Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #1433
This file received at Sierra.Stanford.EDU 94/05/26 00:45:39
HOMEBREW Digest #1433 Thu 26 May 1994
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Janitor
Contents:
Mills (Jack Schmidling)
Mills Part two (Jack Schmidling)
Water heater controls (Venter)
a couple things (Btalk)
"brew King" mini-kegs (Raymond J. Deininger)
BrewsNews (mmankin@ieee.org)" <mmankin@ieeemem.ieee.org>
BeerFest 94 (Maj Don Staib )
Malt Mills, George Danz ("Mr. Dudley")
SG Corrections ("Manning Martin MP")
Re: HBD #1432 SRM, maple flavor (Neil Flatter)
Carbonation question and a gizmo. (COTE_FRANK)
Re: Head Retention ("Mark B. Alston")
one shot of whisky is lethal????? ("John L. Isenhour")
Rich Fortnum ("Daniel F McConnell")
Experiences with 10BL Brewing Eq./Vendors (gcw)
Cask-conditioned "real ales" (Jay Lonner)
RIMS Usage (S29033)
SRM colors/dextrin malt/nastie by-products/sanitation (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
Re: more ramblings (Jim Busch)
Re: Ripping Bacteria Apart (Jeff Frane)
SG and temperature (James Kendall)
Sweet Mead/Gadgets/Krauesening (npyle)
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.
FAQs, archives and other files 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, 24 May 94 17:12 CDT
From: arf@mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: Mills
* NOTE... if you get tired of reading this, skip to the last paragraph.
>From: jim.king@kandy.com (Jim King)
> I like the crush from the Glatt better....
This is a subjective statement that should not be confused with the actual
crush quality. In the serious world, the crush is evaluated by sieve
analysis and in the most recent study I know of, the Glatt was not even
different from the MM, let alone "better". The same study indicated that the
best crush came from two passes through a fixed MM, with the Corona a close
second. The adjustable MM would have come off best if it had been adjusted
correctly. Because of its unique, non-parallel rollers, just setting it with
a feeler in the center makes it look like a fixed mill.
> and I like the fact that it does not come connected to a base, so I can
attach it to whatever surface I like.
The base on the MM is a feature that costs money and allows totally portable
and dust free use. You can obviously remove it or clamp it to a table for
fixed use.
> Also, the adjustable Glatt is only a little more expensive than the
non-adjustable Schmidling Mill...
I would still like to hear from someone who can prove that it makes better
beer than a fixed MM. So, for a "little more" you get a mill that is less
than half the size, whose critical components are plastic and an acknowledged
reputation for catastrophic failure. I may be a little thick-headed and
biased but I just don't understand why people wait in line for them.
> In summary, If Mr. Glatt ever learns to run a business (ie: shipping
in quantity enough to satisfy the demand), he will definitely give you a
run for your money.
If he doesn't solve the reliability problems before upping his volume, he
will soon wish people would stop buying them.
He is welcome to whatever share of the market he can capture and there is
certainly more than I need to satisfy my urge to get my hands dirty. My only
interest is to defend my product from misinformation and make sure that
prospective customers understand what the tradeoffs really are. Thus far,
the choices seem to be a Model T, a Yugo, a VW and a Rolls Royce but without
the price differential one would expect.
>From: wolfgang@cats.ucsc.edu (Robert F. Dougherty)
>Subject: maltmill throughput...
>I have an adjustable maltmill from JSP, and I also noticed decreased
throughput. (BTW, my mm has the groved rollers.) I have played with
adjustments extensively and even took great pains to get the rollers
parallel again. I believe I have isolated the problem, though. It
seems that the rollers get a bit crusted with compacted flour and this
seems to make them more "slippery" than when they are new. I haven't
tried it yet, but I think a wire brush (copper?) would clean up the
rollers well and allow them to suck in the grain once more.
A normal (steel) wire brush will do a good job of cleaning out the groves and
this should should have been pointed out in the instructions.
However, as time goes by, the sharp edges will eventually wear down but this
is not usually a problem with adjustable mills. This is the reason I have
switched to the coarser texture about a year ago.
> This may be the same problem which Jim experienced with his glatt.
Possibly but the situation is reversed, viz., he is having problems with the
new diamond knurl that Glatt has switched to.
>Jack's post in HBD #1428 was too long and contained too many unnecessary
jabs at the competition.
I apologize for the length but as this is an open information exchange, I
sort of consider the "jabs" as information that can be taken as simply data
points which can be verified or countered by the readers. But I see no
reason not to point them out just because I happen to make a competative
product.
cont....
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 May 94 17:28 CDT
From: arf@mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: Mills Part two
>From: Allen Ford <allen@darwin.sfbr.org>
>I called the homebrew supply shop at which I purchased the
Glatt mill to be sure my figures were correct. Indeed, I
was wrong. I paid $85 for the Glatt mill on a one-time good
deal. His price is now $95. For the comparable Maltmill
with adjustable rollers and gear drive, the shop owner owner
quoted me a price of $180. THIS IS A DIFFERENCE OF $85, not
$40. Sorry, next time I'll check my facts more carefully!
No, just stick to an objective definition of "comparable".
The plastic gears are an integral part of the Glatt and it
will not function without them. The precision ground, steel
gears on the MM are an option that may improve the
efficiency in high volume use but are not required or even
useful in homebrewing applications.
The MM is more than twice as large as the Glatt as has been
stated ad nausiam and hardly seems comparable and it needs
to be proven that adjustability is of any real advantage to
a homebrewer.
>If I understand him correctly, Jack has not compared the
two products in side-by-side crush tests. In fact, I
believe that he stated that he has not even seen the Glatt
mill. I HAVE compared them and have reached my conclusions
based on these tests, not on what someone else has told me.
I purchased a Listerman mill and a Corona and did exhaustive
tests and published the results. I will be delighted to buy
(or swap for) a Glatt for the same purpose when it becomes a
final design or at least an off the shelf product. At the
moment it is like nailing jellow to a wall and would no
doubt change again about the time I finished testing one. I
can't even get a data sheet on it and have relied on
articles posted here and comments made by customers who have
called complaining about it.
>I resent this forum being used to publish untested,
defamatory, and/or misleading statements in a blatant
attempt at self-promotion. It is both unethical and
unforgivable.
I agree and again apologize if it came off that way but my
information is based on the above and in addition, the Wort
Processors did a review of the mills about a year ago and
much information can be gleaned from their report. There is
also a review to be published in the Fall issue of Zymurgy
but as it has not yet been published, I can only allude to
the results and not cite them directly.
>From: jim.king@kandy.com (Jim King)
> The mills are EXTREMELY equal....
Hmmmmm.... nice choice of words.
> I especially find offensive your attempt to compare the
price of the adjustable Glatt to that of your fixed roller
mill in an attempt to claim that they cost the same.
(rather than comparing to your adjustable mill, as would be
more appropriate).
What you find offensive is simply my reaction to Glatt
promoters claiming that the MM costs $200. One can now pay
$1000 for a MM but that doesn't mean one need to spend that
much to do what can be done with a Glatt.
As I have stated frequently, if one can make beer as good
with a fixed MM as an adjustable Glatt, it is not offensive
to point this out. It is doing prospective customers a
favor.
> In addition, you try to imply that your mill is easier
and better for motorizing.
Not quite. I said it was designed with that in mind and has
bronze bearings in lieu of plastic and the warranty is not
in any way effected by motorizing it.
> The Schmidling mill that I have worked with has a handle
that is VERY difficult to remove...
Not sure what the problem was but it is as difficult as
loosening the set screw and sliding if off.
> I did not intend to keep a "my mill is better than yours"
battle going....
Prove it. If I wait a few more days, you will probablay
force me to extend this even more. Don't take it personal.
Enjoy your mill and remember about stick and stones?
> Try letting yourcustomers sing the praises of your mill,
rather than doing it yourself.
They do but it is not their responsibility to defend my
product and I reserve the right to do it as I see fit.
And for a final word to put things into perspective and
close out this interesting thread.....
The MM dwells on a separate plane from other mills. Its
supreme performance virtually forcloses any situation where
one would even consider an alternative. The malt flows over
the rollers while you bask in near limousine comfort.
However, motorizing your MM would squander a sublime
pleasure. Elegant polished aluminum, natural fiberboard,
dual massive rollers, smooth rolling oil-impregnated
bearings and the finest assembly staff in the world, enhance
this monument to perfection. But no single feature
distinguishes the MM; its glory is the way all is
synthesized into an awesome, incomparable whole.
js
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 24 May 94 22:05:17 EDT
From: Venter@aol.com
Subject: Water heater controls
In HBD1431, a suggestion was made to use the guts of an electric water heater
for sparge/mash water heating. A few points of information....
For most of our collective lives, the "center detent" on storage water
heaters was set to deliver water at about 140F. However, in the last few
years, concerns about the potential liabilility of scalding the young/old
have caused manufacturers to change the center detent temperature to equal to
120F.
You should also know that the thermostats on residential storage water
heaters usually have large deadbands. That is, they cool down well below
setpoint before they turn on. And, they go well above before they turn off.
So, expect temperatures below what you need for mashing with a considerable
swing
Bob Borgeson
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 25 May 94 08:26:01 EDT
From: Btalk@aol.com
Subject: a couple things
My first question today- How do you figure specific gravity that results
from diluting a known gravity and volume with a known volume of water? In
this case I diluted 7 gal of 1.067 into 10 gal. and didn't use my hydrometer
on the new volume.
In Papazian's book he has a little chart and also says that the rate of
dilution and change in specific gravity are not the same at various
densities.
Is there a formula that handles this? Or even a more complete chart or graph?
Re: malt mills. I have this great idea of converting an old ringer from a
washing machine into a roller mill. At first i thought of replacing rubber
rollers w/ metal ones but on any rollers I 've seen so far, the rubber is so
damn hard that it may work as is!
Has anyone tried THIS???
One more thing. I've just started mashing and used some rice in my last mash.
After boiling the rice to gelatinization I added it to mash. The thing is
that examining sparged grain, the rice seems to have disappeared! Did it all
convert?
Regards,
Bob Talkiewicz, Binghamton,NY <btalk@aol.com>
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 25 May 94 07:57:21 EDT
From: ray@mita.com (Raymond J. Deininger)
Subject: "brew King" mini-kegs
Hello fellow brewers,
I have been listening to the HBD for a while, but this is my first post.
Please have mercy...
My wonderful and charming wife recently gave me this mini-keg system from
the local hombrew shop. She said "the guy said it was great". It looks
(in theory anyway) like a neat device, but I thought I would tap the
collective wisdom of the HBD before I use it.
The thing is a 5 liter can with a plastic plug. It came with a tap that
has a tube that reaches the bottom of the can and holds co2 cartridges.
The name on the box is Beer King.
now the questions:
- Should the beer be primed as usual??
- will the plastic plug be blown off?
- If I don't drink it all in one sitting, will the co2 cartridge
keep it fresh?
- Does anyone have any experience with this thing?
- Should I keep it or return it?
Thanks
Private E-mail ok.
==============================================================================
Ray Deininger, MITA, Inc. | The image | voice: (215) 957-6444
301 Horsham Rd. Suite J | translation | fax : (215) 957-6467
Horsham, PA. 19044 | specialists | e-mail: ray@mita.com
==============================================================================
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 09:04:14 -0400
From: "Mark Mankin (mmankin@ieee.org)" <mmankin@ieeemem.ieee.org>
Subject: BrewsNews
A couple of months ago, I posted an inquiry about BrewsNews, a newspaper my
wife & I subscribed to (and paid for), but never received. To date, I've
received replies (2) from one person (you know who you are).
The info you provided is proving invaluable to us & I've tried to send you
private e-mail thanks & updates, but my replies always get bounced (host
unknown), most recently today (05/25/94).
I'd like to thank you personally for your help & keep you updated on our
progress, but the Information Superhighway seems to be suffering from hiccups,
forcing me to use HBD bandwidth. Please e-mail me with a way to get in touch
with you (even <<shudder>> US Snail). Thanks again for all your help.
Keepin' It Short to Save Bandwidth,
Mark Mankin (mmankin@ieee.org)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 25 May 94 07:28:58 -0600
From: staib@oodis01.hill.af.mil (Maj Don Staib )
Subject: BeerFest 94
The excitement is building...bubbling...brewing...as the Stein Eriksen
Lodge of Park City Utah kicks off it first-ever BEER FESTIVAL!
Here's what's on TAP:
There will be 16 beers from Utah's 4 popular Microbreweries. Music by
CHORD ON BLUES, a fashion show by BJORN STOVA, and BEERMAKING
demonstrations. Whet your appetite with Spicy Southwestern BAR-B-Que,
Oriental, and other fares.
When:
Saturday, May 28 (Memorial Day Weekend). on the scenic outer decks of
Stein Eriksen Lodge, in Park City. 11am to 5pm. Admission is FREE.
If you're in town on business, or just passing through, I wouldn't
miss it! Cheers,
The Braumeister in Layton, Utah!
------------------------------
Date: 25 May 1994 08:58:44 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Mr. Dudley" <S29711%22681@utrcgw.utc.com>
Subject: Malt Mills, George Danz
George:
I *LOVE* my JSP Malt Mill. I Did get the adjustable option ($20-$30) but
rarely use it. Most malts crush fine on the factory setting. Besides the
adjustability is only on one side of the roller being adjusted.
It works but I'm still unconvinced it was worth it, but hey, you never
know. It is very reliable in "stock" form with a rubber ring pinched between
the passive and active roller, but has the potential to wear out. There is an
expensive ($100 I think) option that converts the whole thing to active drive
on both rollers. This option is probably overkill unless you mill 50# per
week. Good luck.
------------------------------
Date: 25 May 1994 09:17:51 U
From: "Manning Martin MP" <manning#m#_martin_p@mcst.ae.ge.com>
Subject: SG Corrections
Rich Larsen asked about an automated adjustment procedure for correcting SG
readings, to which John Bloomberg replied that the answer was probably in a
recent BT article. Unfortunately, this is not so.
Depending upon your accuracy requirements, this can be a tricky problem. For
measurements taken with a hydrometer, you need to correct for the density
change of the wort, which is a function of both its temperature and extract
content, and also for the change in volume of the instrument itself with
temperature. There is a good table of the density of water as a function of
temperature in the CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, which includes a
polynomial fit. Somewhere in there is a thermal expansion coefficient for
glass as well. To get the extract effect, De clerck's book has a chart
showing the correction (in Plato degrees) as a function of temperature and
degrees Plato. It has a rather limited range of temperature shown, however.
The best strategy for high accuracy is to minimize the correction by
adjusting the sample to near the reference temperature. Professional-quality
instruments have both an internal thermometer with a direct correction
readout, and cover a limited range of density (~10 degrees Plato or ~40
points SG) to minimize the error introduced by adjusting only for
temperature.
MPM
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 09:08:01 -0500 (EST)
From: Neil Flatter <FLATTER@CMA.Rose-Hulman.Edu>
Subject: Re: HBD #1432 SRM, maple flavor
>Date: Tue, 24 May 1994 22:39:45 +1000 (EST)
>From: David Draper <ddraper@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au>
>Subject: SRM colors--charts, anyone?
>
>Whud id iz: In today's digest, Rich Webb asked about the SRM values of
>extracts and chocolate malt (to which I replied offline). This jogged me
>into asking something I've been meaning to for a while: does anyone know
>where I can order a color chart showing srm colors? I'd like to be able
>to assess whether I've come close to the target color values, and whether
>my calculated estimates are anywhere close to what I get in reality.
I have calculated degrees Lovibond starting w/ Michelob Classic Dark.
MicDark is used because it is readily available in the US and is
known to be 17 degrees. If anyone would like a copy, I'd be glad to
mail out the info. Another standard could be used w/ similar
calculations, but I haven't tried it myself.
>------------------------------
>Date: Tue, 24 May 1994 16:20:33 CST
>From: "Dan Houg" <HOUGD@mdh-bemidji.health.state.mn.us>
>Subject: maple sap brews, Zima taste opinion
>
>The recent post on maple sap brewing prompted me to post also! Last
>year I made an extract brew using sap as the entire water source.
>I'd made it into a 'maple-ginger lager' and while it was a fine,
>light summer-y drink, I have to admit that little if any maple flavor
>came through. The water or rather sap did seem to produce an
>excellent, clean beer tho. While we made about 15 gallons of maple
>syrup this year (that's about *500* gallons of sap!), I didn't sneak a
>brewing session in. I think a fine, mapley beer could be made
>however with the sap boiled down to the specific gravity of say 1.040
>or so. Anyone try this?
A friend gave me some maple sap he had concentrated down to 1.09
(Thanks, Dave!) which I used instead of the corn sugar suggested by
the extract kit I was using. About a month ago I tried the first
one. It was so sweet that I'll let it set for a while. I gave a
bottle to perspective brewer who liked it, but thought it was over-
carbonated. (He likened it to cola that had gotten warm.) Neither
of us noticed a cleaner finish and any woody/maple/oak/spice notes
would have been overwhelmed by the sweetness. BTW my OG=1.043
- --------------
Neil Flatter Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology
Chemistry - Math (CMA) Department of Chemistry Stockroom Manager
Novell Supervisor 5500 Wabash Avenue 73
(812) 877 - 8316 Terre Haute, IN 47803-3999
FAX 877-3198 Flatter@CMA.Rose-Hulman.Edu
------------------------------
Date: 25 May 94 08:30:00 -0700
From: COTE_FRANK@Tandem.COM
Subject: Carbonation question and a gizmo.
Hi everyone,
How does carbonation work? The first time I feed my yeasties,
at fermentation time, they make alcohol (yes, they do a lot
more than that but please don't give me a HBD beating because
I'm being brief). The next time I give my yeast something to
snack on, at bottling time, they produce carbonation. How come
more head isn't produced during fermentation, and alcohol isn't
increased during bottling? I must admit I don't understand
carbonation the way we do it at all. I'll post any good replies
I get that haven't been posted already.
The gizmo I have is called a "Boil Alert" by Fox Run. My wife
and I found this years before I started brewing in a housewares
section of a small store. We can't remember where but maybe
one of you knows where they can be found. So what is it?
It's a three inch glass disk that sits in your brew pot and
starts flapping around BEFORE your brew comes to a boil.
There is no boil over! None at all. This thing is great,
not only does it warn you that boiling is about to start.
It's flapping around stirs the mix and does the same thing
you would do if you stired constantly while the mix heated up.
After the boiling starts I get a wide flat spoon and remove it
to avoid bothering my family (usually I brew in the mornings).
I can't induce my brew to boil over since I started to use
this (yes I tried). If someone knows where to find these
I'll post that as well.
Ciao' for know,
Frank Cote
Tandem Computers
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 25 May 94 10:11:08 MDT
From: "Mark B. Alston" <c-amb@math.utah.edu>
Subject: Re: Head Retention
Tom makes the following good suggestion:
The third thing is make sure that your glassware is clean and is the right
shape. Both of these factors affect head retention. I'm not an
I never realized how true this is until pouring off the first few
glasses of my barley wine. You could head the foam being destroyed by
the oils and such on the glass. It sounded like the fizz from a cola
head dissapearing. By simply rinsing out the glass before decanting
the head lasted much longer (about one min rather than one second) and
made the beer much more pleasing.
FWIW,
Mark Alston
(c-amb@math.utah.edu)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 11:34:42 CST
From: "John L. Isenhour" <isenhour@lambic.fnal.gov>
Subject: one shot of whisky is lethal?????
Al Korzonas comments about mouth siphon sanitation:
>>rinse mouth with 1/2 oz. Jack Daniels or similar immediately before sucking.
>
>This shouldn't be much of an improvement.
I tend to agree with this, but I do know lots of brewers who suck start siphons
and their beers are not infected. I may have to do some testing of quart size
brews to see what happens (yea, I mean spit in it).
>If you were to hold whiskey in your mouth
>for a lot less than 30 minutes, you would certainly die from alcohol poisoning
>(the vapors would be absorbed in your lungs very quickly and you would expire).
This I have to take issue with. How 1/2 oz of 50% EtOH can be lethal without
carotid artery injection is not something I understand. If you were holding
the alcohol in your mouth you would be breathing thru your nose, you would get
some absorbing thru the walls of your mouth. But breathing alcohol is not more
toxic a way to absorb it than any non injectable method. Its used in chronic
alcohol studies in rats. You maintain a certain level in the air they are
breathing and they stay sauced to a certain degree.
-john
- --
John Isenhour
renaissance scientist and AHA/HWBTA National Beer Judge
home: john@hopduvel.chi.il.us
work: isenhour@lambic.fnal.gov
------------------------------
Date: 25 May 1994 13:13:40 -0400
From: "Daniel F McConnell" <Daniel.F.McConnell@med.umich.edu>
Subject: Rich Fortnum
Subject: Rich Fortnum
Please email me. I am bouncing, bouncing, bouncing.
Dan (there's some bandwidth for you) McC
------------------------------
Date: 25 May 94 18:12:00 GMT
From: gcw@lydian.att.com
Subject: Experiences with 10BL Brewing Eq./Vendors
I'm looking for information on 10BL brewing systems - the quotes from
vendors are coming in, but since none of us have direct experience with
large commercial systems, it would be helpful to hear from other brewers
who have. Some of the main issues: reliability, installation/delivery,
service, ease of use and standard functions/additional features.
This will be a standard brewpub setup and will be serving from holding/
bright tanks. Due to space limitations - ales will be the primary beer
served.
Geoff Woods
gcw@lydian.att.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 11:58:36 -0800 (PST)
From: Jay Lonner <8635660@NESSIE.CC.WWU.EDU>
Subject: Cask-conditioned "real ales"
It is my impression after several messages on the subject that "real ale" can
only be found in the UK. So my question is, how is cask-conditioned ale that
is available here in the States different from "real ale," apart from being
domestic? My favorite local bar always has two cask-conditioned ales on tap,
served from expensive-looking handpumps no less. Last night I had several
pints of cask-conditioned Grant's Scottish Ale, which was obviously unfiltered,
not too carbonated, and absolutely delicious! I have also had cask-conditioned
Red Hook, which is significantly different (in a good way) from regular Red
Hook. What am I not getting?
Jay.
------------------------------
Date: 25 May 1994 14:42:48 -0400 (EDT)
From: S29033%22681@utrcgw.utc.com
Subject: RIMS Usage
I would like to know if anyone out there has had any experiences with the RIMS
(recirculating infusion mashing system). I fabricated one from Rodney Morris'
instructions (with a few modifications - hey, I'm an electrical engineer. I
couldn't help myself). I used it for 12-15 batches and after each batch I
rinsed it with fresh water. The last batch of beer I made using it had a nasty
chemical like taste to it. I removed the heating element from the unit and
noticed that the element had corroded. I also notice that since my grain bed
was about 9-10 inches thick (with 8 - 9 lbs of grain) the grind had to be
coarse so that the flow rate through the grains could be maintained.
Subsequently, my yield was always about 1.045-50 for 8 lbs of grain and
specialty malts. I would appreciate any feedback on this subject.
Lance Stronk
Sikorsky Aircraft, Stratford, CT.
------------------------------
Date: 25 May 94 18:31:00 GMT
From: korz@iepubj.att.com (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
Subject: SRM colors/dextrin malt/nastie by-products/sanitation
David writes:
>into asking something I've been meaning to for a while: does anyone know
>where I can order a color chart showing srm colors? I'd like to be able
You cannot compare printed (on paper) colors with transmitted colors since
the darkness of the transmitted color is dependent on the width of the
sample container. What you can do is to pour a sample of the test beer and
a couple of reference beers into the SAME containers and then compare them.
Bass is 10 degrees Lovibond and Michalob Dark is 17 lovibond. Perhaps you
could call some local breweries and ask them what the SRM is of their beers.
Then you can put together your own reference list. After a few times, you
will be able to estimate the color without the references to within a few
degrees.
*******
Greg writes:
>I plan on brewing a recipe that calls for 1 oz of dextrin malt and
>wonder what the difference is between steeping American Carapils
>Dextrin Malt, along with the crystal malt that is called for, and using
>the dextrin powder that is offerred in many catalogs. Will a 1 oz steep
>really add much body? What about using dextrin powder and when should
>it be added?
I feel that 1 ounce of dextrin malt will add very little. You could
skip it if you want or add 1oz more of the light crystal if you want to.
I don't know how much malto-dextrin powder would be equivalent (if I had
to guess, I'd say perhaps 1/3 ounce net wt.) but it should be added to the
boil to ease disolving.
******
Gregg writes:
>A thought. If an extract, yeast or any adjunct has an infection would the
>off flavor remain even if the bacteria was killed off in the boil.
>I base this on the question does the bacteria itself (as a living organism)
>taste bad or is it the by-products of the bacteria that gives off flavors.
I'm sure you didn't mean that you were going to boil your yeast, but the
answer to your main question is that it's the byproducts of the bacteria
or wild yeast that give the beer an off-flavor or off-aroma. Killing
them will not remove it. Thus, spoiled extract would still make bad
tasting beer even though you boiled it. The alcohol may or may not kill
bacteria introduced before or after fermentation. Gushers usually indicate
that an infection has NOT been killed off by the alcohol. Vegetive, sour,
nasty or meaty off-flavors/aromas with no gushing usually imply an infection
during the mash or one that has been killed off by the alcohol.
*******
Lance writes:
>anymore. So, I would say that money is the main reason. There is a counter to
>this idea though. I have a good friend who works in the UK and he visits many
>pubs and breweries. I asked him about the breweries with open fermentation
>vessels. He confirmed that they do have many breweries in the UK which ferment
>their ales in open fermenters. So, one may ask, how do they prevent the
>dreaded "contamination monster" from ruining their beer? They pitch yeast,
>and a lot of it.
Good point, but also you must remember that in the UK, I'll bet that most of
the beer made in open fermenters is Real Ale and is consumed within 10 to 20
days of fermentation. Off flavors don't really have a chance to develop.
I've got a tape of a program called "The Brewer's of Helston" which features
the Blue Anchor brewpub in Helston. I counted no less than 10 instances of
sloppy sanitation. Ironically, in part of the program the owner says something
like: "When we took over the place, we had some problems with the beer coming
out bad. We had someone look over our processes and help us clean them up."
Gosh, I'd hate to see what they were doing *before* they fixed their problems!
>I believe that some places in Europe ferment their beer with
>only the naturally occurring yeast's indigenous to that area. This is one of
>the good uses for 'contamination' (and yes I quote, Jeff).
That would be the Zenne valley of Brussels and the beer is called lambiek
(also lambic or lambik). Not only do wild yeasts contribute to the production
of these beers but also bacteria (including Pediococcus, Lactobacillus and
Enteric bacteria).
>Hence,
>contamination is a relative thing - some peoples trash is other peoples
>treasure.
Indeed... I'll bet a German brewmaster would burn his/her clothes after a
visit to a lambiek brewery!
Oh, and by the way, I do make purecultureLambieks, and I still don't use
my mouth to start my siphon on those batches.
Okay, to contribute something useful and since I started this whole "don't
use your mouth to start a siphon" thread, I'll post my siphon starting
technique. Basically it relies on the previous liquid starting the next
liquid through the siphon and using a hose clamp (not my fingers) to keep
the liquid in the hose when changing to a different liquid.
1. fill siphon hose with water
2. use the water to siphon sanitizer into the hose
3. use the sanitizer to siphon rinse water through the hose
4. use the rinse water to siphon the wort/raw_beer through the hose
(discard the first cup or so)
If bottling:
5. use the raw_beer to siphon the primed beer through the hose
(discard the first cup or so)
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 16:08:57 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jim Busch <busch@daacdev1.stx.com>
Subject: Re: more ramblings
> should be mashed to avoid haze problems. Adding the specialty
> grains at mash-out was suggested by Bob Jones.
Even though he doesnt do this often!
>
> I do a decoction. You mention Pilsner Urquell as having a great
> malt aroma. PU is made with a triple decoction! I've been
> doing a 2 step mash with my ales, doughing-in at 145^F or so,
> holding for 15 minutes, pulling a 1/3 decoction, heating
> to 158^F, holding for 15, then boiling for 15-60. Adding this
> back puts the mash at 158^F or so. I rest there for 15-30
> minutes. I then add my specialty grains and enough 190-212
> degree sparge water to warm the mash to 165-170^F mash out.
> Using decoctions to enhance flavor has been suggested by Jim
> Busch and others.
Even though I dont do this often! 60 minutes, wow! Now that must
have darkened the mash a bit!
>
> Another way to add to the malt character is to use more specialty
> grains. If John Isenhour stamps MORE MALT on your AHA score sheet,
> he's not asking you to make a bigger (stronger) beer. He's talking
> about malt character and flavor. Many styles benefit from the addition
> of a pound of carapils. You may also consider substituting more of a
> lighter specialty malt for less of a darker one. 3 pounds of British
> Crystal OR 1/4 pound of chocolate malt will give you about the same
> color contribution, but the flavors would be quite different. Likewise
> 2 pounds CaraVienne vs 1/2 pound of CaraMunich.
Good point, I have been using CaraVienne in much higher percentages
than my other caramel malts for just this reason. I use a small bit
of Aromatic or Biscuit, a bit of CaraMunich, but mostly CaraVienne in
my pale ales. Also been upping the Belgian Munich to around 8% of
grist (primarily for when I do a high gravity beer and dilute 10%).
>
>
> From: S29033%22681@utrcgw.utc.com
> Subject: Resp to Jeff Franes Response -- RE:Sucking siphons
>
> >Lance Stronk writes:
> >I think an important thing to remember for those people that worry about
> >'contamination'is that as long as the proper "infection" is started quickly
> (pitching yeast - >8oz or more) there is no problem with siphoning by mouth.
>
> To which Jeff Frane responds:
>
> >I'm not sure why Lance has "contamination" in quotes; perhaps he doesn't
> >believe it's a real issue in brewing? In that case, it would be
> >difficult to explain why so many commercial breweries (small and large)
> >spend a huge percentage of their time sanitizing.
>
The main point I was trying to instill in the brewers out there is that
putting
> enough live yeast culture into the "sterile" wort will "choke out" other
> foreign bacteria present in the brewing/fermenting process. It isn't
difficult
> to explain why the commercial breweries take care in sanit
ation - they wish to
Maybe I shouldnt jump in here since I was one who was pointing out that
in my opinion post fermentation contamination is less of a concern than many
think, but....
Before high krausen takes hold, dropping pH, upping CO2, etc....*any*
bacteria is real bad. Thats why practical brewers are so careful with
prefermentation sanitation. Many bacteria can multiply 3 times as rapidly
as feremntation yeast, and the results are detectable in parts per billion.
Thats why sucking hoses in prefermentation anything is very bad practice.
While the comments on yeast overwhelming the bacteria are valid, the
concern is justified due to the disasterous results that can occur.
> this idea though. I have a good friend who works in the UK and he visits
many
> pubs and breweries. I asked him about the breweries with open fermentation
vessels. He confirmed that they do have many breweries in the UK which fermen
t
> their ales in open fermenters. So, one may ask, how do they prevent the
> dreaded "contamination monster" from ruining their beer? They pitch yeast,
> and a lot of it. I believe that some places in Europe ferment their beer
with > only the naturally occurring yeast's indigenous to that area. This is
one of
> the good uses for 'contamination' (and yes I quote, Jeff). Hence,
> contamination is a relative thing - some peoples trash is other peoples
> treasure.
I also use open fermentation and pitch copious amounts of fresh yeast slurry.
The issue is not one of fermentation techniques, it is of initial conditions.
I fail to see the relationship between professional brewing equipment and
siphon sucking, this is one area where we have an exclusive! And the comment
related to Belgian brewing is not at all applicable to the discussion at
hand. It is also of note that the British cask ales are intended for rapid
consumption and will be more resilient to slow acting bacterium.
And on the subject of things growing, did anyone see the piece on CNN about
chicken processing plants using a TSP wash to kill the samonela on chicken?
Didnt even look like any rinsing was required. TSP is great stuff!
Best,
Jim Busch
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 07:47:35 -0700 (PDT)
From: gummitch@teleport.com (Jeff Frane)
Subject: Re: Ripping Bacteria Apart
I'm not exactly sure what I said (given the cropping job) that set Lance
off. And I'm not interested in ad hominem exchanges about who, exactly,
has a closed mind. I'm also not interested in perpetuations of the
notion that effectively spitting into your wort is OK. I would suggest
that those who are interested do a little checking on the relative
reproduction rates of bacteria and yeast. I would also suggest that
people be a little more careful about assuming that what works in a
brewery that brews every day will work in a homebrewery (heavy accent on
the home) where beer is brewed, at most, weekly.
I haven't heard of any beer successfully made by adding oral flora, even
lambics. It's important to bear in mind that not all bacteria are
created equal.
- --Jeff
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 25 May 94 20:34:14 EDT
From: James Kendall <kendall@ltee.hydro.qc.ca>
Subject: SG and temperature
Hello all,
All this talk about sg and temperature has me wondering about something
I've read in a book concerning sparging. It suggests sparging at around
77 C until the spargings reach a sg value of 1.005. Now, would this
be before or after correction for temperature? This information would be
of great value to me since I will soon make the jump to the wonderful world
of all-grain brewing. Thanks in advance!
"T'is far better to drink a six-pack...than not."
Jim Kendall
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 25 May 94 16:51:20 MDT
From: npyle@n33.ecae.stortek.com
Subject: Sweet Mead/Gadgets/Krauesening
Rob Pyle (what a great name!) asks about a mead sitting at 1.065 or so. I'm
no mead expert but I believe meads typically end up with very low FGs, Rob,
like below 1. This thing needs more yeast (racking leaves lots of it behind),
and some yeast nutrients to help it out. Honey has not what yeasties need to
make good. I'd also raise the temperature to the high 60s to help things
along. Also, what is "yeast extract"?
**
John Pratte asks about mounting the control unit from the water heater to his
pot. You can avoid welding by making a bulkhead fitting, which is basically
a sandwich of two or more fittings, with the wall of the pot and a rubber
washer as the "meat". Assuming your water heater control unit has a male
pipe thread, the fittings will have to provide a female pipe thread to the
outside. Bulkhead fittings can be made with a variety of threaded adapters;
every time I make one it comes out a little different. This is how I've
attached valves, etc. to my kettles and tanks. Also, drilling a hole greater
than about 3/4" in diameter is difficult to do unless you have a 1/2" drill.
Mine is only 3/8", so I borrowed a chassis punch, which is used by
electricians to punch holes in electrical boxes. It requires a much smaller
hole to be drilled, so is much easier to do.
**
Jack Skeels asks about krauesening. I believe that true krauesening is the
process of adding fully fermenting wort (at high krauesen...) to the beer
just before bottling to add priming food and yeast. Adding wort to prime is
often called krauesening, but I believe that is a misuse of the term. The
answer to your question is this: you can do it the easy way, but it ain't
krauesening.
Cheers,
Norm = npyle@n33.stortek.com
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1433, 05/26/94
*************************************
-------
