Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #1004
This file received at Sierra.Stanford.EDU 92/11/03 08:38:50
HOMEBREW Digest #1004 Tue 03 November 1992
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator
Contents:
LA/NA Beer ("Daniel Miller")
yeast sediment (Russ Gelinas)
10 gal Stainless Keg (yoost)
re:real weizen character (jim busch)
Handling liquid yeast (Corby Bacco)
Re:Mash runoff dynamics ("Bob Jones")
lift and drop (Carl West)
efficiency, SN yeast, judging (Russ Gelinas)
Re: A few questions (Jeff Benjamin)
barley free, wheat ales (Rob Bradley)
Bay Area Beer (Sandy Cockerham)
Re: Conversion/Efficiency (korz)
pin lock kegs, 3056 (James Dipalma)
Conversion Efficiency (Jack Schmidling)
Yeast starters & Zima beer from Micah Millspaw ("Bob Jones")
Brewpub in Oklahoma City(Report). (Dewey Coffman)
HBD Field Report #3: Two Belgian Breweries (Phillip Seitz)
Diacetyl and Wyeast 2308 (SynCAccT)
Send articles for __publication__ to homebrew@hpfcmi.fc.hp.com
(Articles are published in the order they are received.)
Send UNSUBSCRIBE and all other requests, ie, address change, etc.,
to homebrew-request@hpfcmi.fc.hp.com
Archives are available via anonymous ftp from sierra.stanford.edu.
(Those without ftp access may retrieve files via mail from
listserv@sierra.stanford.edu. Send HELP as the body of a
message to that address to receive listserver instructions.)
**Please do not send me requests for back issues!**
*********(They will be silenty discarded!)*********
**For Cat's Meow information, send mail to lutzen@novell.physics.umr.edu**
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 02 Nov 92 09:48:19 -0500
From: "Daniel Miller" <dmiller@mailbox.syr.edu>
Subject: LA/NA Beer
Greetings All,
I had the opportunity to talk with an employee of the A-B brewery here
in sunny Syracuse at a Halloween party last Friday. While he was
more interested in telling us how many gallons of beer they dump and
what shows up in returnable bottles, I did find out how they remove the
alcohol from their NA beer. Turns out they use dialysis. Sorry,
wasn't able to get more details. Another data point to experiment with.
Brew On,
Dan.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1992 9:49:30 -0500 (EST)
From: R_GELINAS@UNHH.UNH.EDU (Russ Gelinas)
Subject: yeast sediment
Just exactly what is in the sediment of an Orval ale bottle? I seem
to remember it's quite a mix of beasts which needs to be plated in order
to get the "good" strains. True?
Russ
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 10:11:42 -0500
From: yoost@judy.indstate.edu
Subject: 10 gal Stainless Keg
I recently acquired a 10 gal S.S. 'POP' keg. Looks very old .
has the familiar outlets 'like 5 gal' (although this is a visual assumtion)
the opening in the top screws off and has no gasket.
Anyone know the vintage of this thing and where to get a gasket ??
This will make a great Lagering tank.
How do you seasoned lagerers handle an air lock ??
I would like to use this as a secondary and lager vessel. What about once it's
in the secondary 'blowing' the trub off the bottom through the outlet pipe
rather than 'siphoning off the trub ?
-John Yoost
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 10:49:53 EST
From: jim busch <busch@daacdev1.stx.com>
Subject: re:real weizen character
The discussion on real HefeWeizen character got my interest
going. The big flavor and aroma that is evident in the best
german Weizens is attributable to the combination of esters
and phenolics. The esters are typically noted by a distinct
banana nose, the best commercial example is Paulaner Hefe-
Weizen. The other contribution is the clovey/phenolic
character (due to high concentrations of 4-vinyl guaiacol).
Aside from using a good mix of Quality Malted wheat and
quality german hops, the most important ingrediant for a
Weizen is the yeast.
The Wyeast strain used for making wheat beers seems to
suffer from a variable amount of phenolics (sometimes
imperceptable), a complete lack of banana esters, and a
most annoying tendancy to completely flocculate out. I
have made all grain weizens with this strain and been shocked
by the stunning clarity of the finished product. The answer,
of course, is to use the same strain as that used in Germany:
a Weinhenstephan Weizen yeast. This strain will produce
lots and lots of banana esters (very Paulaner-like) and a
nice balance of phenols. The current strain I am working
with produces more esters than phenolics, but it is still
a nice balance. The other great thing is that this strain
doesnt instantly floc out, therby leaving a normal cloudy/
opaque weizen appearance. BTW, this strain is a single
cell clone, not a blend of S. Cerevisiae and Delbrukki!
Since I got on my Weizen soapbox, hears some pointers for
anyone trying to replicate a Paulaner Hefe:
For all grain batches, use up to 70 percent Bavarian Wheat
malt (or Belgium, I just got mine, so no report on Belgim
wheat yet) and the remaining 30 percent pale malt ( I still
use domestic 2 row for this). Hop with a tiny amount of
Hallertau Hallertau (or hersbruker H.). Here are the style
guides:
OG 1.047-1.056 (11.5 - 13.8 degrees Plato)
FG 1.010-1.020 (2.5 - 4 degrees Plato)
Alcohol by volume 5.0-5.6
pH 4.0-4.5
Bitterness,IBU 10-18
Color, SRM 3.5-9.5
Calories/12 oz 151-178
And this is what I would suggest:
For 5 gallons:
6-7 Lbs Malted Wheat
2-3 Lbs Pale malt or 6 row malt
1 oz Hallertaur (or less!), boil 60 minutes
500 ml Weihenstephan Weizen yeast slurry
1 tsp gypsum (optional, depends on water supply)
Procedures:
Single Decoction Method:
Mash in crushed malt with 1 qt/lb 127-128 degree water. Add
gypsum if used. Hold 122-124 for 25 minutes. Pull first
decoction, 40% of the thickest part of mash. Heat to 160, hold 15
minutes for saccharification rest. Raise to boiling, and boil up
to 20 minutes. Combine two mashes carefully, stirring constantly
to avoid scorching. Combined temp should be 147. Rest 20
minutes, then heat quickly to the above saccharification temp, or
slightly higher. Rest until conversion is complete. Raise to
170, hold 5 minutes and transfer to lauter tun. Lauter slowly to
prevent stuck runoff.
Double Decoction Method:
Mash in at 128, maintain 122-124 for 15 minutes. Divide mash.
Rest 15 minutes at 146. Raise to 161, hold until conversion is
complete, but at least 15 minutes. Raise to boiling, boil 15
minutes. Combine mashes to result in 152-154. Divide mash
again. Raise to 161, wait 10-15 minutes for conversion, then
boil 10 minutes. Combine mashes to end up at 165-170. Lauter.
Infusion Method:
If you are going to attempt an infusion mash, keep the wheat/malt
ratio at 50/50 until you get used to lautering the gummy mash.
Mash in at 126-128. Hold 122-124 30 minutes. Raise to 152-154.
Hold 60 minutes. Raise to 170. Hold 5 minutes, lauter.
Kettle procedures:
Boil 40 minutes before first hops are added. Boil 60 minutes
after hopping. Hopping is usually in the 3-4.5 g/alpha acid per
hectolitre or 1.2 to 2 oz per bbl. Typical hop bills incorporate
the addition of two-thirds of the total hops at first hopping,
and the remainder at 15 minutes until completion of boil.
Alternatively, one-half may be added early in the boil, one forth
at 60 minutes and the last one-forth at 15 minutes until
completion of boil. In either case, it is important to not add
hops later than 15 minutes until end of boil as this style should
not be overly aromatic. If decoction mashing is used, initial
hopping may occur at the start of a boil but if infusion mashing
is done a 30 minute initial boil prior to any hop addition is
mandatory. If this is not done, hop utilization will be poor as
the hot break will attach to the hop particles, coating the
surface and reducing the extraction rate. Hot trub removal is
important. Give the batch a real good stir to generate a
whirlpool in the kettle, cover and let stand 20-30 minutes. Draw
wort off sides of kettle carefully. Pitch active yeast as soon
as first wort runoff hits the fermenter. Keep fermentation
temperature below 68 degrees (60-65 is optimum).
It is important to use a decoction mash to break down the
high molecular weight proteins and gums that will make lautering a
high percentage wheat beer difficult.
This beer can be pushed rapidly through the fermentation cycle and
bottled or kegged as soon as primary fermentation is complete
(dont bother with a secondary on this style as you want the yeast
to remain in suspension as long as possible). Alternatively,
rack to secondary, chill to 32 degrees Fahrenheit, hold 3-5 days
until clear, raise to 42, add culture of lager yeast and rapidly
keg/bottle. This adding of lager yeast is the regular way to brew
this style in Germany (and why you dont want to culture yeast
from a bottle of Maisel-Weizen). Carbon dioxide levels should be
above 6.0 g/litre or 3.1 percentage volume (v/v). This is about
twice the normal pilsner carbonation level. If carbonation is
achieved by krausening, about 9-15% of the initial wort volume
should be added at bottling time.
Happy brewing!
Jim Busch
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 09:01:42 -0700
From: cbacco@ursa5.cs.utah.edu (Corby Bacco)
Subject: Handling liquid yeast
Hello all,
I need some help keeping my liquid yeast in good condition until I can
brew. My brew-mates and I were all set to brew this last Sunday when we decided
to postpone due to an embarrassing oversight (we forgot to get the specialty
grains, oops! One of those days I guess). The next time we can all get
together is this commming Wednesday.
My question is, what to do with yeast until then? The packet was
started on last Thursday and transfered to a starter Friday or Saturday (I
wasn't in charge so I don't know for sure). The starter we're using is pretty
basic (only our second time using liquid yeast); some DME, yeast nutrient, and
water. So what is a good way to keep those little yeasties hopping until
Wednesday? (I realize that by the time I get replies it might too late to do
the suggestions but any replies would still be good info to have for the
future).
Thanks in advance,
Corby Bacco
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 08:25:28 PST
From: "Bob Jones" <bjones@novax.llnl.gov>
Subject: Re:Mash runoff dynamics
> I won't argue with the physics of the approach but there is a fundamental
> end problem. You can not empty the tun below the outflow level unless
> you use a hose to gain the necessary head, at which point, you will be
> back where you would have been with the outflow on the bottom.
> js
Yes, Jack you are right about the final runoff liquid. I guess I wasn't
too clear in my original post. If you have a flexible hose you can just
lower it at the end of the runoff. This way you can have the best of both
worlds.
Bob Jones
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 11:21:39 EST
From: eisen@kopf.HQ.Ileaf.COM (Carl West)
Subject: lift and drop
>4. Is lift canceled out by drop?
Yes, with a perfect fluid, but beer's not a perfect fluid,
it has a gas dissolved in it.
I imagine that there might be a problem if you had _too_ much lift, the
low pressure on the down side would draw CO2 out of solution and I
don't know if it could be counted upon to re-dissolve before reaching
the tap. The pressure at the tap might be right, but the
carbonation/foaminess could get weird.
Make sense? or am I way off?
Carl
WISL,BM.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1992 11:33:41 -0500 (EST)
From: R_GELINAS@UNHH.UNH.EDU (Russ Gelinas)
Subject: efficiency, SN yeast, judging
Jack, the problem with your points/pound/gallon efficiency calculation
is that it doesn't take into account different grains. If you use all
2-row and I use 2-row, munich, roasted barley, rice, barley flakes, and
wheat, we cannot truthfully use p/p/g to compare our efficiency. Some
grains/adjuncts have more possible sugar available than others. The only
true way to compare is to calculate the percentage of the theoretical
maxmimum.
I've got a batch going with yeast cultured from 2 Sierra Nevada bottles.
It is much more active than similar batches made with Wyeast 1056, which is
supposed to be the same yeast. Has anyone else had a similar experience,
or is this just a fluke?
Re. (mis)judging beer: As much as the AHA tries to standardize it,
it is and always will be subjective. Your beer may be perfect, but humans
are not. So we have to live with that.
Russ
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 10:16:45 MST
From: Jeff Benjamin <benji@hpfcbug.fc.hp.com>
Subject: Re: A few questions
Carlo Fusco <G1400023@NICKEL.LAURENTIAN.CA> says:
> I want to take the plunge into all grain brewing but I have a naive
> question about the cooler mash tun. If I make this thing (using the
> ascii graphics from a few weeks ago, can any one tell me which issue it
> was?) will I still need a lauder tun?
No, you won't need a separate lauter tun. One of the nice things about
the cooler-with-slotted-copper-tubing-in-the-bottom system is that it's
a mash tun and lauter tun in one. During mashing, the copper tubing
doesn't do anything. The copper manifold come into play when you're
done mashing; you use it to drain the sweet wort from the grain while
you're sparging.
> One more question about the cooler. How big does it have to be? I'm
> talking about the rectangular kind with the copper tubing in the bottom.
It needs to be big enough to hold your grain and the mashing water. For
five-gallon batches, this is typically 8-10 lbs of grain and 2-3 gallons
of water, for a total volume of perhaps 5-6 gallons. A 10-gallon cooler
should be large enough to handle almost anything (except Micah's
Traquair House recipe :-). The shape of the cooler isn't really that
important.
Welcome to the world of all-grain brewing. I think you'll find the
results are worth the extra effort.
- --
Jeff Benjamin benji@hpfcla.fc.hp.com
Hewlett Packard Co. Fort Collins, Colorado
"Midnight shakes the memory as a madman shakes a dead geranium."
- T.S. Eliot
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 12:57:55 -0500
From: bradley@adx.adelphi.edu (Rob Bradley)
Subject: barley free, wheat ales
Brian Walter beat me to the punch in recommending IREKS 100% wheat
Bavarian extract for barley-free beer. I have seen it at Kedco on
Long Island. I think it's 3.5 kg. That's 7 lb. 11 oz. and plenty
for 5 gallons. I haven't tried the stuff myself, but I got the
following wild & carazy idea when I saw the stuff:
* Mash and sparge about 10 lb grain with porter-style proportions
* Add a can of Ireks in the boil
* Lots of Hallertauer and/or Saaz
The result: a dark half-wheat barley wine. The imagination reels!
The question: what yeast to use? Would Wyeast Bavarian be able
to take hold in an 1.100+ environment? Presumably it wouldn't be
able to finish; one could add champagne yeast in the secondary
after 2-3 months.
On a related note (since one might have to use ale, lager or wine
yeast for the above) is everyone really so sure that you can't
get wheat character from an ale yeast? In 1987 I won best wheat
beer at the CABA conference in Toronto with an ale with about 75%
malt and 25% wheat malt. I used dry ale yeast (maybe Leigh-Williams?
I don't have my notes at work). No doubt, the competition wasn't up
to modern standards, Wyeast not then bewing available in Canada
(although MeV was; I don't know if they had a wheat beer yeast,
though). Nevertheless, the beer had a spicy, floral character;
I believe I remember it being clovey. More objectively, one of
the best of show judges paid me the following compliment after
the awards ceremony: he said he thought the wheat beer was the
category winner that best typefied it's style and voted it BOS.
Presumably the other two disagreed, as Paul Dickie took BOS with
a very fine pale ale. Paul took quite a number of awards in the
late 80s, including "best homebrewer in Canada" in '88. I wonder
if anybody out there knows if he's still winning ribbons?
Cheers,
Rob (bradley@adx.adelphi.edu)
------------------------------
Date: 02 Nov 1992 13:08:37 -0500 (EST)
From: Sandy Cockerham <COCKERHAM_SANDRA_L@LILLY.COM>
Subject: Bay Area Beer
I have a friend who will be visiting San Francisco in 2 weeks. Although he
is not a beer drinker, he has promised to bring 1 or 2 six packs back to me
here is the semi-beer wastelands of Indiana.
My question is, what should I tell him to bring me that is only distributed
out there? I heard Mendocino is good. Any suggestions?
Thanks, Sandy
From: COCKERHAM SANDRA L (MCVAX0::RX31852)
To: VMS MAIL ADDRESSEE (IN::"homebrew@hpfcmi.fc.hp.com")
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 12:30 CST
From: korz@iepubj.att.com
Subject: Re: Conversion/Efficiency
JS writes:
> I suggest that we should stick to the points/per pound/per gallon to avoid
> one more variable that just makes the results that much less useful.
I agree, I just wanted to explain the efficiency from the source to the
final fermentable wort. I don't think that we should get all caught up
with numbers. pts/lb/gal is a good measure of how you're doing, but I
wanted the person asking the question to understand that with some malts,
getting 29 points is a super-human feat whereas with others, you can get
33 points without much difficulty.
> It is also useful to point out that the terms extract and conversion are a
> bit misleading and should be defined more clearly.
>
> I define conversion as the amount of sugar that ends up in the wort after
> mashing is complete. If one drains the mash tun at this point, the
> pts/lb/gallon can be easily calculated and this provides an indication of the
> mashing process, the malt, the water and other variables I probably am not
> aware of. This would provide the conversion efficiency or ratio.
That's called the "first runnings" and is also dependent on your mashout
temperature (if it's cooler, the runnings will be more viscous and thus more
will "stick" to the grain), your equipment and how stiff your mash was (a
thin mash -- one with a large water-to-grain ratio will have lower gravity
first runnings than a stiff mash -- one with a small water-to-grain ratio).
> If one goes on to sparge out the mash and makes the measurements again, one
> now gets the extract efficiency or the ability to get the converted sugar out
> of the mash. This now depends on the lautering system and process and has
> nothing to do with conversion or malt type.
Sure it does. If you only converted 1/2 of the starches, you can only get
1/2 as much sugars out of the grains as you could have if you converted 100%
of the starch. Your extract efficiency is bound by (as you called it) your
conversion efficiency. Your extract efficiency is only as good as your weakest
link which may be either your mashing or your lautering.
> The point of all this is that it is unwarranted to criticise a brewer's
> equipment or his process or his materials for extract/conversion problems
> based on end results. There simply is not enough data to make that
> judgement.
That's why I suggested that brewer's who are getting bad numbers post thier
procedures and ask for comments. 4000 heads are better than one.
> >From: "Bob Jones" <bjones@novax.llnl.gov>
> >On the subject of sparge systems, I would point out that if possible you
> should try to minimize the hydrostatic pressure across the grain bed to
> minimize grain bed compaction. This can easily be done if you place your
> outflow slightly below the grain bed liquid level. Crude ascii graphic to
> follow......
>
> I won't argue with the physics of the approach but there is a fundamental end
> problem. You can not empty the tun below the outflow level unless you use a
> hose to gain the necessary head, at which point, you will be back where you
> would have been with the outflow on the bottom.
But this is usually what you want to do with most lauter tuns, namely, to
keep the grain bed under water (sparge water, that is). When you let the
level of the sparge water drop below the level of the grain, the grain
compacts and your chances of a set mash are increased by a lot. By keeping
the inflow of water at the same rate as the outflow of the runnings, you
can do this. The hydrostatic pressure gradient is the same across the
grain bed the same no matter what the level of the outflow hose? Back to
ascii graphics:
| |
| |
|-----water level-----|
low pressure----> |-----grain level-----| ====outflow== <-low pressure
| | ||
| | ||
| | ||
| | ||
medium pressure-> | mash | || <---medium pressure
| | ||
| | ||
| | ||
| | ||
| | ||
high pressure---> | | || <---high pressure
|_____________________=======
This won't help you keep from getting a compacted grainbed, but it *is* a good,
inexpensive way to adjust the speed of your runoff. By the way, adding more
hose to the end of the outflow hose and lowering the end of the outflow hose
(while keeping the middle of the outflow hose high), will only speed up the
runoff again. The speed of the runoff (just like on a siphon) is the
difference between the height of the level of the liquid in the source vessel
and the relative height of the level of the liquid in the collection vessel
(or the end of the hose if it's not submerged in the collection vessel).
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 14:12:55 EST
From: dipalma@banshee.sw.stratus.com (James Dipalma)
Subject: pin lock kegs, 3056
Hi All,
Last weekend I visited a friend who owns a restaurant. The
conversation soon turned to beer (*why* do all my conversations
invariably get to that topic? :-)), I mentioned that I had just
started kegging my homebrew a few months ago, my friend ushered me
into a basement room located directly under the bar. There were, I
believe, some 20-30 stainless kegs with an assortment of hoses and
fittings running up to the bar, and a few empty kegs sitting off to
the side. My buddy offered me the empties, gratis.
Of course I grabbed the kegs, but there is one small (I hope)
problem. All of my keg hardware is the ball lock type, the new
kegs are pin lock. There are threaded fittings on the ends of the
CO2 line and the beer tap lines, onto which the gas and beer connects
fit. The connects are easy to remove, presumably for cleaning the
hoses. It seems to me that I only need to purchase the pin-lock type
connects in order to use the new kegs.
So my questions are directed to owners of pin lock kegs, or to
those who own both types. Am I correct that the only hardware
difference between the two types are the gas and beer connects? If
not, what other differences are there? I noticed none of the new ones
had a pressure relief valve on the lid. Is there anything different
about the care and feeding of the pin lock kegs versus the ball lock?
Next point, I've noticed a thread in recent HBDs regarding the
clove character, or lack thereof, in wheat beers that were fermented
using Wyeast 3056. This point was discussed in this forum some months
ago. One of the points that arose from that discussion was that higher
fermentation temperatures seened to contribute to the desired clove
phenolic. Accordingly, I brewed and fermented three batches of wheat
beer in the range of 70-75F. I kegged the first batch after two weeks
in the fermenter, reasoning that my ales always finished in two weeks
at somewhat lower temperatures. I force carbonated the beer, and
sampled it two days later. It had a distinct residual sweetness, as
if the yeast had not quite finished. I raised the temperature in the
fridge, and let the beer alone for another week. The next time I drank
the beer, the sweetness was gone, there was *plenty* of clove flavor.
For each of the subsequent two batches, I left the beer in secondary
for an extra week. Both of these beers were plenty clovey, and the
clove flavor actually became increasingly distinct over the weeks it
took me to finish drinking them.
My personal theory is that the S. Delbruckii (sp?) is somewhat
more attentuative than the ale yeast with which it is blended in the
Wyeast 3056. After the ale yeast quits the Delbruckii continues to break
down sugars and produce the clove phenolic, which would explain the
twin phenonema of reduced sweetness/increased clove phenolic that I have
observed each time I've used 3056. If anyone out there can either refute
or substantiate this, jump right in. In the meantime, my advice to those
planning a wheat beer with this yeast is to ferment at 70-75F and give it
an extra week in the fermenter.
For those of you interested in winning competitions, *taste* the beer
before entering it as a German weizen. If it's clovey, fine, if not enter
it as an American wheat. :-)
Cheers,
Jim
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 13:00 CST
From: arf@ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: Conversion Efficiency
To: Homebrew Digest
Fm: Jack Schmidling
>From: malouf@Csli.Stanford.EDU (Rob Malouf)
>Since I did use the "right" yeast, this advice is less than helpful.
Perhaps judges should not assume the worst of homebrewers. In this case, I
know what a weizen is supposed to taste like, I just don't have the skill to
achieve it.
It is with great fear and trepidation that I bring up the obvious again but
just perhaps, the politically correct yeast was at fault. All the skill in
the world can not overcome bad yeast.
>From: dab@donner.cc.bellcore.com (dave ballard)
>Also, did we ever get a definitive answer (not that there is such a thing
around here) about how to sterilize plastic petri dishes?
This provides a segue into another of my crusades. It's called
THROWAWAYAMERICA. I put plastic petri dishes right up there with Bic
lighters, hamburger clamshells and disposable cameras.
I have been using the same Pyrex petri dishes, off and on for 25 years and
the idea of throwing them away after every use brings to mind one of the
justifications for salughtering several hundred thousand Iraquis.
I would think that you could sterilize plastic ones by soaking them in bleach
and rinsing them in clean tap water rather than throw them away. My guess is
that you could get buy that way for the type of culturing we do for home
brewing.
The preferred approach is to use glass ones, the problem these days seems to
be getting them. I just received a catalog from Markson, at someone's
suggestion and they have just about anything you would want in lab glassware,
except of course, petri dishes.
Glass petri dishes seem to have disapeared from the market place. If anyone
knows of a source, please post it and try to talk some sense into your
friends who throwaway plastic ones.
js
p.s. Since writing the above, I went back to the Markson catalog and found I
had only read enough to be dangerous. In addition to the disposable
polystyrene petir dishes, they offer to other plastic versions, including a
"Polycarbonate, M-X271919, transparenc, reusable and autoclavable. They sell
for $36.75 for a package of 10. That is competative with Pyrex and probably
a good alternative. Their toll-free number is 800 528 5114.
I would also insist that anyone you purchase cultures from, use these
reusable dishes. They're three times the cost but will last forever.
jjs
sorry bout the subject but it would cost me 4 cents to check out, edit
it and check back in and pennies do make dollars.
jjjjs
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 15:42:06 PST
From: "Bob Jones" <bjones@novax.llnl.gov>
Subject: Yeast starters & Zima beer from Micah Millspaw
>Subject: Trouble Getting Wyeast Going
>Perhaps Micah or one of the other yeast gurus can give me some pointers.
>I recently started actually buying envelopes of Wyeast, rather than using
>an Nth generation culture I got from CAV@bnr.ca. While the Nth generation
>stuff (1098) took off like a rocket whenever I used it, my 1098 from the
>packet was essentially dead. It swelled the packet, and I pitched it into
>a starter and it seemed to ferment there, although the krausen was rather
>weak. But, nothing at all in the brew. Roused the brew, still nothing.
>Suggestions?
>Actually, one relevant point was that the packet was 7 months past its
>code date. Is Wyeast that sensitive to shelf life? Should I use a yeast
>nutrient in the starter? Is it worthwhile to actively aereate the starter
>during the entire growth phase, eg by using an airstone/airpump system?
>Comments by email or posting if you think it worthwhile. thanks. P.
I say that it is very important that you use yeast nutrients in starters.
As to the Wyeast culture, I don't know their claimed self life but I
do know that duds and screw ups can happen. When I get a new Wyeast
package I grow it up and make certain that it has no unacceptable problems.
If it proves good I will brew with it and take the yeast from that
batch , wash it and store it as a master culture in slurry form. From
this slurry I will take yeast to make my pitching cultures. The yeast
seems very stable in this slurry form (refrigerated) and this method
elminates reusing the yeast into exhaustion while still working from
a known source. (and no I don't blindly trust Wyeast)
If you use forced aeration be careful it can help to things
other than your yeast. It is difficult to sterilize to air being used,
and clean may not be enough. When trying to optimize yeast growth one
walks a thin line in that what is ideal for the yeast is also great
for many unwelcome micro-guests.
micah 10/30/92
I would like to say that I have encountered this Zima clearmalt
beverage. I have to say that I find this to be a very disturbing incident
in the light of the neo-prohibitionist movement. I attended a local social
event this weekend where this Zima was being promoted by the coors people.
I overheard many, very postive responses to the Zima including the lightest
beer yet, this is even better than Keystone, and from a woman who didn't
like beer but liked Zima because it didn't taste like beer. If this product
is to be marketed as a beer this could be a bad trend. I believe that this
is part of the declared mission of the BATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tabacoo
and Firearms) to reduce alcohol consumption in the US by 10 percent this
decade. It would seem that some segments of the brewing industry are moving
to help expedite this. From the taste of this clear malt beverage, which
is alcoholic, if the alcohol were removed you could not tell. In fact if the
flavour were removed you could not tell. I see this as another move by
the big companies to tell the massses that less and less is better. Perhaps
I'm being paranoid but it seems that this is just another indicater of
trouble ahead for those who like to appreciate beer with flavour.
Micah Millspaw
1/2/92
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 20:24:41 CST
From: dewey@sooner.ctci.com (Dewey Coffman)
Subject: Brewpub in Oklahoma City(Report).
I went to Bricktown Brewery in Oklahoma City this weekend. It opened
three weeks ago, Oklahoma passed a Brewpub law where Texas can't.
After the elections are over, I'll be beating on my Senators & Reps.
It's a very nice place, almost more of a restaurant that a Brewpub.
The equipment alone is prominently displayed behind glass walls in
the restaurant. I'd say equipment cost is 1 million+, lots of
kettles, secondary fermenters, wort coolers and refrigeration units.
They only had two beers out of the five on the menu ready: I had
them both, the Copperhead Premium Ale and the Santa Fe Rail Ale.
My opinion here is that they serve the beers too damn cold,
probably < 40 degrees. The Copperhead was fuller bodied with the
Santa Fe probably closer to a lager. Note: Oklahoma has a law where
this beer and MOST others on 3.2% alcohol content.
Other beers on the menu:
Read Brick Ale
Bison Wiezen
Landrun Lager
The Brewpub is more of a "Brass & Fern" atmosphere than pub-style,
lots of starched shirts, course I went there on Halloween/Saturday
night, so it could've been an "off" night.
Prices were $2.10 for a tall draft, probably a sixteen ounce pint.
I reccomend the place, it's very accessable from either I-35 or
I-40 going through OKC. Take the downtown exit.
- ---
Dewey Coffman "If you fail to plan, plan to fail."
UUCP: {cs.utexas.edu,bigtex,uudell}!sooner!dewey dewey@ctci.com
DoD# 0567 1-800-643-SAVE
This letter is printed on 100% recycled electrons. Dont' Bag It.1-800-453-SMOG
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 02:32 GMT
From: Phillip Seitz <0004531571@mcimail.com>
Subject: HBD Field Report #3: Two Belgian Breweries
BRASSERIE LA BINCHOISE (Binche)
There are three people who work here, brewing beer in 1,500
liter batches. All their beers are category S beers in the
Belgian system (ie above 1.062). This is without question my
favorite Belgian brewery.
They make: Marie de Hongrie, a darkish brown, highly
aromatic ale of 8.5 ABV containing pale malt, Munich malt, and a
small quantity of torrified malt for coloring; Fakir, a slightly
less strong but equally aromatic blonde ale; Ours (French for
bear), using wild honey for 2/7 of its fermentables; Speciale de
Paques, a stronger but thinner-bodied blonde for Easter; and my
favorite, Speciale Noel (for Christmas), a rich, highly aromatic
brown beer, and rather orangey.
All use the same yeast, which has a distinctive flavor that
reminds me of spice- and carrot cakes. It comes from a bank and
is used six or seven times before replacement, with continuous
checks for infection. Except for Ours the beers are all-malt;
none contain candi sugar. Mashing is at 65 degrees C, or 150 F.
I didn't catch the hopping rates (all this transpired in French),
but by American standards they were rediculously low. Isinglass
is used for fining, which I gather is unusual in Belgian brewing.
In addition, the brewery adds essential oils to three of the
beers at bottling (Marie, Fakir, Noel), giving them a fuller
flavor and aroma. One of these oils is obviously orange, but I
can't identify the others and the brewer was reluctant to tell
all.
Yeast is also added at bottling, along with 1% beet sugar
(i.e. 1kg sugar for every 100 liters of beer). This is 10 grams
per liter, as opposed to the standard 6.3 grams/liter (3/4 cup @
160 grams/cup). Note also that beet sugar has more carbonating
potential than corn sugar, if I'm not mistaken. At the time of
bottling a quantity of yeast (sorry, didn't find out how much) is
added to a sugar solution and immediately mixed into the beer for
bottling. The bottles are undergo a second fermentation in a
specially heated room at 20 degrees C (70 F).
The brewery itself is located in a former maltings, of
which only a portion is currently in use. It has three
fermentation tanks, and they use the same $0.89 fermentation lock
on their 1500 liter tanks as I use on my plastic bucket. They
use returnable champagne-type bottles for bottling, meaning that
storage and bottle cleaning occupy the bulk of their space and
time. They're working on a nice tasting/reception area located
just underneath the old malt silos.
Coordinates: Faubourg St. Paul 38
B-7130 Binche
Belgium
064 / 33-61-86
BRASSERIE LA CARACOLE (Namur)
People from Namur have a reputation for speaking slowly,
and their semi-official emblem is the caracole, a type of snail.
This is the smallest commercial brewery I've seen,
making 400 liters at a time. Our guide was the business expert
of the four-person partnership--though his brewing knowledge was
substantial--and the brewery is located in his wife's
grandmother's garage. They have to empty the garage before they
can work, but they manage to fit in a kettle and mash tun, as
well as several large closets for fermenters. At the moment all
the beer they produce is sold at our guide's store, La Table de
Wallonie (Place de Marche des Legumes, Namur), but the
partnership has just signed to buy a bigger brewery in Ciney.
Three beers are made: an amber ale, a brown ale, and a
white beer. The first two are category S beers, brewed with pale
malt and various special malts. The brown ale (16 Balling, +/-
1.064) instance, has biscuit and aromatic malts for flavor (the
latter provides aroma, too) plus a small quantity of torrified
malt for coloring. This also has a some candi sugar, allowing
the brewer to raise the gravity of the beer in his kettle without
having to boil more liquid (in effect, this helps him get the
most out of his 400 liter capacity). He recommended not using
more than 15% special malts or sugar in a recipe.
The white beer is made from pale malt and raw wheat only.
He said using raw wheat is just a matter of getting good grain,
properly crushed, and of handling it carefully. Since Belgian
whites are a bit tart they drop the PH of the beer to 4.4, and
various spices are added as well. Among these is dried orange
peel, mixing sweet and bitter varieties. Our guide recommended a
maximum of 1 gram dried orange peel per liter.
Since the brewery has no lab facilities, they buy their
yeast from a bank at Louvain-la-Neuve every time they brew; this
adds $0.24 to the cost of every 75 cl bottle. The good news is
that they can order exactly the volume of yeast they want, at
specified cell counts; the bad news is that the yeast medium is
jet black, wreaking havoc on their efforts to brew light-colored
beer.
An upward step mash is used, with saccrification at 63
degrees C (145 F), though he may have said that they use a two-
step saccrification (sorry--I had a cold and didn't catch
everything). Various noble hops are employed, particularly
Goldings and Saaz. No yeast is added at bottling--only sugar.
Bottles age for three months in ANOTHER garage before sale.
NOTES
1) Corks. Both these breweries use champagne-type corks, which
are not sanitized before use. The Binchoise folks said that cork
doesn't offer anything for microbes to live on, and that such
precautions aren't necessary. Neither brewery has ever had any
problems.
2) Bottles. Binchoise's used bottles are washed in caustic soda
prior to bottling. Caracole uses new bottles only, and rinses
them with the equivalent of a bottle washer just prior to
filling.
3) Fermentation temperatures. Neither brewery is fermenting at
high temperatures; in fact, we had to wear sweaters and jackets
in both places. This is more attributable to the cost of heating
than to any particular fermentation philosophy, but it's clear
that the beer was being fermented in the low 60s or so at most.
Caracole does try for 70F, and has space heaters in its
fermentation closets.
4) Torrified malt. I'd never heard of this stuff before, but I
did see it. It looks like plump barley roasted to a nice coffee
brown. It certainly has a roasted taste, but both brewers use it
for coloring only and try to avoid the flavor. The grains are
NOT "popped" like popcorn.
5) Orange peel and essential oils. My local food coop can order
dried orange peel from Frontier Fruit and Nut--a major health-
food store supplier--for $4.00/lb plus store markup. It also has
essential oils in stock; a 15 ml bottle cost $1.81. A single
drop in a glass of my Binchoise clone showed instantly that it
was (one of) the secret ingredient(s). Even one drop was too
strong, though--I'll try one drop per quart first and report
back.
------------------------------
Date: 3 Nov 92 03:35:36 GMT
From: SynCAccT@slims.attmail.com
Subject: Diacetyl and Wyeast 2308
I'm about to use the Wyeast 2308 for the second time in a batch of
Munich Helles. My first venture with this strain produced a very
good German lager, but it did have a slight diacetyl tone. I've
either heard or read somewhere that the 2308 requires a diacetyl
rest during the primary fermentation. This seems reasonable, but for
clarity, would anyone be able to tell me what exactly a diacetyl rest
does (other than reduce the diacetyl level), how it's done, the
appropriate time during fermentation, at what temperature and for how
long?
Another comment, I have seen a description of the Wyeast products on
the HBD which is fairly brief. Is there a more detailed description
of the products available?
Thanks in advance...
Glenn Anderson
EMAIL ==> gande@slims.attmail.com
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1004, 11/03/92
*************************************
-------
