Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #1084
This file received at Sierra.Stanford.EDU 93/02/24 00:23:47
HOMEBREW Digest #1084 Wed 24 February 1993
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator
Contents:
Why does my beer smell like bubble gum? (Joel Birkeland)
queries correction (Kirk Anderson)
Yeats on Beer and Politics (Paul dArmond)
Carbonation w/ Dry Ice? (J. Michael Diehl)
Gelatin, London beers, Hydrometer readings (Desmond Mottram)
Sierra Nevada Bock? (Michael D. Galloway)
Printing labels on a laser printer (Jeff J. Miller)
labels for laser printer (John Adams)
removing foam scum ("Daniel K. Yee")
Fermenter geometry ("Bob Jones")
More yeast when bottling cold lagers (Will Leavitt)
laser labels (Ulick Stafford)
Beer Labels for laser printers (Bob_Konigsberg)
Phenolic flavours (long) part I (G.A.Cooper)
Phenolic flavours, part II (G.A.Cooper)
Hot Tip on dry hopping! ("Bob Jones")
Curious about Copper (Markham R. Elliott)
Labels for laser printer (Steve Jacobs)
mailing homebrew (Lance Encell)
Re: pH Meters,O2 (Sherman Gregory)
Wort Aeration (Guy McConnell)
Sankey valve removal tool (Guy McConnell)
Celis Wit in Boston (Jim Grady)
Farewell wherever you fare (Guy McConnell)
hbd1081 re: semi-beginner question (Tom Haley)
Refractometers and Hydrometers ("John Cotterill")
WYeast (Doug Cripe)
CAUSE/EFFECT ESSAY (CCAC-LAD) <dskeldon@PICA.ARMY.MIL>
>queries (Andy Rowan)
Re: Several (Richard Stueven)
Re: All-grain vs. extract (David Van Iderstine)
pH is temperature dependent (Keith A. MacNeal HLO1/T09 225-6171 22-Feb-1993 1426)
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: Sat, 20 Feb 93 13:02:21 MST
From: birkelan@adtaz.sps.mot.com (Joel Birkeland)
Subject: Why does my beer smell like bubble gum?
A few questions for those with more homebrewing experience:
1) Why does my homebrew smell like bubblegum? This is my third
batch; I used the following ingredients:
7 lb. container of Steinbart's Light liquid malt extract
0.5 lb. dried light malt extract
1 lb. crushed crystal malt
1.5 oz cascade pellet hops (60 min)
0.5 oz cascade hop pellets (10 min)
1.2 oz cascade hop flowers (1 min)
2 tsp gypsum
0.5 tsp salt
1 qt. Wyeast 1056 starter
I put 1.5 gallons distilled water in a stainless pot. I steeped the
crystal malt about 30 min as the water was heating up, then
removed before full boil. Added extracts, salt, gypsum, boiling
hops, then aroma hops as indicated. Placed boiling pot into sink
full of ice cubes and chilled to ~80 degrees F. Poured into carboy,
without attempting to strain out pellet hop residue. Topped with
presumably sterile bottled water. Pitched yeast solution when I felt
that the wort had cooled to room temp.
The next morning, about 12 hours after pitching, there was noticable
activity. 36 hours after pitching, the fermentation was furious, and
had actually churned up the trub into suspension. BTW, I used a
blow-off tube.
After 10 days, I bottled with 0.75 C corn sugar. 7 days after
bottling, I tried one. Carbonation was OK, but the beer smelled
of bubblegum. My wife thinks it smells like licorice, but to me
it smells like a fresh package of Bazooka Joe.
Does anyone know why this happened? I realize that I haven't given
it very long in the bottle. I seem to remember reading about this
phenomenon somewhere before, but I haven't been able to find it.
2) I would really like to replicate Sierra Nevada Pale Ale. I really
like its hoppy aroma. My second batch of homebrew (recipe almost
exactly that given for batch #3, above) had good hop aroma, but it
disappeared after about 1 - 2 weeks. The above batch has almost
no hop aroma; maybe it is masked by the bubble gum scent.
Why can't I get this nice hop aroma? I have a few ideas:
a) My hops are not fresh enough.
b) boiling bag reduces hop aroma extraction
c) I need to dry hop the beer
d) Hop aroma carried off during blow-off
If anyone can help me out here, I would appreciate it.
Thanks a lot for your help.
Joel Birkeland
birkelan@cs1.sps.mot.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1993 20:12:31 -1100
From: Kirk_Anderson@wheatonma.edu (Kirk Anderson)
Subject: queries correction
I asked if anyone had tried the Abbey Beer kit by "Brew Werk". Of
course I meant "Brew Ferm" as you probably guessed. Not such a good
showing for my first HBD intervention:(.
Say did anyone catch The Simpsons last Thursday, the only show that
tells the truth about America? Case in point: Homer skipped out of work to
go on the tour of the "Duff" brewery. The guide boasted about Duff, Duff
Lite, and new Duff Dry. The three huge tanks with those brands on them
were being filled, all out of the same mega-pipe. If you don't look at the
show, reconsider. No I don't work for Fox.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1993 10:03:26 -0800 (PST)
From: Paul dArmond <paulf@henson.cc.wwu.edu>
Subject: Yeats on Beer and Politics
I just found the following quote in the current issue of "Steamshovel
Press" at the end of an interview with Robert Anton Wilson.
"A statesman is an easy man, he tells his lies by rote.
A journalist invents his lies, and rams them down your throat.
So stay at home and drink your beer and let the neighbors vote."
- William Butler Yeats
I don't agree with the sentiment, but others may like it...
Paul (silence does not imply consent) de Armond
-not that I've been accused of silence, mind you.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 93 2:50:37 MST
From: J. Michael Diehl <mdiehl@triton.unm.edu>
Subject: Carbonation w/ Dry Ice?
I think this was rehashed some time ago, but I missed the discussion.
Anyway, a friend and I have decided to try homebrewing and would like to
brew a bier that we could share with our friends. Unfortunately, most of our
friends would be turned off by a bier with "bugs" floating around in it. So
we were wondering if we could carbonate our bier with dry ice. We were
thinking of putting some in the bier at bottling time. The dry ice should
sublimate directly into solution with the bier. Might take some experimentation
to find the dosage, but what do you think?
Thanx in advance.
+----------------------+----------------------------------------------------+
| J. Michael Diehl ;-) | I thought I was wrong once. But, I was mistaken. |
| +----------------------------------------------------+
| mdiehl@triton.unm.edu| "I'm just looking for the opportunity to be |
| Thunder@forum | Politically Incorrect! |
| (505) 299-2282 | <me> |
+----------------------+----------------------------------------------------+
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 93 10:29:05 GMT
From: des@pandora.swindon.ingr.com (Desmond Mottram)
Subject: Gelatin, London beers, Hydrometer readings
> From: "Dean Roy" <DEAN@alpha.uwindsor.ca>
> Subject: Gelatin Finings
>
> Can someone tell me if there is any difference between the gelatin finings
> sold in homebrew stores and the plain unflavored gelatin you can buy at the
> supermarket. I have a supply of the supermarket variety and was considering
> using some on my latest batch.
I always use the supermarket variety as I've never seen the HB store
variety. It seems to do the trick.
> From: whjeh@hogpa.ho.att.com (John E Haas +1 201 386 4376)
> Subject: London Pubs and Breweries
>
> I'll be in London and Southern England for a week
> in March and I'm wondering if anybody can recommend
> some pubs and/or breweries to visit.
When in London the best beers are Fullers and Youngs. Fullers is brewed in
Chiswick and is common in West London, Youngs is brewed in Wandsworth
and common in south west London. The (once) good chain of "Firkin" (as in a
Firkin good pint) brewpubs eg Phoenix & Firkin, Frog & Firkin etc are also
worth trying.
Try the following pubs:
Anglesea Arms, South Kensington
County Arms, Wandsworth
Dove, Hammersmith
Hand in Hand, Wimbledon
Orange Tree, Pimlico (brewpub)
Princess Louise, Holborn
Spotted Cow, Putney
Thatched House, Hammersmith
White Cross, Richmond
Windmill, Clapam Common
Get copies of CAMRA publications:
Good Beer Guide (national coverage, available in bookshops)
various local guides (available from CAMRA and some local bookshops)
London Drinker Magazine (available in some pubs, eg Dove and Anglesea)
Also Good Pub Guide (avaliable in bookshops), as good beers and good pubs
don't necessarily go together. CAMRA often recommends good beer in grotty
pubs. Only if both guides recommend it can the place be a certain hit.
> From: Kirk_Anderson@wheatonma.edu (Kirk Anderson)
> Subject: queries
...
> 1) hydrometer reading: at the highest level the wort climbs up the
> instrument, or at the bottom of the curve? I've been reading at the
> highest part. Crude experiments with plain tapwater at 60 degrees suggest
> I'm right.
Line, Wheeler and the notes that came with my hydrometer say not so. Stir
the brew remove density layers, twirl the hydrometer to shake off bubbles
below the surface, read the bottom of the meniscus. and remember to correct
for temperature.
Surface bubbles clinging to the scale obscuring it are a real pain. Does
anyone have suggestions for preventing this? I always blow a hole on the
surface and keep blowing gently to stop more bubbles collecting, but it
can't be good for hygiene.
Rgds, Desmond Mottram
des@pandora.swindon.ingr.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1993 09:36:42 -0500
From: mgx@ornl.gov (Michael D. Galloway)
Subject: Sierra Nevada Bock?
Well I did the dirty deed this weekend: My first all grain batch (batch
number 25). The recipe was supposed to be SNPA:
10 lb British Pale Ale Malt
0.5 lb British Crystal Malt (50 L)
1 oz Perle (8.1%)
1/2 oz Cascade Whole Hops - Flavor
1 oz Cascade Whole Hops - To Be Dry Hopped Next Week
500 ml Starter of WYeast 1056
Mashed the pale ale malt and crystal in 13 quarts treated (i.e. boiled)
water at 150 F for 1.5 hr in a 10 gal Gott with a Phils Phalse Bottem.
Sparged with 4+ gal acidified (1/8 tsp "acid blend") to pH = 5.5 water at
170 F. Sparged to 6.5 gal. The gravity at 6.5 gal was 1053. This
implies:
(53 pts) X (6.5gal) / 10.5 lbs = 32.8 pts/lb/gal !
When boiled to 5.5 gal and racked to primary that yields an OG of 62.6.
What should I call this stuff? Sierra Nevada Potent Ale?
Anyway, the mash went very well. The temperature drop was only
two degrees over the 1.5 hrs (I preheated the Gott). Now sparging,
that is another story. I was somewhat overwhelmed by the
sparging: I kept drawing off wort and recirculating it but it
never seemed to clear the way I expected it. I finally said to hell
with it and ran off the initial wort and proceded to sparge
with water to 6.5 gal. There was still good sugar in the sparge
at this point. What is the lowdown on sparging? How much do
YOU recirculate? Am I needlessly worrying?
All in all, an interesting adventure and it went much easier than
I expected. Maybe Sierra Nevada Helles Bock?
Michael D. Galloway
mgx@ornl.gov
Living in the WasteLand
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 93 8:50:14 CST
From: jmiller@anubis.network.com (Jeff J. Miller)
Subject: Printing labels on a laser printer
> Has anyone found a good solution to the challenge of trying to
> print labels for beer bottles on a laser printer?
>
> I've got some ideas for things I could do up on the computer
> and print out, but I'm afraid if I use the usual mailing label
> type labels, I'll never get them off the bottles again.
>
> Any ideas?
I located some 3/4" round labels that are designed for use on
a laser printer; unfortunatly they seemed EXTREMELY expensive
at $15 a box but I don't recall how many labels were in a box.
I've used this size label before by writing on them and then
sticking them on the caps; no mess on the bottle! It seems
that with the proper font you could get beer name and possibly
bottling date or other info.
- --
Jeff Miller Network Systems Corporation
Advanced Development 7625 Boone Avenue North
jmiller@network.com Minneapolis MN 55428 (612)424-1724
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 93 08:28:58 -0700
From: John Adams <j_adams@hpfcjca.sde.hp.com>
Subject: labels for laser printer
I just print my artwork on regular paper and, using Elmer's glue, attach
the label to the bottle. In this manner the label can be easily removed.
John Adams
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 93 10:09:01 -0500
From: "Daniel K. Yee" <yee@a1.relay.upenn.edu>
Subject: removing foam scum
- ------- Forwarded message
Posted: Mon, 22 Feb 93 00:00:01 -0500
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 93 10:09:01 -0500
Author:
Hello all. Most of my previous brews have been fermented in
five gallon glass carboys used as primary fermenters followed by
secondary fermentation in another glass carboy. Since I have
always been somewhat bothered about the quart or two loss of beer
from the blowoff of the primary fermenter, I recently invested in
a 6.5 gallon glass carboy.
Since my new primary has a larger headspace, I do not get any
lost due to blowoff. The beer that I have subsequently produced
have been good, but now I find that it has a tad more of a bitter
"bite" than before (but this only means a slightly longer aging
time before consuming the brew). Any suggestions as to how to
remove the scummy resinous brown globs that float on the foam in a
sanitary fashion? (Yes, I do believe that the blowoffs
from my previous setup remove the "nasties" and hence yield a
smoother beer.)
Eagerly awaiting your suggestions,
Dan "Sven" Yee
- ------- End of Forwarded message
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 93 07:49:20 PST
From: "Bob Jones" <bjones@novax.llnl.gov>
Subject: Fermenter geometry
During my discussion with Pierre Celis, the subject of fermenter
geometry came up. He mentioned that the head or foam cap in a shallow open
fermenter was much more dense and stable than one in a closed smaller
fermenter. He said he don't understand it either. I know when I visit Anchor
and see their fermentations at high krausen I am only getting a snap shot of
the fermentation. Say Russ, when you've walked by that room several nites in
a row, have you EVER seen that foam fall? I don't know how any of this would
apply to us, it is just an interesting observation and may explain how open
fermentation can be safe in some cases.
Bob Jones
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 93 10:54:45 EST
From: leavitt@mordor.hw.stratus.com (Will Leavitt)
Subject: More yeast when bottling cold lagers
After many successful Ales, I decided to try my hand at a true
lager: basic extract/crystal malt oktoberfest recipe with Wyeast
Bavarian liquid yeast. Its been in the secondary for about a month
at 40-45F. Do I need to add more yeast when I bottle it? Some
folks around here say I should, others say that lager yeasts like the cold
and will be ready to go as soon as I add in priming sugar and
give a stir.
One more data point: I'm dry hopping with a whole plug of hallertauer,
which is floating in a mass at the top of the fermenter. Will
this act to precipitate yeast out of solution?
-will
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 93 10:28:34 EST
From: Ulick Stafford <ulick@bernini.helios.nd.edu>
Subject: laser labels
Andy Rowen asks about laser printer labels.
I always use a laser printer to print my labels, but I don't use Avery
lables. I use post-consumer recycled paper (i.e. the other side of
previously printed upon sheets!). I print 8 to a sheet and cut on
a paper cutter, and stick to the bottles with a glue stick. They
stay stuck on but come off easily when you want them to.
__________________________________________________________________________
'Heineken!?! ... F#$% that s@&* ... | Ulick Stafford, Dept of Chem. Eng.
Pabst Blue Ribbon!' | Notre Dame IN 46556
| ulick@bach.helios.nd.edu
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 93 08:05 PST
From: Bob_Konigsberg@3mail.3com.com
Subject: Beer Labels for laser printers
In HBD 1082 Andy Rowan asks about beer labels for laser printers.
3M (No I don't own stock in them), makes at least one kind of 8 1/2 X 11
laser printer label. Its adhesive is the post-it note kind, i.e.,
removeable. They may also make one with stronger adhesive, since I've
found that the post-it note kind, tends to peel off when the bottle is
put into the refrigerator.
The main deal here though is that you can print up 9 labels on a single
page, and then cut them up. There are 3 score lines across the backing
so that you can peel the backing paper off once the labels are printed.
BobK
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1993 14:19:29 +0000
From: G.A.Cooper@qmw.ac.uk
Subject: Phenolic flavours (long) part I
Hi. I was recently asked by some colleagues to write a few notes on the
problems of phenolic off-flavours in beers. The following summarises my
views of what I have read on the subject. I thought you might be
interested. What I would like is comments and suggestions on where I
might be in error, or where I should make changes to improve clarity.
It (just) exceeds the 8K limit so the end is in another message.
Many thanks in advance.
Geoff
-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-
TCP
TCP is a term used by amateur beermakers in the UK to refer to
a particular group of off-flavours and odours reminiscent of
a commercially available antiseptic. These taints, although
not necessarily just trichlorophenols, are caused by phenolic
compounds. Beer will, typically, contain 100-200 parts per
million (ppm) of tannins ("tannin" being a term referring to a
large group of polyphenolic compounds) which come
predominantly from the barley, although there is some
contribution from the hops. Whilst in this form the flavour
threshold is quite high, when combined with chlorine their
contribution to flavour is quite out of proportion to their
concentration. The flavour thresholds for chlorinated phenols
is around 2-3 parts per billion (ppb).
The common causes of this taint are summarised along with
suggestions of how the taint might be avoided.
Water Supply
Chlorination is the almost universal method of sterilising
domestic water supplies. In the distribution system, chlorine
gas can be dissolved directly in the water, a hypochlorite
(e.g. sodium hypochlorite) can be added to the water, or a
chloramine process may be used. Whilst the first two methods
perform in fundamentally the same way, chloramines, which are
produced by combining chlorine with ammonia, persist many
times longer than free residual chlorine. Chloramines are
particularly useful on long transmission lines and where
reliable penetration into stagnant areas of the distribution
system is needed.
Although the level of chlorine in the water should be less
than 1 ppm, it is necessary for it to be removed before using
the water to make beer. To be safe, chlorine must not come in
contact with the phenols naturally occurring in wort and beer
so all added water must be treated wherever it is used in the
beermaking process, including water used in diluting a beer to
produce a beer of lower gravity.
If the supply is also contaminated with phenols then reactions
will occur resulting in unavoidable phenolic flavours.
Fortunately this is rare, the World Health Organisation and
European regulations specify a permissible limit of 1 ppb of
phenolic substances, but water authorities endeavour to remove
all of the phenols as a matter of course, so as to avoid
undesirable flavours. If it does occur then beverages other
than beer, e.g. tea or homemade wine, will also be affected,
and the only practical solution is for the water to be passed
through an active carbon filter. This method is extremely
effective and reliable; it removes all the free chlorine and,
if flow rates are not too great, the phenolic compounds also.
In the majority of cases, where the supply is not contaminated
with phenols, other methods for the removal of chlorine may be
employed.
Commercially, a common recommendation is the addition of
sulphur dioxide, followed by rousing. The sulphur dioxide
almost instantaneously reacts with the free chlorine and also
removes any chloramines in just a few minutes. It is normal
for sodium (or potassium) metabisuphite to be used at the rate
of 1-2 mg per litre. The addition of one campden tablet to
five gallons of water will supply in excess of ten times the
required dose. It should be noted that this method affects the
levels of salts in the water, which might be undesirable, but
which should be allowed for in any subsequent water treatment.
It is more normal, however, for the amateur simply to boil the
water to drive off the chlorine. A boil of 20 minutes is
usually sufficient and this is no imposition because most
water treatments prior to brewing involve boiling the water.
Sterilisers
Chlorine from sterilising agents such as domestic bleach or
commercial cleansing agents, inadvertently left in fermenting
bins, on cooling coils or other equipment could be responsible
for the taint. All equipment, if sterilised initially with
chlorine containing agents should be thoroughly rinsed,
preferably with a dilute metabisulphite solution, prior to
use.
Wort Bacteria
Very few breweries, especially home breweries, are free from
contamination with enterobacteria which, if their growth
proceeds to any great extent, can impart very noticeable
odours and flavours to the beer. In particular, contamination
with Hafnia protea (formerly Obesumbacterium proteus) or the
coliform bacteria Escherichia coli and those of genus
Klebsiella (Aerobacter), can be the cause of phenolic or
medicinal taints. They can also be responsible for other off-
flavours including a parsnip odour and the production of
celery-like flavours, and can influence the development of
high levels of diacetyl.
The action of these bacteria is severely inhibited during the
progress of fermentation, as the pH drops and the alcohol
rises, but they multiply quite rapidly during the early
stages and, if allowed a sufficiently strong foothold, will
leave behind significant levels of their metabolic products.
The H. protea bacterium is also quite capable of surviving
fermentation and appears to be able to influence yeast
metabolism in a way that encourages a high final pH and final
gravity of the beer, and thus assists the survival of both it
and other enterobacteria.
These bacteria, being present in soil and vegetation and also
possibly present in very small numbers in the water supply,
are readily introduced into a brewery. Once established, they
can be persistent and difficult to remove, and are frequently
transferred, in the pitching yeast or by contaminated
equipment, onto successive brews.
Beer is at its most vulnerable between the cooling of the wort
and the time that a strong and active ferment is underway, so
this period must be kept to as short as possible. The normally
low pH of wines means that these bacteria are usually
inhibited and their presence is unlikely to cause phenolic
flavours in home made wines. Also, the naturally high acidity
of roasted grains means that dark beers are less susceptible
to these problems and, conversely, the higher pH of lagers
makes them more vulnerable.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1993 14:20:20 +0000
From: G.A.Cooper@qmw.ac.uk
Subject: Phenolic flavours, part II
The concluding part of the phenolic flavours article
Geoff
-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-
Wild Yeasts
Wild yeast can be the cause of a number of problems in beer.
In addition to off-flavours the most common are surface films,
turbidity and gushing.
Phenolic flavours are known to be produced by certain wild
yeasts, including some strains of Saccharomyces cerevisiae,
and S. carlsbergensis. Also certain strains have developed the
ability to kill other sensitive yeasts and, under appropriate
conditions, can begin to dominate fermentation. A number of
these strains, otherwise suitable for brewing, are
characterised by the unacceptable production of medicinal
flavours.
It may be worth noting the, perhaps extreme, case where one of
the strains of yeast used to ferment Bavarian wheat beers
produces 4-vinyl guaiacol. This gives the beer its
characteristic "clovelike" phenolic flavour.
Avoiding problems with wild yeasts is essentially a matter of
pitching yeasts free of infection and keeping equipment clean.
Continued reuse of a yeasts from previous brews can, over
time, contribute to a build up of contamination.
Avoiding Phenolic Off-flavours
1.The quality of domestic water supplies clearly varies
greatly throughout the country, and within a single district
is subject to seasonal fluctuation. All added water should
be boiled prior to use and in extreme cases it might be
necessary to filter the water through an active carbon
filter prior to this boiling. As an alternative chlorine may
be removed by the addition of metabisulphite but the added
salts may make this undesirable.
2.Any equipment that might come in contact with the wort or
beer, if sterilised initially with chlorine containing
agents must be thoroughly rinsed, preferably with a dilute
metabisuphite solution before use.
3.Microbial infections should be avoided by rapidly cooling
the boiled and strained wort and getting the fermentation
off to a good start by the addition of a sufficient quantity
of an active yeast starter. If yeasts are being re-used from
previous batches, fresh cultures should be obtained at
regular intervals.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 93 08:20:57 PST
From: "Bob Jones" <bjones@novax.llnl.gov>
Subject: Hot Tip on dry hopping!
Ok boys and girls here is the hot tip of the month...
During the Calif. Allstate Competition I judged Barley wines with Steve
Harrison from Sierra Nevada. I mentioned to Steve how much better this years
Celebration Ale was than last years. It was more like it used to be about 8
years ago. He said it was the same exact recipe as last year! The ONLY thing
they did different was seal the fermentor after dry hopping to reduce
scrubbing the aromatics out with CO2 release.
Ok, I went home and tried this technique on a batch. What I did was rack to
a 5 gallon keg and place the dry hops in a nylon bag with a big brass ball
in it to help sink the bag and hops. I then sealed the keg and applied a
small pressure. Everyday as a passed by the kegs I gave it a sort of rocking
motion. After 1 week I opened the keg and fished out the hop bag with a coat
hanger that had been staightened. I resealed keg, cooled and artificially
carbonated. The results are really amazing! I have dry hopped many times and
NEVER had the results this technique provides. The resultant beer is like
taking a hand full of hops and rubbing them in your face with ever glass.
The beers head and clarity are amazing at two weeks. I did use 1 oz per 5
gallons and they were Centenials and very fresh. I will cut back on the next
dry hopped batch. You keggers must give this a try.
I'm already thinking about the next batch, a Pilsener with 100% Saaz and dry
hopped with Saaz.
Bob Jones
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 93 16:36:09 GMT
From: u4imdmre@cpc41.cpc.usace.army.mil (Markham R. Elliott)
Subject: Curious about Copper
Just a question out of idle curiosity that one of you chemists or historians
out there may be able to answer.
This weekend my father-in-law cycled over for a visit and we got on the subject
of brewing. He is an ex-FBI agent, and was retelling a story about an
investigation of an employee of the Pabst Brewery in (Milwaukee ?) back in the
late 40's. At any rate, we started talking about the machinery and processes
etc (I have been known to be a gadget freak). We both started wondering about
why copper is the traditional material of choice in most parts of the brewing
process. We never figured it out, so I told him I'd ask the Digest.
Is copper's use a carry over from the days before stainless or is there some
quality about the metal that makes it the most desirable.
Although I minored in Chemistry years ago, it wasn't/isn't my strong suite, so
any answers in semi-technical/laymans terms would be appreciated and understood
better. (Grammer wasn't my either favorite).
Noch einmal, bitte!! Mark
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 93 11:47:43 EST
From: steve@garnet.spawar.navy.mil (Steve Jacobs)
Subject: Labels for laser printer
> Andy Rowan writes:
>
> Has anyone found a good solution to the challenge of trying to
> print labels for beer bottles on a laser printer?
I purchased a package of 25 pre-gummed, water-based adhesive sheets of
8 1/2" X 11" paper specifically designed for making labels. They come off
the bottle easily with warm water.
The package states that it is photocopier safe (although they do not
guarantee compatibility with all brands of photocopiers).
I bought mine for $3.99 from:
Brew America
138 Church Street N.E. Suite F
Vienna Virginia 22180
(703) 938-4805
Standard disclaimers apply.
Steve Jacobs (KSI Inc)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 93 11:19:18 CST
From: lencell@unmc.edu (Lance Encell)
Subject: mailing homebrew
I'm looking for tips or advice on sending a case of homebrew from Omaha, NE
to New York City. Any help will be appreciated. -Lance (lencell@unmc.edu)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1993 09:25:38 -0800
From: sherman@qualcomm.com (Sherman Gregory)
Subject: Re: pH Meters,O2
>on the subj of pH meters - i recently got one from HANNA (shucks found out
>it is made in italy :0). anyway does anyone have one of these? do you
>notice a fluctuation between hot and cold temps of the same sample?
I just got one of these also, and did some experimentation to test for
this. I did NOT see any variation with temp. Maybe there is something in
your water that is changing as when it heats up. Have you gone back and
forth in temp a couple of times with the same water to see if this is
repeatable? The instructions imply that the readings should be good over a
temp range of 0 to 50 deg C (32 to 122 deg F). I see some seeming random
variations with mine of about .1 units, but I see no obvious correlation to
temperature.
>i have also
>heard that using pure O2 is not very good - most bottles o2 contains an
>additive used to prevent "stuff" growing (for hospital use), it is very
>explosive and too much purew o2 can be toxic to yeast..... although i have
>heard that divers O2 should be fine.
The local Brew pub that I frequent (Callahan's) uses pure O2 (at least it
comes from a green bottle). His beer comes out good. Next time I see the
brewer I will ask him what grade of O2 he uses.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 93 11:37:30 CST
From: gdmcconn@mspe5.b11.ingr.com (Guy McConnell)
Subject: Wort Aeration
Joe Rolfe writes:
> i finally got a re-pitch to work. i had problems with stucks and in
> conversations with Mike Sharp and SHeri Almeda the major problem was O2
> and areation.
[...]
> so if in doubt areate the hell out it. i used an oiless compressor with
> .2 ucron filter and connecteded to the bottom valve of the fermenter. a hose
> dropped into the wort should do fine if you can get it to the bottom for top
> opening vessels. but always use a filter to get "sterile air". i have also
> heard that using pure O2 is not very good - most bottles o2 contains an
> additive used to prevent "stuff" growing (for hospital use), it is very
> explosive and too much purew o2 can be toxic to yeast..... although i have
> heard that divers O2 should be fine.
That's because "diver's O2" is actually compressed *air*, not O2 at all.
The air that goes into a SCUBA cylinder has to be dry and oil-free, though it
is not any more "sterile" than the air it is made from. An aquarium pump with
an in-line filter works well for this purpose.
- --
Guy McConnell gdmcconn@mspe5.b11.ingr.com
A diver too.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 93 11:41:11 CST
From: gdmcconn@mspe5.b11.ingr.com (Guy McConnell)
Subject: Sankey valve removal tool
William M. Seliger writes:
> I'm not sure if this topic has come up before, but as long as we're
> discussing stainless steel fermenters and fermenting in kegs:
> Does anyone know where to get hold of the tool to remove the lock ring
> that locks in the downtube in sankey kegs???
> I would imagine that a toolmaker could make one at a great expense, but
> SnapOn or someone like that must sell these things (probably also at
> great expense).
Bev-Con International sells a Sankey Valve Removal Tool for a mere $225.00.
Hopefully someone has a more economical solution to your dilemma than that.
- --
Guy McConnell gdmcconn@mspe5.b11.ingr.com
"All I need is a pint a day"
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 93 12:48:22 EST
From: Jim Grady <jimg@hpwarga.wal.hp.com>
Subject: Celis Wit in Boston
Some one mentioned that Celis Wit should be available in Boston by now.
Does anyone know where I can find it? After all the descriptions here,
I am eager to try it! Thanks.
- --
Jim Grady |"Talent imitates, genius steals."
Internet: jimg@wal.hp.com |
Phone: (617) 290-3409 | T. S. Eliot
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 93 12:00:40 CST
From: gdmcconn@mspe5.b11.ingr.com (Guy McConnell)
Subject: Farewell wherever you fare
Well, since I posted two articles this morning and the automagical reply
said that there are 51 articles ahead of mine in the queue, I'd better post
this today as well if it is to be seen before Friday.
Friday, February 26th will be my last day here at Intergraph. I am leaving
and going to work in Orlando for another company. My access to the net (and
therefore email and the HBD) will cease with my leaving, at least until I buy
a PC for home.
I have thoroughly enjoyed reading the HBD since 1990 when I subsribed.
Access to the Digest, as well as Charlie's book (recommended overwhelmingly by
the digest contributors) have made my brewing experiences most pleasant. I
read for several months before I jumped in and I have yet to make a single
batch that was "bad". At times in the past, as well as of late, the Digest
degenerates into a forum for "one-upmanship" and the usually high signal to
noise ratio goes the other way. It gets carried out to the ridiculous and
none of the participants seem willing to let it drop. It eventually returns
to normal, though not without casualty. Witness the formation another brewing
forum because of this very thing not so long ago. If I might make a gentle
suggestion, think before you post. As someone suggested long ago, if you see
a post to which you are considering an inflammatory response, have a homebrew
first, sleep on it, and then, if you still must respond in that manner, do it
by email. The Digest is constipated now from those wanting to get the last
word in on the all-grain vs extract snob issue. Email it! If you simply must
post to show your rapier wit or superior knowledge, do it on rec.crafts.brewing
since that type of thing is the norm on usenet. You will dazzle many more by
doing so, if that is your aim. If it is not, then email was more appropriate
anyway. Think about it. My hope is that, by the time I get a connection
again, things will be back to normal. In the meantime I raise a glass to you
all and I look forward to when our paths cross again.
- --
Guy McConnell gdmcconn@mspe5.b11.ingr.com
"All I need is a pint a day"
------------------------------
Date: 22 Feb 93 08:58:00 PST
From: Tom Haley <tah@ccgate.SanDiegoCA.NCR.COM>
Subject: hbd1081 re: semi-beginner question
Chris,
I would never boil ANY grains. What I would do is get a grain bag and
seep it in your wort until apx 180 deg F. This allows some of the
flavor and the nice unfermentables to enhance you beer. Mashing
allows you to convert starch to sugar for more fermentables. I
always seep something when I am doing and extract batch and sometimes
even when doing a full mash.
tom
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 93 10:03:58 PST
From: "John Cotterill" <johnc@hprpcd.rose.hp.com>
Subject: Refractometers and Hydrometers
Full-Name: "John Cotterill"
Brew Dudes and Dudettes,
I have been using a refractometer for a few months now. This past weekend
I decided to do an experiment to see how the refractometer readings match
up to hydrometer readings on beer. I filled my test jar with an IPA and
put my hydrometer in and it read 1.015. I took a drop of the IPA and put
it on my refractometer and it read 8.2% Brix. Converting this number to
points S.G., its about 1.032!! What gives here? BTW, both numbers are
temperature corrected.
JC
johnc@hprpcd.rose.hp.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 93 11:11:41 -0700
From: Doug Cripe <doug@crevasse.ATMOS.ColoState.EDU>
Subject: WYeast
I've got a few questions regarding the use of WYeast. I'm fairly new
to the joys of homebrewing, and up till now have only pitched dry
yeast. However, over the weekend I decided to hoist myself off the
bottom rung of the ladder and try the recipie for an Irish Red Ale
that appeared in HBD a few weeks back, which called for the WYeast.
My questions are these:
1) The instructions state that a period of incubation is needed (1-3)
days before pitching. Why is that? I assume that when you break the
inner seal, some sort of ****cose is mixed with the yeast to wake
them up from hibernation and thus this is some sort of proofing
period to see if they're viable.
2) The rule of thumb is that 1 day is needed for each month beyond
the manufacturing date on the foil pouch at the time of purchase.
Well, the date stamped on mine was Feb 17, and I bought it on Feb 20,
so I concluded that even less incubation time than a day would be
necessary - was this a safe conclusion? This suspicion was confirmed
by what comes next...
3) Another instruction is that the foil pouch should expand to at
least an inch diameter before pitching. I broke the seal, kneaded
the pouch well, and set it on top of my water heater which I guessed
to be about the recommended 80F degrees for the incubation. I
checked on it three hours later, and the pouch had expanded to the
point that it was very taut, and I thought it would burst if I waited
much longer, so I went ahead and pitched it. The instructions led me
to believe that the fact of expansion was more important than the
actual length of time of incubation - was that a correct
interpretation?
4) My roommate brewed at the same time I did, and he used dry yeast.
The next morning his carboy was bubbling merrily (as we've found to
be a normal time span for dry yeast), but there wasn't even a hiccup
in mine. The following morning, however, mine was also bubbling,
though with a tad more melancholy than my roommate's had the morning
before. The temperature in the pantry where the fermentation takes
place is about 67-70F degrees. Is this slow start normal? Should I
expect the total fermentation time to be longer than the usual two
weeks?
Thanks in advance,
Douglas Cripe
Atmospheric Science
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, CO 80523
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 93 13:10:37 EST
From: "David C. Skeldon" (CCAC-LAD) <dskeldon@PICA.ARMY.MIL>
Subject: CAUSE/EFFECT ESSAY
I am currently writing an essay on the reasons for the growing popularity of
homebrewing, and I was wondering if anyone would like to email me some of the
reasons that they feel homebrewing is gaining in popularity.
Please email me directly.
Thanks
<dskeldon@pica.army.mil>
Dave Skeldon: Owner, Operator, and Chief Brew Meister of Wooddale Brewing Co.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 93 13:25:45 EST
From: rowan@lake.rutgers.edu (Andy Rowan)
Subject: >queries
Kirk Anderson writes:
>2) I've counted on Papazian's book for ages. Must I buy the new revised
>version? What do I get that's new (besides an index)?
>From what I've seen, not that much. I started by using a friend's
copy, which was the old edition. When I bought my own new one,
it seemed pretty much the same. Certainly there are differences,
and I haven't done any systematic comparison by any means, but
probably no need to get the new one since the old one serves so well.
Although that index is pretty handy...
Example of a change I did notice: in the new one, he has now tried
maple-syrup flavored beer and highly recommends it.
I also am resisting the temptation to keep the insipid thread
alive about extract vs. all-grain. So shut up already, the rest of you.
=================================================================
| Andy Rowan | You don't know what I'm |
| Cook College Remote Sensing Center | talking about? Don't |
| Rutgers University | worry, everyone tells |
| rowan@ocean.rutgers.edu | me I don't either. |
| (908) 932-9631 | |
=================================================================
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1993 10:38:53 -0800
From: Richard Stueven <gak@wrs.com>
Subject: Re: Several
Norm Pyle reminds us:
>I will explain my motivation for recently going all-grain: FUN.
>I have more fun brewing with grain than with extract. Everything else
>(lower cost, more time, less/more control, etc.) is secondary. All
>homebrewers clearly have more fun brewing beer than people who just go to the
>store and buy it. I have more fun brewing mine with grain. No big deal;
>just brew it and have fun (right, gak?)
###### ### # ##
# # # #### # # ##### ### ### #
# # # # # # # # ### # #
###### # # ###### # # ##### #
# # # # ### # # # # #
# # # # # # # # ### ### #
# # # #### # # # ### # ##
have fun
gak (an all-grain non-snob)
107/H/3&4
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 93 14:02:38 EST
From: orgasm!davevi@uunet.UU.NET (David Van Iderstine)
Subject: Re: All-grain vs. extract
Excuse me for noting, but this all-grain vs. extract thread has gotten
completely dorky and out of control. Can we get on with other things?
DVI
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 93 14:26:24 EST
From: Keith A. MacNeal HLO1/T09 225-6171 22-Feb-1993 1426 <macneal@pate.enet.dec.com>
Subject: pH is temperature dependent
;Date: Thu, 18 Feb 93 11:13:06 EST
;From: Joe Rolfe <jdr@wang.com>
;Subject: pH Meters, Sparge, MM and Extracts
;hi all,
;whew what a subject (forgot, yeast re-pitch, Belgian Ale Book Comments).
;on the subj of pH meters - i recently got one from HANNA (shucks found out
;it is made in italy :0). anyway does anyone have one of these? do you
;notice a fluctuation between hot and cold temps of the same sample? i am not
;sure if mine is defective or what, pH varies by .5 (even after letting it sit
;in the non-ambient temp sample for 1-2 mins)....the probe was calibrated with
;the 7 and 4 solutions minutes before....and soaked in a conditioning solution
;for 30 mins as recomended.... does any one have the temp diffs for pH?
pH, much like specific gravity, is dependent on temperature. I would think
there would be a temperature correction table that came with your meter.
Keith MacNeal
Digital Equipment Corp.
Hudson, MA
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1084, 02/24/93
*************************************
-------
