Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #0558
This file received at Mthvax.CS.Miami.EDU 90/12/20 03:20:39
HOMEBREW Digest #558 Thu 20 December 1990
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator
Contents:
Estimates of Mashing Efficiency (H.W.) Troup <HWT@BNR.CA>
Mashing efficiency (bryan)
Extract rate (mcnally)
Re: HBD FYI (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
It's worse than that, he's dead Jim. (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
Partial Mash (dreger)
Irish Moss and Good Head (Retention) (Jay Hersh)
Re: Kirin not Made in Japan (a.e.mossberg)
Guiness Dispensing (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
HBD FYI - a la robert gorman (Bill Hunter [Sun Denver FSE])
FYI, RFC, OK BY ME (krweiss)
Sources of malt (John Freeman)
Re: Carbonation (John Polstra)
HB Digest # 555 (Duane Smith)
large amounts of malted barley(where can I get it?) (Dan Miles)
my request for HB # 555 (Duane Smith)
Mashing: Surprising Facts (Brian Capouch)
Send submissions to homebrew%hpfcmr@hplabs.hp.com
Send requests to homebrew-request%hpfcmr@hplabs.hp.com
[Please do not send me requests for back issues]
Archives are available from netlib@mthvax.cs.miami.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 90 09:37:50 EST
From: gateh%CONNCOLL.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
> Recently there have been some expressions of surprise in the HBD about
> the use of nitrogen to produce the amazing head of draught Guinness. I
> have no doubt that it is true. I've seen it mentioned in several
> brewing books, and the video that Jim Homer described provides further
> confirmation.
[stuff deleted]
> 3. If you are a kegger and don't mind wasting some CO2 (it's not
> exactly a precious resource) you can get much the same effect at
> home without the nitrogen. Store the beer at your usual pressure.
> When you are ready to serve a brew or two, crank the CO2 pressure
> way up. Draw off the brews at high pressure and you'll get a great
> head, just like Guinness. Then, bleed off some CO2 to reduce the
> pressure back to the normal storage levels.
Except that your basic US tap is not designed to deliver fluids at high
pressure/flow rates. I think the Guinness method is dependent upon the
unique tap which was described by someone else, which is capable of
controlling the flow rate and aeration of the beer as it is dispensed. This
would help ensure that you get some beer along with a wonderful head.
Cheers! - Gregg
Gregg TeHennepe | Academic Computing Services | This is the life
gateh@conncoll.bitnet | Connecticut College, New London, CT | you have -V. Reid
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 90 10:22:00 EST
From: Henry (H.W.) Troup <HWT@BNR.CA>
Subject: Estimates of Mashing Efficiency
I checked the spreadsheet I've been using for some time for estimating
mashing - I used 0.24 per pound per U.S. gallon, or 0.125 per kg per liter.
Incidentally, either those numbers came from Papazian, or from measurement.
So add me as another who can't get 0.30 extraction!
Henry Troup - BNR owns but does not share my opinions | The .signature is the
P.O. Box 3511, Stn. C. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1Y 4H7| lowest form of humour
uunet!bnrgate!hwt%bwdlh490 HWT@BNR.CA +1 613-765-2337 |
------------------------------
Date: 19 Dec 90 09:23:15 PST (Wed)
From: bryan@tekgen.bv.TEK.COM
Subject: Mashing efficiency
I also have been mashing in a Coleman 5 gal water cooler. I usually mash around
155 degrees, if my memory is correct I use about 1 qt of water per pound of
2 row malt. Again if my memory is correct, about 2 quarts of sparge water
per pound of grain. My malt has been precrushed by Stienbart's. I'm getting 7
points per pound.
Stienbarts malt get's down to around 60 cents a pound if you buy enough, can't
remember how much is enough.
Bryan Olson
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 90 09:22:28 PST
From: mcnally@wsl.dec.com
Subject: Extract rate
Well, I tried some of the beer that "suffered" from an extract rate of
.026. It's extremely nice; in fact, here's the recipe (my own):
6 lbs. 2-row Klages
3 lbs. wheat malt
1 lb. dextrin malt ("Cara-pils", as Miller calls it)
7 AAU Tettnanger
3 AAU Kent Goldings
1.5 ozs Saaz (added at end of boil)
Chimay yeast (of course)
2/3 cup priming sugar
Mash water: 14 quarts
Mash-in 135 dF
Mash pH: 5.4 (tough to get that low...)
Protein rest: 30 min
Starch conversion: 2 hrs at 145-152 dF
Mash-out: 5 min,. at 168 dF
Sparge water: 5 gal., 168 dF, pH 5.7
Boil about 90 min. (you get a lot more thanm 5 gallons...)
Hops: Tettnanger & Goldings, 1 hour before end of boil
Saaz at end of boil
Original gravity: 1.053
Terminal gravity: 1.004
The ferment went about a week and a half. I added 3 tbsp. Polyclar and
3 tbsp. bentonite slurry (as per Miller) and let it sit in the
secondary for 2 weeks. It was a little cloudy at bottling, but is
stunningly clear now. The Chimay yeast has tucked itself very nicely
into the beer; I had thought it would be quite pronounced.
I'll be making another made-up recipe with wheat soon, and this time
I'll use 6-row. I'll keep you posted...
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike McNally mcnally@wsl.dec.com
Digital Equipment Corporation
Western Software Lab
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 90 10:33:48 mst
From: hplabs!hp-lsd.cos.hp.com!ihlpl!korz (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
Subject: Re: HBD FYI
I think that Bob has a great idea. Maybe a "Homebrew Digest
Starter Package" could be created. It could contain answers
to the most commonly asked questions. It could then be archived
and maybe a one-line explanation of how to get the package could
be added thusly:
FORUM ON BEER, HOMBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator
For a copy of the "Homebrew Digest Primer" blah blah blah woof woof.
Contents:
Imperial Stout Blah Blah ...
I would be willing to donate a copy of my "STEP-BY-STEP HOMEBREW"
procedure. However, I don't know exactly how the archives work
and whether this idea is feasable.
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 90 10:41:19 mst
From: hplabs!hp-lsd.cos.hp.com!ihlpl!korz (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
Subject: It's worse than that, he's dead Jim.
Upon my cousin's urging, I'm trying to culture Chimay yeast.
This is my first attempt at culturing from a bottle and I
would like some advice. How long should it take to see
activity (i.e. when do I give up and start again)? How
old (young) should the bottle be (i.e. "don't even bother
if the bottle is X or more months old")?
I've got a bottle of Jan `90 Chimay (the cork has the date
stamped on it "0190") sitting at home, on which I am about to
give up. I have decanted the beer, added cooled, aerated wort
(~1/4 cup of light dried malt extract boiled in 8 oz of water)
and topped with a airlock.
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 90 09:50:44 PST
From: dreger@seismo.gps.caltech.edu
Subject: Partial Mash
>I don't do partial mashes for exactly this reason.
If you're making extract only beer you should try partial mashes.
Whether with malt not requiring mashing (dark malts, crystal) or
malts that do (munich, pale, lager, klages etc).
>I feel that the added work provides little, if any,
>benefit. What are other brewer's feelings on this?
First adding grains even 1 lb greatly aids in head retention. There are
additional flavor complexities you add to beer that as far as I can tell
come only from *freshly* mashed grain. I've made both all extract and
partial mash and they're both good, but the partial mash is superior.
The latest example of a partial mash that I've made is "A Taste of Autumn"
(Papazian's recipe in I believe the last summers issue of zymurgy. Perhaps
the fall issue). This recipe calls for toasted klages malt, only 0.5 lbs.
The malt was toasted in the oven at 350 for 15 to 20 min and then mashed with
a number of other malts (about 5 lbs).
The result is an underlying toasty flavor that I doubt
could be duplicated with extract only. By the way anyone considering this
recipe definately should try it. It is really good.
Doug
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 90 12:17:38 EST
From: hersh@coco.ctc.tasc.com (Jay Hersh)
Subject: Irish Moss and Good Head (Retention)
Nonsense Ted, I have been making extract beers for years and have always
used Irish Moss as a fining agent, and have only rarely experienced
poor head retention, which due to the large number of batches I have
brewed using Irish Moss, I would say is unrelated. I think that 2 trials
is far too limited a sample to give up on such a useful additive.
Head retention is a result of trace minerals which effect the surface
tension of the resulting beer, and of the health of the yeast which
helps to create many of these elements by breaking down compounds
which are derived from the grains (I believe the larger proteins in
particular). While Irish Moss will take many of the proteins that
would otherwise form colloidal suspensions out of solution, I'm sure
that the quantities remaining are sufficient to form propoer heads
on the beer, otherwise how could I or anyone else who uses Irish Moss
regularly ever have gotten a beer with a good head on it??
I would suspect that the health of your yeast is a factor. While a yeast
may be viable during early fermentation it may tend to grow weak in later
stages, the result can be undercarbonated beers, and/or beers with poor
head retention. I would recommend that before you abandon Irish Moss,'
which I have found to be an excellent fining (as well as allowing your
beers to remain completely vegetarian, this is important to my brother)
that you try adding some yeast nutrient or heading agent. These two
things are approximately the same thing, giveor take one or two ingredients.
They add trace elements that are important for healthy yeast that
may not be derived from the mashing process (wherever that is being done).
- Jay H
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 90 18:37:24 GMT
From: aem@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (a.e.mossberg)
Subject: Re: Kirin not Made in Japan
In digest <1990Dec19.081509.22648@mthvax.cs.miami.edu> homebrew%hpfcmr@hplabs.hpl.hp.com (CHANGE THIS IF NECESSARY) writes:
>All the talk about Guiness made in Canada, reminded me of an incident at a
>Japanese restaurant with my father. He ordered Kirin and the waitress said
>that they didn't serve it there because it was made in Canada. We went home
>and looked carefully at the bottle. Of course it says "Imported" which is a
>little deceiving. After close inspection, it is revealed that it is brewed in
>Canada by Molson under license from Kirin. So the next time you by "Imported"
>beer, look and see if it was made in its original country of origin.
Unfortunately, it doesn't appear that beers are required to list where
they're brewed. Like I pointed out with Guinness, it says imported, but
it doesn't say anywhere on the bottle "canada" or "bahamas". Obviously
the importing company is trying to imply that it is coming all the way
from Ireland.
aem
- --
aem@mthvax.cs.miami.edu .......................................................
We are a part of the earth and it is a part of us. - Chief Seattle
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 90 12:00:48 mst
From: hplabs!hp-lsd.cos.hp.com!ihlpl!korz (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
Subject: Guiness Dispensing
Completely by accident, well, I was ordering a 40 quart SS pot,
I stumbled upon "GUINESS/BASS EQUIPMENT Tapping equipment for
imported cooperage." It's on pg. 33 of the Rapids 1990 catalog.
John Polstra recently wrote that Guiness is actually dispensed
*differently* rather than just with a different propellant.
This catalog entry seems to support John. Here it is:
1-24 25+
(A) 2-G-483 Guiness Tap $ 68.00 $66.50
(B) 2-G-461 Bass Tap, Brass 68.00 66.50
(C) 2-G-494 Guiness Flow
Control Faucet 135.00 130.00
2-S-021 Faucet Coupling
Gasket Seal for
2-G-494 .34 .30
The A, B and C refer to the pictures. A and B are the apparatus
that attach hoses to the kegs. C looks like a normal beer faucet
except for two differences: 1) the outlet of the faucet is longer
than normal and tapers, and 2) there appears to be an adjustment (?)
knob of some sort just above the outlet. Oops -- divide those prices
by two. Rapids prints list prices and then sells for half of that.
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 90 10:45:45 MST
From: hunter@sunpeaks.Central.Sun.COM (Bill Hunter [Sun Denver FSE])
Subject: HBD FYI - a la robert gorman
i think robert's idea of online info is great. it would be nice if it
could be available via anonymous ftp, and it could be sent in whole to
all new subscribers. additions could be posted as they appear, or at
least a posting of an updated index.
"beer doesn't kill brain cells, it weeds out the weak ones." bill hunter
parrot head * led head * DoD#139 bill.hunter@Central
"ok well we found this mouse in a bottle of YOUR beer eh? like we was at a
party and a friend of ours, a COP, had some and he PUKED!" - doug mckenzie
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 90 11:39:54 -0800
From: krweiss@ucdavis.edu
Subject: FYI, RFC, OK BY ME
Bob Gorman made the suggestion that we develop a collection of FYI notes for
the edification of newcomers to the list. As a relatively unsophisticated
brewer, I don't know what I'd be able to contribute to this project as a
writer, but I think it's a good idea.
What I can and will do is compile all the submissions into a formatted
document, create illustrations (within reasonable time constraints), and
upload the final result to the server in Florida in PostScript form. Hell, if
we do this comprehensively, we could write the successor to TCJOHB! Look out,
Papazian, we're gaining on ya.
Ken Weiss
krweiss@ucdavis.edu
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 90 13:54:01 CST
From: jlf@poplar.cray.com (John Freeman)
Subject: Sources of malt
>
> Anyone out there in brew land know where one can send for, say,
> a 50lb. sack of malted barley (2R or 6R). I have been doing a lot of all
> grain mashing and would like to find a inexpensive source of malted barley.
> The local h.b. shop charges ($1.50 - $1.60) / lb. for malted barley and the
> cheapest I have been able to find mailorder is ($1.00 - $1.10) / lb.
> (20lbs. or more) + shipping. Are there any malthouses that ship direct?
>
I have had good success with Stew's Brew. Stew sells only pale
malted barley at 55 cents/pound plus shipping. I don't have the
address right here, but he does advertise in the classified ads
of Zymurgy.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 90 11:00:44 PST
From: polstra!jdp@uunet.UU.NET (John Polstra)
Subject: Re: Carbonation
Thanks to Stephan Mahan <mahan_stephen@lanmail.ncsc.navy.mil> for
his informative posting in HBD #557 about carbonation and the
solubility of gases in water. His explanation about the reversible
formation of carbonic acid was particularly interesting.
Stephen contradicted my earlier statement that nitrogen is insoluble in
water, writing:
> Gases, in general, are soluble in liquids. The partial pressure of the
> gas in the liquid will eventually be equal to the partial pressure of
> the gas in the mixture in contact with the liquid in the absence of
> other factors driving the process. Nitrogen, in particular, will
> dissolve quite well in water.
I should have known better than to make the unequivocal statement that
nitrogen is "insoluble in water." What I should have said was that
nitrogen is much less soluble than CO2. My CRC handbook lists the
solubility of CO2 in 0 degree C water at 171.3, while that of nitrogen
is 2.33. [The units are cubic centimeters (cc) of gas per 100 cc of
water. I don't really understand how they can use volumetric
measurements such as these for compressible gases. But anyway, the
units for nitrogen and CO2 are the same, so we can compare them to one
another.] So, compared to CO2, nitrogen is *relatively* insoluble in
water -- less soluble by a factor of about 75.
John Polstra polstra!jdp@uunet.uu.net
Polstra & Co., Inc. ...!uunet!polstra!jdp
Seattle, Washington USA (206) 932-6482
"Self-knowledge is always bad news." -- John Barth
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 90 13:49:32 PST
From: uunet!tc.fluke.COM!gamebird@uunet.UU.NET (Duane Smith)
Subject: HB Digest # 555
For some reason I didn't get HB 555 if it got sent. I just re-
ceived #556.
Would someone be so kind as to e-mail HB# 555 to me.
Many Thanks, Duane Smith
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 90 14:16:24 -0800
From: miles@cs.washington.edu (Dan Miles)
Subject: large amounts of malted barley(where can I get it?)
P.S. I forgot to tell you where the HBS is located. It's in Bothell
Washington, and the owner ships via UPS.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 90 14:26:55 PST
From: uunet!tc.fluke.COM!gamebird@uunet.UU.NET (Duane Smith)
Subject: my request for HB # 555
Cancel my request for a copy of HB # 555. I just received it.
Duane Smith
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 90 20:17:11 -0600 (CST)
From: Brian Capouch <brianc@zeta.saintjoe.EDU>
Subject: Mashing: Surprising Facts
I got the privilege of a somewhat extended interview this afternoon with
a very successful and well-known pub brewer. A couple of the things we
discussed, I think, are worthy of bringing before this group, partly for
their informational value, and partly because they might prove to start
some discussion.
First, he told me that in "most" brewpubs today, because of the cost of
equipment to do it otherwise, that mashing is done as single-step
infusion. It wouldn't matter whether ale or lager malts: because
there's no easy way to change the temperature once the mash-in has been
done, hot water is added to the grist, the grist is stirred, and once
conversion has been achieved, the sparge is done. This certainly goes
against what I've learned in terms of multiple-stage rests, protein
rests, acid rests, and the like for lagers. Do any of the others of you
out there know differently? If *he* can be limited this way and sell
tons of beer that most consider really tasty, what do we amateurs gain
from our complicated mash schedules, decoctions, etc.? It's really got
me wondering.
The other thing he said that stuck with me was that, relatively
speaking, there's something *wrong* with fermentations that don't come
to their conclusions within what I'd consider pretty short periods of
time. Depending on temp, 3-4 days for ales and 6-7 days for
cold-fermented lagers. He said that these "slow brews" we live with
(and occasionally brag about :-)) are actually stuck fermentations, due
in the main to inadequate oxidation of the cold wort ahead of pitching.
I have always been bothered by batches that seem to take weeks to
ferment out (I check with a hydrometer, and concur with those who
recommend that beginners have one) and have been pursuing exactly that
avenue in dealing with them. What do the rest of you know/think?
Brian Capouch
Saint Joseph's College
brianc@saintjoe.edu
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #558, 12/20/90
*************************************
-------
