Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #1089
This file received at Sierra.Stanford.EDU 93/03/03 00:20:56
HOMEBREW Digest #1089 Wed 03 March 1993
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator
Contents:
Mashing, was: ?lagel?, and dry hopping (Norm Pyle)
more powdered sugar ("PAUL EDWARDS")
brewcap (Michael Gildner)
Fancy Labels (JCHISM)
Mills / burners (Mike Deliman)
Re: MaltMill (Jack Schmidling)
Re: MaltMill (Jack Schmidling)
RIMS (George J Fix)
Test Driving (Jack Schmidling)
To be fair (Mike Deliman)
re:stuck carbonation (J. Fingerle)
Re: Korean Malt Extract (Fritz Keinert)
Re: Korean Malt extract (digest #1087) ("Robert Haddad" )
Korean malt, fining, labels (Carl West)
.......how come you taste so good? (Rob Bradley)
Brown sugar........ (Rob Bradley)
Re: Yeast Ranching (atl)
Ginger beer summary (Dave Whitman)
Propane Cooker Problems. (Bob Konigsberg)
hop aroma (donald oconnor)
Re: Ginger beer problem (Sherman Gregory)
Maltmill, etc. (Joseph Nathan Hall)
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
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 1 Mar 93 11:55:57 MST
From: pyle@intellistor.com (Norm Pyle)
Subject: Mashing, was: ?lagel?, and dry hopping
The Humboldt Hophead writes:
>To start with I'm an intermediate brewer who uses both extract and grains
>I find, that the combination of the two usually yields a great flavor. I
>don't quite go to the extent of mashing (still not quite sure on the
>procedure) - what I do is boil the grains for about 45min at 150deg,then
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This is mashing.
>I strain the resulting "extract" into my brewpot and combine it with the
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This is sparging.
>canned extract. I usually use either one can or bag of extract and about
>5 lbs. of grain (although how much extract I end up with is a mystery to
>me).
I hate to tell you this HH, but you _do_ know the procedure for mashing. You
are just doing it on a smaller scale. My first mash was done this way,
called a partial mash, adding the extract from the grains to the extract from
the can. To go all-grain, all you have to do is increase the amount of
grains and skip the extract. Of course, that assumes you would ever want to
go all-grain, etc. etc. (ACKK! do I have to be PC here, too? - I hate this.)
Roy sez:
>Hop nose is achieved by boiling pellet hops for two min. and
>loose hops for 5 min.
>
>Dry-hopping seems to contribute mostly to palate flavor.
I tend to slightly disagree with this statement. My experience tells me that
dry-hopping contributes greatly to the nose _and_ the flavor. Also, and this
may be bunk, it seems to accentuate bitter hops as well. I mean that,
although it doesn't actually add bittering, the bittering hops seem more
assertive when boosted with a large dose of dry hops. This may only be true
when the two hops are the same or similar varieties (i.e. I haven't done any
real scientific research to prove/disprove my theories).
Cheers,
Norm
------------------------------
Date: 2 Mar 93 06:54:00 EST
From: "PAUL EDWARDS" <8260PE@indy.navy.mil>
Subject: more powdered sugar
In HBD 1088, Eric said that "Powdered sugur is a mix of finely ground table sugur and cornstarch (about
60%/40%). This is why powdered sugur doesn't cake or clump, and why you
don't substitute powdered sugur for regular sugur when baking (the doughs
become impossibly stiff)."
Wellll, at my local grocery, that stuff is called confectioners' sugar
and is intended for making cake icing and such. 100 percent powdered
sugar is available as well. Some places might call it bartenders' sugar.
it mixers well in drinks, without leaving undissolved grit.
Both types are clearly labelled as to contents.
That said, I only use dry malt for my yeast starters, canning 7 or 8 qts
at a time in a pressure canner.
-- Paul
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 93 08:25:19 EST
From: mmlai!lucy!gildner@uunet.UU.NET (Michael Gildner)
Subject: brewcap
Hello,
Does anyone have comments about the BREWCAP device that fits over
the top of a carboy. I'm thinking of buying one so I can draw
samples out of the carboy alittle easier. Also, are there any
gizmos around that help start a siphon. I can never get that
trick to work where you first fill the tube with water.
Mike Gildner
gildner@mml.mmc.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1993 09:45 EST
From: JCHISM%HSSCAM.decnet@NETVAX.MIS.SEMI.HARRIS.COM
Subject: Fancy Labels
MOORE office supplies catalog has several laser labels that are appropriate
for "gift" bottles or when you want to get fancy. They're called Design
Film and come in 3 varieties - Graduated, Clear and White. The graduated
is a combination of red/white, green/white, yellow/white, blue/white or
gray/white. While it's not a paper, it is a film that easily peels off.
Jami Chism
jchism@decnet.mis.semi.harris.com
disclaimer: I don't work for Moore or have any financial interest
- -----
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1993 07:25:35 -0800 (PST)
From: Mike Deliman <miked@wrs.com>
Subject: Mills / burners
Hello Home Brewers,
Thanks to all who responded on my post to yesterday's hbd.
Here's some followup on the millery:
I recieved two replies, which I'll attach.
This first came in before the hbd went out:
From: arf@ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: Re: MaltMill
To: miked@wrs.com (Mike Deliman)
Date: Mon, 1 Mar 1993 21:26:41 -0600 (CST)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 0
Status: RO
And this second came in after hbd went out:
From: arf@ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: Re: MaltMill
To: miked@wrs.com (Mike Deliman)
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1993 08:10:27 -0600 (CST)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 2570
Status: RO
Message 1/3 From Mike Deliman Mar 1, 93 01:44:40 pm
-0800
Return-Path: <miked@wrs.com>
Subject: Re: MaltMill
>The rollers are filthy, coated fariley well with oil residue, metal
particles, and ground in grime. The easiest way to clean it would be to
dissasemble it and soak the rollers in solvent.
>If you would be willing to ship me a set of clean rollers I'd be gald to
ship back the currently unusable rollers. I'm not exactly thrilled about
the thought of dissasembling/reassembling the thing, but if it'll save
me from the thought of injesting unknown contaminents with my beer, it'd
be worthwhile. (not to mention probably a lot easier than spending hours with
cleaning rags, solvents, boiling water, degreasers, etc...)
>Let me know your thoughts,
I don't think we could remain friends if you knew my thoughts
at the moment :)
However, here are the facts:
The only thing on the rollers is a thin coating of rust-proofing oil. This
is applied after they are knurled so they do not rust in inventory. At the
time they are assembled, the rollers are wiped vigorously with a clean rag to
remove as much as possible. The easiest way to get the rest of it off is to
mill a few pounds of malt with it and feed it to the birds.
Our QC procedure here is to mill a pound with one mill out of every batch of
10 to make sure there are no systemic problems. We simply blow it off with
an air hose after testing and you may have gotten one of these which would
have some dust or debris on the rollers. However, it would be the same as
if you had run a pound throgh it.
Unless something happened to yours from the time it left here till you
received it, it should look just like the 600 others we have shipped and no
one has previously even commented on what you find unacceptable.
Unless you want to pay $75 for the ss roller option, oil is a necessary evil
on a steel product. Once it is in regular use, it will stay clean without
any special attention but I can not inventory hundreds of expensive rollers
and take the chance of them getting rusty nor getting rusty before the
customer has a chance to use it.
You can clean them with a wire brush and cooking oil and then wipe them down
thoroughly. Other than that, I do not know what to tell you. If I send you
another set of rollers, they will look exactly like the ones you have.
Your money will, of course, be cheerfully refunded if you choose to return
the mill.
Sorry for the trouble,
js
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apology accepted, but how's this work?
" The only thing on the rollers is a thin coating of rust-proofing
oil."
"The easiest way to get the rest of it off is to
mill a few pounds of malt with it and feed it to the birds."
okay, I see. take my home brew supplies, coat them with machine oil, and
give it to the birds. Well, I never DID like pidgeons.
I guess either the other 600 users did the above, cleaned with a wire brush,
et all, or were just too embarrassed to complain. Or they don't mind machine
oil lager.
nuff said.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks much to all who responded to the LPG vs LNG question. I suspected
what seems to be true: the burner is probably jetted for LNG, and needs
re-jetted for LPG. The LPG supplies more energy per given volume and thus
requires more 02; since there is no way to increase flow of air into the
venturi, I gotta decrease the fuel flow. Thanks guys!
>pfffft< have a homebrew,
-mike
P.S. After I clean the MM properly, the crush analysis will be posted.
Mike Deliman, 800-USA-4WRS, FAX 510-814-2010, WRS 2400bd BBS: 510-814-2165
email: miked@wrs.com (inet) or [sun,uunet]!wrs!miked (uunet)
Snail Mail: Wind River Systems, 1010 Atlantic Ave, Alameda CA 94501 USA
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 93 09:36:01 -0600
From: gjfix@utamat.uta.edu (George J Fix)
Subject: RIMS
I want to thank the many people who sent comments on my RIMS review.
The typos noted were the following:
1. Replace "It hard" with "It is hard" in the second paragraph.
2. Replace "eat corn" with "eat crow" in the third paragraph.
I have been very critical of the AHA for these sort of typos. I seem
to remember from my youth a story about glass houses and stones. Does
anyone remember how that one goes?
Bob Jones in HBD#1088 raises some very interesting points. As such things
pertain to the specific case of Conrad's system, I would feel a good deal
more confortable if they were addressed directly to Conrad. Those who saw
pictures of my own 1/2 bbl. system in Milwaukee know it is quite different
from Conrad's. It is also different from Bob's, who in turn differs from
Micah. I look on all of this with a good deal of favor. What a boring world
it would be if total uniformity reigned!
Because of length restrictions, reviews differ from technical articles. What
I look for in a review is a clear statement of the product claims made by
the producer, and a good faith effort on the part of the reviewer to check
them. Interested readers can then contact the producer for details. The
following are what I understand to be the claims Conrad is making for his
system. My observation of an actual brew being done with his system leads me
to believe that they are all valid.
1. Total temperature control through uniquely designed controllers and
heating elements. Any reasonable type of infusion mashing schedule
can be used with the system.
2. Recirculation without HSA.
3. High yields and brilliantly clear run offs.
4. A system that is trivial to clean.
Would someone be so kind and post a list of Rodney's articles about RIMS?
I have kept only the one that appeared in the Maltose Falcon newsletter,
since it appeared to be the most complete and detailed.
George Fix
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 93 09:41 CST
From: arf@ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: Test Driving
>From: Mike Deliman <miked@wrs.com>
This issue should obviously be discussed off line but since Mike chose to
post it to the Digest before I even received his comments in email, he leaves
me little choice but to respond in kind.
>As delivered, I'm sure that the maltmill wouldn't pass the simplest of FDA
inspections for food preparation machinery. To be honest, I'm appalled that
someone would ship food processing machinery in such a state; especially
priced at $130.
My objective is to provide a modestly priced product to satisfy hombrewers.
If you wish to satisfy the FDA, you should have purchased the Stainless Steel
Roller Option (SSRO) for an additional $75.
>In the interest of being fair, I've written to the producer and asked for a
clean set of rollers to replace these. I'll post the results of this inquiry.
You might have waited for my response before dragging it out in public.
Here is the response I sent to you before reading the Digest.
Return-Path: <miked@wrs.com>
Subject: Re: MaltMill
>The rollers are filthy, coated fariley well with oil residue, metal
particles, and ground in grime. The easiest way to clean it would be to
dissasemble it and soak the rollers in solvent.
>If you would be willing to ship me a set of clean rollers I'd be gald to
ship back the currently unusable rollers. I'm not exactly thrilled about
the thought of dissasembling/reassembling the thing, but if it'll save
me from the thought of injesting unknown contaminents with my beer, it'd
be worthwhile. (not to mention probably a lot easier than spending hours with
cleaning rags, solvents, boiling water, degreasers, etc...)
>Let me know your thoughts,
I don't think we could remain friends if you knew my thoughts
at the moment :)
However, here are the facts:
The only thing on the rollers is a thin coating of rust-proofing oil. This
is applied after they are knurled so they do not rust in inventory. At the
time they are assembled, the rollers are wiped vigorously with a clean rag to
remove as much as possible. The easiest way to get the rest of it off is to
mill a few pounds of malt with it and feed it to the birds.
Our QC procedure here is to mill a pound with one mill out of every batch of
10 to make sure there are no systemic problems. We simply blow it off with
an air hose after testing and you may have gotten one of these which would
have some dust or debris on the rollers. However, it would be the same as
if you had run a pound through it.
Unless something happened to yours from the time it left here till you
received it, it should look just like the 600 others we have shipped and no
one has previously even commented on what you find appalling and
unacceptable.
Unless you want to pay $75 for the ss roller option, oil is a necessary evil
on a steel product. Once it is in regular use, it will stay clean without
any special attention but I can not inventory hundreds of expensive rollers
and take the chance of them getting rusty before the customer has a chance to
use it.
You can clean them with a wire brush and cooking oil and then wipe them down
thoroughly. Other than that, I do not know what to tell you. If I send you
another set of rollers, they will look exactly like the ones you have, unless
something very strange happened to yours.
Your money will, of course, be cheerfully refunded if you choose to return
the mill.
Sorry for the trouble,
js
.............
I now add that in keeping with the tradition that the customer is always
right, I suggest that you return the mill for detailed QC review. If it is
typical of what we have been shipping for the past year, your money will be
cheerfully rufunded and we will call the whole thing off. If it is as you
described, I will ship you a brand new one and pay shipping charges both
ways.
jjs
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1993 08:08:53 -0800 (PST)
From: Mike Deliman <miked@wrs.com>
Subject: To be fair
To be fair, I feel I should post this, which came in amongst the replies
from yesterday's post.
] Ummmm, not necessarily to defend JS, but: have you ever purchased a
] Corona Mill?? When shipped, they are full of oil and grit, and to clean them,
] you have to disassemble them, and scrub them in a sink full of soapy water.
] So, it sounds like the condition of your maltmill is not that
] far out of line. After, all, you only have to clean it once....
I do see the point. But then, if I bought a blender for $50, I'd expect less
than a blender that costs $130. Nuff said, on to re-jetting that burner and
attempting an SSPA clone :-) !
Brew On Dudes >pffft<, (have a homebrew)
-mike
Mike Deliman, 800-USA-4WRS, FAX 510-814-2010, WRS 2400bd BBS: 510-814-2165
email: miked@wrs.com (inet) or [sun,uunet]!wrs!miked (uunet)
Snail Mail: Wind River Systems, 1010 Atlantic Ave, Alameda CA 94501 USA
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 93 11:14:29 EST
From: fingerle@NADC.NADC.NAVY.MIL (J. Fingerle)
Subject: re:stuck carbonation
Last week,
Paul dArmond <paulf@henson.cc.wwu.edu>
wrote:
That's for later, this is for now: Peter, shake all your bottles and lay
them on their sides in a warm (70F) place. Shake every day, until there
is visible yeast in suspension. I got this trick from The Cellar in
Seattle. I think it works by exposing more yeast surface area. I did
To which I reply: I just had a stuck carbonation situation, my first
ever. I first thought that I had messed up, pehaps not sufficiently
stirring the priming sugar into the beer, but then it dawned on me
that the temperature of my spare bedroom might be the problem.
Due to recent colder weather in the Philly area, the bottles were being
maintained at about 50 to 55F, as opposed to the more usual 60-65F.
So, I simply took them out of the room, shook each bottle, and left
them in the 68-70F temperatures of my house, and voila!, three days
later, sediment and carbonation.
Sometimes its the simple things...Oh yeah, the beer was the Sam
Adams-taste alike from Cat's Meow, an Ale.
- --
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
name: Jimmy On balance, it is a wonderful thing that
email: fingerle@NADC.NADC.NAVY.MIL the cold war is over. -Bill Clinton
-or- fingerle@NADC.NAVY.MIL ON BALANCE?!? It's end has a down side?
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 93 10:32:35 CST
From: Fritz Keinert <keinert@iastate.edu>
Subject: Re: Korean Malt Extract
Date: 1 Mar 93 16:29:23 EDT
From: "Robert Haddad" <M-RHADDAD@bss1.umd.edu>
Subject: Re: Korean Malt extract (digest #1087)
I expected to see plenty of responses on this, but since they don't
seem to be coming, here goes:
I bought some of that stuff before, too. It was from the local
alternative food co-op, and it was not Korean, but I bet it was the
same. What it is is ground-up malt (grains that have been sprouted,
dried again, and ground into flour). It is not dried malt extract,
which you (and I) were hoping to get.
Theoretically, the enzymes should still be in there, so you might be
able to convert it to sugar, but you would have a really hard time
getting it filtered.
I think I tried using it in bread, but it didn't work as flour,
either. It was too sticky because it does contain some sugars. I am
not sure what it is supposed to be good for.
- ---
Fritz Keinert phone: (515) 294-5223
Department of Mathematics fax: (515) 294-5454
Iowa State University e-mail: keinert@iastate.edu
Ames, IA 50011
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 93 10:55:12 EST
From: eisen@kopf.HQ.Ileaf.COM (Carl West)
Subject: Korean malt, fining, labels
Korean malt:
I suspect that what you've got there is malt flour, not extract powder,
just ground up malted grain. Should make good bread.
Fining:
I don't fine my beer either, no point, it doesn't have any money.
Labels:
>Will the color, from a color copy bleed...
Nope, not a problem, the image on a photocopy, B&W or color, consists
of pigmented plastic powder(s) (polyester in some, maybe all, cases)
melted onto the paper. The plastic will not be affected by milk or water.
Carl
Waltham, Mass.
When I stop learning, bury me.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 93 11:57:57 -0500
From: bradley@adx.adelphi.edu (Rob Bradley)
Subject: .......how come you taste so good?
I have advocated the use of brown sugar in pale ales in this forum
on at least two occasions. The first was in HBD#528 in a recipe which
appears in Cat's Meow (p.1-12 in the postscript version). The second
was a little over a month ago in the post where I coined the phrase
"all-grain snob" (mea culpa). This practice recently took a slam:
In HBD#1083 John Freeman sez:
>And keep the stinking brown sugar out of my beer.
Do I detect an all-malt attitude? (I'll aviod the "s" word :-)
Many of us began brewing from kits, using enormous amounts of sugar,
and eventually learned that cutting back on the sugar meant getting
rid of the cidery falvors. This doesn't necessarily imply that all
sugar must be cut out in all circumstances. Belgian beer homebrewing
seems to have become vastly more popular during my three years on the
HBD, and homebrewers are willing to follow Belgian practice when it
comes top sugar. Why should we treat UK brewers differently?
Looking back in my log book, I notice that my first two bitters
contained small amounts of brown sugar - under 15%. Both were
served on draft at parties and both were overwhelming successes.
Having lived in England for two years, I can also assure you that
the flavor was quite authentic. As well, there were occasional
pale ales and brown ales which had brown sugar additions. In all,
something like 4-5% of my 200+ batches. No particular problems noted,
and some raves received.
I notice that I haven't used brown sugar myself since since posting
my Cat's Meow recipe. I think I'll try a brown and/or pale ale
with 10-15% sugar in the near future. I'd also appreciate e-mail
from people who've tried my Cat's Meow recipe, with their opinions
on using brown sugar in a Bass-alike.
Cheers,
Rob (bradley@adx.adlephi.edu)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 93 11:57:11 -0500
From: bradley@adx.adelphi.edu (Rob Bradley)
Subject: Brown sugar........
Some beers, especially British ones, are brewed with small amounts
of brown sugar. I believe that reputable UK brewers keep the total
amount of extract from adjuncts and sugars at or below 15% (see
Foster's _Pale_Ale_). I also understand that when brown sugar is
used, it is more likely to be a "raw" brown sugar, like demerara, than
the stuff one finds in a North Amercian supermarket. The latter
is likely to be ordinary white cane sugar doctored with molasses.
My palate tells me that there is brown sugar in Newcastle Brown Ale,
and an English friend who is quite a good judge of beer agrees. On a
more cautious claim, I believe I have tasted subtle brown sugar tones
in bottled Bass. After a recent experience, though, I'm reluctant
to state definitively that the tones actually come from brown sugar.
Last Friday I had a bottle of Pike's Place Pale Ale, from White River
Junction, VT. This is a really fine brew: on the dark side of pale
ale color, with good body and _substantial_ hop bitterness :-)
On the nose, though, I picked up an unmistakabe brown sugar aroma.
A pleasant one, I might add. However, the label states only malt,
hops, yeast and water, and I have no reason to doubt them. So my
conclusion is that a brown sugar aroma can develop without the
addition of brown sugar in the wort. Any comments?
There has been recent interest in Housman's poetry and the towns
where we live:
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Robert Emmett Bradley | |
|Dept. of Mathematics |"The troubles of our proud and angry dust |
| & Computer Science | Are from eternity, and shall not fail. |
|Adelphi University | Bear them we can, and if we can we must. |
|Garden City, NY 11530 | Shoulder the sky, my lad, and drink your ale." |
|(516)877-4496 | A. E. Housman, _Last_Poems_, #9. |
|bradley@adelphi.edu | |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 93 10:02:25 -0800
From: atl@kpc.com
Subject: Re: Yeast Ranching
> From: arf@genesis.mcs.com
> >From: atl@kpc.com
> > I home can wort for use as starters and for priming my beer. I
> purchased a case of Ball 1 pint canning jars ($7.50), filled them with
> highly hopped 1.040 extract based wort.....
>
> I'm with you up to this point but why not just eliminate this whole step by
> saving a pint of wort from the previous batch. A further bonus (for
> all-grain brewers) is that the starter is more like your actual brews than
> one made with extract.
I had considered using all-grain to make the canned wort, but went
with extract for simplicity. (I had a batch to mash and three to
bottle at this point) Also, I brew widely divergent beers weekly, so
reserving a pint of stout might not be appropriate for starting a
batch of light lager. My canned wort is "least common denominator"
pale type.
> > This may sound like a lot of work, but it sure beats boiling up
> small starters when you need them, and is easier than reserving gyle
> from each batch.
>
> Not sure what you mean by "gyle", I would call it bitter wort but anyway, how
> can your process possibly be simpler than setting aside a pint of wort before
> pitching?
I called it gyle from Papazian's description of reserving bitter
wort for later priming purposes. You may have a point on simplicity,
but I had more faith in the "canned" wort keeping for a long period of
time at room temperature. Also, since I had been reserving gyle for
priming purposes (usually 3 22oz bottles per batch), and frequently
have 2-5 batches fermenting simultaneously, my refridgerator just
isn't big enough.
> You did not mention what kind of air lock you are using on the flask but if
> you use a glass one, simply putting it on at the end of boiling will
> sterilize it and fill it with sterile water as the steam condenses. Nothing
> could be simpler.
I'm not sure which flask you are referring to. I use flasks for
growing my starters, but I don't boil at that point. I pour sterile,
canned wort into the sanitized flask, stir in a small sample of yeast,
and affix a sanitized plastic airlock. At appropriate times, I add
more sterile wort to enlarge the starter, and move to larger flasks
when appropriate.
> > The agar was quite expensive, $24.50 for 100g.
>
> A suitable agar can be had from oriental food shops for far less. It is sold
> in stick form and you need about 6 inches to a cup of wort.
Can you give me the asian name(s) for this? I can just imagine going
into my local asian grocery and trying to describe agar. :-)
>
> Nice article. I don't want to start another snob thread but I put yeast
> culture right up there with all-grain as one of the more rewarding aspects of
> homebrewing.
Thanks for the compliment, no snobbery felt, and yes, it is fun. If
I'd been brewing beer in 7th grade biology class, I might have paid a
little more attention!
Drew
- --------
Andrew Lynch, Kubota Pacific Computer, Santa Clara, Ca. atl@kpc.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 93 13:25:11 EST
From: Dave Whitman <rsndww@rohmhaas.com>
Subject: Ginger beer summary
To homebrew@hpfcmi.fc.hp.co
X-Mailer: LeeMail 1.2.4
I was astonished at the number of responses to my post about low ginger flavor
in my ginger beer wort. Thanks everyone!
Many people pointed out that the sweetness of the wort may be masking the
ginger flavor. The message is that 1) lots of recipes use about 3 oz of ginger
and use 1 hour boil times, and 2) a little ginger goes a long way. Before
panicking, I'll taste the beer during racking into my secondary.
Jim Grady suggests grating the ginger rather than slicing it. For what it's
worth, I tasted the ginger slices after boiling, and they were pretty
flavorless, suggesting that the flavor was sucessfully extracted.
Spenser Thomas warns that he tried adding pieces of ginger to each bottle,
which gave good flavor, but also caused gushing. He suggests making a ginger
tea by steeping ginger in hot water, and adding that to the secondary. Would
steeping santize the ginger enough to avoid the infection suggested by gushing?
How hot / how much time do I need to santize an ingredient?
Dan Butler-Ehle says that he uses ginger a lot, but has never been really happy
with the flavor - the pepperiness is missing. He thinks the ginger oils boil
off early. He has added ginger to his secondary, and that doesn't seem to
help, and sometimes leads to off-flavors. He speculates the pulp rots, and
suggests I try dried, ground ginger.
I looked up ginger and oil of ginger in the Merck Index, and got some insight
into just what's there. The major flavor componant is a fairly high molecular
weight phenol called gingerol. It doesn't look very volatile. However, there
are a number of other constituents which DO look volatile: camphene,
phellandrene, borneol, citral and cineol. I suspect at least some of these are
lost during an extended boil, explaining my and other's reports of
disappointing flavor.
Dave Whitman / rsndww@rohmhaas.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1993 10:27:00 -0800
From: Bob Konigsberg <bobk@NSD.3Com.COM>
Subject: Propane Cooker Problems.
Mike Deliman writes about problems with his propane cooker...
I believe that propane (LPG) has more heat per volume. As for the soot
from your burner, it may be that the air/fuel ratio is not set
correctly. Look at the inlet and there should be a rotatable shutter
that you can adjust the air/fuel mixture with. Mine was a fairly cheap
unit from Sears and it had one.
The other problem I noted with mine was that the gas/flame distribution
was uneven with the far side of the burner having a much longer flame than
the near side. A little surgery with a drill grinding bit and I was able
to change the configuration of the casting to allow a more even gas flow.
See crude graphics below.
\ ------------- / \ ------------- /
\ / \ /
- --------- +---/ ------X +----/
- --------- / / -------- X\ /
\--------/ \-------/
Original Improved
Although it's a bit crude, the two X's in the right hand drawing show
where the carving was done. The left hand carved out area opened up
the gas flow to the inlet side of the burner, and the right hand X carving
made a "bounceback" kind of effect with the gas so that the jet of gas
(later flame) didn't simply flow straight out the opposite side of the
burner from the gase inlet. It's still not perfect, but the flame
distribution is a lot more even than it was as the unit was shipped to me.
Despite the appearance of the drawing above however, the actual grinding does
not (should not) go anywhere near the edge of the casting.
Kip Damrow asks about color copier labels. They don't run when wet.
The toner powder used in photocopying is a plastic powder that is melted
(fused) to the paper. If flexed however, you may see flaking of the
material off the paper.
BobK
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 93 12:42:47 -0600
From: oconnor@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (donald oconnor)
Subject: hop aroma
It seems that every couple of months there is another discussion about
hop nose or aroma and flavor and methods of achieving it in the beer.
It's the general lack of good info in the homebrewing literature and
even texts on brewing science like Biotechnology of Brewing and Malting
and even Malting and Brewing Science on this topic that leads to
repeated queries. That's what led Mark Garetz to put together a nice
article for zymurgy, appearing in the summer issue, about dry-hopping.
Mark has done a really professional job putting the article together with
interviews with Fritz Maytag (several hours), Jim Koch (the beloved one
in this forum) and many other people in the hop industry. The article
discusses several methods using finishing hops such as dry-hopping,
hop backs, finishing hops at the end of the boil, hop tea, etc.
It's interesting that all of these approaches contribute to hop flavor and
aroma of the beer, but the hop flavor and aroma can be very different for
each technique. This is due to the fact that hop oil which is the stuff
which contributes the hop flavor and aroma is really many different oils.
Some are more volative than others and some are more chemically reactive
than others and all are more reactive and volatile at higher temperatures.
Thus the type and amount of oils and secondary oil products in the beer
depends on the variety of hop, amount, temperature, time and many other
factors, including, as Bob Jones pointed out, opened or sealed vessel.
Bob's advice is right on the mark. You will get more hop aroma by
dryhopping in the keg. The reason for this is that volatile hop oils
are not soluble in beer but rather are in suspension. The volatile
suspended oils would really prefer to float away. Take Bob's advice,
don't give them a chance; keep the lid on.
Rather than say that one method of using finishing hops is 'better'
than another, I prefer to say that they are are all wonderful but
different. If you have any doubt about the incredibly vast difference
of hop aroma and flavor betwenn using the same type of hop in (I believe)
nearly equal amounts in two different ways, just compare Sierra Nevada
Pale Ale and Anchor Liberty Ale. Both use Cascade finishing hops.
One is dry-hopped and the other uses a hop back.
I am a proponent of the idea of including more information in a recipe
with regard to finishing hops. it's really not enough to say
"dryhopped with 1 oz cascades." if I want to really match the beer
I need to know how long the hops were in the fermenter or keg and
the temperature. similarly, if you use finishing hops at the end of
the boil, i not only need to know how much for how long, i need to
know the rate at which the hot wort was cooled because the hop
flavor and character are altered significantly during a slow cooling.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1993 11:00:29 -0800
From: sherman@qualcomm.com (Sherman Gregory)
Subject: Re: Ginger beer problem
>Dave Whitman <rsndww@rohmhaas.com> writes
Subject: Ginger beer problem
>3 oz sliced ginger root (peeled for lighter color)
>The ginger and hops were boiled in the wort for 45 minutes, then lemon juice
>was added along with my immersion chiller. After an additional 10 minute
>boil,
>the batch was chilled to 65F. ph: 5.3 before lemon juice, 4.0 afterwards.
>To my chagin, the resulting wort had very little ginger flavor.
>1. Did I steam distill off all the good stuff by boiling the ginger too long?
I don't think so. I made a batch about 6 mo. ago with 1.5 oz of ginger
boiled for an hour and it had a very good ginger flavor. I think that I
might have grated my ginger as opposed to slicing it. Ginger is powerfull
stuff and 3 oz seems like a lot. Maybe it is like hops in that there can
be a lot of variation of "the good stuff" season to season etc.
>2. Can I "dry ginger" the batch by adding shredded ginger to my secondary
> fermenter? Any suggestions on how much to try?
This sounds like a cool idea, but I think that I would finish this batch
without it. Then, if in the end, if there is not enough ginger flavor, you
can brew another batch and "dry ginger" it. This way, you will have a
better idea where the ginger flavor came from.
BTW... How well do your yeasties like that low pH wort?
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 93 12:28:47 EST
From: joseph@joebloe.maple-shade.nj.us (Joseph Nathan Hall)
Subject: Maltmill, etc.
Mike says:
> As delivered, I'm sure that the maltmill wouldn't pass the simplest of FDA
> inspections for food preparation machinery. [...]
> The problem lies in the accumulated detritus lodged into the rollers. While
> assembling the mill, I brushed my hand on the surface of the rollers. I was
> aghast to see zebra stripes on my hand. Stripes of lubricant mixed with metal
> particles, dirt, grunge.
I found the machine-oil smell of the device a bit worrisome, but after
passing a few pounds of grain through as a trial I decided it was
in fact not a problem. The odor has largely gone away now that I've
run a batch through. The odor is not evident in the grain passed
through.
> The rollers have a nice design - they are grooved, which could facilitate the
> uptake of grain. It is also a poor design, as it's nearly impossible to
> remove the accumulated detritus from the grooves.
So? Over the long haul this doesn't make a bit of difference. Over
the short term, yes, it would be nice if Jack brushed the rollers
clean in something like hexane and then with a mild detergent.
> I spent about an hour trying to clean the rollers last night, and at this
> point, I'd still pronounce it unusable. It would seem that in order to
> properly clean the things, I'll need to disassemble the mill completely, and
> break out innumerable amounts of soaps, degreasers, solvents, etc.
> Something I'd rather not do. Certainly not in the Rheinheitsgebot.
I wish Jack had shipped mine smelling like Ivory soap, but I'm not
sure what if any difference it makes. Certainly I have no problem
with the particles of grain that tend to lodge in the grooved rollers.
> To be honest, I'm appalled that someone would ship food processing machinery
> in such a state; especially priced at $130.
Calling it "food processing machinery" is a bit loose. After all,
you are going to thoroughly filter and boil the output. You aren't
really going to "eat" the output of the mill at all. The chance
of, say, a chip of steel making it through to a bottled beer is zero,
considering all the settling and sedimentation that goes on.
Finally, casual experimentation (just now) reveals that a dry toothbrush
suffices to clean the rollers down to the shine on the portion (about
2/3) of the rollers where the grain gets crushed. Why don't you just
run 5-10 lbs of cheap malt through and get on with things ... ?
The effect of the maltmill on fat British 2-row malt is most impressive.
The husks are left almost completely in one piece, and the kernel
is squished perfectly into coarse chunks. The results on less modified
American 2-row and particularly 6-row are a little less remarkable,
but I gather that these grains are harder to crush anyway.
I will print a detailed review when I have some data points.
I am looking for a reduction in astringency (vs. grain from Corona)
and an improvement in extraction rates. So far, at least the latter
seems likely.
================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.
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1089, 03/03/93
*************************************
-------
