Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #1292
This file received at Sierra.Stanford.EDU 93/12/08 00:37:30
HOMEBREW Digest #1292 Wed 08 December 1993
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator
Contents:
REAL ice beer (kopek.edward)
Snakebite (Calum T. MacNeill)
Brigand Ale/beer aging (Spencer.W.Thomas)
Alpha Acid extraction (Ed Hitchcock)
Commercial Beer Matrix, Part 2/2 (npyle)
Brain reaction to Snakebites??? ( Robert DeMillo )
CO2 buildup during lagering phase (Patrick Casey)
Re: Snakebite (BRUCE)
mead address (Shirley Thompson)
Image files (Al Gaspar)
dopplebock vs. barleywine (Keith MacNeal 07-Dec-1993 1147)
America OnLine (GNT_TOX_)
Disappearing Bitterness (Mark Garetz)
Extract, reply (ELQ1)
Different Beers - Same Flavor (David Allison 225-5764)
Local Chicago Shops ("Peter Brauer 312/915-6157" )
Is Stoelting making a magic chiller? (Tim P McNerney)
Unsolicited Mail Order Catalogue ("Mark T. Berard")
Noche Buena (Chris Amley - 3M Telecommunications)
dilution (Steve Piatz)
hop utilization/Barleywine aging/HopGoRound/hop bags/fading bitterness (korz)
KRUSH-OFF (Jack Schmidling)
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: Tue, 7 Dec 93 08:04:26 -0500
From: kopek@karloff.fstrf.org (kopek.edward)
Subject: REAL ice beer
07129308034200E 0016800000000
Date: 07 Dec 1993 08:03 EST
From: KOPEK.EDWARD (ACTG Data Mgmt Ctr, FSTRF, Amherst, NY)
To: homebrew@hpfcmi.fc.hp.com
cc: KOPEK.EDWARD
Subject: REAL ice beer
Attach:
For anyone who wants to taste a _real_ ice beer, try EKU Kulminator
Urtyp Hell 28 from Germany (That's the entire name of the beer, honest!).
It is concentrated by freezing as are the North American "ice" beers.
But, the flavor (and alcohol) are so concentrated, I found this brew
to be undrinkable, unless diluted with some lighter-bodied beer. (I
never thought I'd say a beer was undrinkable, but try it yourself and
let me know how you feel about it.)
You should be able to find this Kulminator without too much trouble;
our local supermarket carries it in the imported beer section. I guess
it's actually a doppelbock in style, except for the freezing treatment.
Oh, and it is reputed to have the highest alcohol content of any commercial
beer. (Maybe, maybe not). I know it is around 12%, and it packs a wallop!
-Ed Kopek, somewhere in Buffalo, N.Y.....
"Thank goodness this morning I woke up, instead of coming to!"
.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 13:38:42 +0000 (GMT)
From: ctmn@sabhal-mor-ostaig.ac.uk (Calum T. MacNeill)
Subject: Snakebite
Smolinsky spoke of his little Welsh B&B giving him a taste of
Snakebite and telling him of its illegal status. I have to say
that this may be the case in England and Wales but us Scots are
smarter than them so we have our own legal system which does not
ban this tipple. Either that or my local hasn't heard anything
to the contrary! In fact it is quite common around here to order
a "snakebite black" which is the half lager, half cider mix but
with a dash of blackcurrant. I have to admit though that neither
of these concoctions really appeal to me.
On a different note I wonder if anyone could help me with the
problem I have with my present batch of 'instant' homebrew.
It's one of these buy your tin of wort with everything included
except water and sugar. The problem is that primary fermentation
went like a dream, but now that i've transfered it to my pressure
barrel for secondary fermentation nothing's happening, ie no pressure
build up what so ever. I've tried adding extra yeast but to no
avail. Please help ASAP as this is supposed to be the main attraction
of a Christmas Eve party. HELP!!!!!!!!!
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 93 09:08:45 EST
From: Spencer.W.Thomas@med.umich.edu
Subject: Brigand Ale/beer aging
Popped the cork on a bottle of this stuff last night. Wow! Vinous,
fruity, old-ale aroma, beautiful orange-gold color, creamy head,
strong!, hoppy in back. Yum!
This is a "Special," a style designation that means almost nothing, as
far as I can tell. With an OG of 1080, it's more-or-less in the
"strong, blond" category, I'd think.
Jackson says it's best 3-6 months from bottling. Well, the cork on
this one said it was bottled 2-90. Still good. There was
some crud on the bottom of the cork, which I carefully cleaned out of
the neck before drinking. Also yeast "fluffies" in the bottom.
I don't know what this says about aging "on the yeast" versus
filtering, but it certainly indicates that a beer can last more than a
few months (which many of us already knew). Although it smelt
somewhat aged, it didn't taste "old" in any negative sense. I wonder
what a new bottle would taste like?
=S
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 07 Dec 1993 10:38:29 -0400
From: Ed Hitchcock <ECH@ac.dal.ca>
Subject: Alpha Acid extraction
I have been playing with Rager's and Garetz' tables, the equation
from the hops faq and the like, and it occurs to me there is something
missing. I seem to recall (from the spring issue of American Brewer, I
believe) that increasing the hop rate decreases utilization. Thus, not
only is the utilization rate not linear with time and boil gravity, it is
also not linear with hopping rate. Does anyone out there have a polynomial
for this?
____________
Ed Hitchcock ech@ac.dal.ca | Oxymoron: Draft beer in bottles. |
Anatomy & Neurobiology | Pleonasm: Draft beer on tap. |
Dalhousie University, Halifax |___________________________________|
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 93 7:55:10 MST
From: npyle@n33.stortek.com
Subject: Commercial Beer Matrix, Part 2/2
Sorry for the strangeness in the Commercial Beer Matrix, Part 1. It seems
something between me and the HBD added a "- " to all of the long lines starting
with "----"s. I don't get it, nor do I know how to prevent it from happening
to Part 2/2. To clean it up, you'll have to remove the "- " in all those
lines. Hope this is useful.
-Part 2/2-
Boston Brewing Company, Boston, Massachusetts
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beer Name | Fermentables | Hops | Yeast | O.G. | Comments
- -------------|---------------|--------------------|---------|------|----------
- -------------|---------------|--------------------|---------|------|----------
Sam | Klages / | Tettnanger | Lager |1.052 |Flagship
Adams | Harrington | Tettnang | | |Product
Boston | 2-row | Hallertauer | | |
Lager | Crystal 60L | Mittelfrueh | | |
- -------------|---------------|--------------------|---------|------|----------
Sam | Klages / | English | Ale |1.056 |
Adams | Harrington | Goldings | | |
Boston | 2-row | English | | |
Stock | Crystal 60L | Fuggles | | |
Ale | | Saaz | | |
- -------------|---------------|--------------------|---------|------|----------
Sam | Klages / | Hallertauer | Lager |1.032 |
Adams | Harrington | Mittelfrueh | | |
Boston | 2-row | Saaz | | |
Lightship | Crystal 60L | | | |
- -------------|---------------|--------------------|---------|------|----------
Sam | Klages / | Tettnanger | Lager |1.081 |First
Adams | Harrington | Tettnang | | |runnings
Double | 2-row | Hallertauer | | |only?
Bock | Crystal 60L | Mittelfrueh | | |
- -------------|---------------|--------------------|---------|------|----------
Sam | Klages / | Tettnanger | Lager |1.056 |
Adams | Harrington | Tettnang | | |
Octoberfest| 2-row | Hallertauer | | |
| Crystal 60L | Mittelfrueh | | |
- -------------|---------------|--------------------|---------|------|----------
Sam | Klages / | Tettnanger | Lager |Varies|Recipe
Adams | Harrington | Tettnang | | |Varies
Winter | 2-row | Hallertauer | | |Yearly
Lager | Crystal 60L | Mittelfrueh | | |
| | English | | |
| | Goldings | | |
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anderson Valley Brewery, Booneville, California
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beer Name | Fermentables | Hops | Yeast | O.G. | Comments
- -------------|---------------|--------------------|---------|------|----------
- -------------|---------------|--------------------|---------|------|----------
Poleeko | Pale 2-row | Eroica | Ale | |
Gold | Crystal 40L | Nugget | | |
Light | | Northern | | |
Ale | | Brewer | | |
| | Cascade | | |
- -------------|---------------|--------------------|---------|------|----------
Extra | Pale 2-row | Nugget | Ale | |
Special | Crystal 40L | Eroica | | |
Bitter | Munich malt | Northern | | |
| | Brewer | | |
| | Tettnang | | |
- -------------|---------------|--------------------|---------|------|----------
High | Pale 2-row | Northern | | |
Rollers | (60%) | Brewer | | |
Wheat | Wheat malt | Mount | | |
Beer | (40%) | Hood | | |
- -------------|---------------|--------------------|---------|------|----------
Boont | Pale 2-row | Eroica | Ale | |
Amber | Crystal 40L | Northern | | |
Ale | Crystal 80L | Brewer | | |
| | Willamette | | |
- -------------|---------------|--------------------|---------|------|----------
Centennial | Pale 2-row | Nugget | | |
| Crystal 40L | Eroica | | |
| Crystal 80L | Northern | | |
| Munich 40L | Brewer | | |
| | Mount | | |
| | Hood | | |
- -------------|---------------|--------------------|---------|------|----------
Deep | Pale 2-row | Nugget | Ale | |
Enders | Crystal 40L | Northern | | |
Dark | Crystal 80L | Brewer | | |
Porter | Chocolate malt| Willamette | | |
- -------------|---------------|--------------------|---------|------|----------
Barney | Pale 2-row | Eroica | Ale | |Flagship
Flats | Crystal 40L | Northern | | |Product
Oatmeal | Crystal 80L | Brewer | | |
Stout | Munich malt | Cascade | | |
| Chocolate malt| | | |
| Wheat malt | | | |
| Roasted barley| | | |
| Oats | | | |
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anchor Brewing Company, San Francisco, California
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beer Name | Fermentables | Hops | Yeast | O.G. | Comments
- -------------|---------------|--------------------|---------|------|----------
- -------------|---------------|--------------------|---------|------|----------
Anchor | Pale 2-row | Northern | Lager |1.050 |Flagship
Steam | Crystal | Brewer (US?) |(Wyeast | |Product
| | | Calif. | |Fermented
| | | lager?) | |at 55F
| | | | |Lagered
| | | | |at 50F
| | | | |33 IBU
| | | | |Kraeusened
| | | | |3.9% ABW
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Norm
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 93 10:04:59 -0500
From: demillo@juliet.ll.mit.edu ( Robert DeMillo )
Subject: Brain reaction to Snakebites???
> Date: 6 Dec 93 07:25:00 EST
> From: "DAVE SMOLINSKY" <SMOLINSKY@merlin.ndhm.gtegsc.com>
> Subject: Snakebite
>
> Hi all,
>
>Back in September I was in Penryhndeudraeth, Wales in the U.K...
>after hours I was chatting with the bartender and he told me about a
>concoction pubs used to make, but is now illegal. It was called a *Snakebite*.
>It was a combination of equal parts of a lager and a cider (I forget what the
>lager was, possibly Tetley's[??], but the cider was Strongbow). The reason it
>was outlawed was because of some chemical reaction that occured that had a not
>so nice effect on brain cells. Anyone ever heard of this or know what it does
>to people's brains??
You've *got* to be kidding me. This sounds like an
"Old Wives' Tale" made into law.
"Snakebites" are pretty common over here in brewpubs (at
least in the Boston area), and are made from a strong lager
and a cider, as the poster states. Usually the lager is the
lager-of-the-house, and the cider is whatever is available.
(At least one brewpub in Boston makes its own cider: Boston
Beer Works.)
If there is a chemical reaction that has a bad effect
on people's brain cells, I haven't KnOwitist iT, aNd
eYe drINCK a lT of snAkebytes....
- --
- Rob DeMillo | Internet: demillo@juliet.ll.mit.edu
MIT Lincoln Lab | America Online: exgalileo@aol.com
Weather Sensing - Group 43 | Reality: 617-981-2105 (office)
"Operation Goofy now in effect!"
--- Tom Servo, "Gamera vs. Gaos," Mystery Science Theater 3000
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 93 10:55:30 EST
From: pacasey@lexmark.com (Patrick Casey)
Subject: CO2 buildup during lagering phase
Hi. When I made my first and only lager this fall, I had a problem at
bottling time -- the beer foamed a lot when I filled the warm bottles
and later the beer had a way too high level of carbonation. Here's
what I figure was going on:
At the lager fermentation temps, the CO2 produced by the yeast tended
to stay in solution rather than come out of solution like it does with
my ales at ale fermentation temperatures. Since I bottled the beer
right out of the fridge after a 2 week primary and 2 week
secondary/lager phase, a lot of CO2 was still dissolved in the beer.
This time I think I'll bring the beer out of the fridge a day or two
before bottling to let most of the CO2 come out of solution. Seems
like I read in Noonan's book that he says the CO2 can be brought out
of solution by siphoning the cold beer straight from the fridge into a
bottling bucket and then rocking the bucket to coax the CO2 out of the
beer. What do you folks do?
Thanks in advance,
Patrick
Patrick A. Casey pacasey@lexmark.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 08:19 PST
From: BRUCE@ARVAX.Syntex.Com
Subject: Re: Snakebite
I believe you Welsh friend was spinning you a bit of a yarn with that brain
cell story.... (I have always been faxcinated by Wales, BTW...)
However, snakebites are definitely EVIL!! I have strayed to the DARK SIDE more
times than I care to (or can...) remember. Many Pubs here in the bay area
have Dry Blackthorn Hard Cider on tap, and are very familiar with snakebites.
I was introduced to them at Jonathan's Roadhouse Pub in Tahoe City while on a
ski trip, and, ever since, I have been hooked. If a place has the cider on tap,
I know automatically what I'm going to order.
They're a little sweet with some of the milder lagers, so I suggest trying it
with Pilsener Urquell or one of the more robust ales. They're also pretty good
with Guiness, believe it or not! I usually get them with the likes of
Red Hook or Bass.
With regard to the brain cell thing, I simply cannot believe that it was
outlawed for killing brain cells. We all know what does that, and it has
nothing to do with a reaction between cider and beer...
These wonderful concoctions do, however have a tendency to sneak up on you
and bite your behind! They are tasty, go down smooth, and have quite a kick.
I don't know what the alcohol content of the cider is, but I have ended up
more inebriated than I have intended on several occasions.
I suggest you search out a pub that has a dry cider on tap, and have them pull
a few snakebites for you. But make sure you have a ride home if you're there
past closing like you were in Wales.
Enjoy!
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 07 Dec 93 09:28:44 MST
From: Shirley Thompson <DUSTHOMP@idbsu.idbsu.edu>
Subject: mead address
In response to Coyote, there is a mead digest at "mead-lovers-request@ekletex.c
om". Any chance of getting your Loganberry mead recipe?
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's to it and to it again, if you don't do it, when you get to it,
you may never get to it to do it again...
-----------------------+-----------------------+-------------------------
Shirley Mae Thompson | 1910 University Drive | Cren: DUSTHOMP@IDBSU
User Service Center | Boise, Idaho 83725 | Internet:
Boise State University | (208) 385-4357 | dusthomp@idbsu.idbsu.edu
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 07 Dec 93 10:46:13 CST
From: Al Gaspar <gaspar@STL-17SIMA.ARMY.MIL>
Subject: Image files
What do I need to look at the .jpg files in the images directory at the homebrew
archive site? Can the be converted to other formats? I'd love to look at some
of these. Thanks for the help.
Cheers--
Al
- --
Al Gaspar <gaspar@stl-17sima.army.mil>
USAMC SIMA, ATTN: AMXSI-TTC, 1222 Spruce St., St. Louis, MO 63103-2834
COMMERCIAL: (314) 331-4354 AUTOVON: 555-4354
relay1.uu.net!stl-17sima.army.mil!gaspar
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 93 11:49:53 EST
From: Keith MacNeal 07-Dec-1993 1147 <macneal@pate.enet.dec.com>
Subject: dopplebock vs. barleywine
Someone asked if dopplebocks are barleywines. The answer is, no there are
differences between the two. The most basic difference being that a dopplebock
is a lager and a barleywine is an ale. Lagers are brewed and aged at lower
temperatures than ales. Dopplebocks are a high alcohol version of lager
while barleywines are high alcohol versions of ale. Barleywines are
generally higher in alcohol content than dopplebocks (a tripplebock might be
in barleywine range).
Keith MacNeal
Digital Equipment Corp.
Hudson, MA
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 93 12:29 EST
From: <GNT_TOX_%ALLOY.BITNET@PUCC.PRINCETON.EDU>
Subject: America OnLine
While reading the brewing online text file I noticed that there was no
e-mail address given for the author, so I will post the info here.
There is a brewing forum on America OnLine in the "Wine and Dine"
section. They keywork "Wine" will get you there. We have about 10
message bases and coming soon will be an interactive database
containing HBD.
America OnLine currently costs $9.95 for the first four hours of the
month, and $3.95 for each additional hour. It's at 2400 baud, but
going to 9600 with a month or two. Internet FTP access, UseNet,
gopher, and archie access will all be coming before the end of the
year. Internet E-Mail gateway already exists.
I would be happy to get a detailed description of the message bases if
anyone is interested.. I also have a text file conatining AOL
recipes. I can u/l the file to the archive site on request.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 93 10:34:17 PST
From: Mark Garetz <mgaretz@hoptech.com>
Subject: Disappearing Bitterness
Stephen Dillinger writes:
>The basic "problem" is that the perceived bitterness in my bottled beers seems
>to fade rather quickly (over a period of weeks). A beer that is extremely
>bitter one week, is perfect the next, and a couple of weeks later the
>bitterness is very subdued.
I suspect what is happenning is that the iso-alpha acids (responsible for
the bitterness) are dropping out with the yeast (Yeast adsorbs iso-alphas).
Now if you say "Well my beer is clear when I perceive it to be bitter, so
the yeast has already dropped out," I would say that reasonably clear
appearing beer can still have lots of yeast suspended in it.
Try this experiment: Shake up the beer to re-disperse the yeast and then
taste it. Yes it will be yeasty, but I'll bet the bitterness returns.
Solutions? Increase your hopping rate and let the beer settle a bit more
before bottling. And/or use a more flocculent yeast strain. I haven't
tried it yet myself, but the new Wyeast 1968 Special London Ale is
reported to be highly flocculent.
Mark
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 93 10:03:20 PST
From: ELQ1%Maint%HBPP@cts27.comp.pge.com
Subject: Extract, reply
In HBD#1289 Larry asks about getting all the extract from pouchs.
I use _Trinity Malt Works_, It comes in 6 lb bags that I put in to a sink
of hot water to soften. It really flows smooth and is easy to get all the
good stuff. I stick the box and all on top of my wood stove when I start
the 5 gal. of water to boil and turn the box several times and I get very
liquid malt.
Michael Barre,
my home address is;
6859 Eggert Rd.
Eureka, Ca. 95503 707-444-8659
Ed Quier. ElQ1@MAINT@HBPP
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 07 Dec 1993 11:18:00 -0800 (PST)
From: David Allison 225-5764 <ALLISON.DAVID@A1GW.GENE.COM>
Subject: Different Beers - Same Flavor
I am having a problem that perhaps you folks out there in HBD-land could
help me with. In short (hopefully), my last two brews came out with the
same flavor, but I used different ingredients.
First brew -
8# US 2-row
1# US 6-row
1# rye flake
Hops: approx. 45 IBU (don't have varieties on hand)
Yeast: Wyeast - Calif. Lager Yeast
Second brew -
9# British 2-row
1# Crystal 40L
Hops: approx. 45 IBU (don't have varieties on hand)
Yeast: Wyeast - Chico Ale Yeast
In both brews, I used a 1400 mL yeast starter (very active) and
fermentation started in about 5 hours. Previously, I had used only only
500 mL starters, with fermentation in 24 hours.
The problem is that both beers have a pronounced flavor component to them
- -- sort of a pear/banana-like aroma and taste (IMO, but it is hard for me
to judge). At about 40 hours of fermentation, the second brew went from
having a medium-amber color with large aggregates circulating around to a
light-amber color with a lot of small particles circulating. The
fermentation was very active during this entire period.
Is this characteristic of these yeasts or did something happen to the yeast
during fermentation? Any ideas? If I could tell the difference between
phenols, esters, aldehydes, ketones, long-chain alcohols, etc. - I guess I
could troubleshoot the problem better. But my beer judging needs to
improved. (another story) -- BTW, the beers are very drinkable, I just
wasn't looking for that flavor. Thanks.
David
(allison2@gene.com)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 07 Dec 93 14:15 CST
From: "Peter Brauer 312/915-6157" <$W$PR42%LUCCPUA.BITNET@UICVM.UIC.EDU>
Subject: Local Chicago Shops
Is there a list out there anywhere of Chicago areas supply houses?
I only know about my brewmaster, "Brewin' Beer" out by O'Hare. I
like his shop but am always willing to look at something new. Thanks.
.
Also, I am sure that I already missed this being new to this net, but
has anyone tried "Clear Beer?" My family in Minnesota sent me samples
when I told them I was making my own because they thought it was neat.
I can't even give this junk away. One would think that they would assum
e that I only liked something with flavor, body, taste, etc. but there
is no accounting for family. While I can't in good concience throw it
away (there are people in China going to bed sober after all) but i
can't stomach the junk. Anyone else tried it? Are they still making
it or did this particular brewery suffer a timely fire?
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 93 13:51:54 PST
From: tpm@wdl.loral.com (Tim P McNerney)
Subject: Is Stoelting making a magic chiller?
I got this flyer from Stoelting which makes the following claims for its
wort chiller:
Chills 5 gallons of wort from 210F to 56F in 15 minutes at .33 GPM.
So basically, 5 gallons of water (.33 * 15) to chill 5 gallons of wort from
210F to 56F. It seems to me that if you were able to obtain perfect heat
transfer and the water you were using was 32F, the best you could hope to
get is 121F.
Am I missing something here? Here is the rest of the info:
Wort chiller w/ stainless steel housing. Counterflow type. Chill rate:
5 gal. of wort from 210F to 56F in 15 minutes at .33 GPM. 3/8" ID stainless
steel wort line wrapped with copper fins. Finned tube assembly centered in
3/4" cold water copper line. 8.5" high x 11.25" diameter.
________________________________
- --Tim McNerney
- --Loral Western Development Labs
- --(408) 473-4748
- --tpm@wdl.loral.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 07 Dec 1993 12:22:23 EST
From: "Mark T. Berard" <mtberard@dow.com>
Subject: Unsolicited Mail Order Catalogue
Hello HBDer's,
I have a digest (etiquette?) question. Today I received at work
a mail order homebrew supply catalogue. I don't recall asking anyone to
send this to me, and if I had, I'm sure I would have asked them to send it
to my home address. While I appreciate getting this sort of thing, I would
want to get it at home!
It would appear that they pulled my address from my sig from a
couple of recent postings to HBD. While I consider this improper, I'm not
sure if it is considered a breech of NET etiquette. I would have prefered
e-mail asking if I wanted the catalogue. By including my snail mail address
in my sig, am I asking for this sort of thing? Could some NET "Miss Manners"
please clue me in to proper behavior in this regard?
Until then, just call me:
Mark "no sig" B.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 17:00:10 -0600
From: ccamley@mmm.com (Chris Amley - 3M Telecommunications)
Subject: Noche Buena
In HBD 1289 Dr. Fix asks for a polite way to get across the fact that the
"new" Noche Buena differs from the old in alcohol, color, and bitterness.
It sounds to me like it's not the same beer, and that's what SW Brewing News
should say: it's not the same beer. Any published note on this beer should
also raise the question: is it ethical to call the new beer by the old name?
Of course, the same note should point out the facts of the new beer.
NB use to be available in Southern California around the end of the year and
it seems a real shame that some people will be misled by this practice,
especially given the rarity of Vienna-style brews.
Chris
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 93 22:01:20 CST
From: piatz@tamarack.cray.com (Steve Piatz)
Subject: dilution
In HBD 1291 Spencer.W.Thomas writes:
>
> Not sure what you want. You mean "what happens if I add 1 gallon of
> water to 4 gallons of 1.040 wort?" Almost right formula:
> 1.040 wort = 40 "points/gallon" = 160 "points" in 4 gallons
> 160 points/5 gallons = 32 points/gallon = 1.032 wort
>
> To do it right, you first convert from gravity to degrees Plato. Fix
> posted a cubic approximation to the tables recently. This gives you
> %sugar (by weight as sucrose) (1 deg Plato = 1% sugar w/w). Multiply
> by the mass of the solution (4 gallons * ???lbs/gal * 1.040) to get
> the mass of sugar. Add your gallon of water, and compute the mass
> of the new solution (original mass + mass of 1 gallon of water (don't
> forget to temperature compensate)). Then compute the percentage of
> sugar in the new solution (100 * original sugar mass / solution mass).
> Finally, convert back to S.G. using the Plato table (or formula).
>
> A close approximation to deg Plato is to divide the "points" by 4.
> But if you use that, you might as well use the simple method in the
> first paragraph.
>
> I haven't compared this to Steve Piatz's table, but his code looks
> like my first method.
>
To incorporate Spencer's concern for using the more accurate degrees Plato
let's use the following:
phys_con = pounds/gallon of water
v = original volume of wort
og = original specific gravity
dilution = percent of original volume added as water
Assume that the wort and the dilution water are both at the same
temperature.
percent_sugar = sg2plato(og)
mass_sugar = percent_sugar * v * phys_con * og
original_mass = v * phys_con * og
new_mass = original_mass + (dilution * v * phys_con)
new_percent_sugar = mass_sugar / new_mass
Which is:
(percent_sugar * v * phys_con * og)
_____________________________________________
(v * phys_con * og + dilution * v * phys_con)
Which simplifies to:
= (percent_sugar * og) / (og + dilution)
Which gives:
fg = plato2sg((percent_sugar * og) / (og + dilution))
After doing all this the resulting table is identical to the more
simplistic approach. The program follows, the #if SIMPLE determines
which approach to use.
#include <stdio.h>
#define NUM_PERCENT 10 /* number of columns */
#define NUM_GRAVITY 30 /* number of rows */
#define PERCENT_STEP 0.05 /* percentage per column */
#define GRAVITY_STEP 0.005 /* gravity per row */
#define INITIAL_GRAVITY 1.010 /* gravity for first row */
#define INITIAL_PERCENT PERCENT_STEP /* percentage for first column */
double
sg2plato (sg)
double sg;
{
return 259.0 - (259.0 / sg);
}
double
plato2sg(p)
double p;
{
return -259.0 / (p - 259.0);
}
main ()
{
int i;
int j;
double og, fg;
double dilution;
printf (" | Dilution By\n");
printf (" O.G. | ");
for (j = 0; j < NUM_PERCENT; j++)
printf (" %3.0f%% ", 100.0 * PERCENT_STEP * (1 + j));
printf ("\n");
printf ("-------|-");
for (j = 0; j < NUM_PERCENT; j++) printf ("-------");
printf ("\n");
og = INITIAL_GRAVITY - GRAVITY_STEP;
for (i = 0; i < NUM_GRAVITY; i++) {
og += GRAVITY_STEP;
printf ("%6.3f | ", og);
dilution = INITIAL_PERCENT - PERCENT_STEP;
for (j = 0; j < NUM_PERCENT; j++) {
dilution += PERCENT_STEP;
#if SIMPLE
fg = (og + dilution) / (1.0 + dilution);
#else
fg = plato2sg(sg2plato(og) * og / (og + dilution));
#endif
printf ("%6.3f ", fg);
}
printf ("\n");
}
exit ();
}
Steve Piatz Cray Research, Inc.
steve.piatz@cray.com 655F Lone Oak Drive
612-683-5268 Eagan, MN 55121
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 93 14:57 CST
From: korz@iepubj.att.com
Subject: hop utilization/Barleywine aging/HopGoRound/hop bags/fading bitterness
Robert writes:
>The unpredictability of results when hopping may be due more to the
>isomerization of the hops than hop utilization.
Yes, but isomerization is one of the many factors that collectively
combine to result in a number we call "hop utilization." I disagree that
it is unpredictable... I feel that for a given system, one can determine
the hop utilization as a function of boil time and other factors. I say
"for a given system" because among other things, kettle geometry, whether
or not you use a hop bag, and heat source intensity (boil vigor) affect
hop utilization. I don't know how much each of these factors, or which
ones of them are significant, but for a given system you can figure out
a set of formulas that will give you predictable bittering.
>Isomerization is an altering
>of the molecular structure of the substance in hops that imparts bitterness
>to beer. It is the isomerized molecules that give the bitterness. Only a
>fraction of the hops are isomerized during the boil (around 25% max) and
>the degree of isomerization is directly proportional to the length of time the
>hops are in the boil. Maximum isomerization occurs at around 45 min. of
>exposure to the boil. After one hour isomerization actually begins to reverse!
>Perhaps this explains why Andy's 90 min. boil was not as bitter as expected.
Could you send me your reference for this... I'd like to read more about it.
I've read many articles that contradict this assertion. Thanks.
>So, actual IBU's can not be calculated without taking %Isomerization into
>account. Since learning this information from the master brewer at a local
>contract brewery, my beers have been much more predictable in terms of
>bitterness and better overall. I believe this is because I now brew to a
>specific target bitterness (based on style).
What all the formulas (the ones Robert posted as well as Ragers, etc.)
calculate are an approximation for the IBUs in the finished product, not
really what gets into the wort. Here's an excerpt from a talk by Bob Foster
(Coors Brewing Co) talk at the Siebel Institute of Technology:
PROCESS UTILIZATION OF ALPHA ACIDS
Formula %U = IBU(ppm)/AA added(ppm) * 100
----------------------------------
Kettle Utilization: (EG.) %U = 45IBU(ppm)/92.4 AA added(ppm) * 100
%U = (0.4870) * 100 = 48.7%
Fermenter Drop (EG.) %U = 25IBU(ppm)/92.4 AA added(ppm) * 100
RUH Drop: %U = (0.2706) * 100 = 27.1%
Lager Drop: (EG.) %U = 23.5IBU(ppm)/92.4 AA added(ppm) * 100
%U = (0.2543) * 100 = 23.4%
Blending (30% H2O): (EG.) 23.5IBU * 0.70 = 16.5 IBU
%U = 16.5 IBU(ppm)/92.4 AA added(ppm) * 100
%U = (0.1786) * 100 = 17.9%
Overall Utilization 16.5IBU - 1.0 IBU loss = 15.5IBU
(packaged beer): %U = 15.5 IBU(ppm)/92.4 AA added(ppm) * 100
%U = (0.1678) * 100 = 16.8%
Confusing? Yes, I agree, and I'm not sure if the numbers were actuals
(measured) or if they were just for example's sake, so we can only take
this information with a grain of salt. However, if we assume that the
numbers are in the ballpark for a real system (granted, Coors' 650bbl
system), then there are a lot more significant factors than just
percent isomerization.
*************
Jim writes:
>> yeast, or champagne/wine yeasts. Aged 6 months to a year.
>Well, Bigfoot is not aged like this, and I dont age mine either. It all
>depends on your fermentation, if you properly attenuate the beer, the
>aging time is greatly reduced. If you bottle at 1.030, it will need
>considerable time to age, but may never be as good as one bottled at 1.020.
>My latest is great at brew day + 10 weeks, or keg day + 8 weeks. It was
>darn good at 3 weeks.
I have wondered about this. I bought a sixpack of Bigfoot back in `91
from a store that is notorious for poor handling. The bottlecap said 1990.
I tried one immediately and it was harsh and undrinkable. Very unpleasant.
It tasted like it was very highly alcoholic but not a smooth, warming ethyl
alcohol. Knowing that high-alchol beers often require aging (Samiclaus
is aged 1 year before distribution), I put the beer aside in a cool
crawlspace and forgot about it. Six months later, I tried another bottle --
better, but still harsh. A year after I bought it, I finally tried the
third bottle: nectar! The harshness smoothed out wonderfully and it had
a very interesting complexity of estery aromas and flavors over a perfectly
balanced malt/bitterness/alcohol base. I have two bottles left right now,
and I regret that I did not buy more.
When the 1992 Bigfoot came out, I bought a case, this time from a better
store. I tried a bottle immediately, expecting the harshness, but it
was not there! I know that SN has been changing their procedures (and maybe
also their recipes) over the years and perhaps they have reduced the OG
or the fermentation temperature or something. The beer seemed more alcoholic
than the 1990 version, but it was all the smooth, warming ethanol flavor.
Comments?
**************
Norm writes:
>Until something big comes along to straighten out the mess, I'll use Rager's
>utilization numbers and formula. Why? Because it is very widely used in the
>homebrew community, making for a good point of reference. If someone tells me
>a beer has 37 IBU, and I know (maybe I have to assume) they are using Rager's
>numbers, I have a reference point to use in trying to duplicate it. Other
>adjustments/utilization tables may be more accurate, but the comparisons are
>what's important to me.
I tend to agree. I recently bought "Dr. Bob Technical's Hop-Go-Round" a
hop version of the Wheel of Beer. I used it last night to compare my
Rager-derived numbers with the Hop-Go-Round. For a 60 minute boil in a
1081 wort, they were almost identical, but for a 15 minute boil the H-G-R
said 6 IBU where my Rager-derived numbers said 3 IBU! I think that the
H-G-R is much too optimistic at the lower end of the utilization curve.
I plan to tape my own scale over the existing utilization scale on the
back of the H-G-R.
********
Further, Norm writes:
>I have had similar problems, Dion. My course of corrective action: use whole
>hops whenever possible and always put the hops in a hop bag. Pellets are
>terrible for this problem, and the hop bag will help even with pellets. I
>would like to hear how others deal with clogging in the kettle.
I add 10% to Rager's numbers when I use a hop bag (which is always).
***********
Steve writes:
>The basic "problem" is that the perceived bitterness in my bottled beers seems
>to fade rather quickly (over a period of weeks). A beer that is extremely
>bitter one week, is perfect the next, and a couple of weeks later the
>bitterness is very subdued.
Anytime someone reports something hop-related is good for a while and then
turns bad after a while in the bottle, I suspect oxygen is the culprit.
I'm not sure exactly how or why, but I would recommend that you evaluate
your processes and see if you may be introducing oxygen while the wort
is still hot. Another thing is that perhaps it is not bitterness that you
are perceiving. Perhaps it is tannin astringency which *does* go away
after a while. Perhaps you are extracting a lot of tannins from your
grain and you are underhopping -- while the tannin astringency is still there,
the beer tastes rather balanced -- when it fades, the beer tastes too malty.
Could this be the problem?
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 93 00:16 CST
From: arf@mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: KRUSH-OFF
>From: STROUD%GAIA@leia.polaroid.com
>Subject: Wort Processor Krush-Off: Part II
>1) The Knurly GlattMill - Powered by a normal household drill, this mill
crushed the malt in an impressive 26 sec., nearly as fast as the Schmidling
MaltMill (21 sec) in our original Krush-Off.
Clearly, a mill that is more than twice as large should demonstrate a
significantly higher throughput at a given rpm than what you have described.
This test is only valid if they are both run at exactly the same speed and no
mention of the RPM was made.
It should further be noted that the MM as shipped is set up for hand cranking
and the grain guides provide a restricted flow to assure ease of cranking
with the very large rollers. To miximize throughput when motorized, the
grain guides can be trimmed to provide a larger hole that will feed the grain
as fast as the 10" rollers will take them.
I have a microbrewery customer that reports a throughput of 17 lbs per minute
on his MALTMILL. That's 3.5 secs per lb, roughly 4 times the rate reported
for the Glatt.
>From: hollen@megatek.com (Dion Hollenbeck)
>Subject: Wort boiler screen
> The end of the nipple is covered with a coarse screen. I have no idea why
it did not plug up the first two times, but did this time.
You were lucky. If the screen is only as large as the diameter or the
nipple, all it takes is one petal of a hop flower to clog it.
>Here are my questions. If you are using a Chore Girl or an
EasyMasher, since both of them are just screens, why do they not plug
up?
The EM screen is a 6" x 3/8" cylinder and needs far less luck to remain
clear.
js
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1292, 12/08/93
*************************************
-------
