Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #1586
This file received at Sierra.Stanford.EDU 94/11/23 01:05:03
HOMEBREW Digest #1586 Wed 23 November 1994
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Janitor
Contents:
NDN: Homebrew Digest #1584 (November 21, 1994) (Gateway)
Colour Formulas (Fredrik Stahl)
Pete's Wicked Ale clone (Bob Monroe)
A Beer In Search of a Style (or Name) (Robert_Ser)
blow-off (Allan Rubinoff)
Low S.G. (Edward Bockman)
Kegs to Bottles (Dave Setser)
Old extract / persistent bubbles (uswlsrap)
Priming, blowoff ("nancy e. renner")
RE:yeast stuff (Jim Busch)
1994 THIRSTY Homebrew Competition (Wolfe)
Yeast from St. Arnold's in Houston? ("Matt Sisk")
Re: Brewsters running with wolves. (Ed Hitchcock)
Answer: Humor Good Luck Combo ("Craig A. Janson")
Re: Priming Question (Dave Coombs)
Re: Blowoff (Bill Szymczak)
bulging extract cans (T1HALL)
All grain process (Gordon Baldwin)
Re:Foam city/old extract/Time in fermenter (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
New Brewer Questions ("Patrick E. Humphrey 708-937-3295")
Male/female brewing (kit.anderson)
NDN: Homebrew Digest #1585 (November 22, 1994) (Gateway)
******************************************************************
* NEW POLICY NOTE: Due to the incredible volume of bouncing mail,
* I am going to have to start removing addresses from the list
* that cause ongoing problems. In particular, if your mailbox
* is full or your account over quota, and this results in bounced
* mail, your address will be removed from the list after a few days.
*
* If you use a 'vacation' program, please be sure that it only
* sends a automated reply to homebrew-request *once*. If I get
* more than one, then I'll delete your address from the list.
******************************************************************
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: 22 Nov 1994 00:05:13 -0000
From: Gateway@foxmail.gfc.edu (Gateway)
Subject: NDN: Homebrew Digest #1584 (November 21, 1994)
Sorry. Your message could not be delivered to:
ymoriya,George Fox College (The name was not found at the remote site. Check
that the name has been entered correctly.)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 12:35:12 +0100
From: Fredrik.Stahl@mathdept.umu.se (Fredrik Stahl)
Subject: Colour Formulas
Hello everybody,
I hope you can help me out on this one. Looking at colour formulas in my
different articles, books and programs, I realized that there seem to be at
least two different methods to estimate the colour of your brew from the
colour potential of the grains.
Dave Miller (in The Complete Handbook of Home Brewing) uses:
potential * modifier * %grain * OG / 40
summed over all the grains,
where
potential = colour potential of the grain, unit L
modifier = factor giving the darkening of wort during boil, estimated as 1.25
%grain = percent of total grain weight
OG = original gravity of wort in points
40 = gravity of laboratory test wort used to obtain the potentials.
Darryl Richman (in The Brewer's Worksheet, Excel spreadsheet available at
Sierra) uses:
potential * grain_weight / total_volume
summed over all the grains,
where the potential now has the unit L * gallon / lbs.
MPM (sample excel spreadsheet found at Sierra, origin unknown) uses the
same as Darryl Richman, except for a correction if the colour estimate is
>10:
corrected colour = 14.6713 * Log(colour_estimate) - 4.6713
Here are colour potentials for some grains from the different sources:
Miller Richman MPM
???? L*gal/lb L*gal/lb
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
English Pale 3 3 3
Roasted Barley 530 397 500
Chocolate 350 397 400
Munich 10-20 5.5 13
2-row 1.6 2.0 1.7
Of course, the colour potential may vary for a specific grain but Richman's
values seem to be generally lower. (Please don't show this to the people at
the mathematical statistics department - they'd beat me blue and yellow and
I'd end up competing with the Swedish flag :-{O> )
Well, sorry about the length of this. It may not be so important (the
colour is just a very rough estimate anyway) but I'd really like to get
things sorted out.
Response by private e-mail is fine - I'll post a summary.
TIA
Fredrik Stahl (Should be a ring there), Math. Dept., Umea University, Sweden
fredrik.stahl@mathdept.umu.se
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 08:29:38 -0500
From: Bob Monroe <monroeb@cosmos.uicc.com>
Subject: Pete's Wicked Ale clone
Last month, Rick Gontarek submitted the following recipe for a clone of
Pete's Wicked Ale. He called it "Rick's Wicked Ale." I would like
to say that I used Rick's recipe with only minor variations and
at bottling time last night, it tasted GREAT! I can't wait to dig into
it. I would highly recommend Rick's recipe, which I have included below
(with credit to Rick of course). The only change I made really was to
dryhop with a little leftover cascades I had around the house.
Give it a try.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Bob Monroe |
Senior Engineer | PH: (603) 429-8596
Unitrode Integrated Circuits Corp. | FAX: (603) 424-3460
7 Continental Blvd. | e-mail: monroeb@uicc.com
Merrimack, NH 03054-0399 |
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 1994 7:38:16 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Rick Gontarek, Ph.D." <GONTAREK@FCRFV1.NCIFCRF.GOV>
Subject: Recipes (Rick's Wicked Ale)
Hello everyone. A few months back I asked anyone with suggestions for a
Pete's wicked Ale clone to comtact me. I received a few recipes, but as
usual, I adapt them according to my own intuition. I respectfully
submit, then, my attempt to clone Pete's. I call it...
Rick's Wicked Ale
8.5 lbs American 2-row pale malt
1 lb Crystal malt (40L)
1/2 lb Cara-pils malt
1/3 lb Chocolate malt
1/2 ounce Cascade hops (boil)
1/2 ounce Brewer's Gold hops (boil)
1/2 ounce Cascade hops (finish)
300 ml yeast starter- Wyeast 1056
Mash grains in 3.5 gallons of water at 75 degrees Celsius (brings temp
to 67 degrees C). Hold at 67 degrees C for one hour until conversion is
complete. Sparge with 5 gallons of water at 77 degrees C. Boil sweet
wort for one hour with boiling hops. Turn off heat, add finishing hops
and steep for 15 minutes. Cool, strain into fermenter, bring volume up to
5.5 gallons. Pitch yeast.
***Notes***
Someone suggested I use Chinook hops, but my bottle of Pete's said that
it was made with Brewer's gold hops. The o.g. was 1.050, f.g. was 1.015.
After two months in the bottle, a side by side comparison was made, and
I proudly proclaim that my beer comes close. The chocolate flavor was
very fresh. Others suggested dry-hopping, but I preferred the chocolatey
aroma to the beer in this case.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 94 09:27:24 est
From: Robert_Ser@ceo.sts-systems.ca
Subject: A Beer In Search of a Style (or Name)
CEO file contents:
Greetings, fellow HBDers!,
Following Ulick S.'s recent request for more posts to the HBD,
I thought this might be a good time to submit my first post... I
hope you'll find my question amusing, if not challenging.
Last week I brewed, well, a beer. Kind of a leftover thingy...
After buying an 8 Kg (about 18 pounds for the metrically
challenged) bucket of Edme light LME at the incredible price of
30$ Cdn, and brewing a bitter and a brown ale two months ago, I
found myself with about 1.5 Kg (3.25#) of leftover malt. I also
found a beer kit can (Armstrong's Pilsner) that had been lying
around my basement for about 9 months. My wife, who was getting
tired of having this mostly empty bucket taking up a lot of room
in the fridge, suggested that I combine the beer kit can with the
leftover Edme LME to use up the old malt and make room in the
fridge... "No!" I cried out in complete horror! "I can't combine
English malt with a Pilsner kit! That would ruin the style!"...
But to no avail: she convinced me (she has quite a pretty smile
and can be very persuasive ;-) ). I wanted something 'German'
tasting, and this is the recipe I came up with:
For 5 US gallons:
- 1 3.75# can of Armstrong's Pilsner beer kit (well hopped)
- 3.25# of Edme light LME
- 3/4# of Munich malt (steep in 150F water for 30 mins)
- 1/2 oz of Hallertauer hop plugs (bittering at -60 min)
- 1/2 oz of Saaz hop plugs (flavour at -15 mins)
- 1/2 oz coriander at -7 mins (yes - I fell for that coriander
thing. I brewed the day before Al K. mentioned that the whole
thing was somewhat of a joke)
- 1/2 oz of Hallertauer hop plugs (aroma at -2 mins)
- Wyeast 1338 (European Ale yeast)
OG: 1048
Here is my problem: I have no idea what style of beer this is!
Not bitter enough, too light colored and too hoppy for an Alt.
Can't be a lager of any kind because of the yeast I used... Would
someone be kind enough to help me out? If this is nothing else but
an 'Ale', how about helping me come up with an interesting name
for it? (I don't know... Leftover Ale? Empty the Fridge Brew?)
TIA
Rob in Montreal
Robert_Ser@ceo.sts-systems.ca
Robert Servranckx
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 94 09:39:06 EST
From: Allan Rubinoff <rubinoff@BBN.COM>
Subject: blow-off
In HBD #1585, Steve Tinsley (stinsley@ti.com) writes, regarding the use
of a blow-off hose:
>you are blowing off active
>yeast through your hose (this applies only to top-fermenting ale yeasts).
>A few months ago, I broke my primary fermenter, narowly escaping major
>lacerations, and had to purchase another one. The guy at the homebrew
>shop suggested I get a 7 gallon carboy for use with my 5 gallon batches,
>that way the active yeast rises and falls, and expends all of its energy
>on the beer, not on a journey through the blowoff hose. Any rebutalls
>to this line of thought? Do the "bad hop oils" really make a difference
>here?
This seems to be a religious issue among homebrewers, but I'll throw in
my two cents. I ferment 3-gallon batches in a 5-gallon carboy, with no
blow-off. I used to use a 3-gallon carboy with blow-off, but switched
because I thought the head retention of my beers was suffering.
I don't know whether you lose much yeast using a blow-off, but I believe
you lose a lot of the proteins responsible for head retention. The
krausen that forms on the top of the beer during fermentation is the
same stuff that makes the head on your finished beer. During blow-off,
you lose a lot of krausen.
I have not noticed any detrimental effect on the flavor of the beer
since I made this change. (I brew only ales, so the beer never sits on
the trub for more than two weeks; perhaps it takes longer for the off
flavors to develop.) And though it may be just coincidence, my beers
have had better head retention since I stopped using a blow-off.
I know most commercial brewers use blow-offs, but I wonder where the
hose is attached to the fermenter. I suspect at the bottom, not the
top. If that's so, this would mean that trub would get blown off,
rather than krausen.
Allan Rubinoff
rubinoff@bbn.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 09:55:12 +0500 (EST)
From: Edward Bockman <ebock@telerama.lm.com>
Subject: Low S.G.
I attempted to brew a white beer this weekend, and am afraid that my mash
didn't go too well.
The mash contained 4.5 lbs of German Pilsner, 4.0 lbs of unmalted wheat,
and .5 lbs of oats.
Mashed in at 120F, rested for 20 minutes, converted at 150F for 1.5
hours, and mashed out at 176F.
The reason I let the conversion go for so long was that it didn't look
like anything was happening. The sparge (5.5 gallons) went very
quickly. After boiling, etc. my SG was only 1.028.
I'm pretty sure that I did not get good conversion. Does anybody have an
explanation... Was enzyme concentration too low? This is the first time I
used the Phil Mill to crack the grains... The husks all looked cracked,
but could it have left the inside to whole? Any suggestions welcome.
Thanks
Edward Bockman (Pittsburgh, PA)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 10:33:41 -0500
From: dsetser@nttfsrv.gsfc.nasa.gov (Dave Setser)
Subject: Kegs to Bottles
I've just purchased all the equipment necessary for kegging my homebrew,
and love the convenience. The one problem that I've encountered is
that of bringing samples to club meetings, friends, etc. Does anyone
know of a method whereby I can condition my beer in the keg, and then
use the keg to fill a limited number of bottles? Common sense tells
me that if I just dispense to the bottle and cap it, I'll have problems.
I'd appreciate any response - the more detailed, the better. Thanks
in advance!
Dave Setser
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 94 10:43:58 EST
From: uswlsrap@ibmmail.com
Subject: Old extract / persistent bubbles
- -------------------- Mail Item Text Follows ------------------
To: I1010141--IBMMAIL
From: Bob Paolino Research Analyst
Subject: Old extract / persistent bubbles
Peter at BCIT asks about old cans of extract:
I wouldn't use them for beer, particularly not for a batch I cared about. Now,
if you were going to make a batch of generic non-descript beer for a party of
non-beer types, you might use it if you were willing to risk the time and
effort that it may or may not be very good. If the people who are drinking it
usually swill down Buttwipers/Miller/Coors/Molson Light, they might think it's
great even if it isn't your best effort. That'll have to be your call, of
course.
But here is a possible use for them--yeast starters. Boil up a can of this
stuff (with some hops), diluted to give you about 1.040 or so, and can/bottle
the wort. I don't go to the bother of canning jars and that process, although
it's said to be the preferred method. When I make a batch of starter wort to
put away for future use, I half-fill (okay, 1/2 to 2/3) sanitised 22 ounce
bottles and cap them. I keep them refrigerated, but that probably isn't
absolutely necessary, particularly if you "can" them. When I'm ready to get
some yeast going, I pull out a bottle of wort (far enough in advance to let it
warm to room temperature), flame the top of the bottle,and pour the wort and
the yeast (either from the plastic vial it's sold in or yeast previously saved
from primary fermentation) into a sanitised 1/2 gallon bottle. After aerating
it, I cover the mouth of the bottle with a few layers of foil
As for using _old_ extract, it ought to be okay for that purpose. But
look at/smell/taste the extract or the wort you make from it. If it seems off,
get rid of it.
- - - - - - - - - -
Bruce at Virginia asks about the airlock that won't stop:
It's hard to know what to tell you without knowing more, but here are a
few things to consider.
1) What's the fermentation temperature? Warm liquids don't hold CO2 in
solution as well as cooler ones.
2) What's the gravity? Is it still pretty high or is it in the expected
range for a finishing gravity for the style you're brewing? If it's low
enough, go bottle it.
3) Do you have an infection or a wild yeast fermenting what should be
unfermentable? Does it taste/smell okay?
Other comments: don't follow instructions on a can of extract. Brew it right
instead! Don't use corn sugar in your beer unless you have a good reason to use
it. Use two cans of extract, or supplement it with some plain dry or liquid
extract.
Don't prime by putting a spoon of sugar in the bottle. Instead dissolve the
corn sugar in boiling water (I use 1/3 to 1/2 cup for a 4-5 gallon batch. 3/4
cup is typically recommended, but I find that too carbonated. YMMV.) and put
that in your bottling bucket as you begin to rack from secondary. You'll get
more consistent results.
Hope something here solves your mystery.
Now go have a beer,
Bob Paolino / Disoriented in Badgerspace /uswlsrap@ibmmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 11:01:15 -0500 (EST)
From: "nancy e. renner" <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Priming, blowoff
(From *Jeff* Renner)
There have been several questions lately about long bubbling secondaries,
high FG, over/under priming, etc. Let me offer my ideas. First, batch
priming is more precise than adding sugar to each bottle. It does carry
some risk of varying carbonation levels due to poorly mixed priming
solution. I boil my priming sugar or malt in a couple of cups of water
and let it cool (covered, in a water bath sometimes) in an oversized
container while I set up my siphoning and bottling equipment. Then,
mmidway through racking from my secondary to my priming container, I stop
and siphon a few cups beer into the priming solution, then siphon this
into the priming container, then finish racking. This avoids much of the
problem of thermal and density stratification. Then I gently stir the
primed beer. You don't have to worry about oxidation. The beer is
probably giving off CO2 from the agitation and this blankets the
surface. Besides, O2 will be quickly metabolized by the yeast.
As far as waiting until the bubbles completely stop, don't bother unless
you want to age the beer anyway (and I think there are advantages to this
-clearer beer being one). Once a minute can go on forever. Two causes
that come to mind are (1)the slowly fermenting sugars that some extracts
have (or some mashes produce), and (2)wild yeasts that may slowly ferment
some complex sugars. Either way, you may want to cut down on your
priming sugars if you expect to keep these beers a long time. Over time,
they will become drier and more carbonated. Unless your bottles are
weakened from abuse, the worst that will happen is gushing.
Adam Rich mentions a Laaglander beer that has stopped at 1020. This is
typ[ical of this extract. It is good as part of a recipe for increasing
final gravity/residual sweetness, but if used 100%, you may get an
unbalanced beer.
Eric Jaquay primed with a cup of blackstrap molasses and hates the
flavor. IMO, blackstrap tastes like what it is, the waste product of
sugar refining. If you have to use molasses, use one of the milder
types, and a lot less than a cup. Good luck with the flavor going away.
I think you are in a better position to find out if it does than anyone
else.
****
About blowoff. I like it. I think it may reduce my bittering slightly,
but it seems to result in cleaner tasting, smoother beers. I like to
adjust my final volume in the primary so that I get less than a cup of
lost beer. Most of the brown residue sticks to the top of the carboy
or Sankey. Soakiong in bleach removes this. By using a one inch hose in
the neck of a carboy, I eliminate
any danger of clog and explosions. Potential clogs are from whole hops.
When I ferment in a Sankey, I attach a small hose to the stopper with a
short piece of broken racking tube and make sure I havent siphoned any
large hop pieces. Cleaning a large hope can be done with a carboy brush,
but I alway soak either size in bleach water. They always seem clean.
Then I boil them before reuse.
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, MI c/o nerenner@umich.edu
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 11:08:16 -0500 (EST)
From: Jim Busch <busch@daacdev1.stx.com>
Subject: RE:yeast stuff
Randy writes:
<I have used (and still do) trub to start a next batch but only from the
primary.
Just a nit, but while there is some trub in the bottom of the primary,
we are a lot more interested in yeast. Some wash the trub away using
"sterile" water or acid.
<As I understand it, aeration is
most important to achieving a quick and healthy start to fermentation.
Which leads to more yeast cells and a faster healthier fermentation. It
is also a significant influance on flavors in the beer as a result of
yeast products, esters, alcohols, etc.
Norm writes:
<I've had this question for quite some time about stepping up your starters.
<What's the point? For ales OR lagers, why bother stepping up the starter
<size? If my final goal is two quarts of starter, I'll just make a two-quart
<starter and pitch the Wyeast right into it. Going from a pint to a quart to
<two quarts (for example) seems like wasted effort to me. If the answer is
<"lag time in the starter", I can see some concern but not a big one. What am
<I missing?
The classic approach is to step up in 10-1 increments. So a Wyeast pack of
50 Ml should be stepped into 500 ml. This will result in more yeast cells
per volume of sugar, which gives quicker growth/ferment. I dont see a big
difference in doing a 20-1 step with 50 ml.
John writes:
<If you know what you are doing, and how to handle a high pressure O2
<cylinder, and realize how much O2 you are putting into your environment,
<then I say go ahead and aerate your wort this way.
I dont want to beat this dead horse too much, but I do want to emphasize
that you absolutely have to have a O2 regulator on your tank. Once you
have this, it is as easy as a CO2 tank to control. These regs do come in
both psi scales for welding and Litres/min for flow rates.
Al asks about stoves for brewing. This is something I have been looking
into. Many people I have asked like the Superb, produces 35K. I use a
burner I fabricated out of a line of burners from Solarflow in Ohio. I
have also used cajun cookers but the deflector plate is important in
heat control as is a lot of stirring when mashing.
Jim Busch
Colesville, Md
------------------------------
Date: 22 Nov 94 10:00 CST
From: Wolfe@act-12-po.act.org
Subject: 1994 THIRSTY Homebrew Competition
1994 THIRSTY Homebrew Competition Results
On November 19th, 1994, The Honorable Iowa River Society of Talented
Yeastmasters (THIRSTY) held its first AHA sanctioned homebrew competition.
Homebrewers from 9 states entered 104 beers or meads in the 14 style
categories. Best of Show was awarded to Dennis Davison of CBS for his
Still Sweet Cyser. His prize was a $50 gift certificate from the Home Brew
Shop in Coralville, Iowa; a plaque; and a free entry into the first round
of the 1995 AHA national competition. The Best of Show runner-up was Steve
Solik from San Jose, CA. He also received a gift certificate from the Home
Brew Shop and a plaque. Third place Best of Show was awarded to Ed Wolfe
and Carol Liguori of THIRSTY.
First, second, and third place ribbons were awarded in each category.
Winners in each category are listed below.
Barley Wine & Imperial Stout Belgian Ale & Dark Weizen
First: Randy & Julie Nessler First: Matt Henry
West Branch, IA Overland, MO
Second: Dennis Davison Second: Jim Clayton
Greenfield, WI Iowa City, IA
Third: Dennis Davison Third: Eddie Brian
Greenfield, WI Iowa City, IA
Brown Ale English Pale Ale
First: Wolfe, Liguori, & Klotz First: Tom Keith
Morse, IA Evanston, IL
Second: Peter Diltz Second: Eddie Brian
Coggan, IA Iowa City, IA
Third: Wes Meredith Third: Gary Lloyd
Keokuk, IA Topeka, KS
American Pale & English Bitter Scottish Ale & CA Common
First: Ed Wolfe & Peter Hanson First: Mark Kellums
Morse, IA Mt. Zion, IL
Second: Peter Diltz Second: Stacy Moser
Coggan, IA Mesa, AZ
Third: Neil Cinnamon Third: Dave Heddinger
Des Moines, IA Des Moines, IA
Porter Classic Dry & Foreign Stout
First: Steve Solik First: Will Decker
San Jose, CA Iowa City, IA
Second: Mike Hansen Second: Greg & Madeline Chaney
Coralville, IA Prairie Village, KS
Third: Greg & Madeline Chaney Third: Marc Schneider
Prairie Village, KS Iowa City, IA
Weizen Bock
First: Ed Wolfe & Carol Liguori First: Roger Meredith
Morse, IA Decatur, IL
Second: Dave Schinker Second: Dennis Davison
Wapello, IA Greensfield, WI
Third: Steve Solik Third: Steve Solik
San Jose, CA San Jose, CA
American Lager German Lagers & Ales
First: Wayne Bowman First: Meredith, Houston, Kearns
Iowa City, IA Keokuk, IA
Second: Tom Dey & Carl Froeschle Second: Steve Solik
Blue Springs, MO San Jose, CA
Third: Wayne Bowman Third: Dennis Davison
Iowa City, IA Greenfield, WI
Fruit Beer & Mead Herb/Specialty/Smoked Beer
First: Dennis Davison First: Tom Keith
Greenfield, WI Evanston, IL
Second: Mark Granner Second: Tom Keith
Iowa City, IA Evanston, IL
Third: Tom Keith Third: Tom Keith
Evanston, IL Evanston, IL
THIRSTY would like to thank all of the judges, stewards, and brewers
who helped make this competition a success. We would especially like to
thank the following businesses for sponsoring the 1994 THIRSTY Homebrew
Competition:
The Home Brew Shop, Coralville, IA (319) 351-4487
S.P.S. Beer Stuff, Cedar Rapids, IA (spsbeer@ins.infonet.net)
Fitzpatrick's Alehouse, Iowa City, IA (319) 356-6900
David's Wines, Cedar Rapids, IA (319) 363-8348
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 10:02:38 -0600
From: "Matt Sisk" <mps@shell.com>
Subject: Yeast from St. Arnold's in Houston?
Has anyone in the Houston area tried to get yeast from the St. Arnold's
microbrewery? If so, what were the results?
Matt Sisk mps@shell.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 12:59:46 -0400 (AST)
From: Ed Hitchcock <ehitchcock@sparc.uccb.ns.ca>
Subject: Re: Brewsters running with wolves.
WRT Kit Anderson's article:
Okay, mildly funny. My wife, however, was not impressed. I
suspect there might be some serious brewsters out there who were also
offended. Unfortunately, I take a firm stance against censorship, so
keep 'em coming. I'll just cringe at the female stereotyping and hold my
tongue from now on...
----------------
Ed Hitchcock, now on the right side of the student/staff division
ehitchcock@sparc.uccb.ns.ca
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 94 12:16 EST
From: "Craig A. Janson" <0003522158@mcimail.com>
Subject: Answer: Humor Good Luck Combo
>> If you tied buttered toast to the back of a cat and dropped it from a
>> height, what would happen?
Since buttered toast always lands butter side down, and cats always land on
their feet if you were sure that the toast was butter side up on top of the
cat, you will have solved the perpetual motion question. My guess is the cat
and toast combination would just spin, hovering gently above the floor. Have a
homebrew, tie a peice of buttered toast to the back of a cat, relax and enjoy
the show.
Craig Janson
MCI Communications Corp.
DEFCON
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 94 14:03:05 -0500
From: Dave Coombs <coombs@cme.nist.gov>
Subject: Re: Priming Question
Timothy Laatsch (campus is probably getting chilly by now, isn't it?
Been away a while now...) reports uneven priming.
To mix my priming solution, I rack from the secondary into a
bottling vessel and pour the still-hot priming solution down the
siphon tube (as you would pour down a glass rod in chem lab) in the
early stages of racking. This limits aeration and thermal shock
while promoting thorough mixing.
dave
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 14:10:27 -0500
From: Bill Szymczak <wszymcz%ulysses@relay.nswc.navy.mil>
Subject: Re: Blowoff
In response to Thomas55@aol.com question about using a blowoff hose
Stephen Tinsley responded:
>fermenter. The problem with it, as it was explained to me by my friendly
>homebrew professional, is twofold. First, there is a contamination risk.
>It's difficult to effectively clean a blowoff hose, and if you do, you
>still run a greater risk of outside infection than with a high-quality
>fermentation lock. The second reason is that you are blowing off active
>yeast through your hose (this applies only to top-fermenting ale yeasts).
>A few months ago, I broke my primary fermenter, narowly escaping major
>lacerations, and had to purchase another one. The guy at the homebrew
>shop suggested I get a 7 gallon carboy for use with my 5 gallon batches,
>that way the active yeast rises and falls, and expends all of its energy
>on the beer, not on a journey through the blowoff hose. Any rebutalls
>to this line of thought? Do the "bad hop oils" really make a difference
>here?
No rebuttal, just a remark that an experiment I did and described about a year
ago in the HBD, supports your line of thought. I pitched my yeast starter into
a 6 1/2 gallon batch of SG 1.041 Special Bitter, then racked into two 5 gallon
carboys, filling one to about 3 inches from the top. Active fermentation was
visible in both batches after about 10 hours and the filled batch began blowing
off after 12 hours. After 10 days (66F) the non-blowoff batch was finished
with a SG of 1.011, while the blowoff batch was still at 1.020. I bottled the
non-blowoff batch and reracked the blowoff batch and let it sit in secondary
for another 10 days, then bottled with a FG=1.013. As far as "bad hop oils"
there was only negligable differences in the two beers - some preferred the
blowoff batch, others the non-blowoff batch, while I really couldn't tell the
difference. Since then I have always used my 7 gallon carboy for primary and
will use a blowoff hose if I either fill it with more than 6 gallons or have a
high gravity wort. On the other hand, I feel the risk of infection using a
blowoff is minimal, especially if your blowoff hose is soaked in a sanitizing
solution (no need to rinse). Also, despite the longer ferment time, using a
blowoff didn't hurt the beer either.
Bill Szymczak wszymcz@relay.nswc.navy.mil
Gaithersburg, MD or bszymcz@ulysses.nswc.navy.mil
------------------------------
Date: 22 Nov 94 11:29:52 PT
From: T1HALL@T4A.dot.ca.gov
Subject: bulging extract cans
You should never purchase bulging cans of extract syrup or other types of
bulging containers with extract syrup. You should get them for free! The
cause of the bulging is a wild yeast that was picked up during processing.
>From what I understand, the store owner can remove the label or other
packing information and get reimbursed from the manufacturer. This summer
I managed to get two 6 lb packages of syrup that were bulging free. The first
I put in the refrigerator and the next morning the soft container was still
growing so I through it in the freezer that stopped the yeast cold. I used
that pack in a stout and don't taste anything unusual. The second package
unfortunately didn't make it to fermentation, since the carboy full of fresh
wort decided the gravitational pull was too strong and turned into a slippery
eel just before crashing on the garage floor like a giant pumpkin spewing
its sweet honey all over the floor. It was ugly and what I missed was sticky
the next day. Oh well, live and learn.
Jim Hall
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 10:42:25 -0800 (PST)
From: gbaldw@zaphod.usin.com (Gordon Baldwin)
Subject: All grain process
Here is my all grain brewing process. I use this process for probably
80% of my brewing. Total brew time is about 3 to 3.5 hours with a break
in there for the mash. I realize there are probably lots of ways to
improve this, but with this system I can turn out very good all grain
ales or lagers quickly. I can even brew after work and be done in time
to put the kids to bed.
Materials:
5 gallon SS pot
8 gallon ceramic on steel pot
zap-pap lauter tun
long SS spoon
Thermometer
1/2 gallon glass measuring bowl
6 gallon plastic primary
5 gallon carboy
10" strainer
Add mash water to 5 gallon SS pot and bring it up to strike temperature.
This is dependent on the recipe. Add the grains and add heat if
necessary to bring it up to mash temperature. I usually mash at about
145 deg F. Wrap the ss pot in an old sleeping bag and go away and do
something else. I start the mash sometimes before I go to bed at night
to brew in the morning, or I come home at lunch and start the mash for
an evenings brew session.
When I am really ready to get brewing, I put the mash back on the stove
and raise the temperature to about 150-155 and wrap back up in the
sleeping bag.
Fill the 8 gallon pot with sparge water and bring to a boil. Once the
sparge water is boiling carefully ladle the mash into the Zap-Pap and
add sparge water to cover the grain by 3-4 inches. Transfer the sparge
water to the 4 gallon pot and put the 8 gallon back on the stove. (my 8
gallon pot almost covers 2 burners). The Zap-Pap sits on a stool and the
1/2 gallon measuring bowl sits on the floor. Recirculate about 1 gallon
and then start carefully pouring into the 8 gallon pot.
Turn on the heat once there is about 1" of wort in the pot. If you go
slow the boil should be going when the pot is about 1/2 full. Shut off
the sparge after each bowl-full until the wort is boiling again. By the
end of the sparge the wort has already boiled down about 1/2 gallon and
half your boil is already done.
Boil for an hour. During the boil is a good time to clean everything
from the mash.
Near the end of the boil I start the sanatizing of the primary.
At 5 minutes before the end of the boil I plop the chiller in to
sanitize. When the boil is done I run the hose from the back yard into
the kitchen and hook it to the chiller. Chill for about 25 minutes.
Put the strainer on top of the primary and pour the wort through the
strainer. This does a great job of aerating, but a lot of the break
material ends up in the primary.
pitch the yeast, clean up the boil pot, and you are done for the day.
I transfer to the secondary after 2 days or whenever the foam falls back
into the beer.
That is my process. I realize there are lots of areas where HSA is a
risk, but I have found that if I am careful HSA is not a problem. I
have to splash a lot for HSA to be noticible. The benefits of this is it
is quick and easy, and it doesn't take any expensive equipment. With the
long mash the flavor profile is kind of a crap shoot, but I like it that
way. When I am brewing "to style" I am a lot more careful about temp
profiles and mash times.
- --
Gordon Baldwin
gbaldw@usin.com
Olympia Washington
------------------------------
Date: 22 Nov 94 19:43:00 GMT
From: korz@iepubj.att.com (Algis R Korzonas +1 708 979 8583)
Subject: Re:Foam city/old extract/Time in fermenter
Matt writes:
>weekend. I had kegged a batch of pale ale earlier in the week for the
>occasion. It had been sitting in the fridge at about 25 psi
>until just before the party. When the time came to dispense, all I
>managed to get from the keg were beautiful glasses of foam. (My
There is a direct relationship between temperature, CO2 pressure and
volumes of dissolved CO2 in your beer. The best discussion of this
relationship (as well as explainations of how to adjust your hose
lengths for a given pressure) that I've seen is in the 1992 AHA
National Conference Proceedings, in Dave Miller's section. I believe
that some of this information may be in the kegging FAQ -- see the
header of HBD to find out how to get the FAQs. You do not have to
increase and decrease your pressure if you have your hose lengths and
diameters correct for the pressure you are using. 25 psi was probably
too high a pressure for the temperature you had and the volumes of CO2
you wanted, but the foaming had to do with not enough backpressure from
the hose/faucet. I store my ales at 54F, have a 6-foot, 3/16"ID beer
hose, ending in a Cobra tap and I believe that my regulator was set to
12psi (currently, I'm using my CO2 tank for something else and had to
change the setting).
***********
Peter writes:
>I have several cans of malt extract that I have had for about 2 1/2 years. I
>am wondering if they are still okay to use or if they should be tossed. Is
>there any way to tell if the extract is usable? Any tips would be appreciated.
You can use it, but I suspect that it will be quite oxidized unless it was
stored at near-freezing temps. I regularly use old extract (stuff that has
gotten too old to sell), but just for swilling beer -- nothing that I would
serve to friends or enter in a competition. The resulting beer is darker
than normal for that extract and has a sort of nutty/sherrylike flavour due
to the oxidation.
***********
Bruce writes:
>Approximately one month ago I started a batch of dark English ale using a
>canned extract. I followed the instructions and added 2.5 pounds of sugar
>to my extract, yeast and water mixture. It has now been a month and I am
>still waiting for the bubbler to stop bubbling. A week ago a bubble was
>released every 1.5 minutes. Today the rate is one every 3.5 minutes. I had
It sounds like either the extract you used was deficient in nutrients (corn
sugar has no nutrients), you did not aerate your cooled wort enough, you
used a very old, weak yeast or some combination of the above. I'm assuming,
of course, that you are not trying to ferment this "ale" at 50F. Actually,
some ale yeasts (like the popular Wyeast American Ale) get sluggish at
temperatures below 63F. I usually bottle when the airlock rate is down to
about 1 bubble every 2 minutes, which takes about 1 to 2 weeks depending on
the yeast, OG and temperature. It's hard to say if your batch is done (a
hydrometer measurement would help, but only if you know the expected terminal
gravity -- some extracts are not very fermentable and unfamiliar brewers
are fooled by the high FG). If the majority of the fermentation was
done in the first week, but then there was a three-week period of slow
fermentation, then I would guess that you could bottle now (has the beer
cleared, i.e. has the yeast settled out?). If the ferment never quite got
going, then you should probably buy a hydrometer take a reading, and send
me email.
If the ferment is stuck due to poor nutrition, then you can make up a good,
well-aerated, 2 quart starter with some dry extract, maybe a small amount of
yeast nutrient and more yeast. Once this ferments-out, dump it into the
primary and let this yeast finish the sugars in your wort (you can pour off
the spent starter if you don't have room for it). The only ways of knowing
which extracts are high in FAN and which are not are either experience or
there is an article in the next issue of Zymurgy which does give the FAN
for a number of popular extracts.
If the ferment is stuck due to underaeration or due to an old or lame yeast,
then use the same solution as for poor nutrition, but you can probably skip
the nutrient.
>been the case with other batches I had brewed several years ago. Is the
>beer ready to bottle or should I wait longer in order to avoid bursting
>bottles after I add a teaspoon of additional sugar at the time of bottling
>to each bottle.
I don't recommend priming each bottle, nor should you add any more or less
priming sugar. I recommend siphoning the finished beer into another,
sanitized container which contains all the priming sugar (1/2 to 3/4 cup
of corn sugar, boiled a few minutes in a cup or two of water) and then
siphon into bottles after stirring gently. Incidentally, I don't believe
there is any physical benfit from using dried malt extract for priming
and corn sugar is considerably more easy to use.
Al.
korz@iepubj.att.com
Palos Hills, IL
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 16:23:00 -0600 (CST)
From: "Patrick E. Humphrey 708-937-3295" <HUMPHREY.PATRICK@igate.abbott.com>
Subject: New Brewer Questions
I am going to got out this weekend and buy the materials for my first
homebrew and I have a couple of questions and would appreciate any help you
may provide.
1) Charlie uses a glass carboy as a fermentation vessel, yet the Brewers
Resource sells beginner kits with 5 gallon plastic buckets for
fermentation. Which should I use/buy?
2) When people use the 5 gallon buckets, do they have a blow-off tube into
a milk jug or do they just leave the fermentation foam (krausen?) in the
bucket? I read that it is a good idea to have this bubble out to get
rid of some nasty off flavors.
Thanks for any help,
Pat Humphrey
New Brewer :-)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 94 15:49:10 -0400
From: kit.anderson@acornbbs.com
Subject: Male/female brewing
TO: homebrew@hpfcmi.fc.hp.com
T>From: tmmpci@mcs.com (Todd McGuinness)
T>Subject: Male/Female Brewing
T>Kit,
T>Glad to hear that there actually are women brewers in our midst. I
T>would like you to know however, not all of us Male brewing types
T>have Significant others to clean up after us... Actually most of
T>the Brewers I know are single and they all clean up their own
T>messes.
T>Now, I'll explain why we are single:
T>A.) Most women don't get it when it comes to brewing males! The
T>passion, the quest, the reward :-).
T>B.) We drink a lot of beer and not many women like that.
T>C.) We usually brew 2 times a week, not much time for anything
T>else ( well, ok, we might make time for some things. :-))
T>D.) We like to tinker with brewing stuff - books, tools, new stuff,
T>spigots, chillers, kegs, and the like. So that takes another
T> hunk of our time.
T>So, if you know any eligible female type person, I won't even
T>include the brewing thing in this one, that actually can stand to be
T>around somebody like this, I have lots of eligible MAN friends that
T>would love to be appreciated for these noble traits!
T>One thing we don't enjoy: is being told that our beer is too big,
T>too hoppy on occasion, and too flavorful. By the way, I have been
T>told this b4.
T>We also don't want to hear: why don't you make a light beer? A true
T>Brewer loves all styles, from Pilsner to Imperial Stout, and
T>will usually make beers for the season -- I know I probably just
T>insulted somebody, but hey, WE BREW THEREFOR WE ARE BREWERS ;-).
T>Well that's my 2cents.
T>Hoppy Brewing!
T>Todd M. McGuinness Beer is good
T>food! PCI Direct
T>A.) usual disclaimer - MOAMO
T>Chicago, IL 60610 Who let in the
T>Moose! tmmpci@mcs.com
I wanted to post this response following the Brewsters' article. Maybe
the HBD needs to have a personals section.
- -------------------------------------------------------------
SWM 40-something homebrewer, "portly", balding, seeks SWF
early 20's, athletic build, who likes televised sports
and washing bottles. Send picture of wort chiller.
- -------------------------------------------------------------
I also wanted to say that (1)the Brewsters' article is a repost, (2)I
did not write it, (3)and I am not female. With an androgenous name
like "Kit" it is a 50/50 shot in cyberspace. It does make for a lot
of propositions from both sides of the aisle when in Chat mode.
Kit Anderson
Bath, Maine
<kit.anderson@acornbbs.com>
*
- ---
* CMPQwk #1.4 * UNREGISTERED EVALUATION COPY
------------------------------
Date: 22 Nov 1994 13:08:37 -0000
From: Gateway@foxmail.gfc.edu (Gateway)
Subject: NDN: Homebrew Digest #1585 (November 22, 1994)
Sorry. Your message could not be delivered to:
ymoriya,George Fox College (The name was not found at the remote site. Check
that the name has been entered correctly.)
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1586, 11/23/94
*************************************
-------
