What I am saying is that the readers of the
digest should not always believe what is said just because it was said!
On the science side. I think it is great that many homebrewers are learning
the sciences of brewing, including Microbiology. This has created a few
monsters though. Some of the net folks have the biggest egos I have ever seen.
>From these egos comes some heavy duty criticisms--some warranted, some not--.
On to a request made by Rick Bodishbaugh:
>
> TO ALL BREWING CULTURE VENDORS: What are your quality controls, and who
> has verified your culture typing? Staff microbiologist? ATCC? Thousands
> of satisfied customers? This isn't some veiled attack. I really want to
> know, and I bet other serious homebrewers do too. In a perfect world,
> everything would be checked by professional independent sources. This is
> done routinely for many consumer products.
I am Head Start Brewing Cultures. I am both President and peon. I have a PhD.
in Microbiology and teach Microbiology and Food and Beverage Microbiology at
Tennessee Tech University. My cultures have numerous origins, icluding Brewing
Schools, ATCC, direct from the Brewery or from bottles. As far as typing goes
I list my cultures by the style of beer it came from. I let the brewer decide
whether he wants to use a pils yeast for a helles. I culture my yeast monthly
and inspect its quality (flavor and fermentation profile). If there any doubts
I purify the culture on agar plates and grow it fresh.
Are any culture vendors doing
> this? Are some doing it better than others? Is it prohibitively
> expensive?
Expenses is a key word. The QC I perform is not a problem. What I have
encountered are brewers who want to know if I use your culture and ferment at
72oF for 5 days what will the ppm's of acetolactate be? And by the way I am
not paying more than $2.75 for the culture. Some brewers have excelled in
their knowledge of yeast and brewing. If you want answers to questions like
that, as well as guaranteed purity and fermentation profiles order your yeast
from Weihenstephan ($200) or from Seibel ($100). But for $2.75 you are often
times getting a Seibel or Weihenstephan strain just without the elaborate
guarantees data from a gas chromatograph.
What is done in the commercial brewing industry?
Large Breweries have several Microbiologists on staff. Medium sized breweries
have consultants. I am available for $75,000 per year for the first and $55
per hour for the second.
What
> guarantees are vendors offering?
I guarantee the customers satisfaction. If they are not satisfied I will
replace the culture or refund their money.
What recourse does an individual have
> who is dissatisfied with a culture? Let's hear from the guys selling the
> cultures. Then we can decide for ourselves what is slanderous and what is
> legitimate criticism.
>
> Rick Bodishbaugh
If I may I would like to suggest that if a brewer has a problem with a culture
approach the supplier. I have some 60 strains now. Since I have started I
have trashed 3 strains because of poor performance and feedback from the
brewers.
Lastly, I would like to say that I started Head Start Brewing Cultures to
expand the choices Brewers had in yeast suppliers. MY expenses to date exceed
my profits. I continue in part because I enjoy it and in part because it takes
a few years to get established. I am open for all feedback that is
constructive. Destructive criticism is best left to Oprah, Current Affair, and
the plethora of others and not to the Brewing digests.
Brian Nummer
Head Start Brewing Cultures
>
> ------------------------------
>
>
> End of Lambic Digest
> ************************
> -------
>
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 1995 16:01:29 -0800
From: dgmur at cclink.fhcrc.org (dgmur at CAD)
Subject: Previous Rant
Sorry. Lost my cool.
Denny
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 1995 07:08:21 +0000
From: "Lee C. Bussy" <leeb at southwind.net>
Subject: Wyeast
So now Wyeast reads the Lambic Digest too?
Jim, sounds like a carefully thought out statement and we all
appreciate it.
_I_ can say however that I _personally_ have plated out _many_
different manufacturers products and have at one time or another
noticed "other than yeasties" in there. Not often mind you.
I do think however that a good strongly fermenting starter is the key
and any beasties that you get in your wort (and you will) should
surely get overrun by the yeast.
That being said.... if big brother really is watching, how about some
input? Yeast being one of the more important components of my
favorite beverage, any help from the "pros" would do a lot more for
their public image than silently and heavy handedly defending
themselves.
- --
-Lee Bussy | The 4 Basic Foodgroups.... |
leeb at southwind.net | Salt, Fat, Beer & Women! |
Wichita, Kansas | http://www.southwind.net/~leeb |
------------------------------
End of Lambic Digest
************************
-------
