Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #1974
This file received at Hops.Stanford.EDU 1996/03/02 PST
HOMEBREW Digest #1974 Sat 02 March 1996
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Rob Gardner, Digest Janitor
Contents:
RIMS elements / Bass-O-Matic Pale Ale II / Scotch Ale (KennyEddy)
Wyeast 2124 vs 2278 ("John McCafferty IntraNet Inc.")
(Maura Kate Kilgore)
chili beer (Alan P. Van Dyke)
Recipes/Cantillon/Cassia/Brewer's Companion (Eric W. Miller)
Re: Adding cold water to brewpot? (Derek Lyons)
Brita water filter info (David M. Muzidal)
Saving trub for another batch (Darcy Munger)
RE: corny carb/old yeast starters (wirwin)
Re: word choice / yeast choice (Jeff Frane)
Brewers Companion by Mosher (John J. Palmer)
Guinness museum is best (Rob Lauriston)
Re: Brewers compainon (Mark E. Thompson)
chili beer (Michael Glinski)
Re: Chili Beer (Steve Shaw C3113)
Re: Copper in beer (Kelly Jones)
Thanks; Yeast from Kona Brewing ("Christopher M. Goll")
SUDS Mash Temp Calcs - "Thermal Mass of Mash Vessel" (KennyEddy)
Mashing and specialty malts ("Kevin Imel")
Is it Beer? ("Dave Draper")
Chili Beer (Alex Aaron)
Homebrew Digest #1971 (February 28, 1996) -Reply (Brent Smith)
Channelling (korz)
Re: What's Brewing on Your Macintosh? /BrewMeister Mac FreeWare (Brian Pickerill)
******************************************************************
* 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: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 10:17:27 -0500
From: KennyEddy@aol.com
Subject: RIMS elements / Bass-O-Matic Pale Ale II / Scotch Ale
Anton (Tony) Verhulst asked about heater elements. I don't have that
specific model in front of me, but I know my local home stores carry the
State Industried line, and I've seen this grayish-green-finished monster
element that must be similar to the one Dion describes. I'm using the State
Industries 90000095 element (about 41") in my plastic brewery (inaugural brew
this Saturday!!). The thing to remember is that operating at half the rated
voltage (120 vs 240) gives you one *quarter* the rated power. And 1125W
divided by the surface area (72" length x pi x 5/16" (?) dia)is about
16W/sq-in density -- about 1/3 of my kettle on my stove! I agree with Dion
- -- scorching shouldn't be a concern. Even with the 9000095, a density of 30
W/sq-in makes this $7 element a viable alternative to the aforementioned $22
unit.
Has anyone considered immersing an uninsulated metal 5-gallon mash pail in a
larger (maybe 20 gal) insulated tub, and heating the tub water? I know it
sounds inefficient and all but it might be worth considering...?
**********************
Bart Thielges presents a recipe for Basmati Pale Ale II. This isn't
"Bass-O-Matic" Ale misspelled, is it?...
**********************
Al K -- I'd be interested to hear what you find out on your continuing Scotch
Ale Style hunt. I didn't mean my comments as any kind of argument -- I'm
quite sure you've got far more "world experience" with beer than I -- but on
the same stroke I'll say I got quite and education last summer. Being
beer-conscious, I tried to pay attention to what I was observing (my wife
thought I was nuts taking notes between sips). My opinion is just that --
opinion -- but I do believe I saw a distinct difference *in general*. The
comment someone made about "beer borders" falling due to societiy's mobility
and increased trade of "quality" beer having a definite impact on what we
call "styles" really rang true. Even fifty years ago (just guessing) I can
imagine there would've been far more distinction between a "Scottish" beer
and an "English"brew , but I'd venture to say that distinction is fast fading
today. That's why I pointed out that I saw the greatest difference in the
"local" beers, brewed by smaller and presumably more "traditional" breweries
than say one of the Scottish & Newcastle brands. What we call "style
guidelines" today (a' la AHA) are necessarily least-common-denominator
guidelines, attempting to strike a balanced center but often ignoring (or at
least not accounting for) so much variation that's out there in reality. If
a small-time Scottish brewer brewed a very minerally, hoppy beer, would he be
deported to England? Would his beer be dumped by angry "style police"
raiding his brewery in the stilly pre-dawn? These days, with notable
exceptions, we can only make general references to regional/historical styles
because of these factors.
Ken Schwartz
KennyEddy@aol.com
Lee Iacocca, on Detroit's resistance to tougher auto emission standards --
"We've got to pause and ask ourselves: How much clean air do we need?"
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 96 09:23:32 EST
From: "John McCafferty IntraNet Inc." <johnm@giant.IntraNet.com>
Subject: Wyeast 2124 vs 2278
I'm planning on brewing a couple of lagers in March. I plenned to use Wyeast
Bohemian (#2124) for a pilsener and then repitch for a Vienna. However I have
become a little concerened about my selection since the comments regarding the
Wyeast Bohemian strain and high fininshing gravities. I am now conisdering
using the Czech Pilsner yeast (#2278). Would anyone care to give me some
feedback on these options fo rthese styles? I have hear that the 2124 needs a
shorter lagering period, is this true? How long should I lager with the 2278?
I am planning on a 10-14 day primary or both batches and then lagering for 4
weeks before bottling. E-mail is fine, I will summarize.
TIA
John McCafferty
Merrimack Valley Brewers
JohnM@intranet.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 10:34:19 -0500
From: maura@ljextra.com (Maura Kate Kilgore)
Subject:
>charlesd@nando.net (charlesd) wrote:
>
>>A quick question for the collective:
>
>> I've recently purchased an 8.25 gallon pot and constructed an immersion
>>wort chiller in anticipation of going to a full 5-gallon boil. The
>>problem is that my poor old stove simply can't boil that volume of
>>water. So, while I try to convince my significant other that the 170K BTU
>>King Cooker is _really_ worth spending $60 on, is there any problem with
>>adding cold water to about 3 gallons of boiling wort to bring the total
>>volume up to 5 gallons and then cooling to pitching temp using the
>>sanitized wort chiller?
>
I added water to my concentrated wort for years before becoming equipped for
a full wort boil, and only had a problem once, when our NYC water was so
polluted, the Dept. of Environmental Protection had to treat it!! (the
moral is, boil your water or use bottled spring water) However, you may
find that lining your burners with tin foil or the "heat saving" rings you
can find in some stores will help your stove bring the larger pot to a boil.
I find it really helps, as does placing my pot over 2 burners.
Beer is our bond,
Maura
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 09:50:29 -0600
From: alan@mail.utexas.edu (Alan P. Van Dyke)
Subject: chili beer
Howdy,
In HBD 1972, Scott Rudolph asks about sanitizing peppers for a chili pepper
beer.
I've made one batch using the pepper in the bottle method with much
success. I used serrano peppers, because they fit in the bottle; jalapenos
are too fat. I basically just washed them under running water. The way I
figured it was that it's more than what I do to my hops when I dry hop, &
I've never had a problem with that, either. I didn't detect any infection
problems at all with the serrano beer.
I found that the beer was most enjoyable about 4 weeks after bottling. I
had used a pilsner for this, so the pepper flavor came through nicely.
However, after 4 weeks the spiceyness started to overpower the flavor.
That's me, however; I know some people that can handle fresh habaneros and
probably wouldn't get too excited by a mere serrano beer. If you want to
control the spiceyness of the beer, you may want to dry-pepper it in the
secondary, maybe two peppers per bottle in the carboy for a couple of
weeks. That way, the beer will have a constant spiceyness instead of a
slow increase through its life.
Good luck with it.
Alan Van Dyke Austin, TX Fermentation & civilization are inseperable.
alan@mail.utexas.edu -John Ciardi
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 10:56:00 -0500
From: ac051@osfn.rhilinet.gov (Eric W. Miller)
Subject: Recipes/Cantillon/Cassia/Brewer's Companion
raudins@lightscape.com (Glenn Raudins) writes:
>I think we are missing
>the middle ground. Recipes are becoming rarer, and as most of us know
>this is how many have improved their beers by looking at others recipes.
Personally, I'd prefer to see *no* recipes posted to the digest. There are
plenty of recipe books out there, there's the Cat's Meow, and other online
recipes. But that won't happen, so I'll contine to scroll past them.
michael j dix <mdix@dcssc.sj.hp.com> posts about the difficulty of finding
the Brasserie Cantillon. The trick is to use public transportation. It's
not far from the main tram terminal.
beernote@realbeer.com (Mike Urseth) writes about Scotch Ale:
>His Scotch
>Ale (Pipers' Pride) uses an additional bitter agent called quassia (sp?)
>that is derived from the bark of some plant grown in the New World.
I think the spelling you're looking for is "cassia," a plant whose bark is
more commonly known as "cinnamon." Are you sure this brewer isn't pulling
your leg?
"Tracy Aquilla" <aquilla@salus.med.uvm.edu> asks about the Brewer's Companion
>I'd really appreciate
>reading more comments/reviews
The parts of the book I have found helpful are the sections on beer color and
comparisons of mashing programs. Those topics are pretty poorly covered in
the other texts in my library.
Eric in Newport, RI
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 08:09:46 -0800
From: Derek Lyons <elde@hurricane.net>
Subject: Re: Adding cold water to brewpot?
At 10:09 AM 2/28/96 -0500, you wrote:
>>>>>> "Derek" == Derek Lyons <elde@hurricane.net> writes:
>
> Derek> Boil the 3 gallons *first* and set it aside to cool.
> Derek> (Overnight?) That way it's sterile and the chlorine is
> Derek> gone.
>
>A note: if your municipal water system uses cloramine to sanitize (as
>does mine), boiling will *not* remove it. Your only recourse is to
>charcoal filter.
>
Never had any off-flavors, and my yeast propogates just fine, so (At least
for me) this does not seem to be a problem.
Also, I aerate the 'set-aside' water in the carboy. It's a heck of a lot
easier to shake a carboy with only 1-2 gallons in it.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 10:28:47 -0600
From: David.Muzidal@dssc.slg.eds.com (David M. Muzidal)
Subject: Brita water filter info
A few months ago I asked for information regarding using a Brita water
filter to treat brewing water. There were very few responses, and since
that time fellow R.C.B. reader Ian Smiley and I have been experimenting
with this very subject. Below is what we were able to gather about the
Brita filter from the product literature, from talking with Brita and
from actual hands-on use in our brewing sessions. We initialy bought
the Brita filters to remove chloramines from our water, but found out
that the Brita filter removes much more than that. We hope you find
this information useful!
a. The Brita filter is a combination of activated carbon and ion
exchange resins which exchanges H+ for cations and OH- for anions.
The filter contains a small amount of silver to prevent bacterial
growth.
b. The Brita filter removes sufficient water-hardness ions to render
the water very soft (at least Plano, TX and Ottawa, ON tap water),
without adding sodium.
c. The Brita filter removes up to 90% of chlorine compounds. It also
removes up to 93% of lead and copper. The Brita filter is is
certified by NSF International under the following standards:
- Standard No. 53: Lead Reduction
- Standard No. 42: Taste, Odor and Chlorine Reduction, Class I
Particulate Reduction, Class V
Bacteriostatic Effects
Copper Reduction
Zinc Reduction
d. The Brita filter is designed to filter 1/2 US gallon of water at a
time, which takes about 3-4 minutes. The manufacturer recommends
that no more than 2 US gallons of water be processed each day in
order to maintain filter efficiency. One Brita filter can process
up to 35 US gallons of tap water. The Brita filter pitcher costs
around $20.00 US and replacement filters cost around $7.00 US.
e. The comparitive pHs are as follows (all samples were measured
at 20C):
Ottawa, ON Plano, TX
i. Tap Water pH ~8.0 ~8.0
ii. Brita water pH ~5.5 ~5.2
iii. Boiled Brita water pH ~7.0 ~7.0
iv. 1 tsp CaSO4/10L Brita water pH ~5.5 NA
f. The water analyses before filtering are as follows (mg/l or ppm):
Ottawa, ON Plano, TX
Calcium (Ca) 17 30
Magnesium (Mg) 2 3
Sodium (Na) 3 9
Bicarbonates (HCO3) NA 92
Carbonates (CO3) NA 0
Sulfate (SO4) 27 27
Chloride (Cl) 5.5 12
Total Alkalinity 28 75
Noncarbonate Hardness NA 19
Total Hardness 58 94
Chlorine residue NA 2.8
pH 8.4 8.0
g. Imperical mashing experiments attest to the Brita's suitability
for brewing. The all-grain NA Pilsener batches (2-row pale malt
used), I believe, would be the most unforgiving beer style of
anomolies in the water. And, I'm satisfied that the water has
performed excellently in this capacity. - Ian
h. The Brita filter produces water that is practically ion free, at
least for the water tested, and should be treated like pure
(distilled) water. This is supported by the fact that the pH of
the Brita water rose from pH ~5.5 to pH ~7 after boiling (due to
dissolved CO2 being driven off).
All in all, I would say the Brita filter is an excellent water treatment
system for any homebrewer who has a less-than-ideal source of brewing
water and who is prepared to take pH measurements and make mineral
adjustments with various water salts. - Ian (Ottawa, ON)
The Brita filter is a low-cost, low-flow unit that produces fairly high
quality water (at least from my tap water). Partial mashes using pale
two row and Brita water resulted in a mash pH of ~4.9. I feel that the
Brita filter is best used as a supplemental water treatment system (given
the flow restrictions and ion content of the filtered water), but can be
used to treat all of the brewing water. - David (Plano, TX)
Many thanks to A.J. deLange for his chemistry help!
David Muzidal David.Muzidal@dssc.slg.eds.com
Ian Smiley ar999@freenet.carleton.ca
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 09:04:00 -0800
From: Darcy Munger <darcym@workgrp.com>
Subject: Saving trub for another batch
Hello there fellow brewers!!!! I was wondering if anyone knows anything
about saving trub from a primary (in sanitized bottles kept in the fridge of
course) for use in another batch of beer. I have just brewed a batch of
Irish Honey Red, and there is a considerable accumulation of trub in the
primary (3 inches + in a 5 gal carboy). I'd really like to hear if anyone
has any experiences recycling trub. Any tips on procedure would be greatly
appreciated!
Hoppy Days are here again!
Cheers!
Darcy M.
darcym@workgrp.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 10:04:52 -0700
From: wirwin@envisionet.net
Subject: RE: corny carb/old yeast starters
in hbd1971, clay crenshaw asked about corny keg carbonation and old yeast
starters.
just a couple of thoughts. i both force carb and naturally carb using cory
kegs. i prefer to naturally carb my koelsch and hellesbiers. i add 1.0 to 1.25
cups of very light m&f dme to 1 cup water, boil 15 min and add to keg. i let
it sit at room temperature for a week or so. i get very fine bubbles. i use 5
to 7 psi dispensing pressure. when i force carb, i chill the keg overnight,
pressurize to 25 psi and roll the keg back and forth for an hour. if i get too
lazy to rock and roll the keg, i just pressurize the keg to 25 psi and leave
it in the fridge. i re-pressurize daily for 3 or 4 days. this seems to give
similar results to the rock and roll method. any comments?
regarding your wyeast starter.. i've been culturing my own yeast for several
months now. i built a cheapie laminar flow hood for my yeast manipulations
from a 64 quart plastic storage box and a small room air purifier with a HEPA
filter. the air cleaner costs about $50, the storage box <$10. I let my slap
pack swell up for a day or so, wipe it off with bleach water and put into the
clean box described above. i buy petri dishes, slants and 50 ml starter
containers from brewer's resource in california. i use a sterile innoculation
loop to transfer some of the slap pack to the petri dish. i usually make 4 or
5 small cultures in each petri dish. i also transfer some of the slap pack to
a slant as my "mother culture". i transfer the balance of the slap pack to a
couple of the 50 ml starter containers. all done, takes <10 minutes and i have
enough yeast for several batches. i seal the petri dish with electrial tape. i
let the petri dish, slant and starter containers rest at room temp for a
couple of days relieving the pressure on the slant and starters daily. i then
store all the above in the fridge. i make my brewing starters from the 50 ml
starters mentioned above. i have used the super starter from brewer's resource
in the past, but now i make my own. 1 cup light dme to 1.5 liter water, 6 or 8
hop pellets (i use perle at 8.5 alpha), 1 tsp. yeast hulls and 1 tsp. yeast
energizer. boil 10 to 15 min. i pour into sanitized pyrex lab flasks and cap
with aluminum foil let cool and you are ready to go. pour one of the 50 ml
starters into 400 ml of "super wort" as formulated above, shake it up, put on
an air lock and watch it go. i usually step up my starters to a total volume
of 1.5 liters in 3 steps. the first 450 ml, then add another 500 ml of "super
wort" when the krausen begins to fall followed by another 550 ml "super wort"
when the second krausen begins to fall. you should be ready to pitch when the
final krausen falls. total time around 3 or 4 days depending on the ambient
temperature and the activity of the yeast strain. i pitch the entire 1.5 liter
rather than just the slurry as there is a lot of activity. i aerate the
bejesus out of the cool wort before pitching. fermentation begins within a
couple of hours. i'm most likely under-pitching, but so far it seems to work
fine. i have stored starters and slurrys in the fridge for several months with
no problems. i let the starters or slurry bottles come to room temp before i
do anything with them. the yeastie beasties do not like rapid temperature
changes. i apologize if this was too basic and for the bandwidth.
best regards
bill at bill's bathtub brewery, lonetree, colorado
two wrongs don't make a right, but three do.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 09:06:16 -0800
From: jfrane@teleport.com (Jeff Frane)
Subject: Re: word choice / yeast choice
Al Korzonas wrote:
>Never did I say that Dave lies about where the strains come from nor did I
>say that he has deceived anyone about the sources. Tom was the first person
>to use the word "lies" in this discussion and Jeff the first to use "deceived."
>
Before that, he wrote:
>>Dave has a habit of concealing the sources of his yeast strains.
>>Unless he has changed his ways, I would be very skeptical of what
>>he says about the yeasts' origins.
I don't know where you come from, Al, but in my world people who
say things like "I would be very skeptical of what he says..." are
implying that the person is telling an untruth. The distinction is
the difference between withholding information for some reason and
given out misinformation, which is what your exchange with Tom implied.
Tom has reported that Wyeast's Strains X, Y and Z had come from
specific breweries, on Dave's direct word. Your response was that
he should be skeptical of what Dave had said -- if this isn't an
implication that he was being told an untruth, I don't know what
would be.
Perhaps you write so much and so quickly for the HBD, that the
implications can pass you by.
And then:
>
>I use Wyeast strains almost exclusively and think that Dave Logsdon has
>done more for improving homebrewed beer than anyone on this planet. So,
>please stop implying that I said bad things about him. Furthermore, if you
>shared the previous posts with Dave, please make sure he gets a copy of this
>one too!
Really, it wasn't of enough significance to mention to Dave. But Wyeast
is the subject of enough unfounded gossip as it is; I wanted to help
nip it in the bud this time.
- --Jeff Frane
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 11:10:12 -0800
From: johnj@primenet.com (John J. Palmer)
Subject: Brewers Companion by Mosher
Tracy asked for more reviews of Mosher's book.
I bought a copy ("Revised Edition") last year when I was working on my own
book. It does have a lot of good technical information as well as some
interesting commentary on Styles. In fact, the text makes for enjoyable
reading; the trouble is finding it. The only fault this book has is that
the large amount of charts, graphs, tables, worksheets, etc, makes the book
so "busy" its hard to find what you are looking for. Flip it open and your
eyeballs are overwhelmed.
Randy does bring together more of the tips and techniques of brewing
together in one place than other books. Grain Roasting, Beer Color, Mashing
Rests, Infections, its all there. One thing I should point out though is
that those of us with full internet access (funny how FTP was the Be-all
and End-all of brewing info just a couple years ago, now its the Web.) have
access to most of the information that is offered in this book (and other
books).
In closing, I will say that I did find it to be a good reference when I was
preparing my own Beginners Book, but that I found the format somewhat
tedious.
Its a good book though.
John
John J. Palmer
johnj@primenet.com or palmer@ssdgwy.mdc.com
The Palmer House Brewery and Smithy
http://www.primenet.com/~johnj/
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 96 07:47 PST
From: robtrish@mindlink.bc.ca (Rob Lauriston)
Subject: Guinness museum is best
Robert Bush wrote about touring Guinness brewery (in Dublin, I presume):
>Guinness is oh so boooring! I went there
>in 1985 (things might have changed but I doubt it) and it wasn't a brewery,
>it was friggin factory!
I was there in 1992, and things have indeed changed. I don't believe the
general public is shown the actual brewery any more. Perhaps some VIP BS
could get you in. Instead, there is a building called the Hop Store after
its former use which houses the best brewery museum I've ever seen. You
basically wander through the two-storey building at your own pace, except
for a short video presentation. At the end there is a tasting room and
souvenir shop. I don't really recall the charge for tasting -- I think it
was one free with your admission ticket and reasonable after that.
Reasonable considering Ireland and Canada are both right up there in the top
five for beer taxation! Since it is not geared to (home)brewers as such, I
don't recall a lot on brewing techniques per se, and as a museum, it was
oriented towards the history of the brewery -- with a video and display of
how wooden barrels were made, for example. My wife is not keenly interested
in breweries, but she found this museum to be very interesting. I'd say it
was definitely worth a stop.
- Rob L.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 9:15:12 PST
From: Mark E. Thompson <markt@hptal04.cup.hp.com>
Subject: Re: Brewers compainon
Full-Name: Mark E. Thompson
> Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 09:21:21 -0600 (CST)
> From: fitz@fasicsv.fnal.gov (Tom Fitzpatrick)
> Subject: Re: The Brewer's Companion
>
> >>I picked up this book last year and after reading it I wasn't all that
> >>excited about it and sorry that I spent $20 for it. I have found David
> >>Miller's new book much more interesting and a better use of my money.
>
> I have to strongly disagree; Are we comparing Randy Mosher's book to
> Millers' "Brewing the World's Great Beers" ???
No i was not refering to the Brewing the World's... but the Homebrewing
Handbook or something like that, i don't have it here. It's a stright
forward reference and text on homebrewing. I use it as a reference quite
regularly.
> People complain about the brewing log section of Mosher's book as a
> waste, but you can tear it out if you don't like it and it still has
> MUCH more useful information than Miller's book. Miller wastes many
> pages glossing over topics such as filtering and kegging that really
> can't be adequately covered in a beginner's book. Also, after the
> beginners stage, you can throw out all the pages dedicated to recipes.
> Some of these recipes seem dubious at best, and I wonder whether he
> really ever made beer with these recipes.
I haven't read the book that you are refering to but the one that i use
has some very good guidelines for starting point for recipies. He also
indicates how to adjust the all grain recipies to fit your yields.
I think that the poster must have his answer now.
Mark
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 13:16:39
From: mglinski@gnn.com (Michael Glinski)
Subject: chili beer
Scott Rudolf requested a recipe similar to Cave Creek. The
problem I have with Cave Creek (my own opinion only) is that it
doesn't taste much like beer, it's just HOT! Here's a recipe I
recently brewed that has some zip to it, but still has a nice beer
flavor.
to make 5 gallons:
1 can (3.3 lb.) Premier Brown Ale Kit (hopped)
3.3 lb. Northwestern Amber malt extract
1 cup Munton & Fison light DME
2 1/2 lb. clover honey
6 habanero peppers
1 ounce fuggle hops
Dried Nottingham ale yeast
Add 6 chopped habanero peppers to 2 gallons cold water and
bring to a boil. Strain out peppers and add honey and DME. Bring
back to a boil, then add all the malt extract. Boil 30 minutes,
then add 1/2 oz. fuggles hops. Boil another 10 minutes. Turn off
heat and add another 1/2 oz. fuggles hops. Let steep 5 minutes,
then transfer to primary fermenter filled with 3 gallons cold
water. Pitch yeast when cool. This fermented in 9 days at which
time I added 3/4 cup of corn sugar and bottled. It came out with a
nice beer flavor, that leaves your lips numb by the time you finish
the bottle. Good luck!
Mike Glinski
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 96 11:03:00 P
From: Steve Shaw C3113 <sshaw@kpt.nuwc.navy.mil>
Subject: Re: Chili Beer
Hi all I'm a long time lurker, thanks!
In HBD #1972 Scott Rudolph wrote:
>I would like to bottle something similar to Cave Creek chili beer; I
>understand it's a matter of putting a pepper in each of the bottles when
>bottling. The only thing that concerns me is sanitation. Has anyone done
>this? I think I remember reading that the peppers are best sanitized by
a
>short microwave bath. I'm not real comfortable with that, but will
probably
>do it unless someone else has a better suggestion.
I have not made a chili beer but have enjoyed many made by my
friend Mrs. Green, Brewmistress. She has made several excellent
chili beers and tells me first she uses serrano peppers because
they are small and are easier to get in the bottle. Bring about an
inch of water to a boil and drop in the peppers. Boil the peppers for
three minutes then place in the bottles. Then fill bottles as normal.
She said it takes about three months to season the chili beer to
get the full effect of the chili's. Hope this helps.
Steve Shaw
sshaw@tscnet.com
http://tscnet.com/pages/sshaw/index.html
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 11:38:36 -0800
From: Kelly Jones <kejones@ptdcs2.intel.com>
Subject: Re: Copper in beer
OK, so John Palmer has weighed in with his informed judgement of why copper in
beer _should_ not be a problem. Now, does anyone have any real data?
Measurements of copper concentration in bitter wort and/or finished beer,
brewed under a variety of conditions? Until we have such data, it would be
wise to add another possibility to Jeff Benjamin's list, namely:
6) Copper in beer _is_ a health problem, but one which we simply have chosen
(for sake of convenience) to ignore.
Kelly
Portland, OR
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 14:50:16 -0500
From: "Christopher M. Goll" <cgoll@cc-mail.pica.army.mil>
Subject: Thanks; Yeast from Kona Brewing
Hello all -
First, I would like to thank everyone who responded to my question
regarding maximum grain capacity in a 5 gal Gott. Answers ranged from
10 to a whopping 16 lbs! Because this was my first all-grain batch, I
stuck to the low end and used 10 lbs pale ale and 1 lb crystal. I was
able to do a two-step infusion mash with some room to spare, and ended
up with about 6 gallons of 1.057 wort in the fermentor. I would guess
that anything over 13 lbs would start to be a real PITA.
Second, a friend just returned from vacation in Hawaii and brought
back a Golden Ale and a Pale Ale from Kona Brewing Co. The Pale is
apparently bottled conditioned. Does anyone know if this is the yeast
used for fermentation, or is it a lager bottling yeast?
How is yeast removed and replaced with a bottling yeast? I'm told
that Kona Brewing is a relatively new and small operation, so I'm not
sure if they would be using any complicated centrifuge or filtration
processes. Any ideas??
Thanks again,
Chris
cgoll@pica.army.mil
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 15:01:46 -0500
From: KennyEddy@aol.com
Subject: SUDS Mash Temp Calcs - "Thermal Mass of Mash Vessel"
SUDS 4.0 has a basic but handy mash-water temperature calculator, which
includes a "thermal mass of mash tun" figure. I'm not 100% sure (maybe 97%)
but I believe this number is the "equivalent gallons of water", in other
words, the number of gallons of water at the starting temperature that would
absorb the same amount of heat as the mash tun does. This ends up converting
into a temperature "fudge factor" which is added to the "ideal" strike water
temperature.
If you're using SUDS and would like to figure the "thermal mass" of your tun,
you'll have to do "an experiment" first. Prepare a typical volume of strike
water at your typical temperature. If you don't have "typicals" use 1.25
quarts per pound of grain at 170 degrees as a starting point. Pour this
heated water into the mash tun, let it equalize a few minutes (covered), then
take the temperature. The temperature will have dropped a few degrees from
the original strike water. Then use the following formula:
"thermal mass" = Vs * (Ts - Tf) / (Tf - Tm)
Vs = volume (gal) of strike water
Ts = strike water temperature
Tf = final (settled) temperature
Tm = starting mash tun temperature (usually same as ambient)
I came up with 0.184 for my Coleman Drinking Water 5. SUDS starts you off
with 0.15, so this is not terribly far off.
Please note that the number of degrees "fudge factor" is NOT constant for all
striking temperatures, although if you always do single step infusions at
about the same temperature you'll be close enough to just add the "drop" to
the "ideal" strike temperature. However, if you do different mash schedules,
you'll find less of a drop at the lower initial strike temperatures than at
higher temps. Using the thermal mass figure along with SUDS will take this
into account.
Ken Schwartz
KennyEddy@aol.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 13:03:02 +8
From: "Kevin Imel" <kimel@moscow.com>
Subject: Mashing and specialty malts
Greetings!
Having been brewing all grain batches for the last year I was
intrigued a few weeks back when the opinion/idea was posted about
adding the crystal and other specialty malts toward the end of the
mash. The idea that the crystal/specialty malts would
contain little in the way of fermentables and "mashables" seemed to
be logical so I decided to try it on my next batch.
So, last sunday I tossed everything BUT the 2 lb of 40L crystal, the
4 oz roast barley, and 8 oz chocolate malt into the mashing pot and
off I went. Yup, sure enough, the mash went to completion (using the
iodine test...checked it three times to make sure it was done) a lot
faster than it had before, by about 45 minutes. I then tossed
in the specialty grains and just for fun ran the iodine
test once more which indicated starch was again present in the mash.
I then brought the temp back up and mashed away until completion yet
again which took about an hour.
Specifics: Mash schedule was 30 minutes at 120 F, and 150 F until
mash was completed as per the iodine test. Initial mash consisted of the
following: 4 lb 2 Row, 1 lb quick oats, 1.5 lb Munich dark, 1 lb
flaked barley. Mash was stirred and temperature monitored at 15
minute intervals. Mash was always stirred throughly before taking a
sample for testing. Test samples were cooled to room temp before adding
iodine.
As an aside: the yield this time was my best yet...I gained 6 points
moving from 27 to 33.
So, here are the questions:
1) What am I missing here? I guess since nothing is absolute that at
least some mashables would be residual in the specialty malts; but,
enough so that the mash would take an additional hour?
2) Is there really anything to be gained by adding the specialty
malts at the end (some people even mentioned adding them at mashout)
if there are still some mashables present? Aren't you shoot yourself
in the foot here by "throwing away" some potential sugars?
Private e-mail is fine and I will post a consensus.
Thanks in advance,
Kevin
___________________________
Kevin Imel
kimel@moscow.com
Palouse, Washinington USA
"The only way to truely fail is to fail to try"
For a copy of my pgp public key send message with subject "SEND PGP KEY"
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 1996 07:48:33 +10
From: "Dave Draper" <david.draper@mq.edu.au>
Subject: Is it Beer?
Dear Friends, John Varady and Paul VanSlyke appeared not to
appreciate Domenick Venezia's negative comments on the post by John
Carey a few digest ago. I have to side with Domenick here. John C.
appeared pretty clearly to have simply come in here, looked around in
only the most cursory way, and then shot from the hip. Given the
tone of John C.'s post, one might have expected far more flamage (but
not from Domenick, who is too much of a gentlehuman for such things).
I thought Domenick's comments were measured, to the point, and
polite--even good-natured and funny.
Disclaimer: I consider Domenick to be a friend but would not hesitate
to disagree with him here in HBDland if I thought it justified.
Cheers, Dave in Sydney
"...if you can eat it, you can also drink it." ---Pierre Jelenc
- ---
***************************************************************************
David S. Draper, Earth Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney NSW Australia
Email: david.draper@mq.edu.au WWW: http://audio.apana.org.au/ddraper/home.html
...I'm not from here, I just live here...
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 13:25:36 -0800
From: Alex Aaron <alex@checkmaster.com>
Subject: Chili Beer
On 2/27/96 Scott Rudolph <rudy@execpc.com> asked about chili beer
> I would like to bottle something similar to Cave Creek chili beer; I
> understand it's a matter of putting a pepper in each of the bottles when
> bottling. The only thing that concerns me is sanitation. Has anyone done
> this? I think I remember reading that the peppers are best sanitized by a
> short microwave bath. I'm not real comfortable with that, but will probably
> do it unless someone else has a better suggestion.
>
> Thanks for any ideas.
> Scott
I bottled a batch of pale ale over 2 years ago, with Serrano Chilis,
and garlic. I placed a single whole chili just rinsed in tap water in 24
of the bottles. In another 24 I placed a peeled clove of garlic. For the
first 2 months the flavors were there but not overpowering. The 3rd to
6th months flavor was really heavy but drinkable. After that the beer
was used mainly for cooking. A couple of the bottles survived 2 years
sampled a chili one, real strong chili flavor.
No problems with infections or off flavors. I don't think a germ could
handle the double whammy of beer and chili or garlic.
The recipe below is what I used.
#9 Love Potion #9 5Gal
1lb 20~ Crystal Malt
7lbs Light ME Telefords
1oz Halletuer Hop Pellet Boil 60min
1oz Halletuer Hop Pellet Boil 30min
.5tsp Irish Moss 15 Min
1 oz Willemette Hop Pellet Finish 0min
1 Yeast Chico Ale HBM
1oz Willemette Hop Pellet Dry Hop Secondary
.75cup Priming sugar
Used blow off tube w/glass primary.
P. SG 1.054 7PA
S. SG 1.018 2PA Rack Secondary 1oz Willemette Hop Pellet
Dry Hop Secondary
TG 1.012 1.5PA Added serranos and garlic to bottles 5.5%
************************************************************
* Alex Aaron *
* alex@checkmaster.com *
* http://www.instachecks.com/ *
* http://www.checkmaster.com/internetchecks/alex/ *
************************************************************
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 14:19:46 -0700
From: Brent Smith <BLS0456@gwgate.mcdata.com>
Subject: Homebrew Digest #1971 (February 28, 1996) -Reply
Thanks!
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 96 15:20:23 CST
From: korz@pubs.ih.att.com
Subject: Channelling
Rob writes (regarding the stirring of the grain bed):
>The stirring also counter-acts channelling.
Here comes this thread again... I would like some soil scientists or
civil engineers (heck... I'll ask my Dad tonight) if stirring reduces
or increases channelling. I have not had any classes on this topic
per se, but I have had enough physics, brewed enough and observed enough
grain beds to have a pretty solid opinion on this subject. I contend
that stirring the grain bed increases channelling.
This is how I justify this. Consider water running slowly through the
grain bed. Now here comes this rake or spoon that cuts a gorge into
the grain bed. The gorge disappears as quickly as it appeared because
there is a layer of water on top of the grain bed. What flowed into
the gorge? Grain? Water?
I would say, from observation it was some grain, but it was mostly water.
Channelling, for those who don't know, but still haven't paged down,
is sort of like a 3-dimensional river that runs through something (soil,
a gravel filter, a grain bed, whatever). I theorize that cutting through
the grain bed actually creates a "path of least resistance" which subsequent
sparge water runs through. Anybody willing to agree with me on this?
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz@pubs.att.com
Copyright 1996 Al Korzonas
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 16:57:08 -0600
From: 00bkpickeril@bsuvc.bsu.edu (Brian Pickerill)
Subject: Re: What's Brewing on Your Macintosh? /BrewMeister Mac FreeWare
>>ARE there only 4 of us Mac users(?)
>No way! There are many Mac users out in BrewLand.
Right on, bro. :)
>There is no reason to
>believe that the majority of HBD readers are PC cusses!
Watch out! I used to use one of those "PC cusses." Nothing _wrong_ with
using a PC in fact the point of this whole Mac thread (except the part
about Mac users whining about not being able to read the judge guide) is
that there is more and better software for the PC, at least at this point
in time, and when looking at shareware brewing stuff. That said, for me at
least, using a Macintosh is much preferable to using a PC and the lack of
brewing software ain't enough to change that! After all, I can run ALL of
the PC software I want on my Mac. I just would really like to have some
REAL Macintosh software. (If you use a Mac, you know what I mean by
that.)
>Don't polls say that
>a majority of internet users are Mac people? As far as one can believe polls.
I, being a survey researcher, quasi-scientific kind of guy, :) would
estimate that there are at least 1000 Mac-using homebrewers out there, but
you are right that that estimate wouldn't be worth much. I arrive at this
crude estimate by noting that there are some 20,000 homebrewers. If only
half of them have computers (conservative nowadays, especially when you
consider that the gender of both computer users and especially homebrewers
is weighted strongly in favor of men) then it makes sense to assume that at
least 10% of those have Macintoshes.
> I think the same proportion of HBD readers are Mac users too. We just might
>not think we need brewing software. Some one should do a poll(but not me!).
No, what really needs to happen is that some really cool Mac brewing
software still needs to be written. I would volunteer but that would put
me into the group of people who have promised this on the HBD before. You
see, it's not the easiest thing to do to write great software. :) This
discussion has come up more than a few times in the 2 years+ that I've been
reading HBD, though probably not this much.
What do I do? Well, I've used several approaches to solving all the
calculation and documentation that's involved in homebrewing. Mostly, I've
used a hypercard stack called WineMaker's notebook to keep my brewing log,
and I've used Glenn Tinseth's Excel spreadsheet for doing some of the
computations. I have SUDSW on my Power Mac and on my 5300cs PowerBook.
SUDS runs great on these machines, but I've not paid for SUDS and I have
only used it to check some numbers. I dont' want to rely on it as a long
term solution. (BTW, the Windoze version of Michael Jackson's Beer Hunter
CDROM runs great on the Power Mac, too. I borrowed it from a friend. I
want my own copy now, but I'd buy the Mac version. :)
NEWS FLASH!!!
I just got a copy of BREWMEISTER via email from Lance Skidmore. Lance was
great for sending and resending this too me. I posted BREWMEISTER to the
infomac archives today and it should be propagaged to all the infomac
mirrors within a couple of days. I tried to put it on sierra directly, but
of course it's not allowing this. Anyone know how to post this on sierra?
Anyone want it for a web page? BrewMeister is FREEWARE. I'm looking
forward to checking out brewmeister in some detail, comparing it to SUDS,
ect... (It will likely come up a bit short, but it looks to be better than
any Mac software that I've used so far.)
BrewMeister appears to be geared more to the all-grain homebrewer, rather
than the extract brewer. Calculates original and final gravities,
potential alchohol, IBUs, and Color. Looks pretty decent in light of the
lack of other Mac alternatives.
Cheers,
- --Brian Pickerill, Muncie, IN <00bkpickeril@mail.bsu.edu>
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1974, 03/02/96
*************************************
-------
