Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #1887
This file received at Hops.Stanford.EDU 1995/11/18 PST
HOMEBREW Digest #1887 Sat 18 November 1995
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Janitor
Contents:
questions about my fruity beer! (affouj)
When is a boil not a boil? (Russell Mast)
Glatt mill gear repalcements? (Bird)
Budmilloors recipe ! ! ("Taber, Bruce")
Wicked Winter and Dock Street Pilsner recipes? (Eugene Sonn)
Mead. Wyeast. (Russell Mast)
re: Prefer Extract Brewing? (Kurt Dschida)
re: When is a boil a boil? (Kurt Dschida)
Questions (Burlybrew)
JS Malt Mills/ Brew City Supplies ("Have you seen Lucky?")
RE: Q&A on when is a boil a boil & partial mashing (Brian Pickerill)
NaCl in Beer?...Heart patient (D. Kris Rovell-Rixx)
105/140/158F Mashes (Rob Reed)
-ator naming (John Boots)
re: Prefer Extract Brewing? ("Harralson, Kirk")
re: Electric Stove Problems ("Harralson, Kirk")
Big Three/cooler mashout (Algis R Korzonas)
40-60-70 and highly modified malts (Steve Alexander)
Slit slanting away ("Dave Draper")
Boil is Boil (KennyEddy)
dispensing pressure/skunky/gusto/extract v. allgrain/lautertuns/Wyeast (Algis R Korzonas)
Scottish Ale ("Dan Wilson")
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!! November 5 thru November 11: The digest
!!! will be unmanned! Please be patient if
!!! you make any requests during this time
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
******************************************************************
* 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.
******************************************************************
#################################################################
#
# YET ANOTHER NEW FEDERAL REGULATION: if you are UNSUBSCRIBING from the
# digest, please make sure you send your request to the same service
# provider that you sent your subscription request!!! I am now receiving
# many unsubscribe requests that do not match any address on my mailing
# list, and effective immediately I will be silently deleting such
# requests.
#
#################################################################
NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS hpfcmgw!
Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew@hpfcmgw.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@hpfcmgw.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.
Please don't send me requests for back issues - you will be silently ignored.
For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to lutzen@alpha.rollanet.org
ARCHIVES:
An archive of previous issues of this digest, as well as other beer
related information can be accessed via anonymous ftp at
ftp.stanford.edu. Use ftp to log in as anonymous and give your full
e-mail address as the password, look under the directory
/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer directory. AFS users can find it under
/afs/ir.stanford.edu/ftp/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer. If you do not have
ftp capability you may access the files via e-mail using the ftpmail
service at gatekeeper.dec.com. For information about this service,
send an e-mail message to ftpmail@gatekeeper.dec.com with the word
"help" (without the quotes) in the body of the message.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 11:33:40 -0500
From: affouj@rpi.edu
Subject: questions about my fruity beer!
hi! just a few questions - i brewed a cherry weiss beer (it's now
happily sitting in the secondary, fermentation has stopped) with
an ale yeast (trying to reduce those usually _awesome_ aromas in
order to keep more cherry smell) and i've got some questions...
1) i'd like to add vanilla to it, enough so that not only the aroma
but some flavor comes through - is 1tbs of pure vanilla extract
enough? too much?
2) it's very dry, and i'd like to possibly add some sweetness to it -
i know lactose adds some (not that much in my experience with some
cream stouts), i have some malto-dextrin, but that's primarily for
body, right? what can i do?
3) also - anyone have any experience with that cherry essence or
extract? it tastes nice as is, but i'm wondering if a bit more
actual cherry flavor would be better suited for the people i'm
brewing this batch for...
4) color? ways to keep it, add it? the red color that was kinda
there after i added juice (post-boil...sorry no real cherries
available when i went shopping for this batch!!!), but after fermentation
it has a tan-orangy color.
thanks very much, this ends the months of lurking here on the HBD,
it's a great resource, one which has helped me a lot! please keep
those questions/answers coming, they're very helpful!
-j
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Jason Affourtit '95 BIO Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute |
| email - affouj@rpi.edu | http://www.rpi.edu/~affouj |
| #include <std-disclaimer.h> | ...Gone PHISHing... |
| Tau Epsilon Phi Fraternity /|\ "...you've lost it, you'll never get|
| LET'S GO NY RANGERS !!!!!!!!! / | \ out of this maze !!!" -Phish |
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 10:55:28 -0600
From: Russell Mast <rmast@fnbc.com>
Subject: When is a boil not a boil?
> From: "Dan Wilson" <DWILSON3@EMAIL.USPS.GOV>
> Subject: When is a boil a boil?
> While brewing this weekend a question came up that has bugged me since
> I started brewing. When is a boil a boil? When I get close to boiling,
> (this is with extract) I can hear what sounds like a large group of
> marbles rioting.
I've noticed this phenomenon myself. My friend Jake says it's got something
to do with some physical changes taking place, uh, somewhere. I forget.
This happens just below boiling temperatures in most liquids. It's not yet
"boiling" though.
> But no bubbles on the top. About 5 minutes later Mr.
> Bubble shows up. The recipe called for removing the grains when
> boiling commenced.
The recipe is wrong. Remove your grains before it boils. If you have a
thermometer, remove the grains around 170F. If not, remove them whenever
you think you've gotten enough of the flavor/color/body stuff from the
grains. Boiling is later than you want to do this.
If your grains steep too hot, tannins will leach into your beer. When you
drink tea, that bitter dryness that makes the back of your tongue feel
dry - that's from tannins. It's great in tea, but you don't want that
in your beer.
> And finally, when grain is used in
> the recipe (like crystal, or chocolate malt) is that what's referred
> to as a partial grain batch?
I don't know the term "partial grain". The term "partial mash" means you
did a mash (starch conversion) with some grains, and also used some extract.
What you're doing I usually hear referred to as "extract with specialty
grains".
-R
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 95 09:51:02 MST
From: roberts@Rt66.com (Bird)
Subject: Glatt mill gear repalcements?
Before I dive in and try to find replacement gears for my Glatt mill
(before they break), has anybody identified a source of replacements
for those gears?
- --Doug
- --
You know how dumb the average American is?
Just remember that 50% is even dumber than that.
Doug Roberts
roberts@rt66.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 95 11:53:00 EST
From: "Taber, Bruce" <BRUCE.TABER@NRC.CA>
Subject: Budmilloors recipe ! !
Well, here goes. I've been thinking about this for a long time. I think
I'm
finally ready to do it. I'm ready to ask the unaskable. I'm ready to
attempt
what no homebrewer worth their weight in wort should ever try to do. I'm
going to try to brew a Budmilloors.
Before you page-down, let me defend myself. You see, I don't drink the
stuff myself. But I'm an open-minded type of guy. I think that the major
breweries are just brewing what the majority wants. I don't think they are
dictating what people drink. It's just that 99% of North American beer
drinkers like thin, dry, tasteless beer. I live in Canada and we are in the
exact same situation with our two big breweries, Molson & Labatt.
I enjoy trying to educate my friends by offering them homebrew representing
different beer styles than those they are used to. Unfortunately, many
people
don't want to be educated. They want a beer that tastes like every other
beer they've ever had. Well, I'd like to be able to give them what they
want.
After all, they are my guests. This is why I'm looking for a good
Budmilloors
recipe (or a Labolson for my fellow Canadians).
Specifically, I'm looking for an all-grain recipe that has been proven to be
a good clone of one of the major brands (they all taste similar to me). I
know
I can simply add a pile of rice or corn adjuncts to thin out a pale lager,
but I
was hoping for a proven clone.
You can contact me by e-mail so that public embarrassment can be avoided.
I will forward recipes to anyone interested. Thanks,
BruceTaber
Ottawa, Canada
taber@irc.lan.nrc.ca
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 12:05:01 -0500 (EST)
From: Eugene Sonn <sonn@oswego.Oswego.EDU>
Subject: Wicked Winter and Dock Street Pilsner recipes?
Hello HBD,
I have a quick request for any recipes cloning Pete's Wicked
Winter Brew and Dock Street's Bohemian Pilsner. These are two of
my favorite commercial brews and need a more steady supply of them
than I can get at my local beer store.
Thanks in advance,
Eugene
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 11:15:50 -0600
From: Russell Mast <rmast@fnbc.com>
Subject: Mead. Wyeast.
> From: jak@absoft.com (Jeff Knaggs)
> Subject: Mead
> 4. If you didn't add any acid, do!
Acid, any acid, is going to change the flavor and body of the mead. Many
mead-makers prefer the effects, I do not. It will speed fermentation and
will reduce the amount of age necessary to mellow the mead. Nonetheless,
I don't use it. Maybe this should be taken to the Mead-Lover's digest.
Still, blanket recommendations for acid should be taken with a grain of salt.
> 5. Yeast nutrient is highly recommended by all modern mead references.
Yes, this will definately speed your mead. I've never heard of any influence
on final flavor, either.
> From: "Tracy Aquilla" <aquilla@salus.med.uvm.edu>
> They threatened to sue because someone claimed that they (Wyeast) were
> willfully and knowingly deceiving the public. In essence, they were publicly
> accused of fraud. Responding to such accusations with the threat of a
> lawsuit was appropriate, IMO.
I don't know what all the brewer who was threatened with lawsuit told anyone
else, but what *I* read from him in the Lambic Digest was pertty darn tame
compared to an outright accusation of fraud.
He reported facts, and he suggested conclusions. He admitted that his methods
weren't perfect. Maybe, in other fora, he was more daring, more slanderous,
but his posts to LambicD were quite fair, IMO. Rather than respond in kind,
the mfgers of Wyeast threatened to sue not only the individual brewer, but his
internet access provider (also his employer).
As I understand it, and I may be mistaken, said brewer tried to contact the
mfger during his experiments and before his post, and was unable to. fwiw,
I still use Wyeast. I think that the mfger learned a lot abot the internet
and how to manage PR in a small community which relies a lot on word of mouth.
I don't think they'll be sueing any brewers anytime soon.
As for "both sides of the story", I mostly know what I read in LambicD. My
understanding was that it was a specific post of that brewer that attracted
the legal action. I also read the brewers official retraction, written in
half-English, half-legalese. There's clearly more to the story, but I
definately think that Wyeast was overreacting, and it will take a lot of
evidence to convince me otherwise. I also think they learned a valuable
lesson. I still use their products, though I tend to reculture a little more
often these days. As far as I'm concerned - case closed.
-R
------------------------------
Date: 15 Nov 95 12:52:12 EST
From: Kurt Dschida <76132.733@compuserve.com>
Subject: re: Prefer Extract Brewing?
In HBD 1884 Michael K. Cinibulk asks:
>Is it really true that everyone does not go back (to extract brewing) once
>they've tried all-grain?
I slowly (read as money permitted) moved over to "all-graining", and found
I have greater flexibility/control over my brews. Yes, it takes longer; yes,
there's more to do. But I consider this all part of the fun of homebrewing
(plus
it gives you more time to relax, not worry, and drink homebrew). When I'm
in a rush & just want to throw a batch together, I do an extract batch or a
partial mash. Easy as that!
Kurt Dschida
76132.,733@compuserve.com or kdschida@vines.dsd.litton.com
I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy!
------------------------------
Date: 15 Nov 95 12:52:14 EST
From: Kurt Dschida <76132.733@compuserve.com>
Subject: re: When is a boil a boil?
In HBD 1884 Dan Wilson asks:
>I've also seen that grain bags should never be boiled. Why's that?
The reason grain (bags) should never be boiled is because at temps. "above 176
degrees F (80 degrees C), virtually all enzymic activity ceases and this effect
becomes permanent as the enzymes are denatured (effectively destroyed)..."
(according to Zymurgy Vol. 18, No. 4 - The great grain issue). Basically, your
grains will stop converting their starches to sugars, which is the reason for
mashing in the first place.
Which brings us to your second question:
>And finally, when grain is used in the recipe (like crystal, or chocolate malt)
>is that what's referred to as a partial grain batch?
Yes. Most often referred to as a "partial mash".
Kurt Dschida
76132.733@compuserve.com or kdschida@vines.dsd.litton.com
I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy!
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 13:09:18 -0500
From: Burlybrew@aol.com
Subject: Questions
Here are some questions for all you trivia buffs out there:
1) What wild grass is the principal ancestor of today's barley?
2) Who were the first people to record a beer recipe?
3) In what year was the first truly golden lager produced?
4) In what city was the first truly golden lager produced?
5) What makes a stein beer different from other beers?
6) How many litres of beer do the Germans drink, on average, per year?
7) Name the five varieties of hops grown in Germany.
8) Name the Munich street that contains the highest number of that city's
breweries.
9) What particular beer fortified Martin Luther during the Diet of Worms?
10) What is the strongest bock beer in Germany?
It's part of a contest. I've got the answers to some of these, but more than
one answer to some, so I'd like to get a broader range of answers.
Thanks
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 95 13:21:11 EST
From: "Have you seen Lucky?" <johnm@giant.IntraNet.com>
Subject: JS Malt Mills/ Brew City Supplies
I'm also interested in purchasing a JS Malt Mill. Does Jack sell direct?
Anyone have pricing? His e-mail address? If not does anyone know of
retailers in New England that carry the mill? I've seen an advertisement for
a JS Malt Mill for $99.95 from Brew City Supplies in Wisconsin. Anyone have
a phone number for them (preferably an 800 number) or e-mail. TIA.
John McCafferty
Chelmsford, MA
Merrimack Valley Brewers
------------------------------
Date-Warning: Date header was inserted by BSUVC.bsu.edu
From: 00bkpickeril@bsuvc.bsu.edu (Brian Pickerill)
Subject: RE: Q&A on when is a boil a boil & partial mashing
> While brewing this weekend a question came up that has bugged me since
> I started brewing. When is a boil a boil? When I get close to boiling,
> (this is with extract) I can hear what sounds like a large group of
> marbles rioting. But no bubbles on the top. About 5 minutes later Mr.
> Bubble shows up. The recipe called for removing the grains when
> boiling commenced. So when did it? I've also seen that grain bags
> should never be boiled. Why's that?
I think it's a boil as soon as you see bubbles rising, while a rolling boil
is one that actually gets the wort churning. When I brewed on an electric
stove, I used to get strange pulsating boils, and it was hard to avoid boil-
over as the burner "coasted" so much. Now that I finally have a propane
setup, I try to keep the wort in a rolling boil as opposed to just
simmering, as it seems there are more gasses driven off--is that what
others do?
HBD CW (Conventional Wisdom) is not to boil the grain at all, but only take
it up to mash-out temps. (About 170F.) The reason is that if you get the
grain hotter, there is too much tannin extraction, especially if the ph
is too high. One thing I would add to this is to be sure not to steep your
specialty grains in too much water, because if you use too much, the grains
will not keep the ph low enough and you will get too much harsh tannin
extraction even at lower than boiling temps. What is the recent concern
over the ph being too low? I guess this hinders the enzymes in the mash?
> And finally, when grain is used in
> the recipe (like crystal, or chocolate malt) is that what's referred
> to as a partial grain batch?
No, that's not partial mashing because it's not mashing. ;-) There is
no need to mash crystal or chocolate malts. Mashing is the process of
converting starches to sugars, and for that you need a grain that needs
to be mashed, such as klages. I have only done one partial mash, so
correct me if I am wrong on this. I used to think until very recently
that klages was a brand name, but I finally figured out that it is a term
to refer to any American pale two-row malted barley. ;-) Read the HBD
and learn. (Or post goofy, half-baked answers, and get corrected by the
"collective"--I'm starting to hate that term. ;-)
- --Brian Pickerill, Muncie, IN <00bkpickeril@mail.bsu.edu>
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 95 14:08:29 EST
From: D. Kris Rovell-Rixx <rovell@hpana0.an.hp.com>
Subject: NaCl in Beer?...Heart patient
Anyone know how much salt is in extracts or commercial beer?
My uncle, who loves beer, was told by his cardiologist to give up
beer and smoking. He only has 25% of his heart muscle remaining.
He gave up cigarettes, but at age 77 beer is his last vice, one that
he'd like to keep. The doctor claims that there's salt in beer.
He loves the beer I make. I just made an extract batch for him, but
then I remembered that salt can be added to some styles though I don't
remember for which ones. The extracts I used were Morgan Golden Sheaf
Wheat syrup and Munton & Fison Wheat dried.
If I did my own mash I could be certain about the salt level, but I
don't yet have all the equipment. By the time I do it may be too late.
If anyone knows about the amount of salt in beer or extracts, please let
me know and help an old beer lover enjoy his suds.
Please, no comments about salty tears from crying in your beer.
- --
__________________________________________________________________________
D. Kris Rovell-Rixx rovell@an.hp.com (508)659-2096
__________________________________________________________________________
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 14:25:04 -0500 (EST)
From: Rob Reed <rhreed@icdc.delcoelect.com>
Subject: 105/140/158F Mashes
Tim Fields <74247.551@compuserve.com> writes:
> I've read and reread Dr. G. Fix's postings concerning a 40 60 70 (deg
> centigrade) mash schedule, and am still unable to nail down whether this
> schedule is a "good thing" or a "bad thing" or "either way" for use with
> highly modified malts. Did this discussion ever settle down firmly in
> any camp?
I can't speak as to whether there is consensus on the use of this mash
regime out there in HBDland, but I would like to make a few comments:
I think the idea behind not performing any rests between 105F and 140F
is to minimize further protein degradation. This is because adequate
modification has occurred during malting of "highly modified"
malts: further protein breakdown can negatively effect foam quality
and body.
I don't know for sure, but suspect that Dr. Fix decided upon 140F for
a B-amylase rest because being at the low end of B-amylase activity
range, the enzyme will survive longer in the event one chooses to
perform an extended B-amylase rest for increased attenuation. In my
mashes, I try not to be too AR about temperature at the B-amylase rest
and strive to hit the 140-145F range.
Cheers,
Rob Reed
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 11:51:33 -0800 (PST)
From: John Boots <jboots@pacifier.com>
Subject: -ator naming
In HBD #1884 Bryan Gros commented on my use of the -ator suffix in naming
a stout. I am aware that the -ator is traditionally reserved for
doppelbocks. However, McMenamin Bros. brewing here in Portland calls
their stout Terminator. I'm not intending to copy their theme, but
rather (being an anarchist) am naming my beers whatever I want. Since my
homebrew company name is slightly (perhaps openly) suggestive, I usually
aim for brew names apropos of that suggestability. I'm not flaming you,
Bryan, just letting you know that to me, brewing is fun, and I don't want
these things to be taken too seriously!
Hoppy Brewing!
John
* * * * * * * * *
Purple Helmet Brewing Co., makers of fine, handcrafted beer, are pleased
to announce their Honeymoon Mead is happily fermenting in anticipation of
the big event!
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 95 15:27:15 EST
From: "Harralson, Kirk" <kwh@roadnet.ups.com>
Subject: re: Prefer Extract Brewing?
Michael K. Cinibulk writes:
>Since subscribing to the HBD (last Spring) I have seen many brewers
>post that they have finally made the move to all-grain and will never
>go back (to all extract). But, I can not recall anyone saying that
>they tried all-grain and decided to go back to extract because it was
<snip>
I recently brewed an extract-specialty grains Bass clone for the first
time in years. I am turning into a taxi service on the weekends for
my kids' soccer games, birthday parties, etc., and a six hour chunk of
time is a rare commodity. I tried overnight mashing, but got
absolutely lousy extraction (21 ppg), and the beer just didn't taste
right. While extract brewing does save time, the bulk of the time
remaining is concentrated on things that I least like about brewing --
setup, sanitizing, rinsing, and cleanup. It's very easy to get hooked
on the creative aspects involved in all-grain.
Kirk Harralson
Bel Air, Maryland
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 95 15:29:54 EST
From: "Harralson, Kirk" <kwh@roadnet.ups.com>
Subject: re: Electric Stove Problems
ED IACIOFANO writes:
>
> Also, as a related comment, it appears that my brewing is
>slowly destroying my stove, with cleaning off the burnt black
>wort on the stovetop, and now this. The wife is patient but
>getting annoyed. Any ideas, short of getting a propane setup
>(which I've been pondering)? Thanks.
Over the course of a few years, I have shorted out a switch, ruined a
receptacle and the enamel top on my electric stove. The repair cost
for the switch alone would have more than paid for an outdoor propane
setup. Mother Nature, in Northern Maryland, seems to know how to rain
on every weekend of the &^$@# year, which severely limits outdoor
brewing possibilities (no garage, either...). With this out, I am
currently looking for an alternative, but have not found a viable one
yet. Unfortunately, my house is all electric and has no natural gas
hookup, which would be my first choice. If either of these options
are available to you, I would make the move immediately -- electric
stoves take a lot of the fun out of brewing (mad spouses take the fun
out of everything else :-)
Kirk Harralson
Bel Air, Maryland
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 95 14:21:30 CST
From: korz@pubs.ih.att.com (Algis R Korzonas)
Subject: Big Three/cooler mashout
I'm really getting tired of this thread as I assume most of you are,
but I'm even more annoyed by someone twisting my words around and
making personal attacks at me.
Bill writes:
>Al K says "...you mentioned Bavaria and their big Breweries, Yes but it's
>*their* big breweries not ours that have blandified....." My point exactly
>this is a world wide phonemon. The post Prohibition changes to American beer
>is a little more compicated than, 'the biggies suddenly got cost concious'.
The world-wide phenomenon you are referring to is called the Industrial
Revolution. Once mass-production became possible and transportation improved,
large, centrallized companies could produce more at a lower cost and
distribute over a larger area. This was the first step. Next, the smaller
producers (manufacturers, farmers, brewers, whatever) had a more difficult
time competing with the big producers and many fell by the wayside or were
purchased by the big companies more for their distribution accounts than for
their production capabilities. These large companies had profits as their
primary driving force and it was to their advantage to cheapen the product.
>Have you noticed that American tastes are bland? Examples: Coffee, Beer,
>Cigarettes, etc. Did the coffee companies of the US somehow force us to
>prefer (at least historically) watered down coffee, while the rest of the
>world had the real thing. Couldn't that have been remedied right there in
>the kitchen?
Or was it that that American tastes for coffee were ruined by the scorched,
reheated, disgusting coffees sold at fast food joints, many of which didn't
care if their coffee tasted good or not? Or was it the health craze that
caused people to switch to weaker coffee, lite beer and low-tar cigarettes?
This is far more complicated than blaming American society for having bland
taste.
>Al also states that "I think they have been leading our tastes." Typically
>American, Al, blame it on someone else. Our vote is when you and I open the
>door and grab a beer, and fork over the sheckles at the counter for the
>selection. Isn't that it? (or say screw it, I'll have a homebrew instead)
When I first tried American Industrial Beer, I didn't like it. Can you blame
me? It wasn't until a trip to England and Germany that I learned what beer
can taste like and began trying to find good beer in the US. Back then,
there really wasn't much to find. Eventually, I got used to the flavourless
swill they pass off as beer and I suppose I was a reluctant supporter of
Industrial Beer. As soon as alternatives like Anchor and Sierra Nevada hit
the midwest, I no longer had to settle for swill if I wanted a bittersweet
carbonated beverage and stopped buying Industrial Beer.
Have you noticed the increasing popularity of craft-brewed beers? How about
rich, robust coffees? What about fresh, interesting, multigrain breads?
American tastes were changed because of a lack of selection and now they are
going back because of availablilty. When you don't have a choice, you either
support what you don't like or do without. Most chose to support what they
didn't like until they got used to it.
>AB's dismal attempt at marketing a Bavarian style Weissbier was a total flop!
>But the beer really was an honest attempt IMHO. I think that helps support my
>assertion that the American beer drinking public is not dupped, they drink what
>they choose: watered down swill.
You are presenting a very narrow picture because it supports your position.
The fact is that AB chose to testmarket their Weissbier at some college
spring break town in Texas, I believe. If they had testmarketed it in
Portland, maybe it would have done far better. Had they testmarketed it
at the GABF they probably would have also done well.
>There's an inference here that 'concerns over money' are *unique* to the
>biggies. Let me suggest this is a luxury unique only to us homebrewers.
>Ingredient costs are just not a great concern with my homebrew operation.
>However, *all* comercial brewerys had better be concerned about costs, or
>perish. If a cost cutting measure by a brewery impacts the beer in an adverse
>way, don't buy it.<snip>
I'm not saying that craft brewers should ignore costs. However, I, and I'll
bet millions of others in the US, given the choice of swill at $.50 per can
and real beer at $.75 per bottle will choose the real beer. How many people
are willing to spend $3.00 for a bottle of Bud in a bar? I'll bet that a
significant portion of them would be willing to spend $1.00 a bottle in a
liquor store if they were aware of the differences and had the opportunity
to taste good beer. In fact, I've personally converted a good 200 Budwilloors
drinkers to good beer at the free beer tastings I help run at a local liquor
store. Some are beyond help, most are willing to try and many do change.
I think it's really cool when I see some of these ex-swill drinkers at the
store weeks later carrying out sixers of Sierra Nevada and throwing a nod and
a smile my way. They remember who introduced them and they appreciate it.
There is an old Lithuanian saying that is fitting to this issue of American
tastes being spoiled by the Megas:
"Net ir suo karemas pripranta." which means
"In time, a dog can even get accustomed to being lynched."
***
Scott writes:
>I recently built a combination mash/lauter tun out of a 48 qt
>rectangular picnic cooler with a slotted copper manifold as part of my
>10 gal set up. I've done 2 pale ales in it so far and have performed
>the mash out by adding boiling water to the mash prior to recirculation
>and draining/sparging. This technique reduces the amount of sparge
>water I can run over the grain bed and reduces my extract efficiency. I
>had some other ideas for how to perform the mashout that may help raise
>my extract efficiency:
>
>1.) Drain some amount of sweet wort from the mash, bring it up to a
>boil and return to the mash tun.
This is the final step in a decoction mash.
>2.) Drain the mash and add some amount of boiling water to the mash
>prior to sparging.
This is like batch sparging and will improve your extraction a little,
but not as much as your #1 suggestion.
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz@pubs.att.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 16:09:26 -0500
From: Steve Alexander <stevea@clv.mcd.mot.com>
Subject: 40-60-70 and highly modified malts
In Homebrew Digest #1884 (November 15, 1995),
Tim Fields writes ...
>Hello All,
>
>I've read and reread Dr. G. Fix's postings concerning a 40 60 70 (deg
>centigrade) mash schedule, and am still unable to nail down whether this
>schedule is a "good thing" or a "bad thing" or "either way" for use with
>highly modified malts. Did this discussion ever settle down firmly in
>any camp? On a related note: 1) is this schedule covered in Fix's
>(first?) book, and 2) is there really a second book on the way?
>
>"Reeb!" Tim Fields ... Fairfax, VA
> timf@relay.com (non-brewing time)
> 74247.551@compuserve.com (weekends)
See <http://www-personal.umich.edu/~spencer/beer/FAQ/Fix-mash.html>
for the original Fix article.
G.Fix's claim is that this low temp rest improves extraction
efficiency(yield) and produces faster saccharification. There were some
follow-up posts indicating the same. My experience agrees. In the
original he does a 40-60-70 for a pale-ale malt, 30 minutes for each
rest, and moves from 40C to 60C in approx 5 minutes via boiling water
infusion - minimizing the amount of time in the 45-55C (proteolytic
enzyme) range. He suggests, along w/ Narziss, purposely avoiding the
45-55C range for highly modified malts - presumably because of the
inherent protein degradation during full modification malting.
G.Fix's post states:
"The value of the rest at 40C can not be understated. The rise in SG
in this mash is almost 3 times faster than what I get when this rest
is omitted. The final mash yield is ~20 % higher. Clearly there is a
lot of favorable activity going on including preparation of the enzyme
systems, beta glucanase activity, and highly favorable enzymatically
assisted grain liquefaction."
My interpretation is that this is grist hydrolysis, some enzymatic
malt granule degradation, dissolving of enzymes in solution, and
beta-glucanase gum reduction taking place - setting the stage for quick
saccharification and lots of carbo's in solution. The 40C rest
justification is NOT based on phytase/phosphotase (acid rest)
activity, as this enzyme is substantially destroyed at pale-ale malt
kilning temperatures.
G.Fix also writes:
"I strongly prefer moderately modified malt for lager beer, and I have
found that a protein rest at 50C (122F) has numerous advantages. I
have done test brews with a 40-50-60-70 schedule, but little is gained
in yield over a 50-60-70 program. I personally am going to stick
with the latter since among other things half of the 3 gals of
transition water can be used to go from 50 to 60, while the other half
can be used to go from 60 to 70."
My interpretation of George's point is that all mashs would improve
with a low temp rest for the reasons stated above. He prefers to
avoid the 45-55C range for highly modified base malts and so uses a
40C rest. For less well modified malts, he will use a 50C (protein)
rest anyway and the 40C rest becomes unnecessary.
I'm not a malt market guru - but it's my understanding is that most
base malts available today including lager malts are well modified,
and many German breweries have moved to single temperature mashes - at
least for their pale lager beers. Don't presume that a base lager
malt is not highly modified w/o checking it's numbers.
It should also be noted that the original post attributes a mash pH at
or below 5.4 for improvements as well.
1) There is no reference to this particular mash schedule in George's
first book. If you are interested in the topic, it is a great
book full of technical information relevent to this topic.
2) Wish I knew.
Stevea
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 08:14:28 +10
From: "Dave Draper" <david.draper@mq.edu.au>
Subject: Slit slanting away
Dear Friends, Jeff Benjamin (whose email address looks suspiciously
like that of the HBD itself! Hmmm...) wrote about sawing slits in a
copper manifold, saying it is not necessary to slant them. Quite
true as far as keeping the sparge flowing smoothly etc., but in my
experience cutting slanted slits (i.e. at an oblique angle to the
long axis of the tubing) makes for a stronger manifold.
Perpendicular slits make it easier for the manifold to bend because
there is less copper there compared to the slanted case. Hard to
describe in words (at least for me), try a comparison: cut a couple
slanted slits and a couple perpendicular ones and see at which ones
it is easier to bend the pipe. If, like mine, your manifold is not,
er, symmetrical in shape, this is of no small concern. If your
engineering skills are better than mine (pretty easy condition to
meet!) then maybe it won't matter.
Cheers, Dave in Sydney
"I'd swap all my gadgets for another 10 years experience..."
---Charlie Scandrett
- ---
***************************************************************************
David S. Draper, Earth Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney NSW Australia
Email: david.draper@mq.edu.au Home page: http://www.ocs.mq.edu.au/~ddraper
...I'm not from here, I just live here...
- ---
***************************************************************************
David S. Draper, Earth Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney NSW Australia
Email: david.draper@mq.edu.au Home page: http://www.ocs.mq.edu.au/~ddraper
...I'm not from here, I just live here...
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 16:41:37 -0500
From: KennyEddy@aol.com
Subject: Boil is Boil
In HBD 1884, Dan Wilson asks about grains & grain brewing.
Dan - take your grains out BEFORE onset of boiling. 170F is a good stopping
point. Higher temperatures can dissolve substances which you don't
necessarily want in your brew. Even better is to let the grain "rest" for a
while (15-60 minutes depending on your patience & ambition) at 145-155F.
While not truly a "mash" (as most specialty grains don't have sufficient
enzymes to convert themselves), you'll get better extraction of the goodies
you're after, especially with crystal malts.
On a related topic --
In the same HBD, Michael Cinibulk asks about all-grain versus extract
brewing.
With only a few all-grain batches in my bag, I must admit it has its allure.
I think the beer tastes better, and it's actually kinda fun (novelty
perhaps). Tasting older extract beers I have lying around (actually standing
around) revelas a difference, although my most recent extract brews seem to
have less "extract taste" (fresher? or am I just getting better at brewing?)
Having seen & tasted the difference, to me extract brewing would be
"cheating", even if it produces a great beer. Kinda like going to auto
mechanics school for years, but then taking the car in to the gas station for
an oil change. But in the same breath, I'd say do what works. Some of the
best beers I have ever tasted are extract; some of the very worst were
all-grain. The Brewer of the Year in our club (it's still November but he's
got it locked up -- has won five of eleven months, with two outstanding
entries ready for next month) brews all-extract and some partial-mashes, but
has never done an all-grain. And he's beating out some pretty talented
all-grain brewers in our club.
Partial-mashing IS a good compromise. This way, you get the full benefits of
mashing your specialty grains. But you must select a top-quality base pale
extract to make it work, otherwise it's self-defeating to some extent. And
it seems to me that a partial-mash using only pale malt is kinda pointless --
it's best-suited for including specialty grains.
My (limited) all-grain technique has been a compromise between not wanting to
commit to a lot of new equipment versus wanting to try it. What I did was to
fashion a mash/lauter tun from a 5-gallon Coleman cooler (sorry Gott fans)
and some copper pipe. Although I once measured the efficiency of a thorough
sparge of 6 gallons of wort at 85% (out of curiosity), normally I assume 65%
efficiency in my recipe formulation and collect just the first 3 gallons of
runoff. The 65% figure then gives me the right gravity of *concentrated*
wort to continue as if it were an extract brew session. I make up the
difference with water and hit my target gravity right-on (or close enough).
Sure, it costs a little more (a *little* more) for the extra grain, and I'm
limited to perhaps 1.065 OG in the final five gallons (a 10-gallon cooler
avoids this limitation), but I don't need a $150 kettle or a propane cooker
either. And I don't have to worry about oversparging!! Plus, the runoff
after the three-gallon mark is close to the 1.020 gravity level well-suited
for starter wort, so it's not necessarily wasted.
I'm sure I'll eventually get to a "real" all-grain setup (I'd like to do
bigger batches -- my wife is complaining that there's "never enough homebrew
around"), but for now it's good practice using the small setup I have.
All-grain is not an end in itself but a means to an end. You can make
hideous all-grain beers and you can make phenomenal extract beers. But give
it a try if you can.
Ken Schwartz
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 95 15:39:54 CST
From: korz@pubs.ih.att.com (Algis R Korzonas)
Subject: dispensing pressure/skunky/gusto/extract v. allgrain/lautertuns/Wyeast
Wade writes:
>The keg dispensing pressure thread is back, and I would like
>to add a comment about the pressure drop in the system. Use
>of different size and length of dispensing hose does not change
>the overall pressure drop through the system, it just shifts it
>around a bit. The overall pressure drop is the difference
>between the pressure in the keg and the pressure in the
>atmosphere. So, by changing the size or length of hose you
>are simply changing the proportion of the pressure drop that
>is taken along the length of hose.
No, no, no, no. Wade isn't the first person to write this and I can
see why it is easy to make this mistake. The reason that many people
make this mistake is because they look at it as a static system. As
a static system, when the beer is not moving, you're right, sort of.
When the beer begins to flow, you have velocity in the hoses and
therefore you have pressure drop. HOSE LENGTH AND DIAMETER *DO* MAKE
A DIFFERENCE IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF PRESSURE DROP FROM THE TANK TO
THE FAUCET. If you have too short a hose or too large a diameter
hose, you will have not enough pressure drop from the CO2 tank to the
faucet and too much pressure drop from the faucet to the atmosphere
and subsequently the CO2 will come out of solution instantly as the
beer comes out of the faucet (read FOAM). This has been written
up in great detail in past HBDs and is very well described in Dave
Miller's talk at the Milwaukee AHA National Conference transcripts, or
pull out the fluid mechanics books and look up fluid *flow*.
Sorry about shouting, but this "hose length and diameter don't make a
difference" misinformation has been repeated all too often.
***
Jim writes:
>I've never had a skunky batch until now......... Is there any
>way to rescue it, at this time, or should I chuck it or just tell my
>friends it is a Molson recipe???
I once read that keeping the skunked beer dark at 50F for a week or two will
reduce the skunkiness. I tried it on a sixpack of badly skunked Newcastle
Brown Ale and it worked!
***
Dan writes:
>"I gotta go for the gusto"
>KimB (ex SO who quoted a *really* bad beer commercial as she was dumping me)
Obviously a woman of no taste. I've met Dan and he has more gusto than
most guys. I got similar treatment from an SO who subsequently married
a guy who makes minimum wage and beats her. (Incidentally, that was a
Schlitz commercial.)
***
Mike writes:
>But, I can not recall anyone saying that they tried all-grain and
>decided to go back to extract because it was too time consuming, or equipment
>was too expensive, or the difference was not worth it, or it was simply a
>PITA. Is it really true that everyone does not go back once they've tried
>all-grain? For now I am happy with extract and frankly, do not have the time
>or resources to try all-grain. What about partial mashing; is there anyone
>that found this to be a good compromise (if one was necessary)?
I never went 100% allgrain. I've continued to do about 25% extract+specialty
for two reasons:
1. I can do an extract batch on a weeknight and some weekends are too busy
to do an allgrain batch, and
2. I own a homebrew supply store and 90% of my customers are extract
brewers -- if I can't advise them on extract recipe formulation or how to
solve problems in their own extract recipes, they might as well buy mailorder,
right?
As for partial mashing, it is only slightly less time consuming (you don't
have to boil the wort down from 7-8 gallons to 5 gallons and you only need
to take 3 or 4 gallons of runnings in stead of 7 or 8) and takes only
slightly less kettle capacity than allgrain (you don't need a 10 gallon
pot, you can manage with a 7 gallon one). If somone is looking to go beyond
extract, I would recommend going allgrain and skipping the partial mash
step.
***
Ken writes:
>Conventional Wisdom seems to say to cut across and about halfway through your
>tubing every half inch, and orient your slits to the bottom of the tun. A
>recent article in Brewing Techniques makes it more scientific by relating the
>total cross-sectional area of the cuts to the outlet area.
Don't forget that there's also an article in the Great Grains Special Issue
of Zymurgy which makes it *less* scientific by simply splitting a single mash
between 6 different types of lauter tuns. The results were quite enlightening.
Aren't I a tease? The point is, comparing these two articles, that although
you can model the theory using math, in real life things sometimes work a
little differently or the differences may not be as big as you think.
Incidentally, the drawings in the Brewing Techniques articles look hauntingly
similar to ones I drew (in ascii art) and posted to HBD on October 26, 1992.
***
Tracy writes:
>Brettanomycetes are bacteria, not yeast.
Brettanomyces are yeast.
And:
>by many homebrewers. It might be a bit confusing to the uninitiated, but it
>has always been clear to me what's in that package of #3278: yeast and
>bacteria.
It is a blend of Brettanomyces Bruxellensis *yeast* and Saccharomyces Cervisiae
yeast. You need to add a Pediococcus and/or Lactobacillus culture to have
any chance of making something resembling a lambiek/lambic.
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz@pubs.att.com
------------------------------
Date: 15 Nov 1995 16:27:16 GMT
From: "Dan Wilson" <DWILSON3@EMAIL.USPS.GOV>
Subject: Scottish Ale
Wow, my second post in as many days. I'm in search of a good extract
recipe for Scottish ale. Ideally a clone for Sam Adams Scotch Ale, but
close enough would be, well, close enough. Thanks!
Dan Wilson
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1887, 11/18/95
*************************************
-------
