Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Lambic Digest #0958
Return-Path: postmaster at engr.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 CAA06326 for <spencer at srvr5.engin.umich.edu>; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 02:52:54 -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 CAA03078 for <spencer at engin.umich.edu>; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 02:52:53 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by truelies.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.7.5/2.2)
with X.500 id CAA09618; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 02:52:53 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from longs.lance.colostate.edu by truelies.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.7.5/2.2)
with SMTP id CAA09613; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 02:52:51 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (daemon at localhost) by longs.lance.colostate.edu (8.6.12/8.6.5a (LANCE Revision: 1.3)) id AAA02835 for reallambic at longs.lance.colostate.edu; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 00:30:06 -0600
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 00:30:06 -0600
Message-Id: <199610070630.AAA02835 at longs.lance.colostate.edu>
From: lambic-request at engr.colostate.edu (subscription requests only - do not post here)
To: lambic at engr.colostate.edu
Reply-to: lambic at engr.colostate.edu (postings only - do not send subscription requests here)
Errors-to: lambic-request at engr.colostate.edu
Subject: Lambic Digest #958 (October 07, 1996)
Lambic Digest #958 Mon 07 October 1996
Forum on Lambic Beers (and other Belgian beer styles)
Mike Sharp, Digest Coordinator
Contents:
Re: Lambic Digest #956 (October 05, 1996) (zen)
Re: Lambic Digest #955 (October 04, 1996) (Matt Olson)
Send article submissions only to: lambic at engr.colostate.edu
Send all other administrative requests (subscribe/unsubscribe/change) to:
lambic-request at engr.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 engr.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 engr.colostate.edu).
A new FAQ is under construction at:
http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~jeremybb/lambic/lambic.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 10:25:21 est
From: zen at netcom.ca
Subject: Re: Lambic Digest #956 (October 05, 1996)
** Reply to note from lambic-request at engr.colostate.edu (subscription requests only - do not post here) Sat, 5 Oct 1996 00:30:06 -0600
> Date: Fri, 04 Oct 1996 08:57:10 -0700 From: Norman
> Dickenson <norman.dickenson at sonoma.edu> Subject:
> American Oak
>
> Subject: Time: 8:28 AM OFFICE MEMO American Oak Date:
> 10/4/96
>
> In LD #955, Al korzonas questioned the oakiness of his
> newly acquired American Oak 20 gal. cask.
>
> He didn't mention whether it was a new or used cask. I
> will assume it was new, since used casks smaller than
> 60 gal. are almost impossible to find.
> I know that new barrels cost an arm and a leg
> regardless of size. Did you know that used 60 gal wine
> barrels are sold off cheap by wineries as trash after
> they are 5 years old? Depending on condition, the
> prices range from $40-50 dollars for a barrel the
> wineries may have paid between $400-800 ea. Add
> freight to that and it's still much cheaper than new
> barrels which need to be broken in. If anyone is
> interested, I can provide phone numbers of used barrel
> brokers in California.
Locally [Toronto area] 40imp gallon Whisky barrels are $40cdn[$30US?]
So I'd say look around. If your area contains any number of homewinemakers
you might be able to find something. FWIW condition on the whisky barrels is
basically perfect.
Nick
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 09:50:53 -0700 (PDT)
From: Matt Olson <molson at teleport.com>
Subject: Re: Lambic Digest #955 (October 04, 1996)
Please remove me from all of your mailing lists. I don't know how I got on
your list, but, if I don't receive some sort of RSVP then I've got about
12,000 listserv sites I can add your server to (scripts are handy). Sorry
about the hostile tone, I just want off your list.
Thank you for your attension in this matter.
Matt Olson
molson at teleport.com
At 12:30 AM 10/4/1996 -0600, subscription requests only - do not post here
wrote:
>
>
>Lambic Digest #955 Fri 04 October 1996
>
>
> Forum on Lambic Beers (and other Belgian beer styles)
> Mike Sharp, Digest Coordinator
>
>
>Contents:
> RE: Lambic Digest #954 (October 03, 1996) ("T.Matera")
> Mysteriosus lampshadus/oak cask (Algis R Korzonas)
> Phil Seitz (Algis R Korzonas)
> Father Barleywine's aphorisms (Todd Gierman)
>
>
>Send article submissions only to: lambic at engr.colostate.edu
>Send all other administrative requests (subscribe/unsubscribe/change) to:
> lambic-request at engr.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 engr.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 engr.colostate.edu).
>A new FAQ is under construction at:
> http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~jeremybb/lambic/lambic.html
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 10:08:23 -0400 (EDT)
>From: "T.Matera" <573125 at xavier.xu.edu>
>Subject: RE: Lambic Digest #954 (October 03, 1996)
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Thu, 3 Oct 96 10:33:39 CDT
>From: korzonas at lucent.com (Algis R Korzonas)
>Subject: Mysteriosus lampshadus/oak cask
>
>I think I've got a culture growing of something related to the
>pellicle Russell has. Remember the one he wants to make a
>lampshade out of? Well, I've taken to leave hydrometer samples
>out for two or three days every time I brew and one of them (now
>in a 500ml Erlenmyer has grown a most impressive pellicle. It
>looks as if it is at least three different life forms. Two of
>them are "floating" on the starter wort and one is "hovering" above
>those two. No kidding. Of the two floaters, the bottom one
>is medium brown and maybe a millimeter thick. The second one up
>is tan and about 1/4" thick. The "hovering" culture looks like
>stretched a stretched out cotton ball or white cotton candy and
>is crawling up the walls of the Erlenmeyer. I don't think that
>these are aerobic cultures because there's an airlock on the
>flask and I'm pretty sure it's been filled all the time. It was
>exposed to air only the first three days. I've got a website now
>(with nothing on it) so perhaps I can take a photo of it and
>put it on the website someday soon. Too small for a lampshade,
>perhaps I can make an eyepatch out of it?
>
>Here's a question... I bought a 20gallon American Oak cask a few
>months ago. I've written to Jean-Pierre asking how I should
>prepare it for use (understanding that this is American White
>Oak and not European as J-P uses). I've yet to hear back from
>him, so I've filled it with plain water and have been changing
>the water every week. I have been smelling a glass of the water
>that I dump and it has never smelled very oaky. In five weeks,
>I think I've put four changes of water through it. None were
>even 10% as oaky as Rodenbach Grand Cru. I even wondered if
>perhaps I had not gotten European Oak in stead of American, so
>I called L.D.Carlson and they said, nope... "made in the US from
>American White Oak." Okay, fine, but having tasted Mike's
>raspberry-oakbranch pLambic, I wonder if mine will taste
>similarly. How long was that "oakbranch" batch in the cask
>Mike? Did you treat the cask any way before use? Perhaps
>a week is simply not enough to impart much character? I'm
>thinking of first doing a Rodenbach Grand Cru clone and simply
>taking samples until it's the right amount of oakiness...
>if it's a month, okay... if it's a year, okay... if it's 3
>years, okay... (if it takes more than a year, I think I'll
>buy a couple more because I want higher "throughput").
>
>I believe that I want to get most of the oakiness out of the
>cask before I start making pLambic/pLambiek in it.
>
>Comments?
>
>Al.
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Thu, 3 Oct 96 10:47:32 CDT
>From: korzonas at lucent.com (Algis R Korzonas)
>Subject: Phil Seitz
>
>Phil--
>Where are you? Email me at korzonas at lucent.com, korz at pubs.ih.lucent.com
>or korz at xnet.com . Sorry for the bandwidth use.
>Al.
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 14:50:11 -0400 (EDT)
>From: Todd Gierman <tmgierma at acpub.duke.edu>
>Subject: Father Barleywine's aphorisms
>
>I politely take issue with a number of points raised by Richard Ransom in
>resoponse to a question regarding the propagation of multi-strain
>cultures. Not that these points are invalid, but that I have an entirely
>different perspective. Never one to believe in absolutes (or a single
>way), I hate to leave budding aphorisms unchecked.
>
>> > Date: Wed, 2
>Oct 1996 12:14:13 -0600 > From: rransom at msu.edu (Richard F. Ransom)
>> Subject: Re: Culturing Multiple yeast strains
>>
>> On Tue, 1 Oct 1996 08:18:17 Anthony Accardi <Greenrhino at aol.com> wrote (>):
>>
>> >Is there a standard practice for culturing multiple yeast strains as
>> >opposed to pure cultures?
>>
>> In a nutshell, no. Almost all microbiological techniques are oriented to
>> separating out and culturing single strains of organisms, not culturing a
>> mixed crop of yeast and bacteria.
>
>Although there is no clear standard, my perspective is that your best bet
>is to maintain as a liquid culture. You may readily lose something when
>picking from a plate. However, few cultures are worth carrying in this
>manner (as a mixed liquid culture). Viable bottle cultures from _some_
>(and the number appears to be ever dwindling) bottles of lambic (e.g.
>Cantillon and perhaps DeTroch, and Hansens if you can get it) are one
>type where it probably pays to just keep it intact. For instance, I keep
>some old Boon and Cantillon bottle cultures as mixed, cryo-preserved
>stocks. Although I have separated out many of the individuals from each,
>I still use the mixed culture to seed p-lambics along with various other
>individual strains. Maintaining the dregs of your fermenting p-lambics
>between batches is one way to propagate at least the organisms required
>for secondary, tertiary (etc) fermentation. Mixed
>bacterial and S. cerevisiae cultures are another example that are best
>left as a mixed culture (unless you have the tools and insight for
>separation and propagation of individuals). Lactobugs (rods or cocci)
>are fairly tricky to culture as indviduals, but often do well as part of
>a mix.
>
>> >How can you be sure that the cultured
>strains are in the > >same proportion as the mother?
>>
>> You can't. The Belgians do it by opening the windows during a certain time
>> of the year to inoculate with wild organisms, but it's simply impossible to
>> get the same proportions of organisms in your beer. You _could_ set up pure
>> cultures of each of the organisms, grow them up in until they're in log
>> phase growth in liquid culture, and spike your wort with them at various
>> times, but even then you'd get variations from batch to batch. And this
>> isn't the way the Belgians do it...they open the windows, "pitch" the wort,
>> and then ferment it for a while under conditions that favor Brettanomyces.
>> After that they cask it and let it sit through near-ambient temps, leading
>> to bacterial blooms in the summer and a funky series of different yeast and
>> bacterial fermentations. First the yeast hit it, then a couple bacteria,
>> then yeast, etc.
>
>Well, this is how most people pretty much go about setting up their
>p-lambic fermentations. It's pretty hard to control such a diverse lot
>of microbes.
>
>> >Will each yeast strain grow to its ideal number when pitched?
>>
>> No.
>
>Ahhh, Pilgrim...What is the ideal number? This is where things get
>really mystic. I don't know what the sound of one hand clapping is, but I
>suspect that the sound of two hands clapping is the sound of redundancy.
>
>> >I'm concerned with keeping a rodenbach strain viable,
>> >which reportedly is made up of 5 different yeasts. Does a mixed
>> >culture end up even close to where it started as far as proportions?
>>
>> No, and that's part of the problem with working with a mixed culture, and
>> particularly with culturing from a bottle. Most Belgian beers are fermented
>> with a mixed culture, and are often pitched with a completely different
>> yeast for the in-bottle fermentation. The only yeast strain cultured from a
>> bottle that I ever found to be even vaguely like the yeast used to make the
>> beer was from a bottle of Sierra Nevada Pale Ale.
>
>Not true. Not true. Well, maybe this is a true experience, but it isn't
>the only one. First of all, though, if you have an authentic 5 strain
>Rodie culture then you don't really have an authentic Rodie culture.
>That 5-strain b.s. appears to be the second biggest marketing fallacy since
>Michael Jacksons interpretation of the fermentation process for Orval.
>Furthermore, it's really hard to know how many yeast strains are used for
>the production of various beers. I'll wager that far more beers are
>fermented with single strain yeasts than not.
>
>Here are some Belgian beers whose bottle cultures appear to do a pretty
>good job (some are multi-strain, some are single):
>
>Cantillon
>Boon (not any more)
>Hoegaarden (still?)
>Blanche de Brugge
>Blanche de Neige
>Duvel (now pasturized)
>Affligem Dubbel
>Chimay Blue and Red (may be different now)
>LaChouffe (for sure)
>Straffe Hendrik
>Dentergems
>Lucifer
>Orval (inconsistent)
>LaBinchoise
>Saison DuPont
>DeDolle (variable)
>Rochefort
>And others
>
>
>> In other words, it's a pain in the ass. I would suggest fermenting with it,
>> saving an occasional aliquot from the early fermentation and propagating it
>> fairly often so that you've got a good, viable sample of the early mix, and
>> then using a mix of this and the late fermentation organisms to start the
>> next batch. Or just use your current culture and watch it evolve and
>> develop for your specific conditions, and don't worry about trying to
>> replicate Rodenbach.
>>
>Don't expect perfection. Expect adventure. Forget the "Rodenbach"
>culture would be my final advice. You will likely have better luck
>approximating Rodenbach with the following: S. cerevisiae (primary),
>Lactobacillus delbruckii or Pediococcus sp., one or two Brettanomyces
>yeasts and maybe 1-2 years time. Of course, if you can carry a couple
>dozen different fermentations for blending your chances for success will
>have increased.
>
>Todd
>
>------------------------------
>
>
>End of Lambic Digest
>************************
>-------
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 14:34:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: jmloy at awod.com (John Loy)
I have a "country life stuff" cataloge which lists large oak barrels for
sale through the mail. These are Parafin lined. Anyone got an idea as to
whether or not these could be useful in brewing or if that is just wishful
thinking?
------------------------------
End of Lambic Digest
************************
-------
