Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #1285
This file received at Sierra.Stanford.EDU 93/11/30 00:38:02
HOMEBREW Digest #1285 Tue 30 November 1993
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator
Contents:
Demerara Sugar ("Robert H. Reed")
German Malt sources request (Crawford.Wbst129)
for James Clark (29-Nov-1993 0911 -0500)
which yeast? (btalk)
Alternative FAQ Formats (Mark A. Stevens)
"Closed" fermentation -vs- "Open" fermentation ("SMSD::MRGATE::\"A1::WESTERMAN_ROBERT\"")
HSA again... (Ed Hitchcock)
Please add me to you distribution (Steven Grove)
Please relax!! (Don Biszek)
Re: Rauchbier (Jason Goldman)
Dark malt & iodine test/cider vs juice (Jeff Benjamin)
Sour 2-row grain (Chuck Wettergreen)
Black Treacle and Hunter AirStat (Steve D. Gabrio)
Caustic washing (George J Fix)
Re: _very_ low s.g. (John Glaser)
pH Meters (Mark Garti mrgarti@eng.xyplex.com)
Noche Buena (George J Fix)
Guinness clone? (Carl Howes)
LiquidVSdry yeast/Counterpressure filler (korz)
Milwaukee brew stops? (dbell)
IceBeer/ CP Fill/ Sulfer Cider/ Filter then Bottle?/ Xtal Entity (COYOTE)
Sierra Nevada and the Hop Back/Yeast (Mark Garetz)
cool ferment temps, mixing yeasts (Rick Magnan)
yeast, cowboy beer (mbarre)
New Refrigerators (Harry Covert)
("Brynczka, Marc J")
Leinenkugel's Winter (THOMAS VODACEK)
dark malt extract (Richard Cox)
Whitbread update (donald oconnor)
Aluminum Brewpots? (d.garrison)
Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew@hpfcmi.fc.hp.com
(Articles are published in the order they are received.)
Send UNSUBSCRIBE and all other requests, ie, address change, etc.,
to homebrew-request@hpfcmi.fc.hp.com, BUT PLEASE NOTE that if
you subscribed via the BITNET listserver (BEER-L@UA1VM.UA.EDU),
then you MUST unsubscribe the same way!
If your account is being deleted, please be courteous and unsubscribe first.
Archives are available via anonymous ftp from sierra.stanford.edu.
(Those without ftp access may retrieve files via mail from
listserv@sierra.stanford.edu. Send HELP as the body of a
message to that address to receive listserver instructions.)
Please don't send me requests for back issues - you will be silently ignored.
For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to lutzen@novell.physics.umr.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1993 08:06:53 -0500 (EST)
From: "Robert H. Reed" <rhreed@icdc.delcoelect.com>
Subject: Demerara Sugar
eurquhar@sfu.ca writes:
> While your at it
> inquire about their demerara sugar. Makes american brown sugar look like
> ordinary granulated white sugar. Once you taste it you'll never go back.
I have used Demerara sugar by Tate & Lyle and have also used domestic light
and dark brown sugar in homebrewing. While I found the imported Demerara sugar
interesting, IMO it is not vastly superior to domestic brown sugar. T&L
Demerara sugar has a smooth, pleasant flavor of molasses. This character is
easily emulated with a quality domestic light brown sugar or light molasses.
Rob Reed
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1993 05:44:37 PST
From: Crawford.Wbst129@xerox.com
Subject: German Malt sources request
I have been using the Belgians malts for a while and would like to try some
other malts to see what effect it has on the malty character of my beer. I
have seen a couple of messages go by that mention good quality German malts.
Does anybody know where I could mail-order some good German malt?
Thanks,
Greg
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 93 09:14:01 EST
From: 29-Nov-1993 0911 -0500 <ferguson@zendia.enet.dec.com>
Subject: for James Clark
>Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1993 16:27:46 -0500
>From: jeclark@ucdavis.edu (James Clark)
>Subject: infection?
>
>our first batch has now been fermenting for about 36 hours and the kreusen
>has already stopped. however, last night it was so active that we were
>getting a bubble every two or three seconds into the overflow container.
>i sniffed the stuff in the container today and it has a very sweet smell.
>does this mean that our beer was infected, or is this just because the
>immpurities in the foam smell bad?
Relax mon. Everything sounds like it is going in a normal way.
If you want, you can rack it off to a secondary container, but this
isn't necessary.
>also, we have a brown ring around the neck of our container from the
>kreusen. the pictures in papazian's book show just a white foam. so is
>the brown stuff bad news?
>thanks
don't worry about it mon! a brown ring of stuff is perfectly normal.
-JC
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 93 09:39:19 EST
From: btalk@aol.com
Subject: which yeast?
I have a doppelbock recipe that has performed well in contests, and in the
quest for the best( also known as the never ending tweak), I started thinking
about choice of yeast. I've used Wyeast 2308 Munich, made into a starter.
Fermented @47 f for 3 weeks, 55f for 1week,back to 47 f for 1 week, then
lager at 32f for 3 -4 weeks. Does anyone have experience with (or
contrast/compare) Wyeast 2308 munich vs. Wyeast 2206 Bavarian?
The 2206 Bavarian description seems to stress the smooth maltiness that a
doppelbock should have.
I have a fridge to use for lagering, so low temp ferments aren't a problem
for me.
Any thoughts here would be appreciated.
THANKS MUCH.
Bob Talkiewicz, Binghamton, NY
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 93 09:39:58 EST
From: Mark A. Stevens <stevens@stsci.edu>
Subject: Alternative FAQ Formats
In Homebrew Digest #1282, Bob Regent (b_regent@holonet.net) mentioned that he
was creating a PageMaker layout and Windows help file of the Yeast FAQ and
asked if these were useful.
My feeling on this is "No---not the way they are."
While a nicely laid out booklet format for the FAQ might be useful, putting
it up on the net in a vendor-specific format requiring a specific brand and
model of printer is decidedly net-user-hostile. Generally Bob, people put
things up in a format that is NOT limited to one software and/or hardware
vendor's products so that as many people as possible can make use of your
hard work and so when the specific product you geared your work toward is
phased out your work doesn't become a useless disk-space waster.
For most information, ASCII text is the most useful format, so you'll find
that no matter how great a job you do, the ASCII format will still probably
be more often used because EVERY platform and software can handle an ASCII
file. For a layout, PostScript is the most intelligent choice because it
is supported by a wide range of different vendors and because PostScript
file viewers are available for most platforms and because LOTS of different
software can import PostScript. (DVI or TeX are not unreasonable choices,
but not as many people know how to handle DVI or TeX files so these aren't
optimal choices).
For the Windows help files, I'd say these are pretty much useless for two
reasons:
1) Form doesn't follow function. When I'm brewing or culturing yeast, I'm
doing so in my kitchen, not at my computer. A document like the layout can
be printed out and taken to the kitchen with me to look at as I perform
whatever process is being described, a help file is totally useless
because I don't keep my computer in my kitchen. Simply a mis-application
of technology.
2) Vendor-specific again. Not EVERYBODY uses or wants to use MS-Windows.
If you really are enamored of hypertext help, then a generically useful
format that allows for information discovery might have some utility.
This means investigating tools like HTML and WWW to put up a net-based
hypertext that anyone anywhere in the world can access with a click
of the mouse. This might require some work, but would be a useful
tool.
In any case, stay away from vendor-specific formats if you want to be
a good net citizen.
Salut!
- ---Mark Stevens
stevens@stsci.edu
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1993 9:13:40 -0600 (CST)
From: "SMSD::MRGATE::\"A1::WESTERMAN_ROBERT\""@smsd.jsc.nasa.gov
Subject: "Closed" fermentation -vs- "Open" fermentation
From: NAME: ROBERT B. WESTERMAN
FUNC: SP52
TEL: 33742 <WESTERMAN_ROBERT@A1@SMSD>
To: smtp%"homebrew@hpfcmi.fc.hp.com"@mrgate
In the NCJOHB it says there is an advantage to the removal of the very
bitter and brown resinous scum on top of the kraeusen (less of a "bite" and
the "fusel" oils are removed which contribute to what is referred to as
"beer headaches"). A "closed" fermentation system (5 gal carboy with a
overflow tube) facilates this. I use a 6 gal carboy with an airlock
("open" fermentation system). Should I switch to a "closed" system and is
there really a noticeable improvement in the flavor of the brew?
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1993 11:26:31 -0400
From: Ed Hitchcock <ECH@ac.dal.ca>
Subject: HSA again...
In Austin + Pugsley's article in the special issue Zymurgy they describe
the technique for a good infusion mash. They say to use enough hot water
to cover the false bottom, then run a stream of strike water and a stream
of crushed malt together, so the malt is thoroughly covered with water when
it gets to the bottom. Once the mash lands, leave it. They also say that
the streaming process traps air in the mash, making it more buoyant, so
that it does not jam up the false bottom. This mention of trapping air in
the mash set off little alarm bells. Can it be that less air contact is
made this way than gently stirring? Or is this just the case for large
scale mashes, where "gently" stirring is next to impossible?
____________
Ed Hitchcock ech@ac.dal.ca | Oxymoron: Draft beer in bottles. |
Anatomy & Neurobiology | Pleonasm: Draft beer on tap. |
Dalhousie University, Halifax |___________________________________|
------------------------------
Date: 29 Nov 93 10:59:56 EST
From: Steven Grove <70003.3234@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Please add me to you distribution
Please add me to your distribution of brewing information. My address is:
70003.3234@CompuServe.COM
Thanks,
Steve Grove
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 93 10:16:27 CST
From: biszek@rose.rsoc.rockwell.com (Don Biszek)
Subject: Please relax!!
IN the latest HBD...
jeclark@ucdavis.edu (James Clark) writes {
Subject: infection?
our first batch has now been fermenting for about 36 hours and the kreusen
has already stopped. however, last night it was so active that we were
getting a bubble every two or three seconds into the overflow container.
i sniffed the stuff in the container today and it has a very sweet smell.
does this mean that our beer was infected, or is this just because the
immpurities in the foam smell bad?
also, we have a brown ring around the neck of our container from the
kreusen. the pictures in papazian's book show just a white foam. so is
the brown stuff bad news?
thanks
- --james }
If you are reading Papazian, then why don't you follow his strongest advice,
and Relax!! Your beer will be the same whether or not you worry and post
20 questions about each bubble that perks up!
don
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 93 9:37:22 MST
From: Jason Goldman <jason@bluestar.cnd.hp.com>
Subject: Re: Rauchbier
This last May, I took a beer trip to Germany and one of my stops was in
Bamberg, home of Rauchbier. My only previous experience with this style
was Kaiserdom Rauchbier, which I found to be totally undrinkable.
However, when we were in Germany, a friend of mine (who is not known for
drinking 'weird' beer) recommended Spezial from Bamberg. Also, Michael
Jackson recommends Schlenkerla in his world guide to beer. So, we
stopped in at Spezial first. I was amazed at how good the beer was.
The smoky flavor was clearly there, but balanced perfectly with a
wonderful malty sweetness. While the smoke was assertive, it wasn't a
sharp, harsh, or chemical-like flavor. I was talking to my table-mates
(who were all local) about America and beer. They asked me how I liked
my beer. I told them that I liked it alot and that I had only had
Rauchbier once before I came to Bamberg and that it had been Kaiserdom.
Before I could say that I hadn't cared for the Kaiserdom, my table-mates
spit on the floor and told me, "Peh!! That is awful beer. No, Spezial
is the real Rauchbier." Then they leaned forward to impart a great
secret: that the *best* Rauchbier is Schlenkerla. They proceeded to
draw me a map to get to the place. One fellow explained that I would
have to have 3 beers when I went there. He said I might find the first
one a little bit strong. He wasn't able to tell me if it was strong
with smoke or alcohol. Anyway, by the time I finished the first one,
I'd be accustomed to the beer and be ready to have a second, where I
could really appreciate the taste. I asked him why I should drink a
third. He lookedd at me as if I were crazy, "Because it is so good, of
course."
We made it to Schlenkerla the next day. This beer was also very malty.
The smoke flavor was slightly heavier and the beer was more alcoholic.
I liked it from the first sip (no need to get acclimated), but my wife
preferred the Spezial because it was mellower.
I judged Smoked beers in the first round of the AHA nationals (in
Denver). The style includes rauchbiers as well as other styles. I was
warned that many of the entries would be likely to rip our heads off
with smoke flavor. Actually, I found two or three good examples of
rauchbier which had assertive yet complementary smoke flavor. I also
learned that peat smoked beers (like at least one smoked porter and some
smoked Scotch ales) can have a very harsh, phenolic character. There
were also a couple of entries that had very little smoke character at
all. One of the other judges was familiar with Bamberg style rauchbiers
and both the other were experienced with other smoked beers. I think
that we passed on some good beer, none of which were overwhelmingly
smokey. However, I do believe that this is a style where one person's
evaluation of overwhelming corresponds to another's evaluation as
perfect.
Jason Goldman
jason@bluestar.cnd.hp.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 93 9:59:20 MST
From: Jeff Benjamin <benji@hpfcbug.fc.hp.com>
Subject: Dark malt & iodine test/cider vs juice
Mark Alston wrote:
> This dark color brought out another problem. There would be no way
> to tell if iodine went black or not. The mash was black on it's own.
> Thus, I could not test for conversion.
One way to avoid this problem is to wait to add the dark malts until
mash-out (or until after conversion). I do this with my porters,
and have achieved excellent results. You still get all the color
and roastiness out of the malt, and perhaps get less harsh tannins &c.
out of the black grains.
I've got a question of my own regarding apple cider. I made my first
batch this fall, using apples from the tree in my back yard. Boy howdy,
pressing apples is a pain! Next year I'll probably use fresh,
unpreserved juice to start off with. However, you see both "apple
juice" and "apple cider" in the stores. Is there a difference? If so,
is it chemical, biological, or just legal/regulatory? And of course,
which will make better hard cider?
- --
Jeff Benjamin benji@hpfcla.fc.hp.com
Hewlett Packard Co. Fort Collins, Colorado
"Midnight shakes the memory as a madman shakes a dead geranium."
- T.S. Eliot
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 93 08:17:00 -0600
From: chuck.wettergreen@aquila.com (Chuck Wettergreen)
Subject: Sour 2-row grain
Some time ago, maybe as much as a year ago, someone posted
information about a bag of Schreier two row that ALWAYS produced a
sour batch. I believe they said that the mash smelled sour beginning
right at the mash in. I'd like to talk (e-mail) to whoever posted
those comments. Thanks
Chuck.Wettergreen@Aquila.com
* RM 1.2 00946 *
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 93 05:34:10 PST
From: gabrio@tc.fluke.COM (Steve D. Gabrio)
Subject: Black Treacle and Hunter AirStat
There has been talk recently about Black Treacle and the
Hunter AirStat. Both items are available at the supply shop in
Seattle that I frequent; The Cellar. Their order line is
1-800-342-1871. The Black Treacle is $4.95 for a one pound can.
The Hunter AirStat is $29.95. They do not, however, sell
orgasms :( or basketballs.
Steve
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 93 12:16:33 -0600
From: gjfix@utamat.uta.edu (George J Fix)
Subject: Caustic washing
Glenn Anderson asks in HBD#1281 about residuals from caustic (NaOH)
detergents.
First, let me say that a 2% sodium hydroxide (NaOH) solution is the
most effective detergent known to me for removing heavy organic soils.
This, however, is not play stuff. Protective gloves and glasses are
definitely required to prevent severe burns.
Pure reaction quality NaOH can be obtained in grocery stores under
various product names. The one most widely available in the Southwest
is called Red Devil. Analysis has shown that it is indeed 100% NaOH,
and contains no impurities. You can get the same stuff from Fisher Scientific,
but at an outrageous price.
Caustics are strong surfactants, and will definitely leave an inorganic
film. Vigorous hot water rinsing may or may not completely remove this film.
Thus in commercial practice a caustic wash is followed by a rinse with a
sequestering agent to remove inorganic residuals. The most popular such
agent by far is phosphoric acid. The main reason for this is that it is a
weak acid that is natural to beer. A widely used sequence goes as follows:
a. Hot water pre-rinse
b. Caustic wash
c. Hot water rinse
d. Phosphoric acid wash
e. Hot water rinse
This is generally all that is required of brewing equipment. Cooling apparatus,
fermenters, et al need an additional sanitation sequence.
Misc. Notes:
1. Large industrial brewers apply the caustic solution at 180-195F. I
have personally found that a solution at 120-140F is almost as
effective, and a good deal more practical for hand operations. We are
now recommending that even small micros and brewpubs use the lower
temperatures. This has proved to be adequate. See e.g. Dave Miller's
column in Brewing Techniques.
2. If you have any doubt about inorganic residuals, apply a standard
iodophor solution. The former will turn the latter as white as
snow.
3. The most widely used iodophor in commercial practice is the version
which has iodine and phosphoric acid as the only active ingredients.
This provides some sequestering action to counteract surfactants,
however the sequestering step (step d above) is still used in the wash
cycle.
4. Industrial brewers typically use a 5% phosphoric solution for
sequestering. I have personally found that a 1% solution is
adequate for all but extreme cases. While this solution is only
weakly acidic, gloves are still recommended. The sequesting solution
can be added at ambient temperature.
George Fix
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 93 11:21:21 -0700
From: John Glaser <glaser@analog.ece.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: _very_ low s.g.
I think I know why you may have your very low gravity. If you
only boiled a gallon or so, it has a very high density (gravity) and
hence will sink to the bottom of the carboy. I literally saw this
happen with some of my first batches. Eventually, the temperature
differential will cause some mixing, but you will be better off
mixing it immediately after pouring. Actually, you will be really
better off getting a larger pot and a wort chiller. Get some
mail-order brewing supply catalogs for ideas, see the Zymurgy
magazine special issue on gadgets, and beg, buy, or borrow some books
on the subject. A stitch in time etc. :<)
John Glaser (glaser@analog.ece.arizona.edu)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 93 09:32:15 EST
From: garti@mrg.xyplex.com (Mark Garti mrgarti@eng.xyplex.com)
Subject: pH Meters
Are there digital pH meters? Do they work well, or
need calibration (how often)? Does anyone know of a
source if they do exist?
Mark
mrgarti@eng.xyplex.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 93 12:47:52 -0600
From: gjfix@utamat.uta.edu (George J Fix)
Subject: Noche Buena
The first words out of my mouth upon first tasting this beer (many moons ago)
was "mucho bueno". Ever since I have been given to misspelling this beer's
name. BTW Noche Buena is the Spanish name for Christmas Eve. I hope my
misspelling did not confuse anyone.
The initial test markets are Az, Tx, Ca, Wa, NM, Nevada, and Chicago. This
distribution may be expanded if sales go well.
Laurie has formed her taste panel, and I will report on the results from
that when they are available. I also have a call into Alberto Jimenez,
the head brewer at Monterrey, to see if if he would share some technical
info about this version of Noche Buena.
George Fix
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 93 13:27:41 EST
From: sdlsb.dnet!73410%sdlcc@swlvx2.msd.ray.com (Carl Howes)
Subject: Guinness clone?
I will be brewing a stout this weekend with which I hope to emulate
Guinness. I looked at Papazian, Miller, and Cat's Meow over the weekend
and developed the following extract/specialty recipie:
7 lbs. M&F light DME
1 lbs. flaked barley
1 lbs. roasted barley
0.75 lbs. crystal malt
1.66 oz Chinook hops (12.6%) at 60 min.
A note on my current limitations. Brewpot: 16qt size, effective maximum
capacity 12qts. This is why the hopping is so heavy, to compensate for
the very high SG in the pot. Scaling is based on Papazians' table with the
goal of coming out equivalent to 15AAU in a full volume boil. The
questions: some sources call for rolled barley, some for flaked. My local
supplier had never heard of rolled. Are they the same thing? Papazian and
Miller both simply specify "high alpha" hops in their "Toad Spit" and "Dry"
stout recipies. In scanning the back HBDs I have on hand, I find Goldings
(I assume Kent) recommended by Brian Bliss in #1145, and Geoff Cooper in
#1150 states that Guinness uses Target. Where all the hops are for
bittering, does the variety really matter? Several sources call for an
addition of soured ale for a Guinness clone. I assume a lactobacillus
souring, or is this a momily? TIA.
Carl
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 93 14:00 CST
From: korz@iepubj.att.com
Subject: LiquidVSdry yeast/Counterpressure filler
Jim writes:
>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?
With the recent arrival of much better dry yeasts, I'd say that perhaps
dry yeast might be better for beginners because it is easier to use.
The slow, long ferment with Wyeast is probably due to under-oxygenation.
A package of dry yeast contains much more yeast than a package of Wyeast
and since the yeast is oxygenated just before drying, dry yeast can cope
better with under-oxygenated wort. This is a common occurance for dry
yeast users when they first switch to liquid yeast. A starter will also
help shorten lag time and reduce fermentation time quite a bit.
Did anyone else notice that two first-place winners in the AHA National
Competition were made with EDME dry yeast?!?! I also happen to know that
the Best of Show winner at the 1993 Chicago Beer Society Spooky Brew
Review was brewed with Red Star Ale Yeast!
*************************************
Dave writes:
I recently recieved a counterpressure bottler as a gift.
Yesterday I got the assorted hoses and connectors that I need to run the
thing, and it didn't take long to find out that I don't really know how to
work it. There are two general possibilities: I'm hooking it up wrong,
or I'm using it wrong. So, first, this is how I hooked it up:
<I've modified Dave's drawing to be hooked up properly>
Beer Line in--> ----------------- <-- Gas in
------+ +-------
| |
| |
Gas out <-- ------| |-+
(vent) ----+ | | |
| | | |
\ | | /
| |
| |
|
V
Gas and Beer Out
The way it should work is to first let CO2 through the "Gas in" leg,
with the "Gas out" valve opened to purge the O2 from the bottle.
Then, close the "Gas out" vent valve to pressurize the bottle.
Next, close the "Gas in" valve and open the "Beer Line in" valve.
Gently opent the "Gas out" valve to fill the bottle.
Once the bottle is full, close the "Beer Line in" valve and remove
the device.
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 93 12:25:58 PST
From: dbell@cup.portal.com
Subject: Milwaukee brew stops?
How about some suggestions for worthwhile (non-industrial)
brewpubs and/or microbreweries in the 'beer city'? A couple
of us have to travel there in the next couple of weeks, and
would like to locate some good sites!
Dave
dbell@cup.portal.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1993 14:21:32 -0600 (MDT)
From: COYOTE <SLK6P@cc.usu.edu>
Subject: IceBeer/ CP Fill/ Sulfer Cider/ Filter then Bottle?/ Xtal Entity
***
RE: commercials and commercial beer:
>These beersare intended to be and are soda pop for adults.
They are nothing more than an alcohol delivery system. They
have only a limited usefulness in our society. They encourage
abuse by their very characteristics.
* E.G.: Ice Beer by Milooooor. Ads say it's "ice brewed, till
xtals form, then cold filtered" makes it "easier to drink"...
implied: Lots and Lots of it! Right?
So what the %&$ is the deal here. Ice brewed? Now they gots a
special yeast which ferments at FREEZING temps or something?
And what's the point of the xtals. Do they filter them OUT so the
beer is "stronger", then water it down again so it's suitable as
Utah 3.2 near-beer?
I intend to distill, ugh...uh...ummm.....I mean- "enhance" a brew
this winter, by doing the ice beer thing. Concentrate, yes that's it!
Plastic bucket, outside after fully fermented, then rack away from
the ice. Keg, and carbonate. Anyone ever tried it? I would think
that with the colds we've had already, getting it frozen shouldn't pose
a problem. Hope no cops see it sitting outside! (or high schoolers for
that matter!)
But what does Miller think their process is? Anyone REALLY know, or
is it what I presume, another advertising ploy to impress the ignorant
mindless masses who don't have a clue what REAL brewing is all about?!!!
***
> Dave Rose. asks bout cp filling
>close gas line, open beer line. Wait for beer to fill bottle under
pressure. Remove contraption and cap immediately.
The problem: Well, if I thought about it i would have figured out
that since the keg and the bottle are under the same pressure, there is no
reason at all for the beer to move from the keg into the bottle. In fact,
this is exactly what happens: nothing. Or at least very little.
...responded to by Mark
1) open valve to CO2 to presurize bottle.
2) open bleed valve to purge bottle of air.
3) close bleed valve and repressurize bottle.
4) close valve to CO2
* Be sure to do this!
5) open liquid valve -- beer will not flow at
this point since the presures are equal
5) slowly open bleed valve. This will reduce the presure in the bottle
and allow the beer to fill it up.
6) When bottle is full:
* You might want to first close exit valve, then
... close liquid valve and remove counterflow
* Even more important. REMEMBER THIS! Unless you want beer
flying everywhere!
7) cap.
* Have your cap ready in capper (magnet! :) and a towel underfoot,
I've understood this to be a gushing experience.
* Make the kegs be as cold as possible to reduce foaming.
Chilling the bottles after sterilization if a good thing too.
You may want to have another set of hands attached to you,
or someone else near by for this. I've heard it takes an octopus!
NOW... "That should do it.... Sounds good."
RE: Setup of lines: Miller shows two alternatives (BWGB):
the one you had
gas in---|____|-- Beer in
|
|_|-- Gas out/purge
Bottle
and
gas in---|____|-- Purge, gas out
|
|_|--Beer in
Bottle
Both have a T connector splitting the gas line between cp-filler and keg.
Therefore they stay under the same pressure.
BTW: I've haven't done this yet- so yes I'm blowing out my _____
BUT: I've read, discussed, and thought about it a fair bit! So nyah.
***
Sean V. Taylor has <<<sulfer cider>>>:
Any ideas on what went wrong?
Does it just need to age longer? * BINGO!!!
Can I salvage this stuff?
* Patience grasshopper. When you can snatch this pebble from my
palm you will be ready to quaff that cider!
* The ciders I've done and tried were sulfury when young (as with
some wines/fruit meads) and the sulfur aroma dissipated with age.
You could let the bottle breath for a time before drinking too.
Pour it fairly roughly. But really- age is the best solution.
Mine have set for half a year, to a year, then were wonderful!
***
A friend is starting to brew, and has access to filter equpt, but
does not keg. He does have a pump, so it could be done.
But why? My thoughts on filtering leave me in the 2-3 micron
range, big enough for yeast to pass, w/o losing body. (too much)
But not sterile filtering. If he's gonna bottle he has to be sure
to leave yeast for carbonation, or repitch. Either way there will
be sediment in the bottles.
Question is: Is there any advantage to be gained by filtering that
wouldn't be better served by fining with ---something, anything!---
rather than hassle with filtering. It just seems so simple a step
to add for a kegger (ya sure, you betcha it's on my x-mas wish list!)
but for a bottler?
ANYONE FILTER WHO DOESN'T KEG? HOW / WHY / WHEN / WHERE / WHO...what?
***
>Many of these recipes call for something on the
order of 1/2 # 30 (L) Crystal, and 1/2 # 90 (L) Crystal. Would this not be
the same as 1 whole pound of 60 (L) Crystal? Would there be any difference
in the flavo2s;either way?
* Uh,,, no. Sorry but it doesn't work that way.
The kilning process darkens the malt to different degrees. Along with
this are changes in the quality of starches, sugars, and colors of the
malt. Each crystal is considered separately in estimating color.
Lighter crystals will give a sweeter note to beers.
Darker crystals will give less sweetness, more body, and a "toasty"
quality. Using some from either end gives you the best of both worlds
and using twice from in between gives you some of each...sort of.
Mixing and matching crystals is a favorite pastime in the Coyote grain
room. A general rule of thumb is are you staying light, or
leaning into ambers, or yet darker. Stick below 60 (or 80) if you're
working in pale territory, and go higher if you want RED amber beer, or
are into the roastier nut browns.
...snip...
>(There's a place in Orlando where you can get a fifty pound sack for
$19.95). Since I don't have a mill, I'm going to buy the grains pre-crushed
(Free crushing).
* Say what? $20 for 50# ! I've seen $30 for 6 row, but that's the best.
What a deal. Send me their address/phone! Shipping will kill it tho.
What kind of malt is it? Belgian NOT I'm sure!
>I've heard talk that crushing grains and then keeping them around for a
while will cause the grains to "go stale/bad". What exactly does this mean?
Will the stale/bad grains not give me as much goodness? Will my beer taste
* If you store it in a dry, fairly cool location it should be ok.
Some of the enzyme/substrate quality of the grain will decrease.
You can expect lower extraction rates. Just UP YOUR GRAIN BILL.
If you use the malt within a reasonable amount of time and store it well
(metal cans/plastic buckets...fairly airtight.) and concede to use more
(which at $20/50# = .40 $/# isn't a problem!) you will be fine.
Some people may encourage you purchase their grain mill, or you may
come across a cheap... cor---onet!! or something. And that's handy!
I'd say use within 6 months, and you're alright. Longer than that...
Brew More OFTEN. Brew MORE...often. a BREW more often.
- --------------Happy Turkey Gobbling to all!-------------------------
May your cranberries ferment as well as mine!
~~~~~~~~~ John (The Coyote) Wyllie SLK6P@cc.usu.edu ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The SCOTCH Ale is well underway. A cranberry/spice ale alongside.
Next is Pilsner Time, then to the X-mas Stouts...so much to brew (repeat)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 93 13:28:27 PST
From: Mark Garetz <mgaretz@hoptech.com>
Subject: Sierra Nevada and the Hop Back/Yeast
A long while ago I promised some info on Sierra Nevada's use
of the hop back. I was suppossed to take a tour with my homebrew
club a few weeks ago, but illness prevented me from attending. I
did finally talk to one of the guys who went, and here's the deal:
Sierra Nevada no longer uses the hop back in production of any of
their beers. Instead, they have switched to dry hopping. The
rate of hops was disclosed, but the person I spoke with couldn't
remember, so I'm going to have to ask someone else. They use
whole hops (everywhere) and put the hops in a hop bag for dry
hopping. BTW, the reason given for discontinuing the use of
the hop back was that it was too much of a hassle to clean and
sterilize.
Other interesting tidbits: The question was asked if Wyeast 1056
(aka American and/or Chico) was the same strain as they used. The
answer was to that they had no idea, but wondered why it would
matter since "you can get our yeast from a bottle of our beer."
Their yeast came from Siebel, and is banked there, so maybe someone
with a connection at Siebel could tell us more. Also, they claim
never to wash their yeast, and they repitch it about 20 generations
before starting with a fresh culture.
I'll report again when I've had a chance to debrief more of the
club members.
Mark
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 93 17:33:01 EST
From: magnan@server1.dfci.harvard.edu (Rick Magnan)
Subject: cool ferment temps, mixing yeasts
Mike Fetzer writes:
> 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.
My recent experience with Wyeast 1056 is that 60 is indeed barely warm
enough to ferment. The beer fermented out pretty well but it was mild.
Does anyone have any recommendations for yeasts that work well at that temp?
Should I think about using lager yeasts? Maybe a lager/ale combination?
Someone asked a couple weeks ago about mixing yeasts in a batch, a question
I've wanted to ask the HBD community for several years since in making one
of my first beers, a pack of dry lager yeast was purchased by mistake and
used along with a dry ale yeast. This was one of my better beers of that
era. I don't recall seeing any responses to the question of blending yeasts.
Its often said that yeast is one of the major factors in the flavor of
beer - seems like this must have been tried at least a few times?
rick
brookline, MA
------------------------------
Date: 29 Nov 93 17:03:50 -0600
From: mbarre@nomvs.lsumc.edu
Subject: yeast, cowboy beer
Homebrewers,
In response to the liquid/dry yeast question, I vote for liquid yeast
only. The only batch in which I ever used dry yeast (EDME) came out
tasting very metallic. I tried a bottle that had aged for six months
and it was better, but still only barely drinkable, and this from a guy
who sometimes enjoys mega brews. The last time I was at the homebrew
store, the proprietor was testing the Doric, Windsor, and Nottingham
(sp?) dried yeasts in side by side comparisons. He judged the Winsor
and Doric better than the Nottingham, but said he would not use dry
yeast in anything he brews personnaly.
On the subject of historical beer, I saw "High Plains Drifter" the
other night and wondered to my self, "Self, what kind of beer is
that saloon serving?" It came from the tap under pressure, the glass
was half full of head, and it was light golden. I guess it came from
a wooden keg and was pretty harsh. Anyone know?
------------------------------
Date: 29 Nov 93 18:43:34 EST
From: Harry Covert <73232.167@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: New Refrigerators
I just got a new fermentation/lagering fridge but since it's the only one
I have, would it be harmful for me to leave a batch in the fridge that
has been through the fermentation cycle (40s for fermenting, 30s for
lagering), while I do another batch. In other words, will the
temperature fluctuation hurt the beer after it has been lagered?
I also got a small serving fridge and I plan on putting a tap through the
top. Any recommendations on how to move that little freezer compartment
out of the way. The freon lines run through it, so it will be kind of
tricky. Also, what equipment will I need for the tap? Thanks
Harry Covert
73232.167@compuserve.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 93 20:45:43 EST
From: "Brynczka, Marc J" <KRNJ%MARISTB@VM.MARIST.EDU>
Subject:
PLEASE SEND ME SOME INFO
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1993 20:39:16 -0600 (CST)
From: THOMAS VODACEK <VODACEK@uwplatt.edu>
Subject: Leinenkugel's Winter
Just had some of Leinenkugel's Winter beer. Not bad. Reminds me
of my last few batches of oktoberfest that ended up much too dark.
I have heard that one of the megabrewers bought up Leinenkugel's
last year and that regular Leinie"s is no longer brewed in
Chippewa Falls, just specialty seasonal beers. Can anyone tell me
the true story?
Tom
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 93 18:58:52 PST
From: Richard Cox <rcox@hsc.usc.edu>
Subject: dark malt extract
Here's a question I've never quite answered. What
characteristics -- besides color -- does dark malt extract
contribute to the wort.
I'm an extract brewer with seven batches under my belt
(literally). My technique with every batch has been to use
the palest possible dry malt extract and add specialty grains
to achieve the desired color, body and sweetness.
Now I'm contemplating brewing my first stout (an oatmeal
stout), and I don't know whether to use dark malt extract
like all the recipes recommend, or to stick with my usual
method.
I'd be grateful for any insight on this.
Thanks,
Richard
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1993 21:50:56 -0600
From: donald oconnor <oconnor@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu>
Subject: Whitbread update
A month or so ago, Chris Lyons asked about the new Whitbread.
The new Whitbread dry yeast has never been distibuted due to the
inability of the processor to produce a clean product. Repeated attempts
have failed. Crosby and Baker states that the new Whitbread will not be
available for at least another 6 months and they are not terribly
optimistic about that given the recent history of contaminated Whitbread.
George Fix has claimed, on the digest and in Zymurgy, that the new
Whitbread is available and that it is clean. Moreover George claimed to
have received very good scores at homebrew competitions for beers
made with the new Whitbread. George claimed that new production
procedures are the reason for the new and improved Whitbread. It's
now glaringly obvious that all of these reports were in error. I advised
digest readers months ago to view the reports as wishful dreaming
lacking any sound scientific basis because of the patently obvious flaws
in George's methods.
For those who still put credence in George's earlier reports, just ask him
where to buy a pack of the new Whitbread.
For those who are still purchasing Whitbread, please note that Crosby and
Baker, the U.S. distributor, states it was produced well over a year ago.
don
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 93 03:53:00 BST
From: d.garrison@genie.geis.com
Subject: Aluminum Brewpots?
I am relatively new to homebrewing, having made just two extract batches.
However I am starting to scrounge up the hardware for mashing. My wife has
a canning setup she has had almost forever. It has a 2-gallong pot and a 6
gallon pot, both made of aluminum.
Should I use them for boiling my brew? I know back in the '80s there was
talk of a link between aluminum and Altzheimer's Disease. I thought that
had been downplayed or disproven, yet I never see aluminum listed in the
brewing books as an alternative. If safety is not the issue, why can't I
use these? I would point out that a LOT of jams and jellies have been made
in them, without apparent ill effects. <At least I don't REMEMBER any loss
of memory! ;^) > They haven't dissolved or corroded. Why would wort be any
different?
Any feedback will be appreciated. I really don't relish shelling out bucks
for a new pot when these are already here.
Donald W. Garrison, Attorney at Law
(Member of the Bar, in both senses!)
D.GARRISON@genie.geis.com
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1285, 11/30/93
*************************************
-------
