Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Lambic Digest #0637
From postmaster at lance.colostate.edu Thu Jun 29 03:32:32 1995
Status: O
X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil t nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
["10817" "Thu" "29" "June" "1995" "00:30:18" "-0600" "subscription requests only" "lambic-request at lance.colostate.edu" nil "244" "Lambic Digest #637 (June 29, 1995)" "^Date:" nil nil "6" nil nil nil nil]
nil)
Received: by truelies.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.6.12/2.2)
with X.500 id DAA07480; Thu, 29 Jun 1995 03:32:29 -0400
Received: from goodman.itn.med.umich.edu by truelies.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.6.12/2.2)
with SMTP id DAA07474; Thu, 29 Jun 1995 03:32:27 -0400
Received: from longs.lance.colostate.edu by goodman.itn.med.umich.edu with SMTP id AA15514
(5.65b/IDA-1.4.3 for spencer at umich.edu); Thu, 29 Jun 95 03:32:24 -0400
X-Notice: **PLEASE NOTE** - Email addresses of the form "user at med.umich.edu"
will be invalid after Sept 1, 1995. U-Mich Med Center users should
check with their email administrators for further instructions.
Information is available at URL - http://www.med.umich.edu/mcit/mailhub/
Received: (daemon at localhost) by longs.lance.colostate.edu (8.6.9/8.6.5a (LANCE 1.01)) id AAA27219 for reallambic at longs.lance.colostate.edu; Thu, 29 Jun 1995 00:30:18 -0600
Message-Id: <199506290630.AAA27219 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
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 1995 00:30:18 -0600
From: lambic-request at lance.colostate.edu (subscription requests only - do not post here)
To: lambic at lance.colostate.edu
Subject: Lambic Digest #637 (June 29, 1995)
Lambic Digest #637 Thu 29 June 1995
Forum on Lambic Beers (and other Belgian beer styles)
Mike Sharp, Digest Coordinator
Contents:
re: Celis distribution (Phil Meyers)
Celis Distribution (C.R. Saikley)
Lambic Digest #636 (June 28, 1995) (Jim Dorsch)
bastard lambics and lambic bastards (Todd Gierman)
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: Wed, 28 Jun 95 08:06:29 -0500
From: Phil Meyers <Phil=Meyers%TS=Deskcase%CS=Hou at bangate.compaq.com>
Subject: re: Celis distribution
>As I understood it, Miller appears to want to increase its >market penetration with this beer, and is starting with the >West Coast=
The problem is that the brewery's capacity is >limited (though expanding),so they need to divert the >available beer to the place=
where they'll start making their >effort. (IE have twelve cases in one state rather than one in >each of twelve states). Presumab=
ly broader distribution will >not be a problem when the brewery's capacity goes up.
>This is strictly hearsay, however. I'm told that it's already >hard to find the beer around here (in the Washington, DC >area), bu=
t have not confirmed this myself.
This is true. According to the SW Brewing News, Celis is going
to go through 2 phases of brewery upgrade. They just broke
ground on doubling the amount of cold storage space and
increasing the effecincy of the chilling equipment. They
foresee a 25%-50% increase in production at the end of this
period. Phase 2 is going to be an increase in tank space.
This is supposed to DOUBLE their output. When I went and did
the brewery tour last fall (before the Miller days), they have
2 HUGE copper kettles that they imported from Belgium.
However, they are currently only using one and brewing for two
days and blending the two batches into one then they would skip
a day and then start again. With the increase in storage
space, they should be able to run both kettles on the same day
for their batch rather than over two days.
However, the quality of the Celis White in the Houston area has
degraded significantly over the last 2 months. Gone is the
tart, citrus-like finish that the beer used to have. Many of
the bottle have trub in the bottom of them. (Sorry, no live
yeast. I tried...) I hope that this is growing pains due to
the Miller deal that can be quickly remedied. While Celis
White may not be the best Wit around, its pretty good! Also,
if you can find it, try Celis Raspberry (no assosiation, blah,
blah, blah). It's hard to get ahold of, even around Houston
but its well worth the $6/6pack.
Regards,
Phil
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 95 09:51:10 PDT
From: cr at humphrey.com (C.R. Saikley)
Subject: Celis Distribution
Phil writes about Celis becoming hard to find in DC, due to Miller's
changes in distribution. Well in the west (SF), I've noticed these beers
are getting harder to find as well. A couple of places have just stopped
carrying them, and one (Andronico's) recently had a sale on these
"discontinued" beers. Can anyone confirm what's going on and where they'll
be available??
CR
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 1995 21:13:06 -0400
From: Jim_Dorsch at f615.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Jim Dorsch)
Subject: Lambic Digest #636 (June 28, 1995)
Regarding Phil Seitz's posting on the availability of Celis beer, my
understanding is that Miller is pulling it out of areas where it is not
wholesaled by a Miller house. They will come back after a time. This
strategy may not work in some states, e.g., Virginia, which has one of
the strictest franchise laws in the nation.
The Celis pullout will be used to advantage by Wit, Hoegaarden, et al.
Do you think people will go right back to Celis when it returns? Hard
to say.
Jim
- --- Maximus/2 2.02
* Origin: Enlightened BBS: Home of the BURP News, (703) 370-9528
(1:109/615)
SEEN-BY: 109/615
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 1995 22:42:46 -0500
From: tmgierma at acpub.duke.edu (Todd Gierman)
Subject: bastard lambics and lambic bastards
This is a "catch up" post. Sorry if it rehashes issues that have already
come to rest.
_You Say "Potatoe" (sp.?), I Say..._
Al gives us an introduction to the orthography of spontaneously fermented
beverages, and then remarks:
>>I'm always in favor of going with the original, so guess how I'm going to
>>be spelling "geuze" from now on (I have been writing "lambik" for quite
>>some time after discussing this with CR Saikley).
Okay, but what about pronunciation? God forbid that some waitress is in
the back room of the local watering hole snickering with her colleagues
over the fact that you cannot pronounce these things correctly. Well, I
guess you could always spell them, if it came to that.
Interestingly, a Dutch speaker recently instructed me that "geuze" is
pronounced more like "kozuh" (at least to my ears). I wonder how they say
"gueuze"?
_The Wonders of Modern Technology_
The traditionalists have broken out the torches and pitch forks and are
heading up to the castle to confront the monster.
Jim Liddil ponders the nature of the beast:
[snip]
>So this brings me to ask, what should be considered as the best commercial
>examples. If someone duplicates Lindemans should it get a 40? It is celar to
>me that many brewers stilldon't really understand the style, but then it is
>very complex. With other styles we have pretty clear cut examples of the
>style.
>What should be sued as the examples for lambic? Hoepfully not Detroch and
>their gag me products.
[snip]
And Al attempts to drive a stake through its heart:
[snip]
>Well, whatever way you do sweeten your lambik, I'm not going to score it high
>if it is a sweetened lambik. It's just not a traditional flavour. Suppose
>ginger got very popular in Pilsners... so popular, that most Pilsners sold
>had some in them. Would you mark-down a Classic Bohemian Pilsner that had
>ginger in it? I would. Popularity is no excuse for tossing out classical
>guidelines for a beer. Create a new subcategory, but don't bastardize the
>traditional guidelines.
>
>Say, perhaps this would help... let's say we split the Lambik category
>into six subcategories: Traditional Geuze, Traditional Faro, Traditional
>Fruit Lambik, Sweetened Geuze, Sweetened Faro and Sweetened Fruit Lambik.
>On the other hand, perhaps this would *not* help. Consider those judges
>that are so ignorant that they have neither tasted nor are aware of real
>lambiks *AND* are fool enough to not even read the AHA guidelines:
>"Intensely and cleanly sour." Sounds pretty clear to me.
[snip]
Notice how Al reveals his pro-Tory favour with his spelling of "flavour" -
very original, indeed.
Okay, here's my point: like most monsters, the "non-traditional" lambics
are merely misunderstood, and can be downright likable, if given the
chance. They are clearly a product of modern technology inspired by mass
market appeal and are designed to breathe new life into a market share that
has steadily declined over the decades.
Not all monsters are the product of greed or wayward idealism. They can
also be the product of pragmatism as Mike Sharp has indicated in the
_published_ portions of his travelogue (hint, hint). To stay in business,
even traditional brewers keep one eye on the bottom line. They have come
to realize that even if you can't legally control the front end of the
process (i.e. spontaneous fermentation), you certainly can control the back
end. Blending, filtering, and sweetening are all methods used to varying
degrees to produce a stable, consistent, balanced and marketable product.
What is important is that people want to drink your product, otherwise
there is little point in making it. Now it can be argued that eventhough
market forces influence the evolution (or devolution as some would have it)
of the style, the evolution of the style also influences the evolution of
the market (kind of an ontological, endless feedback loop), i.e. bland
palates inspire insipid products and insipid products inspire blander
palates, and so on.
In any event, you shouldn't take out your frustrations on the poor
homebrewer who aspires to attempt something challenging and please his
friends (and spouse) at the same time. Yes, you should consider giving his
filtered and sweetened p-lambic a score of 40. Perhaps, for no greater
reason than technical achievement alone. I mean, who has come across a
p-lambic that was clearly filtered and sweetened anyway? Such a beast
should be taken as a sign that its creator not only understands the breadth
and intricacies of the style, but also the technical aspects required to
produce it. Hey, with all the right cultures anybody can make salad
dressing - just sit back and wait. Clearly, even Frank Boon fiddles with
his products, whether it is through experimenting with blending regimens,
partial filtering or whatever. Moreover, it has been noted that where the
brewer doesn't tinker, the consumer frequently does: aren't sugar cubes
and muddlers (?) brought out at Drie Fonteinen and other lambic cafes?
I think that it is really hard to know what is the tradional profile of a
lambic. What we really need to know is what do the old-timers prefer in a
lambic? We need somebody to go over there and survey those grizzled old
dudes sitting around in the cafes smoking filterless cigarettes and eating
radish and cream cheese sandwiches as to their preferences. Of course,
they may be as elusive as an Eyelenbosch kriek.
I think that there is room for these different shades of a very interesting
style. It's up to homebrewers and judges to avail themselves of the
different nuances of the style. And that means being able to put aside
momentarily personal 'likes' and 'dislikes' in order to appreciate
technical achievement.
Why even the bastard son of patriotic brewing can produce an agreeable
monster, that is, if you approach it with an open mind. Now, a ginger
passionfruit lambic, that's another story entirely :-)
Todd
------------------------------
End of Lambic Digest
************************
-------
