Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #0782
This file received at Mthvax.CS.Miami.EDU 91/12/16 03:14:12
HOMEBREW Digest #782 Mon 16 December 1991
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator
Contents:
Hello and Achtung
Sam Adams. The REAL story. (BAUGHMANKR)
Single-step mashing of Klages (Don McDaniel)
Artichoke Liquer (C.R. Saikley)
grainmill idea? (krweiss)
Thomas Hardy's Ale (C.R. Saikley)
Re: Boiling Over (Bob Muller)
Troooooooob (C.R. Saikley)
Mash tun design (Bob Jones)
Pasturization, Malt, Priming (Jack Schmidling)
Three Cheers for Noel Damon! (Alexander R Mitchell)
Re: Transporting Homebrew (Richard Stueven)
BEWARE Guinness-in-a-Can! (Richard Stueven)
Casks, decoction, wort chilling (Conn Copas)
Re: Legal Imports (John DeCarlo)
cold break advice/dissent (joshua.grosse)
Sam Adams' sexy babes at GABF (Carl West)
Liquid Starters ("John Cotterill")
Half-coct decoct (Jay Hersh)
Grain Mills (Brian Midura)
grainmill idea? (krweiss)
Cargo-hold pressurization (BREIN)
Beer Places in Seattle (Katy T. Kislitzin)
Ancient Beer (C.R. Saikley)
lifetime of beers (gaspar)
Wort Spoilage (George Fix)
boiling (man)
Beer Hunter ("CCVAX::HAPANOWICZ")
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
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Rob Gardner (Digest Guy and Scottish Beer Imbiber)
Date: Friday, Noon, GMT
Subject: Hello and Achtung
Hello everyone. I've got a few things on my mind. First, a reminder
that requests, deletions, changes, and subscriptions (except automated
ones) will not be handled until the end of December, as I am away
until then. I'm in Scotland, and have been sampling lots of wonderful
brews in the local pubs, and will be in London soon for a few more days.
I was able to handle some requests this week (and send this message)
courtesy of HP in South Queensferry, but I expect to have no network
access between 12/14 and 12/24.
Second, perhaps more important, I received the following ominous message
from the system administrator at one of HP's main network gateways:
> According to our records, mail from rdg@hpfcmi.fc.hp.com, routed via
> hp-cv.cv.hp.com from hpfcrdg.fc.hp.com, accounted for over 400MB of the
> Internet traffic arriving on hp-cv during November. This makes hpfcrdg the
> second heaviest sender of packets to hp-cv -- right behind our *full* news
> feed.
>
> This kind of volume tends to attract management attention, etc, etc....
In other words, digest traffic is getting out of hand, and people
are noticing. I'm afraid that the time is coming where we're going to have
to figure out how to reduce the volume. The problem is *not* with the
content of the digest; The size of the digest is limited to 50k, 5 days
a week, so please do not think I am asking you to submit fewer articles,
as that would not do any good. The real problem is the number of addresses
on the list, and how delivery is optimized (not at all). So, I will be
thinking about how to distribute the load more efficiently in the next
month or so. Perhaps just having more redistribution points would help
enormously.
I just wanted to make everyone aware of this situation, and get you
thinking on how you can help. Relax and don't worry about it. I'll
keep you informed. My goal is to keep the digest operating, no matter
what constraints are imposed, and the first priority is to appease
whatever administrators or bean counters necessary without impacting
delivery of the digest.
Rob Gardner
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1991 15:37 EDT
From: BAUGHMANKR@CONRAD.APPSTATE.EDU
Subject: Sam Adams. The REAL story.
Sorry. I can't let the disinformation below pass without comment:
>According to the tour guide at the brewery, Sam Adams didn't submit
>an entry after winning three years straight in order to give other
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>(smaller/home) brewers a chance at the award. The following year
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
(Haven't seen such disingenuous prattle since Reagan claimed his
policies were responsible for the destruction of the Berlin Wall.)
>they did enter and win again, afterwards the award was phased out
>for the new GOLD/SILVER/BRONZE medal system. Not only has Sam Adams
>beer won three times in a row, but _EVERY_ time it has entered that
>catagory.
I don't want this to sound like a flame. I'm just speaking the facts.
I attended the GABF the year Sam Adams won the first award. Let me
describe the situation.
First, Koch hired a couple of dozen GORGEOUS females, ALL wearing
leotards, ALL sporting Sam Adams hats, ALL working the crowd with
pitchers of Sam Adams, ALL coming up to the predominantly male crowd
asking, "Here. Have you tried the beer with body?" Then, "How about
a free Samuel Adams hat?"
In case you haven't been to the GABF. Here's the set-up. It's in a
huge room. You could put 3 or 4 basketball courts in there. Around
the walls are the various booths, manned (personned?) by
representatives of the small breweries, pouring out 2 oz samples to
whomever stops by. The first thing to note, is that there is no way
to hit them all. If you did, you'd be staggering drunk by the end of
the night. If you drank a particular unknown breweries beer that
night it's because you happened by that table at a time when your
glass was empty. They don't run you down and pour beer down your
throat. At least 99.9% of them don't.
At the end of the night, as everyone stumbles out the door, you're
asked to write down the name of best beer you drank that night. You
get the picture by now. It's late. You have a GREAT buzz going.
You're not sure about the best beer you tasted but you sure as hell
remember the best boobs you saw that night! What was the name? Oh,
yeah. I'll just look at my hat. Never mind. They're a couple
hundred of them being worn at the moment. I'll look at the guy's
behind me. Those folks sure are nice! And the women are so damned
good looking. No doubt about it. Sam Adams is the best beer I drank
tonight.
It's plain and simple. Sam Adams keeps getting voted best beer in
America because Jim Koch is a great marketer. Not because he brews
the best beer in America.
Obviously, the brewing community was a BIT upset by a couple of years
of such shameful commercialism. Maybe he did skip a year. I don't
know. But next in old Jim's bag of tricks was to hold his national
beer distributors convention at -- guess when -- the same time as the
GABF at -- guess where -- the same place where they have the GABF.
Free tickets to all his distributors AND THEIR FAMILIES to attend the
GABF. Guess who they vote for? With 2 to 300 different beers to
choose from, you don't have to stuff the box long before you come
out the clear winner in that kind of "democratic" election.
So sure they phased out the popular vote and went to the gold, silver,
bronze format judged by a panel of experts. They phased out the
popular vote precisely because Jim wouldn't play by the rules,
unwritten but categorically understood by the rest of the brewing
community. The man has no shame.
I was indeed touched to hear that Koch says he quit entering his beer
to give the rest of the brewing world "a chance". The only chance he
gave was the opportunity to have every beer stand on its own against
the competition with no stuffing of the ballot boxes or his organized
army working the crowd to an unfair advantage. In actuality, Koch is
a pariah at that event and he "don't get no respect" from any of the
brewers. He sells breasts not brew.
I tip my hat to the man (cough! cough!). He's a good businessman.
He and Donald Trump would bed well together. But remember, he doesn't
even brew his blue ribbon beer. He CONTRACTS it. The BEST beer in
America, 'brewed' by the Boston Brewing Company of Pittsburg,
Pennsylvania. Say what??!! Isn't something missing from this
picture!! Like a brewery??
It's better than Budmiller, no doubt. It's even as good as Heineken,
St. Pauli Girl, Beck's and all the rest of the faceless-lagers-brewed-
for-America-to-American-tastes-and-don't-taste-anything-like-their-
European-counterparts that come in from overseas. Furthermore, it
isn't offensive which is the key to selling anything in the mass beer
market of America. Brew a beer that doesn't offend anyone, have a
near-naked woman drink it in front of you and you'll sell millions of
gallons of the stuff.
Anyway, that's how he did it. I'm glad he gets people trying
different beers. I'm glad he supposedly opens people's eyes to the
alternatives to Budmiller et al. Me? I throw my hat into the ring
with the honest small brewers of America. I don't buy Sam Adams
products. I have limited amounts of money. And Jim Krook has more
than his share.
Sergeant Friday. Over and out.
Kinney Baughman | Beer is my business and
baughmankr@conrad.appstate.edu | I'm late for work
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 91 13:58:21 -0700
From: dinsdale@chtm.eece.unm.edu (Don McDaniel)
Subject: Single-step mashing of Klages
Dr. John's idea of usings Klages in a single step infusion has
occurred to me as well. I have been using Klages in a two stage
infusion for lagers and imported two-row pale ale malts in a single-
step infusion for ales.
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
importantly require me to keep less malt in the garage. The
question now is: does Redhook use tradiditional single-step mashing
or do they find they need a protein rest. I suspect the former.
Maybe the person who posted the matrix or some other resident of
the Emerald City can find out for us. Certainly, if it's good enough
for Redhook, it's good enough for me.
Don McDaniel
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 91 12:57:50 PST
From: grumpy!cr@uunet.UU.NET (C.R. Saikley)
Subject: Artichoke Liquer
From: gkushmer@Jade.Tufts.EDU
> How would artichoke taste in beer?
>Anyone have any experience in this? Any perceptions?
Never tried artichoke beer, but a friend has a bottle of artichoke
liquer. The stuff is so vile that I've actually seen grown men wipe
their tongues on paper towels after tasting it!
CR
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1991 12:55:48 -0800
From: krweiss@ucdavis.edu
Subject: grainmill idea?
I just had a stray thought... Has anyone tried rigging a hopper above the
rollers on a cheap hand-cranked pasta machine to crack grain?
The rollers are steel, and adjustable from pretty far apart to really close
together. I just don't know if they'd "grab" the grains and run them
through or not.
If this works, it should provide a superior crush to a Corona at a similar
or even lower cost. I've got a pasta machine, and next time I brew (soon, I
hope, as Thanksgiving parties wiped out my inventory) I'll try cracking
some crystal with the pasta maker and see what happens.
- -------------------------------------------
Ken Weiss krweiss@ucdavis.edu
Computing Services 916/752-5554
U.C. Davis 916/752-9154 (fax)
Davis, CA 95616
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 91 13:25:05 PST
From: grumpy!cr@uunet.UU.NET (C.R. Saikley)
Subject: Thomas Hardy's Ale
There's been talk recently of how long barleywines will keep,
so I thought I'd add my two cents.
The Celebrator staff recently did a tasting of eight of the
last nine vintages of Thomas Hardy's. The importer was kind
enough to send them to us. (No Kidding. Free beer - in the
mail! It's a tough job.....[gloat,gloat]) My notes aren't
handy, but if memory serves, the 87 was the unanimous favorite.
The 86 had soured (very nasty, undrinkable) and earlier batches
were over the hill. This calls into question the brewer's
assertion that TH will improve for 25 years.
And now, at the risk of commercialism......
For a more complete account of this hedonistic event, see the
Dec/Jan issue of the Celebrator.
Please direct all flames to me personally,
CR
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 91 10:46:44 -0800
From: objy!server!bobm@Sun.COM (Bob Muller)
Subject: Re: Boiling Over
I've been following this thread with real interest, and I think I'm beginning
to see commonalities between the theories. First, my own experience.
When I first started extract brewing about 10 years ago, I had boilovers
about 1 batch out of every 3 (I won't tell you about the landlord's reaction
to the drip pan on the stove when I moved out!-). Over time, I found a
way that works and haven't had any boilovers since. I bring the water to
a boil, then heat and dissolve the malt and other ingredients in the boiling
water. Never had another boilover.
So what's the deal? I think Jack's explanation makes sense--there's
something about the rate of increase in wort temperature that reduces
boilover. I think Eric's explanation makes sense--the dissolved gases
(primarily oxygen/nitrogen?) make bubbles that foam. I think a prior
post (sorry, don't have the name) makes sense--the proteins in the wort
make a film that promotes the boilover. I think the posts about adding
water to the boil and lowering the temperature briefly at the boil all
make sense. How to reconcile all these?
Food chemists please correct me. The boilover is clearly a foaming
phenomenon, the same stuff that makes souffles soufle and gives brew a head.
A foam requires at least two things, gas and liquid. The liquid forms
a structure around the bubbles that allows the bubbles to persist in an
ever-expanding structure that stabilizes to whatever extent the liquid's
structure permits. Now, a nice protein foam like egg or malt proteins
would seem ideal to promote a nice stable foam--and it does, both for
souffless and beer. Complex carbohydrates may also be a good foaming
agent, I'm not sure. Example: the new Guiness. This uses nitrogen to
produce very small bubbles, which combine with the protein/carbs in the beer to
form the smooth, creamy, stable head. My guess is that the rate of release of
bubbles is important, the size of the bubbles is important, and the nature
of the foaming agent is important in determining the stability of the foam.
So, my theory is that (1) slowing the temperature rise to boiling in a
wort produces bubbles at a slower rate, reducing the amount of foam (this
is Jack's observation); (2) boiling the water before adding the malt
extract drives off the gases that make the smaller bubbles that form the
foam, thus reducing the malt's ability to cause foam; and (3) skimming
off the coagulating proteins will reduce the amount of foaming agent in
the wort, reducing the amount of foam; (4) dumping in cold water reduces
the rate of bubble production and disturbs the formation of the protein
film that promotes foaming, at least temporarily, but this is enough to
destabilize the foam (and this applies to lowering the temperature when
the foaming occurs, it lets the foam destabilize by reducing foam production).
--Bob Muller
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 91 13:34:43 PST
From: grumpy!cr@uunet.UU.NET (C.R. Saikley)
Subject: Troooooooob
>From: korz@ihlpl.att.com
>Recently, I received a question via email that may be of interest to
>other beginners. The question was "what is cold break?"
>What's in cold break? Well, I'm not a chemist and have not researched
>this too much, but I believe that it is mostly proteins and product of
>tannins reacting with proteins. The tannins are from the husks of the
>grains.
The other source of tannins in beer is the hops.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1991 15:03 PDT
From: Bob Jones <BJONES@NOVA.llnl.gov>
Subject: Mash tun design
###############################################
Following is another contribution from Micah Millspaw on mash tun
design. These contributions are his alone. I am merely acting as a
conduit for his ideas and opinions.
Bob Jones
###############################################
I've built IMHO a very efficient mash/lauter tun. This is the
result of many years of brewing and four earlier mash tuns. I usualy
do single temp. infusion or step infusion mashes so my equipment is
set up accordingly. This mash/lauter vessel is made from a SS
keg(15.5) and can easily mash and sparge 50# of grain. I have brewed
at least 150 gallons using it and had no stuck mashes or any large
problems at all. It is not insulated as SS is a poor thermal conductor
and the grain is a large thermal mass,I lose about 3 degrees F over
2 hours. I've built into this mash tun some interesting features which
might be of use to others who are planning on building or modifing
their mash tuns.
1) the false bottom is a piece of 10 gauge perforated SS
sheet metal with 3/32 holes in it. This is a pricey item but it is
worth the cost.
2) the tun can be gravity filled with strike water from the
bottom up. IMHO this makes for uniform heating of the grain without
stirring, also dry pockets of grain are totally eliminated.
3) Spray sparging over the grain bed Bob Jones has come up
with a flow control ( but I haven't installed it yet) that will
maintain the level of sparge water over the grain bed.
4) most importantly, a vent tube that runs from the top
(outside) of the tun to under the false bottom. I believe that this
vent prevents a set mash caused by a sort of vapor lock, where the
wort cannot flow out because no air can flow in. It has been my
experience that venting under the false bottom works very well, this
is my third mash/lauter tun to use this. However too finely crushed
grain can still cause problems that no mash tun will fix.
On the topic of boil overs, I have a hood with a two speed fan
above my kettle. Since the installation of this hood I have had no
boil over problems and have had much more vigorous boils.
Micah Millspaw
12/11/91
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 91 14:31 CST
From: arf@ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: Pasturization, Malt, Priming
To: Homebrew Digest
Fm: Jack Schmidling
EUREKA! Please note, multiple title. Thanks for all the helpful mail.
Again we prove the value of honey over vinigar.
From: Jeff Frane <70670.2067@compuserve.com>
>To Jack Schmidling: Are you under the assumption that 150 degrees of heat
will kill many microorganisms, other than yeast?
Yes, as a matter of fact it will kill MOST of them. That is why milk and
many other products are pasturized at 150.
> Remind me not to eat any of your home-canned foods.
Home canned foods are processed for long-term storage, not overnight as in
the situation we are here discussing.
Most of the concern in canned goods is with botulism spores that can even
survive an hour in boiling water. That is why pressure cookers are used.
You may rest assured that whatever gets into a 150 deg batch of wort, will
not be worth worrying about in the morning. If the big B spores get it,
boiling won't help anyway. Fortunately, the ones I have talked to, say they
don't like beer.
From: florianb@chip.cna.tek.com
Subject: grain cracking
>Goshums, geewhilikers! At $10 per can, extracts are pretty expensive.
At 80 cents a pound for grain, after about 8 brewings with all-grain
the differential pays for the mill!
At .55 per pound, it is paid for even sooner.
Try: Minnesota Malting 25 lb bag $13.75 plus UPS
I have made two batches so far and like it lots....
The contact is: Bob Jensen
Minnesota Malting
918 N 7th St
Cannon Falls, MN 55009
(507) 263 3911
From: korz@ihlpl.att.com
Subject: Priming with dry malt extract
Jack writes:
>One of the problems I have found with dry extract is that
>there is always some undisolved residue in the bottom of the
>primer making me wonder what is in the last few bottles.
<Putting dry extract in your priming bucket is not a good idea --
it is an invitiation for bacterial and wild yeast infection.
I boil it in two cups of water or wort. That is why I was surprised to find
undisolved or precipitated stuff on the bottom of the primer.
js
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 91 21:42:32 EST
From: Alexander R Mitchell <ARMITC01%ULKYVM.bitnet@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>
Subject: Three Cheers for Noel Damon!
Thank you Noel, for offering info on making a roller mill. That is part of
the HBD-help-another-brewer-out spirit that makes this a good digest. You
said no charge - can we help out with copying costs? Should we put an
extra stamp on our SAS envelope? Once again, thanks.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 91 09:14:19 PST
From: Richard.Stueven@Corp.Sun.COM (Richard Stueven)
Subject: Re: Transporting Homebrew
(This bounced thr first time. If it shows up twice, I owe you a beer.)
In HBD #779, Steven J. Boege asks:
>If I bring a case of homebrew in my carry-on, will I
>be allowed onto a commercial flight?
A couple of months ago, I carried on a case of my own brew. The
security folks at SFO X-rayed it and didn't even raise an eyebrow.
Several other members of this august forum have had the same experience
at other airports, so it's probably a safe bet.
If somebody balks, just bribe them with a bottle!
Richard Stueven AHA# 22584 |----------|
Internet: gak@Corp.Sun.COM |----GO----| Disclaimer: I'm not allowed to
ATTMAIL: ...!attmail!gak |---SHARX--| have opinions.
Cow Palace: Sec 107 Row F Seat 8 |----------|
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 91 09:10:10 PST
From: Richard.Stueven@Corp.Sun.COM (Richard Stueven)
Subject: BEWARE Guinness-in-a-Can!
Shopping for Draught Guinness in a can is much like shopping for
tomatoes. Squeeze each can before you buy it. If you can compress it
at all, _don't_buy_it_ because it contains flat beer.
Before I knew better, I bought and opened one of these compressible
cans. Imagine my disappointment when no foam came up through the
hole. Imagine my despair when I poured the beer into my glass and no
head appeared. It was dead flat. One of the other ten cans in my
refrigerator shows the same symptoms. At $1.89/can, I'm going to
exchange it!
In the meantime, I'm going to dissect the one I opened to see if I can
find any obvious defects.
BEWARE!
Richard Stueven AHA# 22584 |----------|
Internet: gak@Corp.Sun.COM |----GO----| Disclaimer: I'm not allowed to
ATTMAIL: ...!attmail!gak |---SHARX--| have opinions.
Cow Palace: Sec 107 Row F Seat 8 |----------|
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 91 0:52:53 GMT
From: Conn Copas <C.V.Copas@loughborough.ac.uk>
Subject: Casks, decoction, wort chilling
>I have tasted oxidized beer and try to avoid it at all costs. I was musing
>on the cask conditioning of British Bitters, and began to wonder how they
>avoid oxidation of the beer in the cask after the cask is no longer full.
>I mean, the stuff might be around for a few days. Any thoughts?
Depends how well the cask is sealed and consequently whether oxygen fills the
ullage space. Most casks have an inlet which is sealed by a wooden peg, and
which is somewhat permeable. The short answer is that the beer does deteriorate
and is better fresh. Apart from the problem of oxygenation, the brew also loses
condition as dissolved CO2 transfers into the ullage. The brew is pumped out by
hand, so dispensing pressure is not an issue. One solution to all this is to
maintain a blanket of CO2 as the brew is drawn off. CAMRA objects to this
practice on the grounds that it isn't natural/traditional, and there is a
possibility of the brew becoming artificially overcarbonated. This is one of
the few areas where I object to CAMRA ...
Re decoction mashes, Hough et al talk about clarification benefits. Apparently,
the theory goes that raising the grain to boiling extracts residual starch,
which then becomes converted.
Re using chilled water to hasten cold breaks, Wheeler throws cold water on this
idea in his latest book :-). The theory isn't presented at all clearly, but I
believe the basic concept is that trub formation involves an equilibrium, ie,
wort at a given temperature can support a certain
concentration of dissolved trub. By increasing the volume, a larger absolute
amount of trub remains in solution. Conclusion : it is better to chill the
smaller volume using a heat exchanger.
------------------------------
Date: Friday, 13 Dec 1991 07:40:04 EST
From: m14051@mwvm.mitre.org (John DeCarlo)
Subject: Re: Legal Imports
* Forwarded Thu Dec 12 1991 21:32:26 by John DeCarlo @ 1:109/131
I had heard that alot of German and British Beer is brewed at the brewery then
shiped by tankers to the US and that then they are pasturized and have all the
_Bad Stuff_ added, anyone else heard this?
Mike Buckley
[forwarded by me, as Mike has not direct net access]
Internet: jdecarlo@mitre.org
(or John.DeCarlo@f131.n109.z1.fidonet.org)
Fidonet: 1:109/131
------------------------------
Date: Friday, 13 December 1991 10:42am ET
From: joshua.grosse@amail.amdahl.com
Subject: cold break advice/dissent
In HBD 781, John Cotterill <johnc@hprpcd.rose.hp.com> wrote:
> After I do my 5-gallon boil, I pass the hot wort thru my chiller and straight
> into the fermentation vessel, where I immediately pitch the yeast (at about 68
> degrees). Is this undesirable? After the chill phase, should I let the
> cold break settle out and then transfer the liquid into yet another vessel?
Papazian sez that while commercial brewers remove hot/cold break
material from the wort prior to fermentation, homebrewers need not
worry. Note that C.P. recommends a blow-off tube.
Miller recommends that you settle the wort and rack it, but you can
pitch before racking the next day. Miller says that leaving the
hot/cold break material will cause high levels of fusel alchohols to be
produced, and says that this will occur during the respiration phase due
to the yeast using the trub for oxygen instead of the oxygen from your
aeration efforts. Note that Miller does not recommend blow=off tubes.
His "beginner's guide" section has you rack from boiler to fementer,
then to a carboy, then back to the fermenter. Too many steps, I think.
Also, I use liquid yeasts and starters. With ale yeasts, this means I
get a VERY short lag, if I waited until the next day, it would be far
too late. Miller is a lager maker, where even with starters, the lag is
long enough to pitch then wait for settling to occur.
Papazian may be right, in that, the blow-off may expel fusel alchohols
that are produced by fermenting on top of hot/cold break material. I'm
for blending the two bibles together -- and here's what I do (or did) as
of my last batch:
I use an immersion chiller to get to room temp, in the open electric
masher/boiler. Then, I remove the chiller and cover the boiler with a
sanitized cover. After cleaning up everything else, I go get my carboy
where the starter has been working. I remove the fermentation lock,
pour off the used wort, leaving the slurry behind, and then rack the
batch of wort from the boiler onto the yeast in the carboy. I cap,
slosh around, then use a blow-off tube.
Yes, I get some trub formation over the next few hours. But I've not
left a fresh batch of wort sit around for bacteria and wild yeast to
feast on. I use a blow-off tube to remove any excess fusel alchohols,
and I don't worry.
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
Josh Grosse jdg00@amail.amdahl.com
Amdahl Corp. 313-358-4440
Southfield, Michigan
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 91 11:59:19 EST
From: eisen@kopf.HQ.Ileaf.COM (Carl West)
Subject: Sam Adams' sexy babes at GABF
I have this from the ex wife of one of SA's founders.
They have a secretary/receptionist/girl-friday type named Rhonda who has a truly
amazing figure. Rhonda was serving beer at their first GABF wearing something that
was cut down to *there* and up to *here*. Apparently the guys were willing to drink
anything so long as they got to watch Rhonda serve it.
Carl West
When I stop learning, bury me.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 91 10:16:13 PST
From: "John Cotterill" <johnc@hprpcd.rose.hp.com>
Subject: Liquid Starters
Full-Name: "John Cotterill"
I began using liquid yeasts about 5 batches ago. The first surprise was how
long it took to get a serious fermentation started (over 2 days!). At first
I thought it was just an older yeast, but the second batch did the same thing.
Since then, I have been adding the liquid from the package to a little
(very) sterile water and malt put into a bottle with an air lock on it. After
a few days, I can pitch this into my batch and have a fermentation that starts
within about eight hours.
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?
By the way, my second surprise was how good beer tastes using liquid yeast and
how it gives me another degree of freedom for keying in on the ideal recipe.
JC
johnc@hprpcd.rose.hp.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 91 14:06:10 EST
From: Jay Hersh <hersh@expo.lcs.mit.edu>
Subject: Half-coct decoct
> Noonan does indeed
>instruct us to boil the decoction, for up to 45 minutes in some cases,
OK, but I wasn't actually basing my impressions on Noonan. I was
basing it on what I had (perhaps mistakenly) thought to be traditional
German and Czech decoction brewing. Darryl Richman had a more complete
tour of the PU brewery, and I don't have his article here, so perhaps
he can comment on his recollections. It is certainly possible that in
my questioning of our tour guide and the museum curator at the Bamberg
brewing museum (a former brewer who spoke no English, and I not enough German)
that I didn't make my questions clear, or misunderstood the answers.
BTW If you're in Bavaria make the trip to Bamberg. There is a great
brewing museum in a monastery over looking the town. Lots of local brewpubs
making tasty Racuhbiers, and a lot of other great local breweries.
Unfortunately we skipped Kulmbach, though some Kulmbach beers were available
in Bamberg. Also while not as great a brewing town Nurnberg is nearby and
is quite a quaint little town with a hilltop fortress and old city walls
dating from the medieval ages.
Sorry I'm not Norm Hardy, and I don't have my notes handy. A bunch of people
(Wort Processors) are after me for a complete tour write-up but I'm too busy.
- JaH
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 91 13:44:50 EST
From: Brian Midura <midura@ctron.com>
Subject: Grain Mills
I like my grain mill.....
Grain mills are very helpful in the sense that you can bulk order grains for a
significantly lower price and if you and all your friends order the price even
goes lower...
I have only had my grain mill for 3 batches but is has nearly paid for itself
in the amount I saved ordering 5-10 lb bags of grain.
A grain mill isn't necessary but is sure helpful and couldn't do without it now.
.Brian Midura
P.S. If you think they are too expensive and have friends that homebrew
you can all pitch in and it is less of an economic burden on each
person.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 1991 10:18:26 -0800
From: krweiss@ucdavis.edu
Subject: grainmill idea?
This message appears to have disappeared into the ether without landing in
the Digest. Sorry if it turns out to be a duplicate submission...
Has anyone tried rigging a hopper above the rollers on a cheap hand-cranked
pasta machine to crack grain?
The rollers are steel, and adjustable from pretty far apart to really close
together. I just don't know if they'd "grab" the grains and run them
through or not.
If this works, it should provide a superior crush to a Corona at a similar
or even lower cost. I've got a pasta machine, and next time I brew (soon, I
hope, as Thanksgiving parties wiped out my inventory) I'll try cracking
some crystal with the pasta maker and see what happens.
- -------------------------------------------
Ken Weiss krweiss@ucdavis.edu
Computing Services 916/752-5554
U.C. Davis 916/752-9154 (fax)
Davis, CA 95616
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 1991 10:22:03 PST
From: BREIN@dsfvax.jpl.nasa.gov
Subject: Cargo-hold pressurization
mlevy@unssun.nevada.edu (Marcel Levy) writes:
>. . . . . My one experiment with checked baggage and beer
>suggests that either the cargo hold is pressurized, or that the bottles
>can stand it.
The question of cargo-hold pressurization comes up in various contexts both in
and out of the HBD. The cargo-holds of all commercial jets are pressurized to
the same pressure as the passenger cabin. This is why they can carry pets down
there.
In any case, even if you took your beer into the vacuum of space it would be the
same as if the pressure inside the bottle increased by about 15 psi. I should
think most beer bottles could manage this much pressure increment.
Beer in space? Hmm... Has anyone sent some little yeastlies up in the shuttle
to see if they'll still ferment?
Barry Rein
BREIN@gpvax.jpl.nasa.gov
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 91 10:39:43 -0800
From: ktk@nas.nasa.gov (Katy T. Kislitzin)
Subject: Beer Places in Seattle
Two *interesting* taverns in Seattle are Murphy's Pub and The Blue
Moon. They are both on NE 39th, west of Univ of Wash. Murhpy's is
really in Wallingford, The Blue moon is just the other side of I5 from
campus.
Murphy's is an Irish pub with excellent live music most evenings.
They have Guiness and other British beers on tap. Don't remember
which others, I haven't been there in at least 5 years (I don't live
in Seattle any more). One of the local NPR/APR radio stations, KPLU
does a Saturday morning live variety show from Murphy's with music,
skits etc. Similar to West Coast Weekend on KQED in SF or Prarie Home
Companion, but better than West Coast Weekend (IMHO) and more focused
on Irish/Celtic music than PHC. The host(ess) of the Seattle show and
several of the guests have appeared on PHC. Not relevant to beer, but
Seattle has a thriving folk/bluegrass scene.
Somewhat further in the same direction, between Wallingford and
Ballard in Phiney Ridge is the new location of Red Hook, home of
Ballard Bitter, Red Hook, Winterhook etc. I went on a tour in their
old Ballard location when my sister was up visiting and had a
wonderful time. They only had tours on Saturday mornings (they brew
every other day) and you needed reservations. Don't know if policies
have changed. You can get cool tee shirts like the winterhook shirt i
happen to be wearing and they give you as much beer on tap as you can
drink before noon.
The Blue Moon is a funky, bohemian place that has been there for over
50 years. They have local micros on tap: the various red hooks and
grants, probably many others by now but it's been a while ;-) They
used to have different events on different nights: opera night,
grateful dead night, free peanut night etc. i watched the
reagan/mondale ferraro/bush debates there ;-)
Near Boeing, Ranier brewery also has tours, although they HARDLY
qualify as a micro!
Have Fun!
- --kt
PS there is also an excellent homebrew supply store in pike place
market, so your 'friend' could bring you back supplies ;-)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 91 10:28:16 PST
From: grumpy!cr@uunet.UU.NET (C.R. Saikley)
Subject: Ancient Beer
>From: "Dr. John" <JELJ@CORNELLA.cit.cornell.edu>
>Ross Haywood:
>I don't have the definitive answer, but suspect that brewing
>predates the discovery of the "recipe" for stainless steel. I suspect
>that your friend is mistaken, and that there are indeed quite a few
>copper-only kettles in breweries around the world, and probably were
>quite a few more in days gone by.
I'm no anthropologist or metallurgy/historian, but I'd say we're
on pretty safe turf to claim that brewing predates stainless steel.
In fact, I think it's safe to say that brewing predates written
language. The oldest known recipes come from the Sumerians and are
written in Cunieform, the oldest known written language. They'd
already figured out how to make beer by the time they'd figured
out how to write about it. As far as I know, there are no "recipes"
for stainless steel in Cunieform. :+}
There are anthropologists out there who espouse the theory that
humans made the transition from hunter-gatherers to an agrarian
society in order to have a more reliable supply of grains for
beer making. I guess they were the first to go all-grain!
Chai Yo,
CR
"We brewers don't make beer, we just get all the
ingredients together and the beer makes itself."
-Fritz Maytag
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 1991 11:28:35 -0600
From: gaspar@wuchem.wustl.edu
Subject: lifetime of beers
It may be of interest to report that I recently drank a bottle of Gale's
Prize Old Ale that had lain with my wine for 12 years. It was superb and
was superior to but of kindred character to a Thomas Hardy's Ale. The
Gale Prize Old Ale came in corked bottles of 9 3/4 fl.oz. capacity, and an
old CAMRA guide described it as the last commercial beer in England to come
in corked bottles. Can someone tell me if it is still being brewed, and if
so, in what kind of bottles does it come. Mine is a lovely brown pressed
glass with a charming inscription. Peter Gaspar
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 91 14:43:31 CST
From: gjfix@utamat.uta.edu (George J Fix)
Subject: Wort Spoilage (George Fix)
Jeff Frane's comments about wort spoilage appear to me to be right on target.
This is an area which many homebrewers take lightly since the damage to the
finished beer is usually not as serious as it is with other types of infection.
Nevertheless, problems from wort spoilage are apparently somewhat common. What
is particularly frustrating is to be evaluating a beer in a competition where
the brewer has clearly used a well designed recipe with high quality brewing
materials, yet have the overall effect compromised by minor (but invariably
unpleasant) effects of wort spoilage.
The most dangerous wort spoilers are from a broad class of gram negative
bacteria generally called coliforms. What they have in common (other than the
Gram stain) is a strong propensity to produce various sulfur compounds (DMS,
H2S, and misc. mercaptans). The effect is different from the malt derived DMS
cited in other posts, and has the unmistakable aroma of cooked corn. (This
flavoring is totally unrelated to the use of corn as a cereal adjunct). Most is
scrubbed out in the fermentation, but residual flavoring recalling rotten
vegetables can remain in the finished beer.
Two points deserve emphasis. First, effects can occur with only moderate levels
of infection. In experiments I did in preparing my book, it was found that
infections as low as 1000 cells per milliliter can be relevant. (E.Coli from
ATCC was used in these experiments). Recalling that there are roughly
10,000,000 yeast cells per ml. in a normal pitching, this amounts to one
coliform to every 10,000 yeast cells, hardly a massive infection.
The second point is that the sulfur compounds produced have very low flavor
thresholds. For example, the DMS/H2S/mercaptan mixture produced by coliforms
is typically detectable at 10-20 micrograms per liter (parts per billion if you
like!). This is in striking contrast to esters, diacetyl, etc. whose thresholds
are measured in milligrams per liter (ppm). Powerful stuff this.
The coliforms are inactivated at 140F, so wort held at 150F is theoretically
safe. Nevertheless, I feel that Jeff's concerns are well founded. First, 150F
is cutting it close to the danger point. Second, there is always the possibility
that bacteria will find thermal protection inside protein particles or in some
other place.
There is one other wort spoiler that is unwelcome in most beers, but is welcome
in sour mashing. These are thermally resistant strains of lactobacillus. In
fact, it is my view that the real challenge for sour mash brewers is to promote
the lactos while keeping the coliform count low. If done well with the right
recipe, this can lead to refreshing and snappy flavors a la Berliner weisse
(when it is fresh!). In most beers, on the other hand, it will lead to an
unacceptable sourness.
As a practical matter, our best defense against wort infection is keeping our
brewing equipment clean. A variety of cleaners work well (e.g., TSP, B-Brite,
washing soda, etc.). What is apparently important is not the cleaner used, but
rather making sure that the equipment is cleaned in a timely manner after use.
I am very sympathetic to the "no chemical" approach to sanitation. Indeed, some
of the flavors imparted by residual chemicals can make rotten vegetables sound
pretty good! As a personal matter, on the other hand, I simply do not trust
myself to do an adequate job at for example cleaning using hot water and a
cloth alone. Moreover, enough is known about the chemical cleaners and
sanitizers that they can be totally neutralized after use using the appropriate
procedures.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 91 16:26 EST
From: man@kato.att.com
Subject: boiling
Since I moved my brewing outdoors, I have had experiences that none of
you have mentioned. When I brewed indoors, it took 1.5 hours minimum to
boil down 6.5 gal of wort to 5.5 gal. So far, I have made 2 batches
outdoors. One batch was 6.5 gal pre-boil and the other was > 8 gal pre-
boil. In both cases, I boiled it to under 5 gal in 1 hour. I am using
a King Kooker jet propane burner, but I keep it at a setting so it
just does boil. Does anyone else experience this? My 8 gallon batch
had an extra 1.5 gal of water added to the kettle after the sparge.
I figured this would fix the problem, but I still had to add > .5 gal
of water to make a 5.5 gal batch.
Jack:
On this intimidation theory. I don't but it, but then I don't know for
sure, either. Why don't we do this: Will anyone who got a free copy under the
pretention of posting a review please step forward and explain yourself?
Now, give them a week. If Jack has a larger list than those who respond,
I suggest he post them after the week is over. Then we will see who is
fessin' up.
Jack:
On the STUFF postings. You said you didn't separate your posts to save
bandwith (sic). But you continue to post ads and EASY MASH techniques
and INTIMIDATION posts to both the HBD and rec.crafts.brewing. This
is a terrible waste of bandwidth. You essentially send these posts
to r.c.b twice. I suggest you only post these to one place (your choice,
but HBD would let you get to everyone) and then with the extra bandwidth,
you can separate your posts and keep the threads going with meaningful
subject lines.
Mark Nevar
------------------------------
Date: 14 Dec 91 13:48:00 EST
From: "CCVAX::HAPANOWICZ" <HAPANOWICZ%CCVAX.decnet@bigvax.alfred.edu>
Subject: Beer Hunter
Any word on when "The Beer Hunter" is to be shown on TV?
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #782, 12/16/91
*************************************
-------
