Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #1033
This file received at Sierra.Stanford.EDU 92/12/15 00:28:13
HOMEBREW Digest #1033 Tue 15 December 1992
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator
Contents:
sparging / iodine test (Ed Hitchcock)
Beer compatible solder? (Ed Hitchcock)
Foul smelling brew (Paul Gilders)
second runnings (card)
Returned mail: Host unknown [from Mail Delivery Subsystem] ("Spencer W. Thomas")
Gummed labels for laserwriters? (Lou Casagrande)
food grade buckets (James Dipalma)
when to pitch a starter? (Peter Maxwell)
Re: blowoff or blowup? (Richard Stueven)
Cinnamon Stopper? (HOWED)
Boston's Best Burton Bitter (Richard Stueven)
Ham Brew Forum (Jack Schmidling)
artesian water (Theodore B. Samsel)
Legality of Eisbocks (STROUD)
RE: HBD 1032 (James Dipalma)
American Society of Brewing Chemists (ASBC) (John DeCarlo)
Re:Wyeast/Lautering/Conversion/Corona (korz)
Ham Brew Forum (Gary M. Diana 39623)
re: citrus flavor from hops (Kevin M. Madge)
Subpoena (Chuck Cox)
Homebrew Distributors?? (Nick Zentena)
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: 14 Dec 1992 09:21:02 -0400
From: Ed Hitchcock <ECH@ac.dal.ca>
Subject: sparging / iodine test
Mark Garti asked about sparging:
>I use a zapapp lauter tun (bucket in bucket). It was made from
>2 6.5 gallon buckets. all this talk about sparging and solution
>concentration had me thinking about my technique. when sparging
>and adding sparge water, are you supposed to let the water level
>start to drop below the the top of the grain before adding more
>sparge water. OR do you never let this happen. All the books
>are pretty grey here.
I believe the accepted wisdom is to keep the water level about an inch
above the grain bed. For my last sparge I placed the lid of a margarine
container on the grain bed and poured the sparge water over that, so it
spread out instead of stiring up the grains.
>also no one touched my question about reasonable conversion times.
>i had asked if most people end up doing a conversion step of 45-90
>minutes? papazzian had indicated a total time of about 25 minutes.
>is anyone getting decent efficencies with this short a time. I'm
>not but i don't know if this is the problem, or if it's something
>else. i usually get 25 ppg.
>Mark mrgarti@xyplex.com
Miller's theory, as far as I can tell, is that conversion should
take 1/2 an hour or so, but by leaving it for 1.5 hrs you can be sure it's
done. My friend brewed a porter following Papazian's technique, and I brewed
a brown ale using Miller's. One thing about Papazian's protocol is that it
takes time to heat up the mash on the stove doing a step mash, so that
15 min. protein rest + heating + 25 min at 150 + heating + 15 min at 156
adds up to about 1.5 hrs anyway. Our extraction rates were virtually
identical at just above 25 (including all specialty grains), so the loss is
in the sparge.
Scott James asked about iodine tests and conversion times:
>I've used iodine to test a small piece of grain as an indicator of
>starch conversion and it seems to work. I pull out a grain sample
>and put it in a white plate. After adding a drop of iodine, I look
>to see if it remains light brown or turns dark blue (starch present).
>Sometimes it takes upwards of two hours for complete conversion! I
>think my mash is to dilute (around 2-3 gallons in 6-8 lbs pale malt).
Testing grains with iodine will skew your results. The hard part
of the grain contains starches, such as cellulose, which test positive but
are not what you are trying to break down. Try the iodine test on a small
quantity (1 teaspoon) of COOLED liquid, with as few grains as possible.
I agree that your mash sounds a little dilute, I would go with about 1.5-2
gallons for 6-8 lbs grain.
The goal in sparging is to get the sweet liquid out of the grains.
Lauter tuns do this essentially by serial dilution through a filter bed. The
filter bed is important in preventing unwanted insolubles from getting into the
boil. But what I want to know is: Is there anything fundamentally wrong
with centrifuging the grains? Just spin the sickers real fast in, say,
a converted washing maching, while gently spraying the sparge water from the
middle? If any particulate matter gets through the whole volume of liquid
could be filtered through cheesecloth or filter cloth. Any reason for not
doing this other than tradition?
Ed Hitchcock
ech@ac.dal.ca
------------------------------
Date: 14 Dec 1992 09:45:58 -0400
From: Ed Hitchcock <ECH@ac.dal.ca>
Subject: Beer compatible solder?
I wanted to solder some copper pipes for shuffling wort around between
mash, sparge, boil, chiller and primary. Lead is a no-no, and I
understand tin is not so hot for beer either. Anyone know of a kind
of solder that works on copper pipe that is not harmful to beer? I could
use threaded connectors, but that gets messy, besides, I would undoubtedly
have to solder a threaded connector to a straight piped somewhere along the
line...
Ed Hitchcock
ech@ac.dal.ca
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 09:15:04 EST
From: paulg@cme.nist.gov (Paul Gilders)
Subject: Foul smelling brew
Hi folks,
Just thought I'd get some net wisdom on a problem that my
roomate and I have recently experienced with our homebrew. We have
only recently started homebrewing and are still using the simple kits
with pre-hopped malt extract. We have however had two very successful
batches in the past month - a very nice porter and brown ale. However,
on our third batch we tried to produce something a little lighter and
decided to go for a Scottish Ale. In our previous brews, we used an
additional 2lbs of dried malt to our kits. This time, we added 3lbs of
light malt to the wort and boiled for about 20 minutes. We noticed
something strange when we transferred the hot wort to the sink for
cooling - not all of the dry malt had dissolved. This was a little
surprising to us because we had boiled up at least 2 gallons.
Anyway, we decided to proceed as usual, thinking that the dried malt
would eventually dissolve when we added more water and that it would
not effect the action of the yeast anyway.
So, the following day, fermentation was already well under way
and everything seemed to be going really well. The second day of
fermentation also produced strong action in the fermenter, but by the
third day all activity had stopped. We decided that we would leave the
mixture a further day before bottling. On the 4th day therefore, we
removed the top of the fermenter and were a little shocked to smell a
disgusting stench from the top of the mixture. We were immediately
worried about our results, since our previous brews had all smelt
great at this stage. We took a reading with the hydrometer, which had
only dropped from 1040 (before fermentation) to 1022. Complete
fermentation had obviously not occurred.
We are always really particular about sanitation and are
therefore suspicious of the quality of the yeast - dried yeast came
with the kit. One friend of ours suggested that maybe the yeast had
stopped, or maybe the problem is related to the undissolved dried
malt, which was still present as solids in the brew. Are there any
other explanations of what has happened and why? We did continue to
bottle a few test samples, but had no extra yeast to try and continue
fermentation. We decided to throw the rest of the brew down the
sink.
Any helpful ideas would be appreciated.
Paul.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 09:16:05 EST
From: card@apollo.hp.com
Subject: second runnings
> Subject: Re: traquair left overs
> To: card@apollo.hp.com
> Date: Friday, December 11, 1992 6:37:09 am (EST)
> From: tanner@ki4pv.compu.com (Dr. Tanner Andrews)
>
>Don't just stash those second runnings to brew another day; it
>won't take long for them to turn sour. Yes, you will boil the
>wort. Too late: the damage has been done,
>--
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 10:09:45 EST
From: "Spencer W. Thomas" <Spencer.W.Thomas@med.umich.edu>
Subject: Returned mail: Host unknown [from Mail Delivery Subsystem]
I can't get mail to Russ, so I'll "defend myself" here.
"Rad Equipment" writes:
> Subject: Late Grain Additions, citrus, pH Time:8:04 AM Date:12/10/92
> >as alternatives to very high mash temperatures, S. Thomas
> >recommended adding crystal only in the mash-out rest,
> >so the big sugars don't get reduced
>
> This comment, via Jed Parsons, raised a question in my mind. Is there
> sufficient time in the mash-out for the sugars in the crystal malt to dissolve?
> Wouldn't it be better to separately steep the crystal malt during the mash
> cycle and then add it to the mash?
Could be, and I've done this, too. Of course, they sit there during
the whole sparge time. I normally only steep crystal for about
.5 hour when I'm doing an extract batch, so the sparge time should be
sufficiently long to extract the sugar.
Time for an experiment!
=S
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 11:11:49 EST
From: casagran@gdstech.grumman.com (Lou Casagrande)
Subject: Gummed labels for laserwriters?
Fellow Homebrewers,
My co-brewer and I have been looking for the kind of gummed labels
which must be wet in order to apply them (this is to make their
removal easier) which are also arranged in sheets so that they can be
fed through a laserwriter. Of course, we want to design our own
labels, and since we brew a variety of beverages, we need to be able
to easily print a variety of labels. Has anyone run across anything
like this?
AdvTHANKSance,
Lou Casagrande
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 11:29:48 EST
From: dipalma@banshee.sw.stratus.com (James Dipalma)
Subject: food grade buckets
Hi All,
I recently brewed my worst batch of beer ever, and I'd like some
help identifying the cause.
With the onset of winter, the prospect of spending two hours in
an unheated garage in sub-freezing temperatures huddled over a cajun
cooker definitely puts a damper on the fun aspect of brewing.
Accordingly, I decided to downsize my batches to three gallons, so I
could boil the entire volume on the stovetop in my nice, warm kitchen.
I took the fairly obvious approach of multiplying the quantities on
the grain bill of my favorite recipe by 0.6. The resulting 5.5 pounds
of grist placed in a standard (i.e., 5 gallon buckets) Zapap lauter tun
produced a grain bed with a depth of about 5 inches. I had read about
(in Noonan, I think) the realtionship between grain bed depth and
good filtering, so I went to the local hardware store and found two
3.5 gallon buckets. These buckets are considerably smaller in diameter
than the 5 gallon buckets, so I reasoned that the grain bed should be
considerably deeper. They also *looked* just like the food-grade
buckets I already had, so I dutifully brought them home, drilled them
out, installed a tap, brewed a three gallon batch of pale ale, and
put it in a three gallon carboy to ferment.
The beer sat in primary for three weeks before I bottled it, due
to an unexpected business trip. I generally ferment 5 gallon batches
in 6.5 gallon carboys, then rack to secondary. With the use of these
oversize carboys, I don't need a blowoff tube. The first sign of
trouble was the incredibly thick mass of trub that had collected in
the neck of the carboy. There was even some trub in the airlock,
though not much. As I racked the beer to a bottling vessel, little
warning bells were going off in my head, "shoulda used a blowoff tube",
"sat on the trub for three weeks", "can you say 'fusel alcohols?'".
I decided to taste the brew before bottling.
Well, the beer smelled something like turpentine, and it's aroma
was it's best feature. The flavor was so incredibly foul, I cannot
find the words to describe it. Needless to say, the bacteria living
in my septic system enjoyed an evening of drunken revelry, at my
expense.
What went wrong? I have two theories:
1) The buckets I bought were not food grade. It's easy to imagine the
horrible types of chemicals that may have leached into the beer, given
the temperature and acidity of the mash during sparging. I recall a
post on HBD from the dim and distant past, wherein someone explained
that by federal law, food grade buckets are required to have certain
information stamped on the bottom. An acronym, something like HPE?
HPDE? springs to mind. Any net.brewers have this info?
2) The off-flavor resulted from sitting on the trub too long. Since
I've always used oversized fermenters and racked to secondary, this
is one problem (probably the only one) that I have'nt experienced.
Anyone ever brew a beer that had this problem? What is the flavor
like (assuming you were sturdy enough to keep it in your mouth long
enough to taste it)??
Cheers,
Jim
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 12:52:43 -0500
From: uucp@hophead.canrem.COM
From: Peter Maxwell <peterm@aoraki.dtc.hp.com>
Subject: when to pitch a starter?
>I'm about to embark on my first ever use of liquid yeast. I've made up a
>starter of 1 pint of wort and am waiting for the frothies to start. This
>raises the question on exactly when to pitch this starter. In particular:
>1. The instructions indicate "at high krausen". Is this the normally done
>practice?
>2. Why the above? What happens if one waits until the starter is fermented
>out and all activity ceases? I would have thought that the yeast are
>continually multiplying during fermentation, as well as during aerobic
>respiration, so that the maximum cell count would result from using it
>later.
The yeast will drop out of suspension and start
going dormant.
>3. In conjunction with 2, I gather the yeast go dormant at the end of
>fermentation, but so what? When beer is bottled, fermentation has
>definitely stopped, but the yeast happily rapidly ferments the priming
>sugar. So what's the difference between this and pitching fermented-out
>starter into fresh wort?
You want the largest number of active cells. The
idea behind the starter is to get the ferment going
has quickly has possible. If the starter is already
dormant for awhile then you have to wait for
everything to get going again. In bottle
ferementation you are going to wait 1+weeks anyway
so it doesn't matter. Also with lagers that have
been sitting around for awhile pitching fresh yeast
into the green beer isn't unusual.
>From: Carlo Fusco <G1400023@NICKEL.LAURENTIAN.CA>
>Subject: Questions about imports
>A question for Canadians from Ontario. Has anyone tried importing beer by the
>Vinage's division of the liquor store? If yes, what type of mark up should I
>expect? I want to get a case [24] of Sierra Nivada Pale Ale [I would like to
>try it since I hear so much about it], but the people at the liquor store
>never heard of it.
Well I've discussed it with Customs. It will cost
you 55% in duties and taxes if you go to Buffalo and
pick it up your self. Expect the LCBO to charge even
more-( I think the various SN products are something
like $8-9US a six in Buffalo.
>Now a question for American's. I had the opertunity to try the Samual Adams
>Boston Ale. What are people's opinions of this beer?...I liked it, there is
>nothing like it in Canada, from a domestic view point.
I'd also like an opinion of this beer. The two
bottles I tried weren't very good at all. In fact
I'd say they were either off or just rather bad. No
head retentions and personally not a very exciting
taste. Locally I'd suggest that any of the
Wellington products are much better. I have a couple
bottles of Samual Adams Lager hopefully this will be
better but I'm not holding my breath.
>From: bradley@adx.adelphi.edu (Rob Bradley)
>Subject: yeast's tolerance of alcohol
>I racked a gallon of cyser today. Using M&F dry, the gravity fell
>from 1082 to 1002 in only 3 weeks. I was somewhat disappointed:
>I used ale yeast instead of, e.g., champagne yeast to get a higher
>final gravity. I figured the alcohol would kill off the yeast
>somewhere around 8% alcohol by volume, leaving me an FG of 1020
>or above.
I think the bigger question here is what's in the
batch. Honey will ferment out totally. How far will
the cider go? A drop of 80points is quite large but
I'd argue that unless the SG was much higher it
would ferment dry.
Nick
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 10:23:07 PST
From: gak@wrs.com (Richard Stueven)
Subject: Re: blowoff or blowup?
In HBD# 1032, Dave Hyde laments his brewing misfortune:
>...dumped it into a carboy, which it almost filled. Mistake #1.
>
>...pitched it with dry yeast without draining any, and stuck in a
>blowoff tube. Mistake #2.
>
>...the warmest room of the house, and let it set. Mistake #3.
>
>...just pull the tube out...and replace it. Mistake #4.
>
>WHOOSH
>
>I came home after all that night.
Mistake #5.
have fun
gak
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 13:33 EDT
From: HOWED@bcvax1.bc.edu
Subject: Cinnamon Stopper?
In mid-November I decided to brew a simple cinnamon beer for the
holidays. It's basically a brown ale with some fresh ground cinnamon added
during the end of the boil. There were no problems in the fermenters. The
S.G. went from 1.040 to 1.014 with no problem. Nothing unusual when I bulk
primed them seemed to happen either. The problem is that Christmas is coming,
and the beer has yet to carbonate.
Could one of these factors be the problem? --->
I added 3/4 tblspn of cinnamon to the priming sugar because
there was no cinnamon taste to the beer when I bottled.
Did I bottle too quickly?
In an attempt to carbonate more, I tried adding 1/4 tsp of
corn sugar to a bottle, and it foamed over, leaving a
great head, but still no carbonation. I have since
tried re-priming one six-pack worth to see what happens
Any suggestions?
Baffled but Brewing Better Beers,
Dave
HOWED@BCVMS.BC.EDU "It's crisp, it's clean, and it's
distinctively alcoholic. It's....
BEER!"
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 10:32:29 PST
From: gak@wrs.com (Richard Stueven)
Subject: Boston's Best Burton Bitter
Commonwealth Brewing Company in Boston makes a terrific ale they call
"Boston's Best Burton Bitter". It's nice and thick and malty and I
can't even find a description of the style anywhere.
Can someone who's familiar with this beer (eh, Chuck? nudge nudge)
give me some pointers on replicating it?
thx
gak
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 09:00 CST
From: arf@ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: Ham Brew Forum
I get many inquiries about my logon (arf) and herein furnish the explanation
along with another idea for expanding the outreach to and of the homebrew
community.
ARF is an acronym for the Amateur Radio Forum. This was a weekly talk show
that I hosted for over 5 years on the 75 meter amateur radio band. It was 3
hrs of nonstop monolog and dialog on frequently outrageous and usually
politically incorrect issues of the day. I was, for all practical purposes
the Rush Limbaugh of ham radio. Unlike Rush, I got nothing (but fun) for my
efforts and finally got bored with it all and gave it up this Fall. The
acronym was a natural choice for my internet logan as I was also very active
in political discussions on usenet and the continuity made sense at the time.
It now occurs to me that there could be enough home-brewers with ham licenses
or at least short wave radios out there that we could get a home brew
discussion goin on the radio. I had mentioned home brewing frequently during
my ARF programs but never once heard from anyone with the slightest interest.
It is entirely possible that the two hobbies are incompatible for some reason
but it can't hurt to ask.
So, if there are any hams out there interested in talking about home brewing
on the radio, please drop email to me and let me know.
js
------------------------------
Date: Monday, December 14, 1992 07:34:59
From: TBSAMSEL@qvarsa.er.usgs.gov (Theodore B. Samsel)
Subject: artesian water
Just because water comes from an artesian well doesn't mean it is
of higher "quality". The chemistry of the formation in which the
aquifer resides is as important as the nature of the aquifer's
recharge zone(s).
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 14:11 EST
From: STROUD <STROUD%GAIA@leia.polaroid.com>
Subject: Legality of Eisbocks
Two local brewing companies have both started advertising (and selling) what
they claim to be eisbocks. In both cases the claim is made that the alcohol
level of the final product is increased by actually freezing out part of the
water.
I was always under the impression that the BATF considers this practice to be
illegal, since it is a form of alcohol concentration and hence is synonymous
with distillation.
Any comments?
- --Steve Stroud
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 15:14:17 EST
From: dipalma@banshee.sw.stratus.com (James Dipalma)
Subject: RE: HBD 1032
Hi All,
In HBD 1032, Mark Garti asks:
>when sparging
>and adding sparge water, are you supposed to let the water level
>start to drop below the the top of the grain before adding more
>sparge water. OR do you never let this happen. All the books
>are pretty grey here.
I try to maintain 1-2 inches of water on top of the grain bed
when sparging. If you let the water level drop below the top of
the grain, the runoff will slow due to the lack of water pressure
in the column. Also, when you add water to such a sparge set-up,
you will disturb the grain bed and diminish the filtering.
>also no one touched my question about reasonable conversion times.
>i had asked if most people end up doing a conversion step of 45-90
>minutes? papazzian had indicated a total time of about 25 minutes.
>is anyone getting decent efficencies with this short a time. I'm
>not but i don't know if this is the problem, or if it's something
>else. i usually get 25 ppg.
My conversion times are approximately one hour, with slight
variances due to amount and type of malt used. 25 minutes seems a
little low, are you using an iodine test to determine if conversion
is complete?
**************************************************************
Also in HBD 1032, Scott James asks:
>I found that buffering my sparge water (2-3 gallons) with 1/2 teaspoon
>gypsum greatly increased my extraction rates. Does anybody else do
>this to?
And Todd Enders writes:
>Sparge
>water was acidified with lactic acid ala Miller
>...
>The last runnings had no preceivable tannic taste.
There was a recent thread on this forum regarding the lack of
tannin extraction during decoction mashing, the conclusion being
that low pH environments minimize the extraction of tannins.
Someone (Darryl Richman?) included an explanation of why tannin
extraction is problematic during sparging, i.e., the pH of
the mash increases as sparge water is added.
In my particular case, I have well water that is very hard.
When I pre-boil this water, a large amount of white precipitate
forms which I assume to be calcium carbonate. The pH of this
water after boiling is still something near 7. During sparging,
the taste of tannin becomes noticeable when the SG of the runoff
is still 1.020-1.025. Clearly, there is still quite a bit of
sugar present, but if I continue to sparge I get the tannins
as well. I saw the thread on tannin extraction, and decided to
try acidifying my sparge water.
I got this stuff called 'Acidblend' from a friend who makes
wine, and uses it for the same purpose, pH adjustment. I don't
know what's in it, but it is certainly effective in lowering pH.
I use 1/4 *teaspoon* per 4 gallons of water, which brings the pH
from ~7 to 5.5 - 5.0!! I have used it for the last three batches,
and while I did notice a slight improvement in extraction, the
biggest improvement, IMHO, is that I now sparge all the way down
down to 1.005, with no noticeable tannin taste in the runoff.
I can't taste any sugars at that point either, so I stop sparging
at this point.
I have'nt noticed any unusual fermentation characteristics
with these three batches, so it appears that the yeast is still
working well, despite the somewhat more acidic wort. The first
of the three batches was kegged this weekend, so I'll soon have
some notion of what effects the acidification had on flavor.
Cheers,
Jim
------------------------------
Date: Monday, 14 Dec 1992 15:53:32 EST
From: m14051@mwvm.mitre.org (John DeCarlo)
Subject: American Society of Brewing Chemists (ASBC)
Had to look up some standards-related stuff and found a bunch of listings
for Brewing standards. Things like ASBC Brewer 4-58, or ASBC Malt, or
ASBC Wort. Anyone have the scoop on these before I investigate through
more mundane means?
Thanks.
Internet: jdecarlo@mitre.org (or John.DeCarlo@f131.n109.z1.fidonet.org)
Fidonet: 1:109/131
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 15:01 CST
From: korz@iepubj.att.com
Subject: Re:Wyeast/Lautering/Conversion/Corona
Jimmy writes:
>Anyway, I just recently bought some liquid yeast and was a bit
>shocked at the price; not that it is outlandish, or anything,
>but after using the dry yeast that comes free with the extract
>syrup, it seems like its a lot of $. So, my next thoughts turn
>to culturing yeast.
Well, I personally think that it is worth it. I have lately been
trying Nottingham and Windsor from Lallemand, and Cooper's, but I'm
not about to give up my #1028 or the other Wyeasts. My recipes are
formulated with specific yeasts -- that's because the yeast has *so*
much to do with the flavor of the final beer. Splitting a package
of Wyeast is a great way to bring down its cost.
>Using Papazian, 2nd edition, I have no problem with the explanation
>of the preparation of the medium. Now, on p279, under the heading
>"Culturing the yeast", he says to open the container of pure yeast
>culture and pour it into your previously prepared medium (6 oz of wort
>in a 12 oz vigorously sanitized bottle.)
>
>My liquid yeast has the two sections of liquid, one of which
>your supposed to break, then let the package swell up. Do you do
>do this, allow for the swelling, then dump the entire thing
>the bottle? Or do you break the inner part
>and immediately dump both sections into the bottle? Or do you
>ignore the inner part and just dump the one section in?
Pop the inner package, let it swell to about an inch and then pitch
it into the starter -- that would be my advice. For the record, the
yeast is in the outer package.
>Once the liquid yeast is in the bottle, you place a fermentation
>lock on it, according to Papazian. Fermentation starts, but then what?
>Papazain says stick it in the refrigerator, then repropogate in 2 to
>4 weeks. When do you use it? When you repropogate, do you split
>the bottle contents in half and propogate two cultures? Do you drain
>off the liquid in the top half of the bottle and just use the sediment?
>Do you have to let everything get to room temperature?
If you will not use it right away, I suggest letting it ferment out and
store it in a cool (60-65F) place. When you're ready to brew, 12 or 24
hours beforehand, add some more 1020 wort to get the yeast re-started.
>I have so many questions, about this, that I may as well stop at this
>point. Can anyone give me some pointers and/or step-by-step
>instructions? And, perhaps, can anyone render an opinion: I'm
>still a beginner, having only brewed 5 batches, am I getting
>in over my head to quickly?
No. You won't be a beginner for long, but only by experimenting with
different techniques and ingredients can you break out of beginnerhood.
Liquid yeast is a great way to go.
****************************
Mark writes:
>I use a zapapp lauter tun (bucket in bucket). It was made from
>2 6.5 gallon buckets. all this talk about sparging and solution
>concentration had me thinking about my technique. when sparging
>and adding sparge water, are you supposed to let the water level
>start to drop below the the top of the grain before adding more
>sparge water. OR do you never let this happen. All the books
>are pretty grey here.
You should *not* let the water level drop below the level of the
grain. The grain are partially supported by the water and thus
draining the water will cause the grain to compress.
>
>also no one touched my question about reasonable conversion times.
>i had asked if most people end up doing a conversion step of 45-90
>minutes? papazzian had indicated a total time of about 25 minutes.
>is anyone getting decent efficencies with this short a time. I'm
>not but i don't know if this is the problem, or if it's something
>else. i usually get 25 ppg.
I believe that Charlie is talking about fully-modified malts (Pale Ale
Malts) converting completely at relatively high saccharification
temperatures. Sure, you can convert fully modified malt in 25 minutes
at 158F. On the other hand, if you use all Munich malt at 148F, you
can easily exceed 2 hours for conversion.
*****************************
>>From: BLASS@bigvax.alfred.edu (YOU'VE GOT THE EGGS, I'VE GOT THE SCRAPPLE, LET'S MAKE US A BREAKFAST)
>>I am interested in recipes for mexican beers, like Corona, and
>>how to make malt liquor. I tried a few different malt liquors, some
>>enjoyable (Mickey's Fine Malt Liquor), some not that enjoyable. How
>>is it made and are there any recipes?
Rather than have you be disappointed by your homebrew, I'd like to point
out that these two beers you have mentioned, are very light-bodied and
light-flavored. Most of the recipes you will find will make a beer that
is considerably more flavorful and heavier than these. The way to make
a very light-bodied, light-flavored beer is (as James put it, rather
tersely) to add alot of corn sugar. You may get a negative reaction from
many homebrewers regarding very light beers because, for many, it is just
the style of beer that we are trying to avoid -- I became a homebrewer
primarily because I could not find beers other than the American Light
Lager style in my area. I've since found suppliers.
Just a style note -- Corona is not a typical Mexican beer. Mexican beers,
in general are more full-bodied, amber in color and more flavorful. Many
are of the Vienna style. Corona was created to fill a market need -- the
laborers in Mexico could not afford the regular beers, which contained a
lot of expensive malt. Corona was created as a cheap, high-corn-sugar
"beer" for the poorest people in Mexico. The lime, incidentally, was
introduced not to the beer, rather it was used by Mexicans to clean the
tops of dusty cans and then discarded. Some marketing suit saw them and
thought they were putting the lime in the beer. (Wanna make friends at
a fern bar? -- tell a yuppie with a lime in his beer these two stories.)
************************
Dave writes:
>Vanilla Bean Stout (5 gal)
>
>2 lb crystal (90L)
>4 oz chocolate malt
>4 oz black patent malt
>2 oz roasted barley
>6 lb dark dme
>
>1.5 oz Northern Brewer (60 min)
> .5 oz Eroica (finish)
>
>Wyeast Irish (1098)
^^^^
Hmmm? Wyeast Irish is #1084. #1098 is British Ale (Whitbread).
*********************
MIKE writes:
>Well after fifteen batches, I got cocky and walked away from a covered pot and
>I paid the boil over price for the first time. I KNOW this has been discussed
>here before but I never paid any attention. How to I get this crap off of my
>stove? I've tried "Soft-Scrub" but it just doesn't cut it. Please, if I don't
>get this off my wife might leave me else quit brewing. I'd really miss her
>too. MIKE
In the future, you might try soaping-up the top of the stove before brewing.
Any splatters or boilovers will not stick to the surface and then you just
rinse after brewing. In the meantime, I suggest spraying something like
Formula 409 or Fantistic onto the stain and letting it sit for an hour.
Then rub-and-scrub till your arm gets tired and repeat with the spray.
Al.
P.S.
In digest 1031, John notes:
>P.S. Apparently some of the Chicago Beer Society (CBS) members have gone
>national! Our newspaper, the San Diego Union-Tribune, carried an article
>today by Michael Lev all about homebrewing, including a picture of Ray Daniels
>cooking up a batch. Also mentioned were Randy Mosher, Steve Paeschke, Chris
>Campanelli, Chris Nemeth, and Al Korzonas. And of course it wouldn't be a
>decent article with a few quotes from Charlie Papazian. (Sorry to hear about
>Al's bock-style home perm solution :). Great job guys! Keep spreading the word!
Don't feel bad for me John, after two additional months of aging, that perm
beer won 2nd place for Bock at the CBS Spooky Brew Review.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 16:04:49 EST
From: diana@Kodak.COM (Gary M. Diana 39623)
Subject: Ham Brew Forum
Full-Name: Guy Diana
Jack -
I saw your post on usenet abot the 80m homebrew forum.
Sounds like a great idea to me. I am building a couple
qrp boxes, and have recently built a power supply. I have
an antenna tuner project getting ready as well.
Being new to homebrewing, I'd like a forum to ask people
"dumb" questions (I built this wonderful vfo from an
article in QST; the power output is X, is that right??).
- Gary , N2JGU
gmdiana@kodak.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 16:13:55 EST
From: magdek@LONEX.RL.AF.MIL (Kevin M. Madge)
Subject: re: citrus flavor from hops
dratchen@std.MENTORG.COM (Daniel Ratchen) wrote the following:
> Are there any hop experts out there? I am trying to identify
> what type of hop can be used to impart a citrusy aroma and
> character to a brew. I have tasted this in several Northwest
> micro-brews and I am curious what the brewers did to get this
> flavor.
I'm not a hop expert, however a beer that I brewed had a slight
unexpected citrus flavor. I dry hopped the beer with willamette
hops in a hop bag (willamette was also used for bittering).
The hops that I used was fresh.
Kevin Magde
magdek@lonex.rl.af.mil
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 15:25:13 EST
From: chuck@synchro.com (Chuck Cox)
Subject: Subpoena
Well, I was served an interesting document the other day...
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
United States District Court
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
BOSTON BEER COMPANY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP,
d/b/a THE BOSTON BEER COMPANY
V.
SLESAR BROS. BREWING COMPANY, INC.
d/b/a BOSTON BEER WORKS
SUBPOENA IN A CIVIL CASE
CASE NUMBER: 92-10865-K
TO: Charles Cox
Synchrosystems
44 Western Ave (wrong address!!)
Cambridge, MA 02139
YOU ARE COMMANDED to appear ...
at the taking of a deposition in the above case.
YOU ARE COMMANDED to produce and permit inspection
of the following documents ...
Any written correspndence or other documents in your possession which
refer, relate or allude to Boston Beer Company, Boston Beer Works, or
Commonwealth Brewing Company and/or any persons connected with Boston
Beer Company, Boston Beer Works or Commonwealth Brewing Company.
(signed) Richard A. Savrann, Esq.
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
As some of you may recall, I wrote a letter to the BBW attorneys this
summer expressing my opinion about this trademark infringement nonsense.
While the letter was never used, the BBC attorneys found out about it by
reading my postings to the net, and now they want to see it.
While issuing the above subpoena is perfectly legal, I think it is also
indicative of how absurdly litigious Koch & Co have become.
FYI: The above case is an appeal to the original trademark infringement
case which BBC lost. They are also suing the CBC for using the word
'Boston' on their labels.
Here is a copy of the letter that has them so worried...
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
5 June 1992
To whom it may concern,
In my opinion, consumers will not be confused by any
similarity between "Boston Beer Works" and "Boston Beer
Company". "Boston Beer Company" is not widely known by
consumers, since most identify their products as "Samuel
Adams". In addition, "Boston Beer" is a generic phrase and
is part of the name of a variety of businesses,
organizations and events in the Boston area.
Sincerely,
Charles Cox
BJCP Master Beer Judge
Member - Boston Beer Society
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
- --
Chuck Cox <chuck@synchro.com>
Free your mind and your ass will follow - George Clinton
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 16:27:24 -0500
From: Nick Zentena <zen%hophead@canrem.com>
Subject: Homebrew Distributors??
Hi,
Does anybody have a list of homebrew
distributors?[not resellers]
Thanks
Nick
*****************************************************************************
I drink Beer I don't collect cute bottles!
zen%hophead@canrem.com
*****************************************************************************
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1033, 12/15/92
*************************************
-------
