Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Lambic Digest #0879
Return-Path: postmaster at lance.colostate.edu
Received: from srvr8.engin.umich.edu (root at srvr8.engin.umich.edu [141.212.2.81]) by srvr5.engin.umich.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id DAA29095 for <spencer at srvr5.engin.umich.edu>; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 03:15:27 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from truelies.rs.itd.umich.edu (truelies.rs.itd.umich.edu [141.211.83.38]) by srvr8.engin.umich.edu (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id DAA23284 for <spencer at engin.umich.edu>; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 03:15:26 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by truelies.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.7.5/2.2)
with X.500 id DAA06190; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 03:15:45 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from longs.lance.colostate.edu by truelies.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.7.5/2.2)
with SMTP id DAA06185; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 03:15:44 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (daemon at localhost) by longs.lance.colostate.edu (8.6.12/8.6.5a (LANCE Revision: 1.3)) id AAA15297 for reallambic at longs.lance.colostate.edu; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 00:30:08 -0600
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 00:30:08 -0600
Message-Id: <199606260630.AAA15297 at longs.lance.colostate.edu>
From: lambic-request at lance.colostate.edu (subscription requests only - do not post here)
To: lambic at 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
Subject: Lambic Digest #879 (June 26, 1996)
Lambic Digest #879 Wed 26 June 1996
Forum on Lambic Beers (and other Belgian beer styles)
Mike Sharp, Digest Coordinator
Contents:
Brettanomyces contamination (Todd Gierman)
More on Orval and brett. contaminations (Scott Bickham)
more on cherries (Daniel S. McConnell)
Re: Lambic Digest #878 (June 25, 1996) (Mike Sharp)
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
Note that the request address is not an automated server. It forwards
to a real person who may not be able to process the request immediately.
Subscription changes often take 2-5 days, sometimes more.
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: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 10:01:18 -0400 (EDT)
From: Todd Gierman <tmgierma at acpub.duke.edu>
Subject: Brettanomyces contamination
Scott mentions problems with Brettanomyces contamination.
I can't remember whether I have mentioned it in this forum, but I, too,
have discovered Brett contamination in 4 consecutive batches in the past
year. It was the fourth batch that made me suspicious enough to go
searching. The Brett was easy to find in this one. Signs in previous
batches included: slow but continuous carbonation of beer, in spite of
releasing pressure in the kegs on several occasions, and the development
of off flavors if the beer sat longer than 3-4 weeks. The 4th batch had
off flavors early on and I suspect that my starter contained some Brett -
I had used wort transfered and frozen from previous batches without
reboiling it.
I suspect that some Brett resides in my racking cane and tubing. The
simplest solution is to not use these items when racking non-Brett
beers. It's easier to get a new cane and some tubing than to clean up
the old, which may not be very effective.
I don't find the Brett contribution to be very intriguing when I hadn't
intended for it to be there. However, I agree with Scott that one is
more likely to get off-flavors not usually associated with lambic.
Interestingly, a friend used a large starter from the primary of my 4th
batch to brew an ESB. This beer took 1st in its category at two
separate, but local, competitions held several months apart. When I
tasted it, I noticed a subtle off-flavor. More noticeable Brett
contributions were the stripped out body and the high level of
carbonation. So, the moral of the story is: Brett may adversely affect
your beer style, but don't worry, because the beer still has a chance to do
well in competition :-)
Todd
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 10:13:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: Scott Bickham <bickham at dave.nrl.navy.mil>
Subject: More on Orval and brett. contaminations
There's more to the story, and I'll clarify some of my comments. The
source of the brettanomyces was a coupling between my oxygen tank
and the plastic airstone. There is also lactic acid bacteria present, as
evidenced by the sour dunkelweizen I just kegged and recategorized as an
Oud Bruin (a pretty good one, at that). I normally aerate before I
pitch my yeast, but when I brewed 10 gallons of fresh wort to
pitch onto 5 gallons of fermenting pLambic, I aerated the mixture
and the brett. and pedio found a home in the tubing. Of course this
propagated to my carboys and kegs, and because I used the airstone for
other worts, they eventually became contaminated. The flavors that
resulted were textbook: hoppy beers were resistent to the lactic acid
bacteria, but were a good environment for the brettanomyces, while
the lactobacillus feasted on the residual sugars in the low hopped
worts. By lowly hopped, I would say 20-25 IBUs max, while the
brett. was dominant when there is >35 IBUs.
While I'm at it I'll respond to the person who inquired about
continuous fermentation and viability. He mentioned that he was
unable to find much viable yeast or bacteria in the sediment,
which is surprising because there are certainly enough to ferment
the sugars in the fruit that is added after a couple of years,
and there are viable organisms in the dregs of some commercial
lambics. I have done some experiments with continuous fermentation,
and while the resulting beers ferment down below 1.004 and taste
okay, they do not seem to have enough complexity, at least after
9 months. I think the problem is that the fermentation is too
rapid for the slow growing lactobacilli and brettanomyces to make
much of an impact on the flavor. There is some brett. flavor,
but it comes across as mousey rather than barnyard (and yes, I have
lived on a farm). The acid levels also seem a little low, but they
do improve with age and when fruit or another source of sugar is
added. At this point, I will put the demijohn in a corner and see
what happens, but if it needs some corrections, I will blend
it with 5 gallons that have ben fermented with only brettanomyces
and lactobacillus.
My next installment with discuss my latest trick - high gravity
pLambic brewing!
Scott
- --
========================================================================
Naval Research Laboratory, Code 6691 E-mail: bickham at dave.nrl.navy.mil
Complex Systems Theory Branch Home or BJCP: 7507 Swan Point Way
Washington, D.C 20375 Columbia, MD 21045
(202) 404-8632 FAX: (202) 404-7546 (410) 290-7721
=========================================================================
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 11:34:59 -0500
From: danmcc at umich.edu (Daniel S. McConnell)
Subject: more on cherries
From: msharp at synopsys.com (Mike Sharp)
>On the subject of cherries, Belle Vue uses "Groechem" (sp?) cherries. I had an
>excellent kriek made of these while I was sampling my way through
>their cellars last year.
Other varieties to look for are Oblacinska and Stevnsbar (available on a
very limited basis in the US). These are old world varieties used to make
kirsch and have fruit chemistry similar to the Westerlesse Kriek. (percent
malic
acid = 1.77) and just slightly higher in soluble solids (16.5 [vs. Montmorency at
13]), very likely has similar color, and also has seeds in the pits.
DanMcC
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 96 08:32:05 PDT
From: msharp at synopsys.com (Mike Sharp)
Subject: Re: Lambic Digest #878 (June 25, 1996)
Scott Bickham <bickham at dave.nrl.navy.mil> writes:
> Subject: Traditional fruits
>
> Thanks to Mike S. for correcting my comment that peaches are "more
> traditional" than some of the others used in the soda pop lambics.
> More common would be closer to the mark, although we shouldn't get
> in the trap of being narrow-minded about what fruits and spices are
> traditional in Belgian ales.
OK, first and foremost, I think everyone should be free to experiment
as they wish.
Certainly I won't disagree with peche being "common" since Timmermans,
Lindemans, St.Louis and other brands all have a peche version now.
If this interests you, go for it -- you'll probably need extracts
to get an assertive flavor/aroma, but I'll leave that for another post.
On to the question you posed...
> ...while most fruit lambics are
> made with cherries or raspberries, others have certainly been used over the
> long history of lambic brewing. While we can certainly say that certain
> aspects of the brewing and fermentation process are traditional,
> what the Belgians add to the secondary is another ballgame. With so
> many peach orchards in the low countries, my guess is that Lindeman's
> is not the first brewer to experiment with using them in lambics. So
> what defines a fruit as being traditional?
While it is certainly conceivable that some Belgian somewhere put
<insert fruit/spice of choice> in lambic somewhere in the time of Breugel,
this doesn't make something common practice. In my opinion, an
act can be considered "traditional" if its generally accepted by those
of a given craft (not amateurs attempting to recreate it) and has been
done in that manner a sufficiently long time that those currently
practicing the craft cannot recall when it was done
otherwise. (i.e. my father's father did it this way...)
>From Webster's
tradition: ... 3. the delivery of opinions, doctrines, practices,
rites, and customs from generation to generation by oral
communication. 4. a statement, opinion, or belief handed down
orally from one generation to another.
A good example of "tradition" that doesn't relate to fruit is the
spontaneous fermentation of lambics. I don't think anyone here will
argue this point.
Lambic, Gueuze, Faro, and Kriek all fit this definition as they predate the
memories of the current brewers, there is historical evidence of their
having been made, and the current brewers all accept these as styles
widely made by their predicessors.
More recent arrivals are Framboise (though generally having been
accepted now -- does anyone have the date? I think it was in the 60s?
Martin?), Cassis (black current, Mort Subite), Peche (Lindemans),
Apple (Cantillon as an experiment only), Plum Strawberry Banana Pineapple
(DeTroch). Some of these varieties are now being made by more than one
brewer.
Sure, perhaps some knowledge has been lost. I'm willing to accept that.
After all, we lost all evidence of the space aliens that helped build
the pyramids.
(-8 sorry, just had to put that in. 8-)
Yes, its possible that knowledge has been lost, but as much as I can't
disprove the possibility, nobody can prove its existence. We're stuck.
The best we can do is say that it _could_ have been done because the
materials where at hand. This, however, doesn't make for a traditional
practice, just possible practice.
> I don't know, but as Will Durant
> once pointed out (I could have the numbers wrong), "95% of history is
> guesswork, the rest is prejudice."
Interesting quote. I assume it was meant to be applied to historical
events on which we can't question a group of individuals who experienced
them. Lets play with this anyway...
Is it a guess that the existing brewers inherited the styles they know?
Is it a guess that certain combinations, previously unavailable, have
appeared within our own lifetimes?
Is it prejudice to not consider a historical possibility (i.e. no evidence)
to be tradition?
Is it prejudice to separate that which we have evidence for from that which
we believe might have been?
If we confuse that which we have evidence for with that which we believe
might have been aren't we doing a disservice to researchers who follow?
I'll leave these as points to ponder. Lets not rat-hole this any further.
This has been fun. We should have philosophical debates more often...
--Mike (in the mood to debate I guess...)
------------------------------
End of Lambic Digest
************************
-------
