Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #0690
This file received at Mthvax.CS.Miami.EDU 91/07/30 03:09:23
HOMEBREW Digest #690 Tue 30 July 1991
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator
Contents:
Keg not bottle, & correction to pH (Desmond Mottram)
Re: Homebrew Digest #689 (July 29, 1991) (Tom Amiro - Sun BOS Information Architecture)
Re: Dryhopping (wbt)
Dry hopping
mg/L to ppm (Daniel S Robins)
wet-hopping (Russ Gelinas)
Bread yeast (Ted Manahan)
boil (Jack Schmidling)
Boulder Stout ("Anton E. Skaugset")
please add me to mailing list (Les Rehklau)
A yeast cluturing experiment. ("DRCV06::GRAHAM")
ppm vs. mg/L (Tom Strasser)
Malt Aromatics (Tom Strasser)
Darryl Richman a nome de plume? (Dave Platt)
Brewery Tour wrap-up, future Mid-Atlantic conference (Stephen Russell)
The Great, Unabashed, ppm vs. mg/L Debate (Stephen Russell)
Re: PPM <--> g/mL (Steve Thornton)
stuck (top) fermentation (Mark Sandrock)
A Judge's Lament (Martin A. Lodahl)
Water, Conical Fermentor, Brewpub Costs (Martin A. Lodahl)
Re: YEAST (korz)
Controlling fermenter temperature (David Taylor)
For Sale: Yeast Bite Ointment (BAUGHMANKR)
Rye Malt (Jack Baty)
bush beer (Richard Hubbell)
Send submissions to homebrew%hpfcmi@hplabs.hp.com
Send requests to homebrew-request%hpfcmi@hplabs.hp.com
[Please do not send me requests for back issues]
Archives are available from netlib@mthvax.cs.miami.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 91 10:30:19 BST
From: Desmond Mottram <des@swindon.ingr.ingr.com>
Subject: Keg not bottle, & correction to pH
Fed up with bottles? USE A KEG!!
There has been a bit of chat about this aready (apologies for lack of
acknowledgments):
- -----
> >I find bottling to be pretty boring, and am thinking of buying one of
> >those Edme plastic dispensers. The way I understand it, ....
- ----
> Oh, one more silly thing...any opinions on those british-style plastic
> mini-keg things? ...
- ----
> > I am interested in kegging my homebrew and am thinking about using a
> > beer sphere (party ball)....
I have been kegging in those British-style plastic things for several years
now and am most satisfied. They are far easier and quicker to clean. They
impart no taste to the beer. They give the beer a finer, creamier head. The
beer is smoother and less fizzy as less C02 get forced in. (Tho' if you
_like_ gassy beer this is a big minus). The beer keeps for weeks; months if
you keep the air space to a minimum. It's somehow more satisfying having
beer on-tap than in bottles.
The only problem I had was with the C02 injector. I was induced to buy a
fancy constant-pressure regulator/injector (Brits only - from Boots). It
gave me nothing but trouble. It leaked, lost pressure, cracked, ate C02
cylinders. In the end I junked it and replaced it with a simple injector
consisting of little more than a nut and bolt with a hole down the centre
and a rubber non-return sleeve over the end. Since then nothing but simple
pleasure.
The only other thing I'd add is that the tall drum-style kegs take longer
to clear than the horizontal keg on legs (piggy). I like my pig best.
- ----
On another matter entirely, I got the effect of pH on mash enzymes the
wrong way round. It should be:
higher pH favours alpha-amylase -> more dextrin, sweeter
lower pH favours beta-amylase -> more maltose, dryer
I said I couldn't actually taste the difference, but after my last batch
when I deliberately raised the pH I'm beginning to wonder...
- ----
Desmond Mottram
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 91 08:10:57 EDT
From: Tom.Amiro@East.Sun.COM (Tom Amiro - Sun BOS Information Architecture)
Subject: Re: Homebrew Digest #689 (July 29, 1991)
I'd like to get off this alias.
Tom Amiro
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 91 8:19:52 EDT
From: wbt@cbema.att.com
Subject: Re: Dryhopping
Subject: Dry hopping
I've read this five times now and still can't decide what it means. 8-)
(In response to question about keeping dry hopping hops from plugging the
syphon):
Al writes:
> Are you using hop pellets? Since I started dryhopping (last brewing
> season) I would never do without.
This gives the implication the author dry hops with pellets...
> I still use pellets for the boil --
> I use a hop bag in the boil and just throw the hop leaves
> into the fermentor after the krauesen falls.
Why use a hop bag with pellets? Anyway, here it's plainly stated
that leaf hops are used for dry hopping. I can't rationalize that against
the first statement. Do you use leaf hops or pellets for your dry hopping ?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Bill Thacker AT&T Network Systems - Columbus wbt@cbnews.att.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 91 9:23:21 EDT
From: Daniel S Robins <dsrobins@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>
Subject: mg/L to ppm
As a chemist, I thought I could be of some assistance with your
questions concerning conversion of mg/L to ppm. Parts per
million/billion (depending on which you would like) are used to
express concentrations of solutes (stuff of interest)that are quite
dilute. Below is the conversion:
ppm = (weight of solute/weight of solution) x 10e+6
Some points to remember:
1. Doesn't matter what weigh unit you use as long as it is
consistent. By that I mean, if your solute weight is expressed in
mg then your solution weight must be in mg as well.
2. Since your solution I assume to be water, the simple conversion
is 1L = 1000 mg.
If the explanation has been clouded, let me know. Hope I could be
of some further assistance.
Dan Robins INTERNET:dsrobins@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
Ohio State University
140 W. 18th Ave.
Columbus, OH 43202
614-292-0426
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1991 9:46:33 EDT
From: R_GELINAS@UNHH.UNH.EDU (Russ Gelinas)
Subject: wet-hopping
This talk of dryhopping and clogged siphons got me thinking (don't worry
I'll be careful). Why not heat up some hops, strain it, and put the "tea"
into the fermenter, in effect, wet-hopping? I seem to remember a "Hop-head"
beer at the AHA conference made by a Maine club that did just that, and it
worked very well. You might even try adding some alcohol to the tea as you're
heating it up; that might help with the oil extraction.
Aha, I knew it. Darryl Richman/Poorman is actually Steve Russell! That's
why you never see them posting messages at the same time! Good one, Steve.
Russ Gelinas
UNH
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 91 08:11:57 pdt
From: Ted Manahan <tedm@hpcvcbp.cv.hp.com>
Subject: Bread yeast
Full-Name: Ted Manahan
> Every book I have ever read and every person I have asked, says bread yeast
> makes yucky beer but I have never heard it from anyone who has ever actually
> tried it.
I tried it for soda pop once. It carbonates just fine, but gave the pop
a "yeasty" flavor and didn't compact well at the bottom of the bottle.
It was impossible to pour off a clean glass of pop without lots of yeast
sediment in the glass.
Ted Manahan
tedm@hp-pcd.cv.hp.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 91 09:46 CDT
From: arf@ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: boil
To: Homebrew Digest
Fm: Jack Schmidling
TO BOIL OR NOT TO BOIL
The following excerpt is from "BREW IT YOURSELF" by Leigh P Beadle. I would
be interested in comments. His position is very clear and stimulates my
conspiracy hot button.
On p.42 he is discussing the brewing process with canned extract.....
"You simply pour the malt extract into you container and disolve them in
water.
There is one very important point I should make concerning the mixing of the
malt, which I will again emphasize in the section on porcedures. Do NOT
bring the water to a boil. ...... stuff on enzymes.... If you allow the
water temperature to approach the boiling point, you will upset this sugar
conversion and cause it to refix at a stage that will not allow the yeast to
convert all the malt sugar to alcohol and carbon dioxide. The temperature
of the mixing water must not exceed 153 degs F. Every other book on
home-brewing has incorrectly given instructions to boil the malt in the water
to disolve it. This will only guarantee that some of the malt sugar will not
be converted. This single bit of misinformation from those who should know
better has caused many beginners to become unnecessarily discouraged in their
attempts at brewing."
.........
Wow!
jack
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 91 10:53:12 CDT
From: "Anton E. Skaugset" <skaugset@aries.scs.uiuc.edu>
Subject: Boulder Stout
Greetings.
Has anyone out there tried Boulder Stout (Boulder Brewing Company, Boulder
Colo.)?
I got a six-pack this last week, and notwithstanding M. Jackson's rating of
three stars, I think it's almost undrinkable.
It's got a very light stout flavor, and it's quite sweet, but what really
turns me off is an overwhelming flavor of chicory. The label says they only
use water, malted barley, hops, and yeast. But the flavor of chicory is
very intense. It's like drinking iced coffee.
Do they actually use chicory in their beer? If not, does anyone know what
kind of malt gives this flavor? And what are other beer-drinkers opinions
of the beer?
Thanks.
Anton E. Skaugset "You have to kill a pessimist.
skaugset@aries.scs.uiuc.edu Optimists usually take care of themselves."
University of Illinois
Reed '87
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 91 09:43:14 -0700
From: les@mips.com (Les Rehklau)
Subject: please add me to mailing list
Please add me to your mail list.
thanks
les (les@mips.com)
------------------------------
Date: 29 Jul 91 12:53:00 EDT
From: "DRCV06::GRAHAM" <graham%drcv06.decnet@drcvax.af.mil>
Subject: A yeast cluturing experiment.
I sure hope the experiment goes better than the spelling on the "subject"
line.
It seems to me that slants are nice, but more trouble than necessary for
saving yeast to reuse. I'm going to try this little, semi-scientific
experiment.
1. Make a regular batch of beer.
2. Save several ounces of the yeast slurry.
3. Divide the slurry among two dozen sterile culture tubes.
4. Top off each tube with the beer just made.
5. Cap and store in refrigerator.
6. Each month for two years, make a starter from a tube.
If the yeast is viable, I should have an active starter within a day or so.
I have been told that yeast stored under beer will remain viable for over
a year. I'll let y'all know as the experiment progresses.
If this works, it will sure make storing a large variety of yeast an easy
task.
Dan Graham
. . .
Occam's Razor for homebrewers: When there is more than one possible
answer, pick the one that tastes better!
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 91 13:06:57 -0400
From: strasser@raj2.tn.cornell.edu (Tom Strasser)
Subject: ppm vs. mg/L
With the conflicting information yesterday I thought I would add my
two cents worth on the conversion issue. ppm are NOT equal to mg/L
unless the attomic species being measured has the same atomic weight
as that of the liquid (e.g. water, e.g. 18 g/mol). Two cheers for
Rich who realized this in his entry. To be a little more specific,
as Rich didn't deal with units, the equation to convert mg/L of atom
x to ppm is:
ppm= [mg/L]*m*(Aw/Ax)
Where: Aw=atomic weight of water, 18 g/mol
Ax=atomic weight of x, the mg/L species reported initially
m=the same m as listed in Rich's formula, a factor to
correct the concentration of species x if more than one atom of interest
is present in the molecule report in [mg/L] (e.g if mg/L of CaCl2 is
reported, then Ax=40+2*35.5=111, and m=1 if you calculate Ca ppm, while
m=2 if you calculate Cl ppm).
For those of you who doubt this, a simple way to think of it is ppm
measures the number of atoms in the water, while mg/L measures the
weight of the atoms in the water. The number relating the weight to the
number of atoms is the atomic weight of the species involved, and this
is why the atomic weight must be a part of formula relating these two
measures.
I'd be happy to give a more thorough analysis to people interested, but
I doubt this would be of interest to the digest subscribers in general.
Tom Strasser......strasser@raj5.tn.cornell.edu......Long live the IBU's!
P.S.- Does this sound right to you Darryl??? or should I say Steve???
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 91 13:33:02 -0400
From: strasser@raj2.tn.cornell.edu (Tom Strasser)
Subject: Malt Aromatics
In HBD 660 srussell@snoopy (Darryl?) asks of ways to impart malt aroma
to a beer. I have watched with interest, as no replys were forthcoming.
I have done an informal poll among Ithaca brewers who I know have more
malt aroma in their beer, and it seems they may cover during the boil
(many because they have to).
I was wondering if those of you in digest land think, as I do,
that this is a plausible way to increase malt aroma in beer. We all
know that during the boil there are a tremendous amount of volatiles
driven off which we can smell anywhere near the boiler. If this is the
case, then perhaps if you cover during the boil you will prevent the
malt volatiles from being driven off, leaving them to be enjoyed by the
drinkers of our homebrew. So what do you think???
Tom Strasser.....strasser@raj5.tn.cornell.edu
P.S.- Did anyone see Steve Russell and Darryl Richman at the convention
at the same time???
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 91 09:41:49 PDT
From: dplatt@ntg.com (Dave Platt)
Subject: Darryl Richman a nome de plume?
In #689, Darryl Richman (darryl@ism.isc.com) writes:
> P.S. To all the adoring fans, yes... it's true: this is just a facade
> account and nome d'plume for Steve Russell (srussell@snoopy.msc.cornell.edu),
> one of those lovable rascals at Cornell, where there is nothing better to
> do than drink. IBU, UBMe, We All B Each Other.
So... you mean to tell me, after all these years, that Steve Russell
is the _other_ other Darr{e|y}l?
I have trouble believing this, Deesar... you don't _look_ Cornellish!
;-}
-dave-
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 91 14:45:40 EDT
From: srussell@snoopy.msc.cornell.edu (Stephen Russell)
Subject: Brewery Tour wrap-up, future Mid-Atlantic conference
Summer is here and the time is right for drinking beers in New Jersey, of all
places. Some sixty homebrewers and friends converged upon the Clement Brewing
Company in Vernon Valley this past weekend. The brewery, with its open,
wooden cask fermenters, and wooden cask lagering tanks was a bit of an ana-
chronism, but great to see nonetheless. Clement Pilsener and Blonde Double
Bock flowed freely, as did homebrew from 10 clubs in 4 states (NY, NJ, PA,
CT). Hopefully, we will be able to go again next year, drink more beer, dance
more polkas, drink more beer, eat more ham hocks and honey chicken, and drink
more beer. Thanks to all who came and made it such a worthwhile time.
It is hoped by many of us that at some point in the not-too-distant future
(maybe by 1993?) we can set up a Mid-Atlantic Regional Homebrew Conference and
Competition. The first stage is to get homebrewers from the area together
just to get to know each other. I hope that others around our region that
hold events will publicize them (and this goes for other regions as well)
and encourage multi-club and independent participation. Hats off to those
seven clubs in Southern California who put on their first regional this past
spring; I would enjoy hearing how you all organized this and what went on.
Perhaps one of those Maltose Falcons (maybe even Darryl himself, or should
I just write myself? :-)) or Barley Bandits or someone else could e-mail info
to me.
IBU ERGO SUM,
STEVE
ps Despite rumors circulating to the contrary, I am *not* Darryl Richman, but
I do believe that a certain tall, lanky North Carolinian just might be.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 91 14:47:40 EDT
From: srussell@snoopy.msc.cornell.edu (Stephen Russell)
Subject: The Great, Unabashed, ppm vs. mg/L Debate
Ok, I couldn't resist.....
As for the ppm vs. mg/L debate (n.b. don't you all just LOVE how we can flame
on about such stupid, nitpicky things like this for days on end.....), Tom
(strasser@raj5.tn.cornell.edu) Strasser is *NOT*, generally speaking, correct
that ppm measures the NUMBER of atoms of a given species dissolved in solu-
tion. Actually, ppm is most often the WEIGHT of these atoms, although from
the sound of "parts", it seems like it SHOULD be by number. It's just a con-
venience thing...people have easier access to scales than they do to periodic
tables and calcultators, I suppose. My feeling is that ppm is anachronistic.
Let's suppose you add 5 grams (5000 mg) CaCO3 into 1 liter of water. This
gives 5000mg/L (obviously!). It also gives 5000 ppm. How? You have, by
weight, 1,000,000 mg water in 1 liter, since the density of water is 1 g/cc.
5000mg/1,000,000mg = 5000 ppm. Of course, you have .4 x 5000 = 2000 ppm Ca
and .6 x 5000 = 3000 ppm CO3. This is just illustrative: I wouldn't add
these concentrations for brewing unless I was after a *real* chalky product
(wouldn't dissolve under normal conditions, anyway, I'd bet).
But, hey, let's let Tom and John Polstra fight it out, and since the whole
thing is contingent on whether or not one defines a priori whether you have
ppm by weight or by number, both are right and both are wrong.
And now, back to your regularly scheduled program...
IBU ERGO SUM,
STEVE
Hmmmmm....will the REAL Darryl Richman PLEASE stand up?!?
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 91 15:17:09 EST
From: Steve Thornton <NETWRK@HARVARDA.HARVARD.EDU>
Subject: Re: PPM <--> g/mL
One fellow says:
>Sure! To convert from PPM to mg/l, just multiply by 1.0. To convert
>from mg/l to PPM, divide by 1.0. Or is it the other way around ... ? :-)
>
>No, seriously folks ... for all practical purposes, the two units of
>measure are the same.
And another says:
> Boy, do I feel dumb! (Well, not dumb, really, just metrically
>impaired.) As some people were nice enough to point out:
>
> a. 1 litre = 1000 grams
> b. 1 gram = 1000 milligrams
> c. from a and b we have - 1 litre = 1,000,000 mg
> d. from c - mg/L and ppm are the same
>
> Please correct me if this is wrong. If everything about making
It's wrong. 1 liter does indeed equal 1000 grams -- of pure water at 4
Centigrade. You wouldn't expect a liter of Mercury to weigh the same as
a liter of alcohol, would you? Since you're trying to discover the amount
of stuff in your water that isn't water, it seems reasonable to assume that
it will not have a density of 1.0, right? So, I'm afraid you're going to
have to go back to the calculating board and figger it out.
Now if I was really smart, I'd tell you how, but I missed that day in Chem.
Steve
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 91 15:07:51 CDT
From: Mark Sandrock <sandrock@aries.scs.uiuc.edu>
Subject: stuck (top) fermentation
Tried my first batch of homebrew in about 6 years Friday night, and seem
to have a stuck fermentation on my hands. The details are: 3kg (6.6lb)
light malt extract, plus 1lb crystal and 0.5lb toasted pale ale malt,
boiled for 1 hour with 2oz Bullion and Cascade hops, and a starter made
from Edme dry Ale Yeast. Cooled wort in sink and added to cooled preboiled
water in 5 gal glass carboy to make 4 gals of wort. Initial SG and temp not
measured, but temp estimated to be about 70F (based upon room temp). Used
blow-by method with 1"ID tubing leading to bucket of (strong) bleach solution.
Fermentation was strong through first 16 hours or so, but then slackened
until finally ceasing by 24 hour after pitching. Repitching additional
(M&F) Ale Yeast and placing carboy in 90-100F bathwater produced steady
bubbling, which ceased again overnight as water cooled to room temp (70F).
Haven't taken SG yet, but surely a high gravity ale like this (Palilia
recipe from p.155 in Papazian's book) has a long way to go still. In trying
to figure out what might have gone wrong, I come up with 2 possibilities:
(1) wort not adequately aerated. After pouring the 2.5 gals preboiled water
into the carboy, I swirled it around a bit hoping this would help. Wort was
both poured and siphened (filter kept clogging), but I have no idea if this
constitutes adequate aeration. It's pretty hard to stir wort in a carboy and
not easy to shake it up either, considering the weight. Any hints about this?
(2) It turned out that I had misread the instructions in Papaizan for making
a sterilizing solution. Instead of the one teaspoon or so he recommends for
this purpose, I was using the 2oz (per 5 gals) he recommends for a "cleaning"
solution. On top of that, I always rinsed using *cold* tap water, rather than
the warm or hot tap water recommended by Papazian. Is it possible that some
small amount of chlorine made it into the wort and caused the problem?
Any email responses will be summarized, or reply via the Digest.
Thank you.
Mark Sandrock
- --
UIUC Chemical Sciences Computer Center "There are thoughts always abroad in
505 S. Matthews Ave., Urbana, IL 61801 the air which it takes more wit to avoid
Voice: 217-244-0561/Fax: 217-244-???? than to hit upon." -O W Holmes
Internet: sandrock@aries.scs.uiuc.edu Bitnet: sandrock@uiucscs
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 91 12:23:22 PDT
From: Martin A. Lodahl <pbmoss!malodah@PacBell.COM>
Subject: A Judge's Lament
At a tasting last night, someone said something we all "know", and a
little light went on: "Homebrew can't make you sick!"
*BZZT!* Wrong! True, an infected beer is not likely to pass its
infection on to you. That would be like catching the Dutch Elm
Disease. But the more acquainted I become with infected beer, the
more I'm convinced it's not harmless.
For the last few days I've been judging the first round of the
California State Fair's homebrew contest, and there have been a
shocking number of infected beers, with unusually serious
infections. Saturday, for example, we had two "self-emptiers"
out of a flight of eight. That's a pretty scary percentage!
Another beer caused all the judges in the panel to develop violent
(though brief) headaches within seconds of tasting it. I've
developed even less pleasant physical complications after my last
two contests, and I'm beginning to suspect it isn't just a
coincidence. Have other judges experienced anything like this?
I've noticed that some with much more experience than I have simply
refuse to taste anything that smells especially bad, and I think I'm
beginning to see the wisdom in this.
The advantage to this attack of the Creeping Green Horribles is that
it helps convince me that I'm not just another virtual homebrewer,
dreamed up by Kinney Baughman and Darryl Richman (who?) ...
= Martin A. Lodahl Pacific*Bell Systems Analyst =
= malodah@pbmoss.Pacbell.COM Sacramento, CA 916.972.4821 =
= If it's good for ancient Druids, runnin' nekkid through the wuids, =
= Drinkin' strange fermented fluids, it's good enough for me! 8-) =
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 91 12:58:13 PDT
From: Martin A. Lodahl <pbmoss!malodah@PacBell.COM>
Subject: Water, Conical Fermentor, Brewpub Costs
First, hats off to Tom Bower for his pointer to Sears as a source
for a reasonably-priced (like, free) water analysis, and hats off to
Sears for offering it. The cost of buying a filter setup from them
is less than the prices I'd been quoted for an analysis. I'll send
my sample off right away ...
Was anyone else (other than Kinney Baughman) as surprised as I that
no one mentioned the Brewcap in answer to John Cotterill's question
concerning a conical fermentor? Functionally, I would think that
would fill the bill nicely, but I haven't tried one yet.
And another word on the discussion of the cost of starting up a
brewpub or microbrewery: if you're seriously considering such a
move, I urge you to attend a session of Dr. Michael Lewis' course,
"Brewpubs and Microbreweries: Brewing & Business", offered a couple
of times a year through the U. C. Davis Extension at a cost of about
$275. Yeah, that seems like a lot, but it's cheap compared to the
risk you'll be taking in starting such an enterprise. Dr. Lewis was
deeply involved in the Back Alley Brewery debacle, as well as having
served as a consultant to many successful micros & brewpubs, and
offers unique insight into what you can expect to meet. You can get
an advance taste of reality the next time your brother-in-law Harry
says you should go pro, by asking how much he's willing to invest,
without guarantee, in your brewpub ...
= Martin A. Lodahl Pacific*Bell Systems Analyst =
= malodah@pbmoss.Pacbell.COM Sacramento, CA 916.972.4821 =
= If it's good for ancient Druids, runnin' nekkid through the wuids, =
= Drinkin' strange fermented fluids, it's good enough for me! 8-) =
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 91 14:25 CDT
From: korz@ihlpl.att.com
Subject: Re: YEAST
Jack Schmidling writes:
>Every book I have ever read and every person I have asked, says bread yeast
>makes yucky beer but I have never heard it from anyone who has ever actually
>tried it.
Someone on the digest (a long time ago - maybe digest #50 or #100) wrote
of a comparison test that they did using a couple of dry beer yeasts and
bread yeast and the beer from the bread yeast (to them) tasted the best.
But that was a long, long time ago in a land far, far away and I've
probably killed most of the brain cells that held that info.
>In light of the fact that all beer and ale yeast are the same species as
>bread yeast, I find it hard to believe that any residual taste could be
>significantly different.
Different strains of yeast produce beer with significantly different flavors.
I brewed two batches of beer, back-to-back using all the same ingredients
and technique except for the yeast. One was made with Muntona dry yeast
(from a Munton and Fison kit) and the other with Wyeast London Ale. Both
tasted quite good, but the Muntona batch had quite a strong clove taste.
The clove taste faded to where it was tolerable after about two months,
but never quite went away.
>I am even having a hard time believing there is a difference between top and
>bottom fermenting yeasts. They look and act pretty much the same, as far as
>I can tell.
I have only brewed ales (because I LOVE ales and like lagers) but have
read quite a bit on the subject. Besides *actually* flocculating to the
top or bottom, the main difference (or at least the main difference that
is important from a mechanical perspective) is that lager yeasts are
tolerant of colder fermentation temperatures whereas ale yeasts either
go dormant or die at colder temps. Just to make the picture complete,
at colder fermentation temperatures, yeast produce less esters and other
by-products, hence lagers don't have the fruity flavors that ales do.
Al.
korz@ihlpl.att.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1991 11:23 EST
From: David Taylor <DAVID@phillip.edu.au>
Subject: Controlling fermenter temperature
Gooday, I am brewing through winter here while most HBD readers are enjoying
warm beer drinking weather! I am about to brew some batches with ale yeast and
need to control the fermenter temperature. To date I've used a flat, flexible
waterbed heater (300W) wrapped around a plastic fermenter with the sensor poked
between the heater and fermenter. I'm not really sure what temperature the brew
is sitting at, (the plastic is a poor conductor) and can't use the heater on a
glass carboy.
I'm thinking of building a cabinet large enough for three fermenters, heating it
with light bulbs, stirring the air with a computer cooling fan and controlling
the temp. with the water bed thermostat.
Does anyone have any comments on using heated-air cabinets as opposed to water
baths, or any other clever ideas?
Thanks all... David
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1991 21:59 EST
From: BAUGHMANKR@CONRAD.APPSTATE.EDU
Subject: For Sale: Yeast Bite Ointment
OK. There's nothing like talking about what you don't know what
you're talking about to send you to the reference books.
Quoting from _Malting and Brewing Science_, page 539. (I hope
you're ready for this. Parenthetical comments come directly from
Webster's and are for the benefit of those who are as ignorant of
biochemistry as I am. OK, Cornell. Quit laughing!!! Some of us
went to a liberal arts college. So there!)
"Yeast cells in stationary phase of growth often contain a single
large vacuole. Within this organelle there are usually several dense
'granules' (volutin granules) of polyphosphate. During exponential
growth (this is primary fermentation, I assume) there may be one or
several vacuoles in the cell and they often lack granular inclusions
(that's the polyphosphate stuff, I think), possibly indicating the
mobilization of a phosphate reserve during active growth. Vacuoles
are bounded by a single membrane and contain hydrolytic enzymes
(these guys react with water producing a weak acid OR base)
whose function is to recycle ('turn-over') the macromolecular
components of the cell e.g. protein, nucleic acids. The vacuolar
membrane isolates these lytic enzymes (that is, the hydroLYTIC
enzymes whose action is destructive) from the cytoplasm. It is of
interest that these enzymes have no substantial carbohydrate moiety
(funny what those chemists find interesting, ain't it?), in contrast to
extracellular enzymes of yeast. Disintegration of the membrane, which
is encouraged by high temperature, alkaline pH, the absence of
nutrients and certain organic solvents, results in the autolysis of the
cell. Leaving yeast for long periods in contact with beer may also
induce autolysis and the products released IMPART A BITTER TASTE
(YEAST-BITE) TO THE BEVERAGE." (emphasis mine)
On page 637, during a discussion of how to make yeast concentrates:
"The autolytic procedure involves the disintegration of the vacuole
and the release of lytic enzymes."
And on page 819: "Yeast should not be allowed to autolyse in contact
with beer as the fatty acids liberated will destroy the foam
stability."
Now. Here's where I need help from you chemistry types. I read the
above as saying: As a result of high temperature, alkaline pH, the
absence of nutrients and certain organic solvents, or just plain old
age, a yeast cell will autolyse. Autolysis is the distintegration
of the vacuolar membrane within which we have these granules of
polyphosphate (sounds bitter to me) and hydrolytic enzymes (I guess
these could be bitter, too). Once the membrane distintegrates,
these polyphosphates and lytic enzymes are released (along with some
fatty acids) producing a bitter taste in the beer, commonly known as
"yeast bite".
Whew!! That's the best I could come up with. No matter what the
particulars are, it sounds like "yeast bite" is a product of
autolysis.
I stand corrected.
Yeast does bite.
Ouch! Stop that!!
Kinney Baughman | Yeast bites are my business and
| I can't find the salve.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 91 21:11:11 CDT
From: jack@wubios.wustl.edu (Jack Baty)
Subject: Rye Malt
Some time ago the subject of malted rye came up the the digest. The Summer
1991 issue of _Zymurgy_ contains an ad from a supplier. The Malt Shop ad
says they've had a ton produced for them. The important information (page
69) is:
$1.09 / lb or $43.60 / 50 lb
The Malt Shop
N 3211 Hwy S, Cascade WI 53011
1-800-235-0026
- --
Jack Baty
Division of Biostatistics Washington University Medical School St. Louis
jack@wubios.WUstl.edu
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 91 20:30:44 PDT
From: 6600hubb%ucsbuxa@hub.ucsb.edu (Richard Hubbell)
Subject: bush beer
I have heard of a beer from the Cook Islands called bush beer
it's made from oranges. Has anyone made this or tasted this or....
Just curious it sounds real intersting.
RH
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #690, 07/30/91
*************************************
-------
