Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #1075
This file received at Sierra.Stanford.EDU 93/02/11 00:39:02
HOMEBREW Digest #1075 Thu 11 February 1993
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator
Contents:
hbus & ibus (Jim Grady)
QC, Archive, Snobs, Iodophor (Jack Schmidling)
Malted Barley (Michael D. Galloway)
DAB recipes? Yeast Culturing, and others. (thutt)
Re: John Harvard Brew House (Jonathan A. Rodin)
stainless-steel pot (Drew Scott)
Re: Spiced Ales, DME vs. syrup (David Van Iderstine)
beer (Gregory C. Seher)
3.2 a/w, Spaten Hefe Weizen, Never mind the full grainers, d (Ulick Stafford)
all-grain snobs (Andy Rowan)
A New Journal (Martin A. Lodahl)
Re: recirculation FAQ (continued) (korz)
Chinook hops (Joseph Nathan Hall)
fining -> diacetyl (Russ Gelinas)
A Beer Odyssey (Act I) (Richard Stueven)
hops plugs & G.W. Kent (NOT!) ("Spencer W. Thomas")
Re: Wet dream/ridding oil from plastics (korz)
Worst brew (SCHREMPP_MIKE/HP4200_42)
Re: Hops Cultivation (korz)
Re: Spiced Ale ("John DeCarlo")
Re: chimay yeast (korz)
Re: chimay yeast/recipe idea (Drew Lawson)
Malting Wheat (Kelly Jones)
BBW wins again! (Chuck Cox)
Souring Wort (Dan Wood)
Archives (Richard Stueven)
Re: diacetyl? (korz)
Send articles for __publication_only__ 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, BUT PLEASE NOTE that if
you subscribed via the BITNET listserver (BEER-L@UA1VM.UA.EDU),
then you MUST unsubscribe the same way!
If your account is being deleted, please be courteous and unsubscribe first.
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 don't send me requests for back issues - you will be silently ignored.
For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to lutzen@novell.physics.umr.edu
IMPORTANT NEWS -- PLEASE READ
-----------------------------
There will be nobody reading mail sent to homebrew-request during the
period Feb 8 through approx. Feb 28. This means that any requests for
changes or cancellations will not be handled until the end of the month.
Subscription requests will continue to be handled automatically, and the
digest will continue to be sent automatically, barring any computing
device catastrophes. So if you send a message here and get no immediate
reply, or if the digest stops suddenly, please do not panic. Just be
patient.
ps. and please try to behave yourselves while I'm gone ;-)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 93 8:26:42 EST
From: Jim Grady <jimg@hpwarga.wal.hp.com>
Subject: hbus & ibus
First of all, thanks for all the charts and formulae for hbus -> ibus
given boiling time, S.G., etc. I do still have a question however. I
have seen that pellets have different utilization than whole hops (both
in this forum and in some of the homebrew books); indeed hop plugs have
yet another utilization rate. Yet, none of the charts nor formulae
contain any reference to the form of the hops. Does anyone have any
suggestions here? Am I worrying too much? Should I just use what I
have as a starting point and see how I like the results?
- --
Jim Grady |"Talent imitates, genius steals."
Internet: jimg@wal.hp.com |
Phone: (617) 290-3409 | T. S. Eliot
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 93 07:40 CST
From: arf@ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: QC, Archive, Snobs, Iodophor
>Fm: Jim Busch
>PS: to JS- My lauter tun/open fermenter does indeed have a spigot. The
only problem with taking ferment SG readings is that what comes out is
yeast sludge!
True but my "QC" samples were tongue in cheek. They never get near a
hydrometer. The first squirt is a bit yeasty but with the you-know-what
screen at the other end of the spigot, I get a fairly clear "sample" to
taste.
>From: neilm@juliet.ll.mit.edu ( Neil Mager )
>Subject: Special Archive Proposal
Let me make another proposal. How bout explaining what an archive is and how
one goes about accessing it before you expand on a special archive.
............
> Various, Snobs...
Again, I am forced to defend my statements on "all-grain snobs" but prefer to
do it without personal references because this thread is simply going the
wrong way again. I am sure that I could benefit from sensitivity training
but I wasn't able to sell my business at 40 and retire to a life of leasure
because I was a fool or a tyrant. One key to success is to find out what
people really intend, want and mean and not try to explain to them what they
mean.
I listed many reasons why people make extract or all-grain beer, some
positive and some negative and some with a value to be asigned by the brewer
or reader. To isolate the meanest and thrash the messenger with it is not
only unfair but deflects the discussion into an endless stream of usless
personal attacks instead of getting to the bottom of the issue.
Viz...... The economics is one major factor in the issue and it certainly is
true that one can make a batch of extract beer with less initial expense than
a single batch of all-grain beer.
However, as one refines his extract process, he ends up within a few dollars
of an all-grain brewery. When you get right down to it, the only thing one
really needs to do all-grain is a large enough kettle to boil it in. These
are available for $30 at ACE Hardware and $5 more will get you a homemade
Easymasher in the same store. I am sure if one haunts garage sales, one
could get it down even further. That and less than $10 for ingredients will
put you in the all-grain business. Most of the rest of the gadgets and
gizmos are just as useful and important to the serious extract brewer as they
are to the all-grainer.
One final point, I posted the same article to Compuserve and received not a
single negative comment. Again, I am not sure what this portends but it is
food for thought.
>From: "Rick (R.) Cavasin" <cav@bnr.ca>
>My incentive for using an iodophor was the hope that it could be reused more
than bleach (iodine less volatile than chlorine?) and hence less would go
down the drain (and into the air I'm breathing!).
Precisely my reason (breathing) for trying it. That is, in addition to the
fact that I got a free sample in the mail. However, I don't think that it
has anywhere near the useful life of bleach.
I do not feel comfortable with the 1 minute contact time with a sanitizer so
I always used bleach full strength or at least 50:50 and I use this stuff, 1
oz to the gal. There is no shortage of clean water around here so I have no
qualms about thorough rinsing.
I don't like the chlorine fumes and I usually wear a respirator when doing a
keg or my pump and hoses. I like being able to do a simple one time rinse
with the iodophor and not having to worry about the fumes or pitting my kegs.
I was a bit disconcerted when a fresh batch came through the pump almost
clear. I suspected oxidation so I did some experiments by shaking samples in
closed testubes and the color does not change no matter how much or over what
period I shake it.
I have no idea where the iodine goes or why it changes color. The is not
enough water in the system to dilute that much.
I guess, untill I have a bad batch of beer, I will continue to use it.
As as aside, I tried using it for the starch test and it is totally ambiguous
and unsuited for the test.
js
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1993 08:43:46 -0500
From: mgx@ornl.gov (Michael D. Galloway)
Subject: Malted Barley
OK,
I've got my 10 gal. cooler with false bottom and associated plumbing,
I've got my 8.5 gal pot, and I've got my immersion chiller: I guess
I'm ready to mash. I am going to get 8-10 lbs of British Pale Ale
malt this weekend and do "it". However, I recall (please pardon my
poor memory) a thread (hey, a real thread and not a flame thread!)
pertaining to high quality malts (Belgium?). Could someone with a
good handle on that thread please point me to the appropriate HBD
issue numbers or email me a summary. I am interested in using these
malts. Also, could someone post or email this newbie a description
of what comprises a high quality malt (proteins/nitrogen/modification/?),
i.e, what are the important factors. Are all malts fully modified
these days? How do you determine this information?
Hey BadAssAstronomer, how about a few bottles of my first all-grain
batch?
Inquiring (and Forgetful) Minds Want to Know!
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 09 Feb 93 08:45:59 EST
From: thutt <thutt@MAIL.CASI.NASA.GOV>
Subject: DAB recipes? Yeast Culturing, and others.
Does anyone have a recipe for a DAB beer clone? If not, do you
know what IBU it has? What type of malt/hops would produce that
flavor?
Secondly, what is the general concensus on Bigfoot Barley Wine? I
tried it, and felt that it tasted EXACTLY like SN Pale Ale, only
more alcoholic; I was not impressed... I expected something
different. Is this how a BW is supposed to taste?
Could someone provide me with the number to one of the science
houses that sells flasks & test tubes?
Does anyone have any 'caveat emptors' for the mail order places
that are advertised in Zymurgy? (Are some less reliable than
others? I've noticed some strange variations in price too...)
I've also gotten a book published by G.W. Kent on Culturing Yeast
that should be avoided, if you like the English language. The book
seems to be technically correct, but is so full of errors (bad
editing, grammatical errors) that I will probably write a nasty
letter of complaint to the publisher (it's in its third!!!!!
printing, and it STILL has this many errors).
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 93 09:12:46 -0500
From: rodin@ftp.com (Jonathan A. Rodin)
Subject: Re: John Harvard Brew House
The beers currently sold at John Harvard Brew House are not brewed there.
They only recently got their license to brew and so their first beers are
still weeks away from being servable.
Jon
- --
Jon Rodin FTP Software, Inc. voice: (508) 659-6261
rodin@ftp.com 2 High Street fax: (508) 794-4488
North Andover, MA 01845
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 93 10:05:19 EST
From: drew@scorpio.ic.cmc.ca (Drew Scott)
Subject: stainless-steel pot
For those of you who live in eastern Canada, I found a source
for 30 quart (US) stainless-steel pots. I don't know who
manufactures them (no label) but they seem fairly sturdy.
The regular price is only $65 but I got one on sale for $50.
I know the same pot is sold elsewhere for over twice this
price. The address of the store is:
Ares Equipement Ltee
4913 Boul. St-Charles
Pierrefonds (Montreal), Quebec
H9H 3E4
Tele: 514-624-0386
Fax: 514-624-4550
I have no idea if they will accept orders over the phone.
Andrew
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 93 09:41:56 EST
From: orgasm!davevi@uunet.UU.NET (David Van Iderstine)
Subject: Re: Spiced Ales, DME vs. syrup
In HBD #1073, Jonathon Knight asks:
|>has anyone tried BOTH the technique of adding whole spices at some
|>point to the boil AND adding powdered spices at the end of the boil?
I used to add whole spices somewhere mid-boil, and found that, for some
of the spices, their aroma/taste was being boiled off, particularly things
like orange zest or vanilla. Others, like ginger, would last through and
overwhelm completely. I tend to steer clear of ginger now, both `cuz it
easily overwhelms, and I just don't like its flavor!
I switched over to powdered spices near the end of the boil (5-8 minutes)
and am much happier with the results now. It has become very easy to get
consistency from batch to batch with this method, I find. I've settled
in on a particular recipe of my own creation which I have made several
years running now, and I can be assured it'll "taste right" when done.
There may be some dispute, though, over just how fresh powdered spices
might be, and that'd I think affect their utilization in the wort. The
only advantage I can see to whole spices over powdered is this "freshness
thing". And for certain spices, like orange zest, there is no powdered
alternative, nor need there be. Add that one near the end of the boil
for best results. And be aware that "oily" spices, like coriander, will
severely affect head retention and even bottle conditioning (carbonation)-
that is, really retard it!
Finally, I find it easier to control quantities with the powdered
versions. And believe me, they're *small* quantities! Nothing over 1 1/2
teaspoons goes in, some as little as 1/2 teaspoon!
On the subject of dry malt vs. syrup extract-I use only Munton & Fison
dry malt extract, have for 5 or 6 years, make great beer w/it, see no
reason to change. Also, I buy it 55 lbs. at a time, to minimize cost.
I go w/their lightest variety, & use specialty grains for flavor/color.
Dave Van Iderstine
===========================================================================
== Dave Van Iderstine Senior Software Engineer ==
== Xerox Imaging Systems, Inc. ==
== UUCP: uunet!pharlap!orgasm!davevi davevi@pharlap.com :INTERNET ==
==-----------------------------------------------------------------------==
== "I haven't got time for instant gratification!" ==
==-----------------------------------------------------------------------==
== "I've got plenty of time, however, for that ALL-EXTRACT beer." ==
===========================================================================
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 93 9:49:05 CST
From: Gregory C. Seher <lippy@cwis.unomaha.edu>
Subject: beer
Yee, yee i know 'dat all you'ds be makin' home 'de brew. Yet we de see
all of the sea, in my bell-e Coors Light 'tis for thee.
Peace.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 93 10:59:40 EST
From: Ulick Stafford <ulick@schumann.helios.nd.edu>
Subject: 3.2 a/w, Spaten Hefe Weizen, Never mind the full grainers, d
Tom Colvin regrets that only 3.2 alc beer is available in
grocery stores in Utah. 2 points. That is not unusual even in
more liberal states such as Minnesota. In Indana 3.2 are
not sold, but grocery stores need a licence to sell beer,
and can't sell it chilled. And nowhere can sell it on Sundays,
unlike in neighbouring states due to a bible belt part in
the south. But at least it is cheaper than neighbouring states,
and we don't have an inane law like MI's 10cent return charge
(but why can't all beer sale laws and prices be like Wisconsin?).
3.2 is 3.2 by weight ~4% by volume, so it is not gruesomely weak.
It is stronger than many European table beers.
Spaten usually sell Hefe Weizen under the brand name, Fransiskaner,
which is readily available. I cultured from it once, think I got
Krausen, but by the time I was ready to pitch, it was not lively and
the culture seemed to have a aa tart lactic acid flavor, so I used a
substitute (Fleischman's baking yeast - don't laugh the beer eventually
was award winning), but I suspect with proper sanitation it is a viable
yeast.
Never mind whole grain snobs, us decocters look down upon them with an
even more snobbish disdain - what they are too lazy to stir a thick
decoction and spend up to 8 hours mashing (but then I only do double
decoctions and I'm sure triple decocters think I'm ignorant and lazy,
and hop growers and barley malters think they're lazy, and people who
grow and harvest, and malt and mash their own barley and wheat and
irish moss look down on them).
RE natural carbonation. I have had a hard time priming lagers even
with sterile wort, canned from the batch. The perfectly cleared lagered
beers have so few viable yeast cells that carbonations takes 3 weeks or
more. I will just prime ales and will now krauesen lagers in future
(and us krauseners look down with a snobbish disdain on primers - even
those who prime with sterile wort and especially those who think they`re
krauseners because they`ve never read a book more advanced than Papazian's
work, which of course us advanced snobs know, incorrectly defines
Krauesening).
:-) :-) for humor impaired
Ulick Stafford
** Heineken!?! Fuck that shit ... Pabst Blue Ribbon!!! **
(my very first sig ... now resurrected)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 93 13:00:05 EST
From: rowan@ocean.rutgers.edu (Andy Rowan)
Subject: all-grain snobs
Jack Schmidling (arf@ddsw1.mcs.com) writes in HBD 1071:
>Keeping in mind that lots of people stick with extract because they are lazy,
>paranoid or il-informed and further keeping in mind
> [etc. etc.]
>Having said that, I suggest it is the extract brewers' insecurity,
>sensitivity and paranoia that creates the image that all-grain brewers are
>snobs.
Gee, Jack, you don't suppose it might also be because you characterize us
as lazy, paranoid...
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 93 10:08:58 PST
From: Martin A. Lodahl <pbmoss!malodah@PacBell.COM>
Subject: A New Journal
If you read the Celebrator this may be old news to you, but a new
magazine devoted to the technical side of homebrewing, pub-brewing
or microbrewing is about to make its debut. Called "Brewing Techniques",
it will break new ground in homebrewing (as far as I know) by being
an honest-to-goodness "peer review" journal. The Editorial Advisory
Board (the peers who do the reviewing) consists of Patrick Baker, Byron
Burch, Fred Eckhardt, Teri Fahrendorf, George Fix, Terry Foster,
Mary Anne Gruber, Dave Miller, Greg Noonan, David Ryder and Bill
Siebel. Impressive! The clear wort of usable brewing information
certainly seems unlikely to be beclouded by the trub of unsupported
speculation presented as fact, with a panel like that reviewing
submissions.
The magazine will be published 6 times a year, at a subscription price
of $30. For an unspecified time there will be a $24 introductory
rate for "charter" subscribers. To subscribe, send a note with your
name and address information to:
Brewing Techniques
P. O. Box 3076
Eugene, OR 97403
You'll be billed after the release of the first issue, scheduled for May.
To discuss advertising rates or editorial questions, call Stephen
Mallery, Editor, at 503.683.1916.
I think this may be the magazine many of us have been waiting for ...
= Martin A. Lodahl Pacific*Bell Systems Analyst =
= malodah@pbmoss.Pacbell.COM Sacramento, CA 916.972.4821 =
= If it's good for ancient Druids, runnin' nekkid through the wuids, =
= Drinkin' strange fermented fluids, it's good enough for me! 8-) =
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 93 12:22 CST
From: korz@iepubj.att.com
Subject: Re: recirculation FAQ (continued)
I have one more piece of info on the recirculation issue that wouldn't
fit in my last post.
George Fix wrote:
>A minor data point. Dave Miller uses 2 hours of recirculation
>on a 15 bbl. (465 gal.) commercial brew. His recirculation times
>with homebrews was shorter.
>
>Dave and I have discussed recirculation at length over the years.
>He gets a grainy/husky flavor in his beers (homebrew and commercial)
>which he finds to be attractive and desirable. I have different aspirations
>for the beers I brew. Neither of these viewpoints are ameanable to
>rational analysis. What we have here are matters of style, and subjective
>opinion. Besides, just think what a boring world it would be if we were all
>making the same beer with the same procedures.
>
>As Micah pointed out (at some point in the early summer), the low lipid levels
>of US 2 row malt like Klages means that very little recirculation should
>be needed to get a clear runoff. (Malt properly crushed helps here as well.)
>Wort trub has a very high fatty acid content. The Belgium malts definitely
>have a higher lipid content, and I find that recirculation of ~4 gallons in
>a 13.3 gallon (50 liter) batch is needed to get proper clarification. So far
>grainy tones are not indicated, but the final judgement will have to await
>an analysis of the finished beer. If grainy flavors do show up, then I will
>modify the recirculation procedure.
>
>George Fix
Okay Chris, perhaps you would like to take all this and incorporate it
into the FAQ? Note that first we need to debate/resolve the "need for
lipids" issue.
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 93 12:23:33 EDT
From: joseph@joebloe.maple-shade.nj.us (Joseph Nathan Hall)
Subject: Chinook hops
Kevin says:
> ObBrewing: No takers on my question about flavor/aroma properties
> of Chinook hops, huh? Do any commercial brews use them?
The books I've read seem to disdain the use of Chinook for aroma and
bouquet. I've used 'em for both bittering and aroma and don't recall
that the results were particularly good or bad. The complaints are
harshness and poor storability, if I recall.
Centennial is far superior in my opinion. Try dry-hopping with a
half and half mixture of German Hallertau and Centennial. Fragrant,
fresh, and yummy. Wow!
================O Fortuna, velut Luna, statu variabilis================
uunet!joebloe!joseph (609) 273-8200 day joseph%joebloe@uunet.uu.net
2102 Ryan's Run East Rt 38 & 41 Maple Shade NJ 08052
Copyright 1993 by Joseph N. Hall. Permission granted to copy and
redistribute freely over USENET and by email. Commercial use prohibited.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1993 13:56:24 -0500 (EST)
From: R_GELINAS@UNHH.UNH.EDU (Russ Gelinas)
Subject: fining -> diacetyl
Lee M.,
I'd vote that adding finings early on in the secondary is what is
causing the high diacetyl in your beer. In fact, this is just what happens
with Samuel Smith beers, except their yeast flocs out because of the
nature of their slate fermentation vessels. Give the yeast more time
in suspension in the secondary to reduce the diacetyl.
Another source of high diacetyl is low oxygen levels at the beginning
of the primary ferment. If your ferments are slow or weak, and finish
with a high final gravity, this may also be adding to your problem.
Russ G.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1993 10:58:56 -0800
From: Richard Stueven <gak@wrs.com>
Subject: A Beer Odyssey (Act I)
A Beer Odyssey
I don't much like sweet beers. The Brown Ale style is not one of my
favorites. I'm not so much a hophead as I am a "malthead". I like
beers heavy, fairly dry, and very well-balanced. Bitter is fine,
flowery is right out. (I point this out so you'll have a handle on my
perspective later on. Beer with me!)
Having said that, one of the best beers I've ever tasted is Downtown
Brown Ale, from Lost Coast Brewing in Eureka. It's just sweet enough,
with just the right level of hops; it's one of my favorite beers of all
time.
I had my first taste of Downtown Brown Ale at the 1992 Fort Mason Beer
Festival in San Francisco, and I've enjoyed it at a number of
festivals since then. I had always determined to visit the brewery
and sample their beers firsthand, and one particular weekend in August
was finally the right time. My plan: drive from San Leandro to
Eureka on Saturday, visit Lost Coast in Eureka and Humboldt Brewing in
Arcata (as long as I'm there), spend the night in Eureka, and drive
home Sunday morning. Simple enough.
The Friday before the trip, I met my friend Jake at Brewpub on the
Green in Fremont. We talked about his recent trip to the Hockey Hall
of Fame in Toronto, we had a great dinner (they make some fine
hamburgers there, honest!), and we had a taste of all of their beers:
Wheat - 4.0%. Seems to be an American style, but hints of
Bavarian (clove) character. Maybe a wheat lager?
Lager - 4.2%. Same characteristics as Wheat, but not as
sweet.
Amber - 4.2%. Nice color, fruity like an amber should be.
Good stuff. Very slight Irish moss (?) flavor.
ESB - 6.0%. Just like the Amber, only more so. The alcohol
really comes through in the flavor.
Porter - 5.0%. OK - rather light and benign. ("Benign" being
the opposite of "assertive".)
Like many of the microbreweries, the brewers at Brewpub on the Green have
really improved their beers over the last year or so. So many
breweries were making...well, bad beer a year or two ago, and those
same breweries are making some of the best now. Brewpub on the Green
is no exception.
At eight o'clock in the morning on Saturday, August 15, I got in my
trusty Cougar and hit the road. I fought the early weekend Bay Area
traffic and headed north on US 101. As usual, I skipped breakfast...
why should today be any different? (Little did I know...) Around ten
o'clock, I was feeling mighty dry. I checked my map for potential
lunchtime stops...and there it was! Just an hour away - the Mendocino
Brewing Company of Hopland, California! I had been there before...good
beer, good food, and most importantly today, perfectly placed for a
lunchtime respite!
I drove into Hopland around 10:45, just a few minutes before opening
time. I waited in my car, checking my Celebrator and my map for any
more potential stops on the way to Eureka. Hmmm...Anderson Valley is
out of the way, and North Coast is even further. Too bad.
Magically, the clock struck eleven...it's opening time! And would you
believe the added bonus: it was the brewery's Ninth Anniversary.
The party started immediately; the barbecue was fired up, and the Eye
of the Hawk Ale was flowing. There was a geezer at the bar (named
"Norm", appropriately enough) who claimed that he had been there every
day since the day the place opened. There was a camera crew working on
a documentary of Northern California brewpubs. I tell ya, the place was
hoppin'! For lunch: a barbecued buffalo steak, done to perfection. I had
a round of samplers to go with my lunch:
Peregrine - Thin, yellow. Very light. Certainly a good
"transition" beer, useful for the re-education of
drinkers of industrial beer.
Blue Heron - Somewhat better. Slightly more body and flavor,
little aroma.
Red Tail - OK amber ale. Good color, flavor not as strong as
it could be. MUCH better on tap than bottled!
Black Hawk - Good black thick roasty. A little sweeter than I
like, but good enough for serious quaffing!
Eye of the Hawk - I need a pint of this to tell if I really
like it.
My pint of the Eye of the Hawk Ale was really remarkable. It's their
"special" ale, brewed only for special occasions like today. It's an
outstanding, full-bodied ale, darker than the Red Tail, and with a
similar but much more assertive flavor. It's too bad this is such a
rare beer.
[To Be Continued...]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 93 14:35:51 EST
From: "Spencer W. Thomas" <Spencer.W.Thomas@med.umich.edu>
Subject: hops plugs & G.W. Kent (NOT!)
I was at G.W. Kent on Saturday, so I asked them about hops plugs.
Randy said they had added them to their catalog this year, but then
were unable to get any from the supplier. Something about a bad crop
this year. So, G.W. Kent is not shipping hops plugs at this time. If
you thought you got some with the G.W. Kent label, you must be
confused. The only ones I've seen are imported by Crosby & Baker.
He also said that as far as he knows, any plugs on the market now must
be from the 1991 crop. If this is true, then my experience with plugs
speaks very well for their keeping ability. As I said yesterday, the
plugs I bought recently had the freshest hops I've ever used.
=Spencer W. Thomas | Info Tech and Networking, B1911 CFOB, 0704
"Genome Informatician" | Univ of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109
Spencer.W.Thomas@med.umich.edu | 313-764-8065, FAX 313-764-4133
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 93 13:33 CST
From: korz@iepubj.att.com
Subject: Re: Wet dream/ridding oil from plastics
Jack writes (quoting Paul):
>Bacto WL Differential Medium has the same formula as Bacto WL
Nutrient Medium, with the addition of 0.004 g of Actidione per
liter. This inhibits the development of yeasts without
interfering with the development of bacteria generally
encountered in beers.
A most enlightening article. However, if this is in response to the
discussion about a medium that rejects or encourages "wild yeast", it seems
to confirm my opinion that such a medium is a wet dream.
I believe another poster mentioned that the media which contains the
Brom Crestal Green (sp?) will identify different yeast strains because
each has its own characteristic pH, thus being stained a slightly different
shade of green. This is the key to the isolation of yeasts using this
media. But you can still have wet dreams about it if you wish... ;^).
***********************
Tom writes:
>Our brewing club recently brewed a beer with chocolate in it. Does anyone
>have any idea on cleaning the oil out of the plastic tubing and buckets
>easily? We were trying to avoid using dish washing detergent since they
>normally leave behind stuff for anti-spotting and who knows what else.
Well, it has been pointed out in many texts and in this forum, that there's
BIG difference between soap and detergent. I'm not a chemist, so I don't
really know what that difference is (chemists, please chime-in and explain).
I too, have been wondering if using dishwasher *detergent* (one without
any special additives for sheeting, i.e. anti-spotting) would be okay for
glassware and brewing equipment. What about pure Sodium Carbonate (washing
soda)?
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 93 11:57:16 -0800
From: SCHREMPP_MIKE/HP4200_42@pollux.svale.hp.com
Subject: Worst brew
Tim Anderson's discussion of "bucket conditioned beer" sounded a whole lot like
hte first time I fermented something (on purpose). A couple of suggestions from
my experience:
1. Steal the sugar from a restaurant packet by packet.
2. When the flavor of the brew prevents it from being consumed, add some
unsweetened lime Koolaid. (I did this before Jonestown made lime Koolaid
famous... or was that grape?)
Mike Schrempp
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 93 13:18 CST
From: korz@iepubj.att.com
Subject: Re: Hops Cultivation
Brian writes:
>The Problem: I have no idea as to what variety these hops might be. We
>live in the infamous Willamette Valley, so I at least have the obvious
>first guess. Does anyone out there know of a good reference book that
>would allow me to key out this beast. Perhaps a "Peterson's Field
>Guide to Hops and Grains."
I suggest the Hops Special issue of Zymurgy -- in it there are photos of
virtually every common hop cone and it's corresponding leaf. Since you
live in the Willamette Valley, I suggest that you make use of the wealth
of local knowledge. Take some cuttings to a grower and ask them to
identify. I'll bet that the big commercial facilities have extensive
libraries too.
>Other Questions: Papazian suggests that the soil for growing hops should
>be loamy and kept continually moist during the growing season. We have
>excruciatingly high clay content in our soils and have never watered at all.
I give each plant about 6.25 gallons of water every morning via a
timer-controlled soaker hose. Water makes a big difference. Initially,
I gave each hill (4: Hallertauer, Hersbrucker, Nugget and Willamette)
three 1 foot coils of soaker hose for 15 minutes per day. I soon noticed
that the Willamette was doing much better than the Nugget, which was doing
better than the Hersbrucker, etc. I noticed that the soaker hose was
spewing more at the near end than at the far end (I should have known).
After re-arranging the hose to give the far-end hills more hose, the
growth rate seems to have evened out.
>Nevertheless the plant has done quite well. Will the quality of the
>hops be affected by my lack of care? Or should I follow the adage "If
>it ain't broke, don't fix it?" Also, how much will AAU vary with time
>of harvest, amount of watering, etc. And lastly, is there any moderately
>low-tech way of determining AAU of homegrown hops?
If you pick too early or too late, you will not get as much AAU as if
you picked at the right time. It seems to me that the general consensus
is that when the cones begin to feel light, springy and papery as opposed to
heavier, smushy and damp, it's time to pick. I found that not all the
hops are ripe at one time. I just set up a ladder and picked-off the ripe
ones once per week.
I've asked about low-tech ways to determine %AA and the only one I could
come up with is brew experimental batches and use your tastebuds. If
someone knows how to determine %AA using simple chem, please post!
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 93 15:19:02 EST
From: "John DeCarlo" <jad@pegasus.mitre.org>
Subject: Re: Spiced Ale
>From: "Knight,Jonathan G" <KNIGHTJ@AC.GRIN.EDU>
>I made my first spiced ale this year and boiled orange zest, ginger root,
>cinnamon sticks and whole cloves for about the last thirty minutes. It
>has a bit more bite than I intended, although the beer does taste quite
>good. I am wondering whether I boiled the stuff too long and whether
>powdered spices at the end of the boil would produce a "kinder, gentler"
>brew.
OK, some more opinions:
1) Why should it make a difference whether the spices are powdered or not,
as far as your question goes? Does it assume that all the spices are
left in the brewpot and none get into the primary?
2) I am now firmly convinced that the only way to add spices is to "dry
spice", by adding the spices only to the secondary. After all, we know
that the amount of flavor and aroma contributed by hops boiled a long
time is much less than that of hops boiled a short time or hops not
boiled at all (dry hopping). Why should spices be different? And since
I only use spices for flavor and aroma, I dry spice.
Did a real nice job on my Pumpkin Pie Ale. Plus, you don't have to use
powdered spices if you don't want to, just let them sit longer in the
secondary.
Fidonet: 1:109/131 Internet: jdecarlo@mitre.org
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 93 14:01 CST
From: korz@iepubj.att.com
Subject: Re: chimay yeast
Drew writes:
>The yeast in Chimay is not a single strain. It is either 3 or 5. I
>forget which, but I think it is 3. If you plate it and isolate a
>single cell for building a culture, you will only get one of the
>three.
To the best of my memory, every source I've read says that Chimay is
brewed from a single yeast strain. It has been widely publicised
that Father Theodore was the man who isolated Chimay's current
fermentation yeast and really cleaned up the beer. I've read
somewhere, perhaps the bottle, that Chimay adds yeast during bottling
- -- I recall that there was no mention from this source of whether
the yeast added at bottling time is the same as the fermentation yeast
or different. Nor do I recall if they mentioned filtering out the
fermentation yeast. The bottling yeast may be the same as the
fermentation yeast since maintaining two strains of yeast is twice
as hard as maintaing one and it's not like the bottling yeast in
Chimay is a particularly good flocculator (like SNPA's yeast is).
Orval is brewed from a single yeast also, but then bottled with a
mixture of 5 yeast strains. My source is one of the Jackson books
(either the pocket guide or the New World Guide to Beer... I suspect
the latter). I feel, from my experiments, that one of the 5 bottling
strains is the fermentation strain, the one that produces the
characteristic banana/bubblegum nose of Orval.
Another multi-strain yeast is Whitbread. George Fix wrote this quite
a while ago that Whitbread is a three-strain yeast. My cousin has noted
that along with the change in bottles, Whitbread Ale has lost that
characteristic "dark bread" flavor. I have yet to verify this. Anyone
else notice this? Note that Wyeast #1098 bears a striking resemblence to
Whitbread yeast ;^).
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 93 12:05:56 PST
From: lawson@acuson.com (Drew Lawson)
Subject: Re: chimay yeast/recipe idea
> The yeast in Chimay is not a single strain. It is either 3 or 5. I
Yea, I was wrong. That's what I get for trying to be helpful and
posting from a year old memory.
Drew Lawson If you're not part of the solution,
lawson@acuson.com you're part of the precipitate
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 93 13:15:31 -0700
From: Kelly Jones <k-jones@ee.utah.edu>
Subject: Malting Wheat
Does anyone out there know anything about malting wheat?
I buy (unmalted) whole wheat (for baking purposes) for about 15 cents
a pound. Looking at this the other day, I thought I could make some
decent Weizen if I could maybe get a small batch of the wheat malted.
In addition to expanding my skills as a brewer, this would save me a
bundle over what my homebrew supplier charges for malted wheat (about
$1.50 per pound - an order of magnitude higher!)
Anyway, I tried malting a little the other day, and found it hard to
determine when the grain was fully modified. The "steely-mealy" test
(mentioned, I believe, by Miller) does not seem to work here. The
grain, when wet, is soft and mealy, but is completely steely when
dried. I even tried mashing several ounces of this malted wheat in a
"micro-micro" mash tun (along with about 33% 6-row barley malt), but
got very poor conversion.
Does anyone have any experience with this, or know any good references?
Email me, and I'll post any significant/interesting information, as
well as let you know if I have any success with this. (Or does
anyone else really care?)
Too busy to make a fancy sigline...
Kelly Jones (k-jones@ee.utah.edu)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 93 10:42:15 EST
From: chuck@synchro.com (Chuck Cox)
Subject: BBW wins again!
Here's an update on the Sam Adams vs Boston Beer Works nonsense.
Jim Koch (dba Boston Beer Company, aka Sam Adams) lost his appeal in
Federal District Court. Koch has the right to appeal again, and given
his attitude he is likely to do so. His lawsuit against the
Commonwealth Brewing Co is still pending.
I wasn't at the trial, but I heard that Koch presented witnesses who
claimed to have gone to the BBW, disliked the beer, and blamed it on the
BBC. Under cross-examination they were all discredited. One admitted
to being too drunk to remember any details of the visit. Another
objected to a 'foul aroma' which turned out to be the smell of a batch
being brewed (something Sam Adams fans generally have to go to Pittsburg
to experience). Like the original suit, the ruling on the appeal was
quick and decisive; Jim Koch does not own the word "Boston".
So what happened to me?
Koch never followed up on the subpoena they served me. We had to
reschedule it, and they never got back to me with a new date. I think
they lost interest when it became obvious that I am not an employee or
representative of the Beer Works or the Sunset Grill, and that I was
hostile and well-prepared. I got to keep the $46 federal witness fee,
and Koch had to spend some money to file & serve the subpoena, so I did
my part to waste Koch's money.
I am still boycotting Sam Adams products, and I urge you all to do the
same. Since Koch has introduced more lawsuits than beer styles in the
last year, I think it is safe to say that the Boston Beer Company is a
law firm and does not deserve to call itself a brewery.
I want to thank you all once again for your letters of encouragement and
outrage. I had intended to keep them all in defiance of Koch's subpoena
of my personal correspondence, but I ran out of disk space and had to
delete them.
By the way, I never heard from the person who is forwarding my posts to
Koch. I am not surprised. It is obvious that the weasel doesn't have
the spine to stand up for his/her own actions, typical for a Koch crony.
To Koch & his email droid: You are both losers, and the brewing
community would be better off without you. I will continue to publicly
criticize your business practices, and encourage consumers to boycott
your products.
I am thinking of starting a new brewery, "The Adams Family Boston
Brewing Company". Any interested investors? Any interested attorneys?
(for those who recently tuned into the HBD: Jim Koch has taken to suing
any brewery that uses the word "Boston" in the company name or on any of
their products. I, and all my personal correspondence referring to
local breweries were subpoenaed by Koch in his appeal against the Boston
Beer Works. I have no affiliation with the BBW except as a satisfied
customer and friend of the owners. The subpoena was pure harassment
meant to stifle my outspoken public criticism of Koch & Co.)
- --
Chuck "Boston" Cox <chuck@synchro.com>
Starve a lawyer - boycott Sam Adams Beer.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 93 15:29:48 CST
From: wood@ranger.rtsg.mot.com (Dan Wood)
Subject: Souring Wort
A brewing friend has become enamored with soured beers, Samuel Smith's
Taddy Porter in particular. He would like to replicate this taste in
his own brew, using an extract recipe. We both frequently do partial
mashes with adjunct grains, so suggestions in that vein are certainly
within his capabilities.
So, if anyone could share his experiences, both success and failures
in souring beers (intentionally :) we would be most grateful. Please
feel free to respond via email if you prefer, I will summarize and post
a follow-up on results.
Happy brewing! Or, "fermenting" :( for those who share my pride in
producing fine beers from extract.
Dan Wood
wood@rtsg.mot.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1993 13:33:05 -0800
From: Richard Stueven <gak@wrs.com>
Subject: Archives
In HBD# 1071, ex-beginner Russ Gelinas recommends:
>Read *all* the HBD archives. Yes, all. IMHO,
>the HBD archives are perhaps the richest source of homebrewing info
>available.
Here at Wind River Systems Technical Support, we have a knowledge base
system called TOPIC (made by Verity in Mountain View CA). It lets us
search all of our old calls, bug reports, useful email, etc, so we can
answer customers' questions much more quickly and easily than before.
Of course, the first things we loaded into the system were the entire
HBD archive, the ASCII Cat's Meow, the publist, and tons of other
net.brew_stuff, and we update it monthly. Mighty informative! Mighty
useful!
have fun
Richard Stueven
Technical Support Manager
Wind River Systems, Inc.
510-814-2166
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 93 14:24 CST
From: korz@iepubj.att.com
Subject: Re: diacetyl?
Lee writes:
>I have recently begun brewing all grain batches, 5 or 6. A constant
>comment about my beers is that they contain noticable levels of
>diacetyl.
>I discussed my brewing process with an experienced all grain brewer
>who too was having this problem with his beers. We decide that since
>the yeast strains we were using 1056 and 1098 are not noted for high
>levels of diacetyl in their flavor profile that the following could
>be flaws in our brewing process:
>2) Adding finings immediatley after racking to the secondary. We did
>this to induce CO2 generation to purge the head space. This would cause
>the yeast to prematurely fall out of suspension thus reducing the
>quantity and the time in which the yeast was reducing diacetyl.
BINGO. That's your problem, IMO. I feel that you don't have to add
the finings to generate CO2 production -- by the time you are transfering
to the secondary you already have some C02 dissolved in the beer. When
the beer travels over the top of the siphon hose (just past the highest point)
it is at slightly a lower pressure and some of the CO2 will come out of
solution, taking up your head space. Another method, is to use your
kegging setup to squirt a bit of CO2 into the secondary before racking.
It's heavier than air and will minimize oxidation *during* transfer too.
>What can I do to produce high levels of diacetyl and minimize its reduction
>if I want to brew something with a Samuel Smith profile? Is a warm
>ferment with a yeast strain noted for diacetyl production and fining
>immediatley after primary fermentation the way to go ?
I think so.
Al.
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1075, 02/11/93
*************************************
-------
