Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #1283
This file received at Sierra.Stanford.EDU 93/11/27 00:36:58
HOMEBREW Digest #1283 Sat 27 November 1993
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator
Contents:
Liquid vs. Dry (Jim Posey)
200 IBU's and Old British Beer recipes (Geoff Cooper)
beer clip art (George Tempel)
re: almost there (The Rider) (Michael Fetzer)
re: brew belt problem (The Rider) (Michael Fetzer)
Rauchbier replies & Zymurgy recipe correction (WESTEMEIER)
Cider Problems (sean v. taylor)
_very_ low s.g. (James Clark)
thanks (James Clark)
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: Fri, 26 Nov 1993 02:53:44 -0800 (PST)
From: Jim Posey <dodger@quack.kfu.com>
Subject: Liquid vs. Dry
A Beginners Query.
I've recently begun brewing and have only used WYEAST Liquid yeasts.
All batches showed activity 12-32 hrs. after pitching, and all have
taken at least twice the stated "normal" time to finish fermenting.
Some simple batches have taken 2 weeks, more complex batches 6 weeks.
My carboy sits in a room heated to 70~ and sanitation doesn't seem
to be a problem. (They all taste great!) I know the WYEAST is
underpitching, but... Which is better, all around for the entry-
level brewer, liquid or dry?
email to me at dodger@quack.kfu.com or post any info you think
deserves sharing. Thanks very much in advance.
Jim Posey
ps I enjoy reading everyones opinion, but not over and over again.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1993 11:38:39 +0000
From: G.A.Cooper@qmw.ac.uk (Geoff Cooper)
Subject: 200 IBU's and Old British Beer recipes
>From: Mark Garetz <mgaretz@hoptech.com>
>Subject: 200 IBUs
>
>Al Korzonas writes in response to my posting of a
>historical reference that IPAs of the time had IBU
>ratings of around 200!
>
>My first reaction was that this can't be right! So
>
> [snip]
>
>But the same reference also states that "20 lbs per quarter
>of the best hops shall be used" for ales and porters brewed
>for the India government.
>
>Assuming the same 5% alpha and OG of 1.080, this translates to
>203 IBUs at 30% utilization (Rager's formula unmodified).
>Using my more conservative utilization of 20%, we still get a
>whopping (hopping?) 143 IBUs!
Yes. There are references to hopping rates of 20 lbs per quarter, and yes
the formula does equate this to 200 IBUs (but how accurate is the formula
when extrapolated to these extremes?) Rather than adding hop extract to get
some theoretical level of IBU, why not try brewing a beer with this hop rate?
>So Al is right (or close anyway). These musta been some beers!
They are, I can assure you!
> Has anyone ever brewed or tasted beer this
>bitter?
Yes. A number of times. The Durden Park Old British Beers book gives the
following recipe for one Imperial gallon (1.2 US gal):
Original India Pale Ale OG 70
3lb Pale Malt
2.5 oz Goldings Hops
An infusion mash and 90 min boil - I leave the detail to you. The recipe
corresponds to the heaviest IPA shipped from Burton-on-Trent in the 1830s
according to the reference. Simmond's of Reading were shipping an almost
identical formulation (2.9lb pale malt plus 2.25oz hops) in 1880.
It should be matured for *at least* eight months (it was a long way to India)
Give it a go Mark
>BTW, in case anyone's interested, the reference I'm using is
>The Manual of Brewing: Scientific and Technical by Egbert Grant
>Hooper, 1891.
Ref: W H Roberts, The Scottish Ale Brewer, 1837, and the Courage
Brewing Archives.
************************
And while people are publishing recipes from our book :-)
>From: Jim Cave <CAVE@PSC.ORG>
>Subject: Error in Zymergy
>
> When reading Ed Westemeier's article in zymergy about the old (as in
>historical) English recipes, I noted that the extraction/efficiency rates
>for these recipes are out of line. These are for 6 U.S. gal recipes.
>For example, the Usher Stout:
>
> 18 oz pale malt.
> 6.5 oz carapils
> 4 oz black xstal
> 2 oz xstal
> 2 oz Amber
> 2 oz Brown
>
ALL RECIPES in the Old Beers Book and when reproduced in Zymurgy are
FOR 1.2 US GALLONS. That is one Imperial gallon
Make the Usher's Stout it's well worth it. Not only that, but I used that
grist formulation (at about a factor of two) to produce an Imperial stout
at OG 106. I tasted it for the first time last week and it is superb.
> This logic does not seem to follow for the Whitbread porter:
> 2.5 lbs pale malt
> 7 oz brown
> 2.5 oz Black --- 1.060 O.G. 6 gallons
Again, a wonderful beer with a simple recipe.
>So....what gives?
The recipes are out by a factor of 5. And I think it was my fault that the
error arose.
Geoff
[Currently G.A.Cooper@qmw.ac.uk; from 1st Jan 94 will be G.A.Cooper@gre.ac.uk]
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1993 20:41:27 +0000 (U)
From: George Tempel <tempel@MONMOUTH-ETDL1.ARMY.MIL>
Subject: beer clip art
beer clip art
coyote...
I too am a Mac/Homebrew person, and would love to share in any
clip art you run across.
As for coyotes, how 'bout some of the stylized southwestern
ones you see in the media now adays? I think there's one you
could modify; it comes with either Adobe Illustrator or Photoshop
as a sample poster, but you could base your stylistic coyote
on that one.
george
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1993 10:04:26 -0800
From: mfetzer%ucsd.edu@chem.UCSD.EDU (The Rider) (Michael Fetzer)
Subject: re: almost there
James,
congratulations on getting set up!
As to your questions,
yes, 5 grams of dry yeast should be plenty. Some people want to pitch the
larger packets, or two small ones, and the more you get in there, the
better, but 5 is enough. Be sure to aerate *very* well. Doesn't matter how
much yeast you put in if there's no oxygen for it to use...
no, there should be no problems using the liquid extract instead of dry. I
have heard arguments that syrup is better, because it has not been as
highly refined as the dry, and I've heard counterarguments that syrup is
just dry with water added back. In either case, you don't do *worse* by
using syrup. One caveat: syrup is equivalent to dry plus 20% water, so, if
your recipe calls for 5 lbs dry, you need 6 lbs syrup.
Mike
- --
Michael Fetzer pgp 2.2 key available on request
Internet: mfetzer@ucsd.edu uucp: ...!ucsd!mfetzer
Bitnet: FETZERM@SDSC
HEPnet/SPAN: SDSC::FETZERM or 27.1::FETZERM
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1993 10:04:33 -0800
From: mfetzer%ucsd.edu@chem.UCSD.EDU (The Rider) (Michael Fetzer)
Subject: re: brew belt problem
EKELLY@admin.stmarys.ca writes:
>a home environment. She believes that the surface temperature of
>the brew belt (100 degrees +/- 5) kills the yeast which is in the
>general vicinity of the belt (1 to 2 inches). She claims that this
>area which is void (or almost) of yeast is a natural incubator for
>nasties which can grow rapidly at 100 degrees with little or no
>yeast to worry about.
I've never used one of these gadgets, but I'd say your friend is right.
Beer yeast *does* thrive at 75, and anything over 90 is not good for it. On
the other hand, ~100F is perfect for the nasties to breed in.
Why do you bother with the setup? Even tho your basement may be at 60, if
your wort is at 75 when you pitch, it will take hours if not a couple of
days to equilibrate down to 60. Why not just put a jacket of glass wool
around the carboy/fermenter? When it eventually reaches 60F, it's still
(barely) warm enough to ferment ales.
You might also be able to put some insulation between the brewbelt and the
fermenter, so it doesn't come in direct contact with the wort, or even a
second waterbath that you keep warm, and put the fermenter in that.
One thing's for sure: I'd brew my next batch without the belt, and see what
happens.
Mike
- --
Michael Fetzer pgp 2.2 key available on request
Internet: mfetzer@ucsd.edu uucp: ...!ucsd!mfetzer
Bitnet: FETZERM@SDSC
HEPnet/SPAN: SDSC::FETZERM or 27.1::FETZERM
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1993 18:53:52 -0400 (EDT)
From: WESTEMEIER@delphi.com
Subject: Rauchbier replies & Zymurgy recipe correction
Many good ideas about my rauchbier aroma question:
Bob Jones suggests that Rauchbiers can be divided into the ones
that are drinkable and ones that win competitions.
He also advises me to decide if I'm brewing them to my taste or
for competitions.
I agree completely. As a Certified judge myself, I can appreciate
the problem of the jaded palate after a half dozen score sheets.
I think I'll forget the competition aspects of it and just brew
the beer I enjoy.
By the way, I was surprised that so many people asked why I would
bother with the style. The fact is that the only commercial example
I know of in this country (Kaiserdom) is pure swill. I don't know
if it's a shelf life problem or what, but if that's your only
experience with the style, you're right to question my sanity. It's
nothing at all like what you'll find in Franconia. Brew some
yourself (or come to Cincinnati and try mine) to see what it's really
like. A fine Oktoberfest with a subtle smokiness that adds to the
flavor and doesn't compete with it. THAT'S Rauchbier!
Mike Schrempp suggests "dry smoking" by adding a few handfuls
of smoke in the secondary. This is a marvelous idea, and I'll
give it a try, but I use pretty thick smoke and I don't know if
I can force it through the narrow neck of a carboy. His other
suggestion sounds more practical. I've already sent off my $29.95
for an EasySmoker (tm).
Ulick Stafford's idea of bubbling smoke through the secondary is
probably more practical, but I don't feel comfortable with the
infection risk in such an arrangement. Intriguing thought, though!
Mark Bunster's idea of smoking the finishing hops is also very
intriguing. It may not have a large effect, but if the smoke is
kept fairly cool, it might work.
Ed Quier's idea of putting apple wood charcoal in the primary is
interesting, but I guess it won't impart much smoke flavor
or aroma. I'm very curious to hear the results of the attempt,
however!
Thanks to all for the suggestions and interest.
++++++++++++++
ZYMURGY RECIPE ERROR
Jim Cave asks about the (obvious) error in the recipe quantities
in my Zymurgy article. Others also probably missed the correction
so here it is again:
The quantities shown are for ONE _Imperial_ gallon, NOT 6 US gallons.
To convert to 5 US gallons, multiply everything by 4.2
To convert to 6 US gallons, multiply everything by 5.0
The Zymurgy editor has promised me that a correction will appear in
the next issue. No one is really sure how it happened, but it is
clear that it would not have occurred if they had sent out proofs
for review prior to printing. Ah, deadline pressures!
Again, apologies to all for the recipe errors.
Ed Westemeier
Cincinnati, Ohio
westemeier@delphi.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 93 20:07:51 EST
From: sean v. taylor <sean@chemres.tn.cornell.edu>
Subject: Cider Problems
Well, I opened up my first bottle of cider last night and I
was very disappointed. It was well carbonated, crystal
clear, and altogether okay but for one thing: it had an
overpowering sulfur flavor. The good cider flavor was
there, and the added cinnamon was as well, but the sulfur
was the dominant flavor. Yuck.
My guess is that I overdid the campden tablets.
Outside of adding them and sterilizing with a weak (as
advised in a winemaking book) solution of metabisulfite,
I don't know how else I could have gotten the sulfur flavor
in there. Anybody have any other ideas? I took sweet cider
(read:unfermented) added some cane sugar to raise the S.G.,
some tannin, acid blend, yeast nutrient, and champagne yeast.
It fermented in primary for one week, and in secondary for about
one month. I bottled and it has set for about one month.
Any ideas on what went wrong?
Does it just need to age longer?
Can I salvage this stuff?
Thanks for any advice,
Sean V. Taylor
sean@chemres.tn.cornell.edu
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1993 21:18:50 -0500
From: jeclark@ucdavis.edu (James Clark)
Subject: _very_ low s.g.
my friend and i tried to make our first batch of beer today (try being the
operating word). it was a semi-disaster, but between a cracked carboy and
burnt malt extract on the bottom of the pan (dude, are we supposed to stir
this?) we got the stuff racked.
here's the problem: we weren't really that exact with our water. we just
cooled the wort, dumped it in with some cool water and topped off the
carboy (good thing we had three of them available) so that there was about
three or four inches of air space left. we thought we had it, but the
starting gravity was way too low. the recipie says o.g. should be about
1.036 and ours was
1.014.
so, should we just throw it out and start over, or can we introduce some
super- concentrated wort, or should we even worry about it?
or should we just call it "unintentional light beer"?
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1993 21:49:16 -0500
From: jeclark@ucdavis.edu (James Clark)
Subject: thanks
i'm sorry, i was going to put this in the last letter, but i forgot:
just in case i forgot to reply to anyone who sent me info,
i really apreciate the help and encouragement i received in reguards to our
first batch (to bad it didn't turn out better, but the blame for that rests
on our heads alone). i feel like a leach because i get all this help, but
i'm not really able to contribute to the HBD in a positive way (yet).
anyways, thanks again.
- --james
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1283, 11/27/93
*************************************
-------
