Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #0784
This file received at Mthvax.CS.Miami.EDU 91/12/18 03:09:24
HOMEBREW Digest #784 Wed 18 December 1991
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator
Contents:
Stainless Pots - Cheap (solo)
Re-using Yeast (Marty Rowe)
Re-using Yeast (Marty Rowe)
Pilsen Mash (Jeff Frane)
unsubcribe (going away) (DWEILL)
Counterflow chiller size (Tom Dimock)
Re: Liquid Starters (John DeCarlo)
Re: bottle fillers (John DeCarlo)
Cancel Me!!! (rdm5g)
Sam Adams Breweries (JPJ)
Truncated HBD #783 (S94TAYLO)
Yeast herds, Berghoff Bock, Rambling (Norm Pyle)
Clarification on rolling grain mill instructions (adietz)
grain mills (Scott Bickham)
Chillers & Wet Mills (BAUGHMANKR)
RE: Best size for counterflow chiller (Bill Dyer)
Trippel Corsendonk (David Pike)
Re: On Mashing & The Menage (jonm)
Re- Subject- Iodophor Anyon ("Rad Equipment")
Re: Subject: Iodophor Anyone? Time:9:18 AM Date:12/17/91
Phil's Philler -- review (Arthur Delano)
Re: John A. Palkovic's de-arf program (larryba)
Followup to my Erroneous Seattle Post (Katy T. Kislitzin)
Be gyled (C.R. Saikley)
smelly wort ("KATMAN.WNETS385")
Grain Crushing ("Justin A. Aborn")
Re: Bottle Fillers (korz)
Boston Lager (C.R. Saikley)
The Video Review! (RUBICON READY)
Re: distilled water and beer (korz)
Re: water quality (korz)
klages and ale (florianb)
Yeast bank (Ted Manahan)
Re: Homebrew Digest #783 (December 17, 1991) (John Pierce)
re: Rolling Grain Mill, under $40
Send submissions to homebrew@hpfcmi.fc.hp.com
Send requests to homebrew-request@hpfcmi.fc.hp.com
[Please do not send me requests for back issues!]
Archives are available from netlib@mthvax.cs.miami.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 91 16:53:34 EST
From: solo@thor.mlb.semi.harris.com (solo)
Subject: Stainless Pots - Cheap
I just received a sale flyer from Superior Products. They are a discount foodservice equipment supplier, and they have, among other things, Vollrath stainless steel 'stock pots' on sale (catalog says sale ends Feb 7, 1992).
>From the catalog:
Stainless Steel Stock Pots by Vollrath
Made of 18.8 _stainless_ for greater resistance to pitting and corrosion, plus heat conductive base to save energy. Flat covers allow stacking to save space. *In Stock.
$List $SPECIAL
7-L-100 7-1/2 qt. 4 lbs 77.00 43.00
7-L-103 11-1/2 qt. 6 lbs 83.00 46.00
7-L-105 16 qt. 6 lbs 108.00 59.00
7-L-107 20 qt. 8-1/2 lbs 121.00 65.00
7-L-129 24 qt. 9 lbs 130.00 70.00
7-L-130 38-1/2 qt. 13 lbs 172.00 90.00
7-L-492 60 qt. 15 lbs 255.00 130.00
Covers:
7-L-123 For 7-1/2 qt. 15.00 9.90
7-L-125 For 11-1/2 qt. 19.00 12.40
7-L-127 For 16,20,24 qt. 29.00 18.40
7-L-136 For 38-1/2 qt. 38.00 22.00
7-L-494 For 60 qt. 39.00 23.00
They also have other goodies like restaurant-quality beer glasses and mugs, and lots of draft beer equipment and plumbing. There is a 'stainless steel beer chiller' which is used to chill beer inline on its way to the draft arm which could be used as a wort chiller. They also have CO2 tanks and regulators, etc.
Superior Products can be reached at (800)328-9800; their catalog is free.
I am in no way affiliated with Superior Products, I am just a happy customer who thought he'd pass some info along. Bottoms up!
s.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 91 16:54:35 EST
From: mar@dvinci.mitre.org (Marty Rowe)
Subject: Re-using Yeast
I need some expert opinion on re-using yeast. Approximately a month
ago, I saved from my primary frementer two scoops of the dregs.
The yeast for this batch was Wyeast American Ale. I put the dregs
into a sanitized plastic container. I covered the dregs with a few
inches of fremented homebrew and stored it in the fridge.
The question is, will I be able to use this yeast for my next batch?
Should I use a low gravity starter to get the yeast active or can I
simply dump the contents into the chilled wort. Would it be
worthwhile to seperate the trub from the yeast sediment? I recall
reading a post in the HBD about this, but I was unsuccessful in
attempt to find it. Does anyone remember the subject line or the
issue number? What "things" should I look for, or smell, in able to
determine if it is infected. Or has it been stored too long to reuse?
BTW, the yeast was used for an IPA and is planned to be pitched into a
brown ale. Thanks in advance for your help.
- --
Martin A. Rowe
MITRE Corporation
Bedford, MA
mar@dvinci.mitre.org
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 91 17:15:22 EST
From: mar@dvinci.mitre.org (Marty Rowe)
Subject: Re-using Yeast
I need some expert opinion on re-using yeast. Approximately a month
ago, I saved from my primary frementer two scoops of the dregs.
The yeast for this batch was Wyeast American Ale. I put the dregs
into a sanitized plastic container. I covered the dregs with a few
inches of fremented homebrew and stored it in the fridge.
The question is, will I be able to use this yeast for my next batch?
Should I use a low gravity starter to get the yeast active or can I
simply dump the contents into the chilled wort. Would it be
worthwhile to seperate the trub from the yeast sediment? I recall
reading a post in the HBD about this, but I was unsuccessful in
attempt to find it. Does anyone remember the subject line or the
issue number? What "things" should I look for, or smell, in able to
determine if it is infected. Or has it been stored too long to reuse?
BTW, the yeast was used for an IPA and is planned to be pitched into a
brown ale. Thanks in advance for your help.
- --
Martin A. Rowe
MITRE Corporation
Bedford, MA
mar@dvinci.mitre.org
------------------------------
Date: 16 Dec 91 19:29:05 EST
From: Jeff Frane <70670.2067@compuserve.com>
Subject: Pilsen Mash
On Decoction Mashing:
The following is from H. Lloyd Hind's Brewing Science & Practice, Volume II,
written in the 1930s, during a chapter on decoction mashing: "It is then heated
to the boiling point, again at the rate of about 1-1/2^F a minute, and boiled
for times which may vary from 1/4 hour for pale beers to 3/4 hour for dark, when
it is pumped back to the mash tun."
He specifically spells out the variant employed at Pilsen:
"Only two vessels are used, a combined mash and lauter tun and a copper. The
mash is made at the rate of 6 to 6.3 hectos per 100 kg. . . . to give a first
wort of 12.5 or about 1.050. The initial rise of temperature given for each mash
[below] is secured by pumping an appropriate proportion of the main mash from
the mash tun to the copper, where sufficient boiling liquor or boiling mash, as
the case may be, had been retained to give the required increase. The starred
figures represent temperatures in the mash tun. The others are temperatures in
the copper.
Hydration cold
95^* By hot liquor pumped from mash copper
1st mash 126.5 By hot liquor retained in mash copper
144.5 Raise in 13 minutes
167 Raise in 20 minutes, sacc. 8 mins.
boil Raise in 12 minutes. Boil 30 mins.
110.5* Return to main mash.
2nd mash 144.5 By hot wort retained in mash copper
167 Raise in 20 min. sacch. rest
boil Raise rapidly. Boil 15 minutes
144.5* Return to main mash
3rd mash 190.5 By hot wort retained in mash copper
boil Raise in 12 minutes. Boil 10 min.
162.5 Return to main mash.
Confusing, ain't it?
To Peter Gaspar: Gale's is available here in Oregon, for a good bit of money. It
may be in a pint bottle; think it's with standard crown cap. Hmm, on reflection
the bottle might be embossed. I will check if you want. I think it definitely
needs time in the bottle. Your 12 year old may be optimum. One I tasted was
definitely too young. Ooog.
To George Fix: Thanks for answering the call on sour mashes. I know about the
resilience of coliforms from working in a bacteriology lab in a food processing
plant. Some of the spinach we were testing had gone through the dryers (very,
very hot dryers) in clumps and the levels inside the clumps were astronomical.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1991 02:07 EST
From: DWEILL%MIDD.BITNET@mitvma.mit.edu
Subject: unsubcribe (going away)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 91 08:23:04 EST
From: Tom Dimock <RGG@CORNELLC.cit.cornell.edu>
Subject: Counterflow chiller size
Brian Capouch asks about sizes for the tubing in counterflow chillers...
Everyone I know who has used 1/4" tubing has regretted it. They are just
too slow. 3/8" is better. Now if you're into brewing fast, my
counterflow chiller is made using 25' of 1/2" tubing, and it will take
5 gallons of boiling wort down to 80 F in under five minutes. My boiler
drains from the bottom - it might be difficult to start 1/2" as a
siphon. For general guidelines, I'd say about 16-18' of 3/8". Other
opinions?
------------------------------
Date: Tuesday, 17 Dec 1991 08:34:34 EST
From: m14051@mwvm.mitre.org (John DeCarlo)
Subject: Re: Liquid Starters
>From: "John Cotterill" <johnc@hprpcd.rose.hp.com>
>My process is very inexact, I just add, "oh, about this much
>malt to about this much water." My only real concern is not to
>put so much malt in the the final alcohol content in the starter
>kills the yeast. What do other people do? Do you boil hops
>into the starter mixture? Are there any rules of thumb for how
>much malt to use?
Lots of good questions <grin>.
The Wyeast liquid yeast packets recommend a starter of 1.020 SG
wort. No mention is made of hops, though. I don't know of any
good reason to put hops in your starter, but there might be some.
If you use dry malt extract, such that 1 lb. in 1 gallon gives
1.040 SG, then a 1 pint starter would use:
1 lb. 1
-------------------- = ---- lb. = 1 oz.
8 pints/gal * 2 (reducing the 1.040 to 1.020) 16
Internet: jdecarlo@mitre.org
(or John.DeCarlo@f131.n109.z1.fidonet.org)
Fidonet: 1:109/131
------------------------------
Date: Tuesday, 17 Dec 1991 08:35:36 EST
From: m14051@mwvm.mitre.org (John DeCarlo)
Subject: Re: bottle fillers
>From: psrc@sewer.att.com (Paul S R Chisholm)
>Siphoning was a thousand percent easier with the bottle filler!
>To stop siphoning, all I needed to do was lift the "wand". Very
>simple, very straightforward to control exactly how much beer
>gets in the bottle.
Well, I stopped using mine because there is no way to control
exactly how much beer gets in the bottle. The volume taken up by
the filler itself leaves *way too much* headspace in the bottle.
So I have to top off each bottle separately from a small pitcher.
Way too much work.
Now if there was a bottle filler with a manual switch controlled
from the top, so I could fill the bottle as much as I wanted, it
would have the advantages of both systems.
Internet: jdecarlo@mitre.org
(or John.DeCarlo@f131.n109.z1.fidonet.org)
Fidonet: 1:109/131
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 91 09:29:25 EST
From: rdm5g@hemlock.cs.Virginia.EDU
Subject: Cancel Me!!!
Please cancel my subscription to the homebrew digest. I am losing
my net access at this sight. I will most likely rejoin the news letter
when I get net access again.
thanks
Rod
------------------------------
Date: 17 Dec 91 11:23:39 EST
From: JPJ@B30.Prime.COM
Subject: Sam Adams Breweries
For anyone's information,
The Boston Beer Co. produces Stock Ale in the Jamaica Plain, MA brewery,
as well as all the specialty beers (Lambic, Wheat, etc). The remainder
are brewed in Pittsburgh, New York (to a lesser extent) and, of course,
Germany. They will brew Lager in the JP Brewery when the need arises,
and, as I have been told, the need does arise often.
+----------------------------------------------+
| Jim Jedrey (JPJ@B30.PRIME.COM) |
| Portsmouth, NH +---------------------+
| Bud is Mud, Coors is Poor, and Schlitz is... well, you know... |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 91 10:22 EST
From: <S94TAYLO%USUHSB.bitnet@VTVM2.CC.VT.EDU>
Subject: Truncated HBD #783
Can someone forward me a copy of 783. Mine got truncated after the first
article. It will be interesting to see how many copies I actually get...
Thanks a bunch!
Al Taylor
Uniformed Services University
School of Medicine
Bethesda, Maryland
s94taylor@usuhsb.bitnet
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 91 08:28:26 MST
From: pyle@intellistor.com (Norm Pyle)
Subject: Yeast herds, Berghoff Bock, Rambling
Frank Tutzauer's yeast culturing discussion got me thinking about this
concept of only using one or two "generations" of a particular strain to
avoid promulgating a bad characteristic or two. Do this make sense? You
actually have dozens, hundreds, thousands, of generations of the yeast in a
single batch, no? I mean you start off with a small number of yeast cells
and by the time your beer is at full-krausen, you've got lots and lots,
right? I'm not disputing the claim that one shouldn't keep reusing a batch
of yeast, I'm just curious about this. Is a generation considered to be a
"herd" (MOO! :-) of yeast that hasn't gone dormant, therefore each time a
"herd" of yeast runs out of food, that is considered to be a "generation"?
Last night I picked up a six-pack of an American bock brewed by Berghoff.
They claim to brew in the old-world German style, blah, blah, blah. The beer
was good, not great. The only other beer I have to compare in that range is
Paulaner Salvator, a double bock. The Salvator is clearly more alcoholic, as
I would expect, but it is also much smoother tasting. The Berghoff has a
slightly unpleasant edge to it that I can't really put my finger on, except
to say that I've tasted other beers with it. I don't think it is skunky,
although the beer is packaged in green bottles. Have others tried this brew?
What was your impression? I'm looking for a detailed description because I'm
trying to hone my beer evaluation skills a bit, and this is a bit of a
stumper for me.
Martin Lodahl's brewing woes amused me, but I can relate. Believe me, I can
relate. Kinney Baughman's Jim Koch gripes amused me, but I like the beer. I
hear you Kinney, but I let it roll off like water on a duck's back, 'cause I
know its just marketing (something close to lawyering).
I'd also be willing to pick up the digest on rec.crafts.brewing if that's
what it takes. Good plan, Fritz.
Happy Holidays!!!
Norm
------------------------------
Date: 17 Dec 1991 10:49 EST
From: afd@hera.cc.bellcore.com (adietz)
Subject: Clarification on rolling grain mill instructions
In yesterdays posting regarding a pasta maker into grain mill, I wrote:
>Put in some grain and try out your new rolling mill. Iterate on the grinding
>as necessary.
This should say: "Test the mill with some grain. Use a gap appropriate for
your grain. If the grain fails to be forced between the rollers, go back
and resurface the rollers until you have a rougher texture. Continue this
process as necessary."
You will have good cracking with only one pass (not iteratively as the first
posting seemed to say). Accept no substitutes.
Cheers,
-A Dietz
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 91 11:10:44 -0500
From: bickham@msc2.msc.cornell.edu (Scott Bickham)
Subject: grain mills
While shopping for cookware gifts yesterday, I found a mill that grinds using
three grooved rollers with an adjustable spacing. The rollers are about 4"
in length and located at the vertices of an inverted triangle. The retail
price ( which this establishment sells at ) was around $80. A bit pricey
compared to a Corona, but much better than $200 for a homemade one. I think
the manufacturer is Mikasa or something that sounds similar.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1991 11:48 EDT
From: BAUGHMANKR@CONRAD.APPSTATE.EDU
Subject: Chillers & Wet Mills
Brian asks:
>So I need to make a "quick-and-dirty' counterflow chiller. My question
>is this: would 1/4" or 3/8" tubing make the better mousetrap? Intuition
>tells me that the 1/4" would allow a much greater wort-to-coolant
>surface area, since there'd be more wort (relatively) on the outsides of
>the tubing than in the center. That would be at the expense of
>throughput, but I'd rather have cool wort exiting slowly than hot wort
>exiting fast.
All the above intuitions are correct. In fact I shared them when I
designed the first version of the counter-flow chiller that I sell. I
chose 5/16" OD tubing for that model. 95% of the time it works fine.
It's a little slower on the siphon (@ 30 minutes) but very efficient.
However, it's too efficient for big, high gravity brews and the cold-
break is so pronounced that some people complained that it clogged the
siphon. Two years ago I switched to using 3/8" tubing. With a strong
water flow it works fine. From my kitchen sink, I found that on the
average the water exiting the chiller was about 10 degrees warmer than
the smaller pipe. If the wort coming out is too warm there are two
things you can do. (1) Use a pinch clamp on the end of the exit hose
to slow down the flow of wort. (2) Try to connect to an outside
faucet. The outside faucet at my house generates about three times the
flow of water than does my kitchen sink. No one has yet to complain
of a clogged chiller with the larger tubing, BTW.
The other thing to remember is to keep the water housing of the
chiller as small as possible. Heat exchangers are more efficient the
more the coolant turns over.
Tom Dimock observes:
>On roller mills - the reference in HBD 780 to building a roller
>mill using the rollers from a grocery store checkout came from a
>small book on building your own brewery.
That's Bill Owens' book, _How to Build a Small Brewery_. It's still
being published. Overall a good book. And at $5.00 or so, a good
value for the info.
>In doing some serious "wetware simulations" (i.e. kicking back with
>a homebrew and thinking about it), I came up with several unknowns.
Your allusion to 'wetware' caused me to think about the possibility of
using the pasta machine as a wet-mill roller. Wet-mills are touted as
the best possible solution to the mill problem. They crush the
grains while generating absolutely no powder. Conjecture tells me
that the wet grains would be 'tackier' and would pass through the
smoother rollers of the pasta machine. That could save roughing up
the rollers so that the machine could still serve that function. It's
probably easier on the machine anyway.
OK you kitchen tinkerers. Get to it and try it out. I don't have a
pasta maker (yet). After some homemade lasagna at a friends house a
month ago using her own pasta, I admit to thoughts of purchasing one.
Now if it can double as a wet-mill roller.......
Kinney Baughman | Beer is my business and
baughmankr@conrad.appstate.edu | I'm late for work.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 91 10:49:49 CST
From: dyer@marble.rtsg.mot.com (Bill Dyer)
Subject: RE: Best size for counterflow chiller
In HBD #783 Brian says:
>So I need to make a "quick-and-dirty' counterflow chiller. My question
>is this: would 1/4" or 3/8" tubing make the better mousetrap? Intuition
>tells me that the 1/4" would allow a much greater wort-to-coolant
>surface area, since there'd be more wort (relatively) on the outsides of
>the tubing than in the center. That would be at the expense of
>throughput, but I'd rather have cool wort exiting slowly than hot wort
>exiting fast.
>Is that logic good?
Well, I thought it was good logic too but I was wrong. I made a wort chiller
from 1/4" tubing immersed in ice water. It worked great as far as cooling the
wort goes, but it had several other problems, namely the throughput was way too
slow and on top of that it clogged. It took about an hour to cool the first
3 or so gallons of a 5 gallon batch. At that point the thing clogged and I had
to run some boiling water through to clean the clog and finish the cooling.
A slow throughput is one thing but over an hour is too long for me. I tried
increasing the flow by raising the bucket (I sat it on top of the fridge)
but that didn't help much. I am going to do one of two things to solve this
problem, either shorten the length of my current copper coil or go out and buy
some bigger stuff, I havn't decided yet which is better. From feeling the wort
coller as it is now, the wort seemed to be cool about half way through the tubing
so I can probably cut down the length by about 1/3 (it is about 30' now I think).
This should increase the flow by 50% if I remember correctly. Of course to solve the
clogging problem, I may keep the length and go to the 3/8 tube. Or as a third
alternative I could cut the tube I have now in half a connect a Y to it. This
should double the flow. Actually if I could remember all the fluid dynamics
and thermodynamics I learned in college I could figure out exactly how long and
how big my tube needs to be, but that is too much work so I will just guess.
Later,
Bill_____________________________________________________________________________
| you'll think I'm dead, but I sail away |Bill Dyer (708) 632-7081 |
| on a wave of mutilation | dyer@motcid.rtsg.mot.com |
| -Pixies | or uunet!motcid!dyer |
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 91 8:53:27 PST
From: davep@cirrus.com (David Pike)
Subject: Trippel Corsendonk
I have just recently received a 'trippel Cosendonk' belgian ale 'Brewed and
Bottled by Brewery du Bonq, for Brewery Consendonk, Oud-Turnout, Belgium.'
I have not consumed this ale yet, intrigued by the idea of culturing the
yeast visible in the bottom of the bottle. Does anyone know about either
of these breweries or the beer itself? Do they practice the deception of
using a different yeast to bottle with than to ferment with, like some....
Or is the yeast the original and makes a fantastic trippel??
Dave
------------------------------
Date: Tue Dec 17 09:00:47 1991
From: jonm@microsoft.com
Subject: Re: On Mashing & The Menage
> How does one brew all-grain with out interruption and still have a
> familial unit?
Mash in at 10pm (or whenever it gets quiet). Caffeine is optional.
Actually I have only tried this once, but it was a remarkable
experience ... everything quiet and still and dark, except me and
my brew, with its various sounds and smells. Recommended.
Jonathan Mark
jonm@microsoft.com
------------------------------
Date: 17 Dec 91 09:30:45 U
From: "Rad Equipment" <rad_equipment@rad-mac1.ucsf.EDU>
Subject: Re- Subject- Iodophor Anyon
Subject: Re: Subject: Iodophor Anyone? Time:9:18 AM Date:12/17/91
I believe that Byron Burch is now selling smaller bottles of Iodophor at Great
Fermentations of Santa Rosa. Seems to me I read a bit about it in his last
Beverage People News. Give him a call at 707-544-2520.
RW...
Russ Wigglesworth CI$: 72300,61
|~~| UCSF Medical Center Internet: Rad Equipment@RadMac1.ucsf.edu
|HB|\ Dept. of Radiology, Rm. C-324 Voice: 415-476-3668 / 474-8126 (H)
|__|/ San Francisco, CA 94143-0628
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 91 12:50:14 EST
From: Arthur Delano <ajd@itl.itd.umich.edu>
Subject: Phil's Philler -- review
Since there have been some questions about bottle fillers on the Digest,
I thot' I'd throw in my two cents worth.
I've always bottled with a bottling bucket, with a spigot attached (no
stopped siphonings for me!) and a length of 3/8" dia. tubing leading to the
bottles. After two batches of this setup, having to pinch the hose and
dribble beer all over the floor between bottles was getting to me, and I
wanted a filler.
The brew store had a Phil's Philler, which is a brass mechanism about the
twelve inches when collapsed, and an additional half inch when extended.
The wide end (containing, I suspect, the valve) fits inside a 3/8" tube
very snugly; no problems with slippage. The wide end is 3" long. The narrow
part has a bevelled end and the tubing is thin. When the mechanism is
fully extended, a pinhole can be seen in the narrow tube just before it
meets the wide tube.
After the bottling setup is prepared, the philler is inserted in a bottle
and pressed against the bottom (there are about 2-3" of the filler over the
height of a 12 oz. bottle; I've used it with 28 oz. bottles with no
trouble, however). The bevelled edge keeps the beer from damming up; the
beer swirls around and fills the bottle with very little bubbling. The
philler can be held at various positions between fully open (compressed) and
fully closed (extended) and regulate the flow of beer; helpful during the
end of the fill when the beer is going up the neck.
The niftiest part of the mechanism is as follows: when the fill is complete,
you simply remove the philler, and the beer remains at the level it was
while the philler was in. This is because the valve is above the fill line,
and the pinhole is an air bleed, thus the beer inside the tube inside the
bottle remains when the philler is removed; the only displacement is the
volume of the metal and not its contents. Brilliant.
Now for the downside. Despite claims that the mechanism is stickproof, I've
overfilled my share of bottles when gravity could not overcome stiction.
(a small spring would help immensely, but would probably increase the price
a great deal). An interim solution I've found is to use two hands, one
on the large tube and one on the small. This is less work than trying to
pinch off a siphon tube and aim for the next bottle, but is hard on the knees
if your bucket is on the table and your bottles are on the ground. A bit
of practice is necessary to get a consistent fill level on all your bottles,
and if the flow is stopped before the bottle is full, a surge of air will
percolate through the bottle. (I've found this to be not much, tho' it is
annoying). Lastly, this gadget retails for $9.00 or so. I wouldn't have
paid that much for it, but I would pay $4.00.
It has speeded up -- and even more importantly, made neater -- my bottling
procedure by a great deal. I'm glad I have it.
AjD ajd@itl.itd.umich.edu
ps. It was gotten for $4.00 by introducing a friend to brewing and getting a
$5 discount at Modern Brewer in Cambridge, MA. $9.00 minus $5.00 discount
equals $4.00 paid. :->
------------------------------
Date: Tue Dec 17 10:05:34 1991
From: larryba@microsoft.com
Subject: Re: John A. Palkovic's de-arf program
Jack has improved his postings, how about you? In spite of Jack's
various posting problems, he does have something useful to offer
the home brewer. Do you? Everyone would be better served by
trying to educate Jack on how to be a reasonable submitter rather
than submitting inflamatory crap like the "de-arf" program.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 91 10:52:25 -0800
From: ktk@nas.nasa.gov (Katy T. Kislitzin)
Subject: Followup to my Erroneous Seattle Post
Well, having been out of the Seattle area for many years, i should
have known better than to try and say anything about it, but I had
such good times there drinking beer that i couldn't resist ;-)
anyway, here are some corrections and additions:
Murphy's is closed for further notice.
The blue Moon is on N 45th St, on the same side of I-5 as the U of
W campus.
The Trolleyman/Red Hook Brewery is in Fremont, not Phinney Ridge.
Next time on Phinney Ridge, try the 74th St. Ale House at 74th & Greenwood.
They have numerous micros on tap and an occasional cider. It's a good
fallback if the Trolleyman is full.
The name of the homebrew supply store is:
It is Libery Malt Supply Co.
1418 Western Ave.
Seattle, Wa. 98101
(206)-622-1880
Some other places to try:
The Red Door (in Fremont, at N 34th & Fremont Ave N, just north of the
bridge) lots of micros; a good alternate to the Trolleyman
Cooper's Ale House (Lake City Way at about 80th; once again lots
of micros
Thanks go to Paul Brownlow (paul@pilchuck.data-io.com) and Rick Noah
Zucker (noah@cs.washington.edu)
- --kt
a former seattle-ite with a poor sense of geograpy and memories of
great beer ;-)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 91 10:52:38 PST
From: grumpy!cr@uunet.UU.NET (C.R. Saikley)
Subject: Be gyled
>From: hays@voodoo.physics.ucsb.edu
>I have a question regarding Kraeusening my medium to heavy bodied ales. I
>tried this on my last batch using the formula outlined in Papazian. It
>is only very slightly carbonated (but still very drinkable, of course!).
>According to Burch, I should raise the S.G. by .005-.006 which I believe
>makes Charlie's formula low by a factor of two. In any case, I need some
>help from you Kraeuseners.
>The Details: Extract/Mash recipe with I.G.=1.040 , Edme ale yeast,
>two weeks in closed plastic fermenter, racked and bottled with 1.4 quarts
>of gyle.
I've been using this method for 4-5 years now, and have found that
although CP's formula has its limitations, it's pretty good. As I
recall (if brewing books were at here at work, I'd never get anything
done!), the amount of gyle suggested is directly proportional to the
amount of green beer, and inversely proportional to the OG of the gyle.
It works out to 48oz of 1.040 gyle in 5 gallons. If the gravity goes
up to 1.080, the quantity drops to 24oz.
Now, what this formula fails to account for, is that not all 1.040
worts are created equal. The ratio of fermentables to nonfermentables
varies considerably, and thus the amount of carbonation varies also.
If one were so inclined, a formula could be developed based on both
OG (original gravity) and TG (terminal gravity), which gets around
this problem, but has some of its own. To determine the amount of gyle
to hold back for priming, you'd have to be able to predict the TG
beforehand (difficult, especially if it's a new recipe), or hold back
extra and only use what's called for after measuring the TG (read
wasted beer!). Based on all of that, I've been content to use CP's
numbers with an adjustment to account for the fact that my worts are
typically very rich in unfermentables (mash temps ~158F).
Another consideration is that beers primed with gyle generally take
longer to carbonate than those primed with sugar. Regarding Andy's
problem, it could be that all that is required is a little more time.
I've got some questions :
1. How long has the beer been in the bottle???
2. What was the final yield???
3. What proportion of the wort sugars came from the
extract vs. the mash???
4. What was the mash temp?
All of these factors will influence the CO2 level. If I had to
venture a guess, I'd suspect that time is the most likely. Perhaps
waiting another week or two will solve the problem.
Cheers,
CR
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 91 18:40 GMT
From: "KATMAN.WNETS385" <6790753%356_WEST_58TH_5TH_FL%NEW_YORK_NY%WNET_6790753@mcimail.com>
Subject: smelly wort
Date: 17-Dec-91 Time: 01:38 PM Msg: EXT02402
Hi folks,
My fiance loves the smell of making beer. I tend to do it on a weekend day
when he has to work, because he invariably comes over (just when the pot is
starting to boil over), unbraids my hair and plays with it (over the cooking
proto-beer, and I shed lots :( ) and does nuzzly things while telling me how
wonderful I am to make him beer. While this is going on, the pot boils over,
and I smack him good. When he comes home and beer has been made in his absence,
(my preferred course of action) he bounds across the room exclaiming my virtues
to the skies, and says how great it is to come home to the smell of home cooked
beer.
When I lived in Williamsburg, VA, we could smell the Anheuser-Busch folks
making beer, and after people figured out what it was they just said, "oh,
Busch is making beer. Hey, maybe we should go over to Busch (gardens) tomorrow
for the free tour. We can ride the monorail and see THE RUMBLE OF HOOFBEATS THE
RATTLE OF CHAINS again." No one ever said it smelled bad. We always associated
the smell with free beer.
Lee Katman == Thirteen/WNET == New York, NY
=Do not= use REPLY or ANSWERBACK, I can not receive mail in that fashion.
Please send all mail to
INTERNET katman.wnets385%wnet_6790753@mcimail.com
OR
MCIMAIL EMS: wnet 6790753 MBX: katman.wnets385
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 91 9:42:56 EST
From: "Justin A. Aborn" <jaborn@BBN.COM>
Subject: Grain Crushing
Has anyone used the KitchenAid grain mill? I have never seen it
and I wonder whether it cuts our mustard.
Also, the diagrams I have seen of professional roller mills have
three sets of rollers. Each successive set has a smaller gap
between the rollers.
My guess is that the three roller set design improves the
throughput of the mill more than it defines final crush quality.
Further, I guess is that if we homebrewers are willing to let
crushing take a little longer per pound, a pasta maker with
roughed up rollers could be just the ticket. Now to motorize it...
Does anybody know differently?
Justin
Brewer and Patriot
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 91 13:35 CST
From: korz@ihlpl.att.com
Subject: Re: Bottle Fillers
Paul asks:
>Do people not talk about bottle fillers because there's a problem? Or
>because they're so wonderful, no one would consider siphoning without
>one?
Bottling wands are discussed occasionally. Usually, however, not until
someone has a problem with bottling. I would not bottle without one --
they are great. On the one that I have, the gizmo at the end is orange
and contains a spring to shut off the flow. I intend to bottle (instead
of kegging) the batch currently in the primary since it is a
ginger/orange/cinnamon/nutmeg ale and not for everyday consumption. I
want to save the kegs for the everyday beers.
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 91 11:51:45 PST
From: grumpy!cr@uunet.UU.NET (C.R. Saikley)
Subject: Boston Lager
Regarding production of Sam Adams "Boston" Lager......
>From: R_GELINAS@UNHH.UNH.EDU (Russ Gelinas)
>There *is* a
>brewery in Boston, although some (most?) of the beer is contracted
>out to Pittsburg. One of the Boston brewers will probably set this
>straight.
The SA that we get on the West Coast is brewed in Portland (That's
Oregon, not Maine, silly), by the Blitz-Weinhard Brewery. When I
toured that brewery in July, the generally uninformed tourguide
claimed he knew nothing of this, which was consistent. When I
mentioned it to the two guys serving in the hospitality room, their
eyes got wide and they started whispering as if it were some well
kept secret that I had just divulged. They eventually admitted that
SA was made there, but said they had been instructed not to talk about
it. Since Jim Koch admits that SA is contract brewed, I could only
conclude that BW didn't want their loyal fans to know that they were
making "Boston" Lager.
CR
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 91 11:53:41 -0800
From: robertn@folsm3.intel.com (RUBICON READY)
Subject: The Video Review!
> Now that the dust seems to have settled on the commercial
> issue, I would like to point out that what was gained or
> lost is more than meets the eye.
>
> Sure I sold some v----- (at a bargain price) but I also gave
> enough away to make it a net loss.
>
> What is sad is that the ones I gave away were to people who
> offered to post objective reviewS of the v-----.
> Unfortunately, not a single commment has been heard from all
> the freebies I sent out and I can only conclude that the
> flames, so intimidated the "reviewers", that they are
> affraid to say boo.
BOO! Ha! I'm not afraid! BOO! BOO BOO BOO :-) :-) :-)
Ok Jackaroo! I'll tell you what I thought of "THE VIDEO". I'll even
tell everyone on the net, so hold onto your shorts, cause here we go!
While visiting a friend to whom you sent a sample, we drank some exceptional
homebrew, and watched your video. So...
The video as a whole to approach a first attempt at brewing is good. It in
fact kinda parralleled my first expierience. I think it would be helpful to
get a first time brewer off the ground. But now, syrup and sugar, yuck!
The overall flow was good, as were the cute little light signs you used to
tell times and ingredient measurements.
However, here are a few things I noticed that you might want to change.
Get rid of the fruit flies! The "By the way, those are fruit flies" sure didn't
do much to reinforce the first rule, sanitation.
I don't know about other brewers, but I stay away from wooden spoons, as is
seen in the video. A stainless steel spoon, or even plastic would be better.
Who knows what is hiding in the porous wood!
Clean your stove. It looked like somebody had cooked a splattering hambuger
before you decided to brew.
You should make your kitchen look like one of those TV cooking shows.
The only thing visible in the kitchen should be brewing stuff. Especially
inside the refridgerator. Unless maybe you want to show some beer time
munchies next to the beer...
Lose the advertisement for that Baderbrau stuff. I've never seen the stuff
before, and didn't care for the big advertising spot, even if everyone does
have thier price. A quik tour was fun, but not the big ad.
To sanitize the bottles, did I miss something? The only part I remember was
in the rootbeer part, where Marilyn poured the solution from bottle to bottle.
Isn't it better to soak those bottles to insure sanitation??? Did I miss
something when I checked the barbeque???
So, are these flames? No, they're just a few minor recomendations. Were the
flame wars justified? Yes and no. It is hard to visualize exactly what is
going on across a keyboard. I think many flames would only have beed sparks,
had the video been viewed.
Jack, I'll give you a fairly solid "B". It was good, and would prove helpful
to a new brewer. But, there are odds and ends that need tying up. Your working
on citizenship now, so we'll give you a "Acceptable" in that catagory :-)
RobertN
robertn@folsm3.intel.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 91 14:18 CST
From: korz@ihlpl.att.com
Subject: Re: distilled water and beer
Rick writes:
>I can get a glass carboy from my local water distributer for $7.
>The carboy comes filled with distilled water. Can I use this water
>for making beer? I am an extract/specialty grain brewer (ales, stouts...).
Yes. Plain and simple. Since you aren't mashing, you don't have to
worry about pH, minerals, etc. Some might say: "Hey! If you're making
a Burton Ale, don't you want to make your water have the same mineral
profile as the wells in the Trent river valley?" Well, yes and no...
it depends. It depends on your extract. If you have an extract that
was made in Burton upon Trent, I suspect that they did not remove any
of the minerals prior to making the wort that became the extract. When
they evaporated away the water, they left behind the minerals. The
minerals should still be in the extract. However, one of my favorite
extracts, the one I use for my favorite Bitter, is Munton & Fison Old Ale
Kit. But when I use a can of this extract and add 1.5 to 3 lbs of light
dried extract, plus some boiling hops and dryhops, I add 1/3 oz Burton Water
Salts from Wines Inc. to my 5 gal of relatively soft Chicago water.
Oops... I forgot to mention the Brewer's Choice British Ale yeast from
Wyeast Labs (#1028, I believe). I'm slowly approaching what I remember
of the Ales I drank on tap in England, but my memory is fading and
getting clouded by the bottled versions I get here. The bottom line is,
you can use distilled water for extract brewing, but you may want to
optionally add minerals to taste.
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 91 14:47 CST
From: korz@ihlpl.att.com
Subject: Re: water quality
John writes:
>What exactly should I ask my water dept.? Should I call or write? Is
>there a law that says they have to supply this info at no cost?
I called my water dept when I lived in Hickory Hills, IL and asked for
"the latest water analysis report." They sent me one within a few days.
It contained everything I had expected -- all the minerals, etc. When
I moved to Palos Hills, IL (the next suburb south of Hickory Hills),
I did the same, but got a different animal entirely. What they sent
me was six or so bacterial counts. Not what I had expected. I haven't
tried again, explaining that I want mineral concentrations.
Hmmm... <dialing>... Hello? ....
Well, I just got around to it. The lady at the water department wasn't
sure, so she transferred me to the Palos Hills Commissioner of Public Works!
Imagine that! As soon as I said "mineral content," he said "oh, yeah --
you want a Chicago water analysis." I asked if that will be just like
the water out of the tap in Palos and he said yes. After a few minutes
of discussion, I found out that Hickory Hills used to blend Chicago and
well water. I had noticed that some months the water would stain the
sink and on other months it would not. That explains that. So when you
talk to your Water Dept rep, ask if your water is blended and if the
ratio changes from month to month.
The Commish said I should get the analysis in a day or two.
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 91 12:58:45 PST
From: florianb@chip.cna.tek.com
Subject: klages and ale
Don McDaniel asks:
>The matrix recently posted for Redhook ales reveals that they use
>Klages as the base malt for all their products. They've got some
>fine products. This led me to wonder about switching to Klages
>for ales. Doing so would save me about $.20 per pound and more
I don't know about Redhook, but I have been using Klages 2-row
for ales for years. I always use a 30-minute protein rest, then
go up to 155 for the saccarification. I make good ale, if I may
be so forward. Of course, I can't make Redhook.
I missed the matrix you speak of. Which HBD was it in, or can
someone send me a cutout?
Thanks,
Florian
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 91 13:14:15 pst
From: Ted Manahan <tedm@hpcvcbp.cv.hp.com>
Subject: Yeast bank
Full-Name: Ted Manahan
Frank Tutzauer writes:
> So...I'm considering two options. First, slants, agar, and petri dishes, as
> detailed in several of the zymurgy articles; and, second, a yeast bank
> involving glycerin (?) and sticking the yeastie boys in the deep freeze.
I have used, and continue to use, the yeast bank. I find it pretty easy,
and the thawed yeast can be built up into a viable culture. Be warned
that the yeast seems somewhat weak upon thawing. I suspect that many
cells are killed by this process. However, once you have built up a few
of them they work just as well as the original batch.
The process that seems to work best for me involves using three stages
of starter - two tablespoons, 0.5 cup, and .75 quart. This takes four or
five days from thawing the yeast until it is ready to pitch.
I found that the original five test tubes were not enough - buy extras.
I like to keep five tubes of each yeast type.
I have a batch of lager going in my garage as I type this. The yeast is
about six months old, Bavarian Lager. I expect it to turn out well!
Ted Manahan
tedm@hp-pcd.cv.hp.com
503/750-2856
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 91 12:43:44 PST
From: pierce@chips.com (John Pierce)
Subject: Re: Homebrew Digest #783 (December 17, 1991)
Subject: re: Rolling Grain Mill, under $40
> afd@hera.cc.bellcore.com (adietz) Writes:
>
> 1. Buy a pasta maker, or sneak one out of a trendy friend's kitchen.
>
> 2. Modifying the pasta maker. No disassembly required.
Ahh and if you are the complete ex-Yuppie ("Grumpy"?) <Grown-Up...>
you might even have the "Pasta-EZE" motor drive for said pasta machine!
These sell for about $35-40 too, just like the pasta maker itself. (You
get the pasta maker for Xmas one year, use it once, put it away, get the
motor for Xmas the next year, and actually use the thing about 10-20
times til you get bored!). Seriously, tho. The motor drive works
great, and saves muchos sore shoulders if you are a wimp.
john pierce, pierce@chips.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 91 16:25 CST
From: jh317a@swuts (John Hosey)
please add me to your mailing list
thank you
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #784, 12/18/91
*************************************
-------
