Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2089
This file received at Hops.Stanford.EDU 1996/07/01 PDT
Homebrew Digest Monday, 1 July 1996 Number 2089
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Shawn Steele, Digest Janitor
Thanks to Rob Gardner for making the digest happen!
Contents:
pitching rates (Kyle R Roberson)
the clever tongue (robtrish@mindlink.bc.ca (Rob Lauriston))
Calculating Efficiency (ndd3@psu.edu (Nicholas Dahl))
Looking for a cider recipe (Brad Manbeck)
10 gal coolers -- easy & cheap ("David K. Schafer")
headspace, etc. (Steve.Robinson@analog.com (Steve Robinson))
Boil Over No More!!!!!!! (aesoph@ncemt1.ctc.com (Aesoph, Michael))
maltose syrup (Gregory King)
Beer Postcards ("Goodale, Daniel CPT 4ID DISCOM")
Message size,Reinheitsgebot,wild hops,Clinit*st ("David R. Burley")
warm weather brewing (Gregory King)
Infected Brew Update ("Bessette, Bob")
Re: end of the esters thread... ("Tracy Aquilla")
Celis Grand Clone (Bart Thielges)
Iodine T*st and Celluose ("David R. Burley")
mashing and enzymes (Gregory King)
First all grain batch complete! (Brian S Kuhl)
Re: te*t (shawn@aob.org (Shawn Steele))
Radiator hose for RIMS (Tim Martin)
Re: headspace, etc. ("Robert A. Uhl")
"Hops in Spaaaace" ("Decker, Robin E.")
wines/iodophor/more on mashing/ancient beer/140F rest/flavour vs. taste (korz@pubs.ih.lucent.com)
NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESSES
homebrew@aob.org (SUBMISSIONS only)
homebrew-digest-request@aob.org (for REQUESTS only)
Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew@aob.org
(Articles are published in the order they are received.)
Send UNSUBSCRIBE and all other requests, ie, address change, etc.,
to homebrew-digest-request@aob.org, BUT PLEASE NOTE that if
you subscribed via BEER-L, you must unsubscribe by sending a
one line e-mail to listserv@ua1vm.ua.edu that says: UNSUB BEER-L
This list service is now being provided by majordomo@aob.org, so some
of the commands may have changed. For technical problems send
e-mail to the Digest Janitor, shawn@aob.org.
If your account is being deleted, please be courteous and unsubscribe first.
ARCHIVES & OTHER INFORMATION
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 or visit
http://alpha.rollanet.org on the Web. Othere information is available by
e-mail from info@aob.org and on the AHA's web site at http://www.aob.org/aob.
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 at /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. Some
archives are available via majordomo@aob.org.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Kyle R Roberson <roberson@beta.tricity.wsu.edu>
Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 22:25:59 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: pitching rates
Andy Walsh quotes an optimum cells per ml rate of about
1.5e7. I think that we should be careful in specifying
cells per ml of WHAT. Most books quote in the 16e6 cells
per ml of WORT range. This e7 number sounds like cells
per ml of slurry or concentrate range. Wyeast has yeast
counts like this in their pouches, but after going through
the centrifuge (or whatever they use).
You need about a liter of concentrated yeast per bbl of
wort, less of yeast slurry. This is why homebrewers usually
underpitch rather than make the effort to ranch up to
commercial pitching rates. A lager needs about a gallon of
actively fermenting starter for a 5 gallon batch to attain
commercial pitching rates.
Keep quoting the literature, I can't get my hands on the
technical stuff very easily. Anybody at "Holy Stephen"
in a position to OCR articles onto a web site?!
Kyle
P.S. Those sending in complaints that the "administrative"
messages don't acknowledge their increasingly strident
request to terminate this fine forum are providing unwelcome
comic relief. If they thought that they were getting too much
mail before, ... Maybe the HBD header should be deleted, since
it obviously can't be read.
------------------------------
From: robtrish@mindlink.bc.ca (Rob Lauriston)
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 96 02:01 PDT
Subject: the clever tongue
Al K. wrote in HBD # 2086:
"You cannot taste esters. Bottom line. Your tongue only senses sweet, salty,
sour and bitter (well, you can add astringency and the heat from alcohol, I
suppose). It cannot discern things like esters. If you had a cold and your
nose was clogged, you (nor I) could not tell the difference between an ale
and a lager that had the same OG, FG and were bittered with the same hops.
"I should add that the tongue can sense the slickness of diacetyl and there
are some effects of flavour hopping that are sensed in the mouth, but I can't
seem to put them into words."
It can be useful to distinguish between taste _per se_ and aroma, but
doesn't the somewhat careless common usage include the effect of aroma on
taste?
More important, I'd be interested in some discussion of exactly what the
tongue can perceive. The "sweet, salty, sour and bitter" categories are the
generally accepted descriptions of the tongues taste receptors, but as Al
hints, tasting gets much more involved in practice.
Lets draw an analogy with eyesight. The light receptors we have are rods
for black and white, and three types of cones which sense three different
combinations of the primary colours. (clarification invited <g>). Like the
tongue, our eyes have only four types of receptors, yet no one would ever
claim that we could see only four things.
Even setting aside aroma, isn't the mouth capable of sensing a very wide
variety of complicated combinations which are flavour? While I can
understand how the receptors in the eye combine simple inputs to generate
what we see, I have a hard time imagining how "sweet, salty, sour and
bitter" can be combined to account for the difference between apricots,
chocolate, basil and blue cheese; nor can I imagine that the differences
beyond "sweet, salty, sour and bitter" are all in the nose. But I can be
quite obtuse. Can anyone help me? Are my mouth and mind ruined (AMMAMR)?
What about the physical sensations of temperature or the prickliness of CO2?
Any comments?
- -- Rob in Vernon, B.C.
------------------------------
From: ndd3@psu.edu (Nicholas Dahl)
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 06:49:24 -0500
Subject: Calculating Efficiency
I've got a question about calculating efficiency. I read in HBD#2088 that
David Burley got 89% extraction on a recent brew. This is what he said:
My efficiency was 89%
extraction, based on Pap's numbers in above ref with the OG of 1.060 for 10
pounds of 6- row american malt plus 12 oz cooked barley in 5.5 gals.
(10*35 + 0.75*30)/5.5 = 67.7 so 67.7/60 = 88.6%
Approximate alcohol = (1.060 - 1.015)* 105 = 4.7% w/w = 4.7*1.25 = 5.9% v/v
from C. Papazian, New Complete Joy of Homebrewing, Avon p.47
Is the number "1.060" supposed to be the gravity before the wort is boiled,
or the gravity of the wort before yeast is pitched? Could somebody
straighten me out???
Truth in brewing,
Nick
------------------------------
From: Brad Manbeck <bjm@roisysinc.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 08:10:58 -0500
Subject: Looking for a cider recipe
I am hoping to locate a good cider recipe. Both my wife and I like
Woodpecker Cider, although she's not too fond of my ale homebrews. So I'm
hoping if I can include her in the process with a cider she likes I'll
convert her to a true homebrew lover. Thanks in advance for your help.
Brad
------------------------------
From: "David K. Schafer" <DSCHAFER@museum.nysed.gov>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 09:09:52 EDT
Subject: 10 gal coolers -- easy & cheap
Hey there everyone,
Following the discussion on 10 gal coolers, I saw something at
Wal-mart (what a frightening experience) the other day that may
interest folks.
They are selling 10 gal (actually, 48 quart) Coleman Coolers for
only $14.99 [originally $19.99 -- what a deal!!! ; ) ] These
particular coolers also have a side drainplug that could be used in
creating a lauter tun as well.
Don't know the quality of Coleman coolers, but the price seemed great
compared to other prices people have mentioned here lately.
Happy shopping and keep that American economy alive and well!!!
(aka. "what's good for Wal-Mart is good for America" ??!!!!)
Good Brewing!
Dave
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
David Schafer Cultural Resource Survey Program
dschafer@museum.nysed.gov New York State Museum
518/473-1503 3118 Cultural Education Center
FAX 518/473-8496 Albany, NY 12230
------------------------------
From: Steve.Robinson@analog.com (Steve Robinson)
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 96 09:29:20 EDT
Subject: headspace, etc.
This is of only marginal relevance, so I apologize up front for the BW.
I was reflecting on the fact that a British pint glass would hold a 16 oz.
U.S. pint and still leave room for headspace. This made me wonder how the
U.S. wound up using such bizarre (non-Imperial AND non-metric) units of
liquid measure. Does anyone out there know?
On the subject of how a posting and a reply can show up in the same digest,
I believe that some people subscribe to the non-digested form of the HBD.
This would allow them to post a reply as soon as the original posting
reached them, no?
Steve Robinson
No. Andover, MA
steve.robinson@analog.com
------------------------------
From: aesoph@ncemt1.ctc.com (Aesoph, Michael)
Date: 01 Jul 96 10:42:40 EDT
Subject: Boil Over No More!!!!!!!
Dear Collective:
No matter how big your pot is for boiling wort, it always seems to boil
over!!! The usual remedy for this is frantically removing the pot from
the burner and trying to reduce the temperature on the stove another 5
degrees or so to keep it from happening again - good luck. I was brewing
with a chef freind of mine recently who instructed me on the proper
technique to keep pots from boiling over. Just blow on it!!!!!! The
stuff on top trying to boil over is just bubbles, and the thermal shock
from blowing on them will burst them and keep them from boiling over. He
used to use a small fan blowing just over the lid of his pots to keep
them from boiling over - and he used to make 20-30 gallon batches of
pizza sauce!!! Another secret for the home brewer!!!!!!
==================================================
Michael D. Aesoph Associate Engineer
==================================================
------------------------------
From: Gregory King <GKING@ARSERRC.Gov>
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 1996 11:41:06 -0500 (EST)
Subject: maltose syrup
Dear Collective,
I just bought an excellent book called "Brew Your Own Real Ale at Home" by
Wheeler and Protz, which contains recipes of more than 100 ales from the UK.
These aren't the exact recipes, of course, since commercial breweries are
reluctant to release this information. However, the breweries often will
divulge the types of malts, adjuncts, and hops that go into their brews
without revealing their relative proportions. This information, along with
OG, FG, IBUs, alcohol content, color, Protz's taste buds and Wheeler's com-
puter program are enough to put together educated guesses of recipes for
these brews. The types of yeast used are not given, so there is still some
experimentation to be done by the homebrewer. I'd recommend that any fan of
English bitters and pale ales take a look at this book. [Book review mode off]
One of the adjuncts called for in some of the recipes is maltose syrup, which
I am unfamiliar with. Do any of you know if this is available in the US?
If not, any ideas on what a good substitute might be?
TIA,
Greg King
gking@arserrc.gov
------------------------------
From: "Goodale, Daniel CPT 4ID DISCOM" <GoodaleD@HOOD-EMH3.ARMY.MIL>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 11:12:00 -0500
Subject: Beer Postcards
Dear Collective,
For those of you who still use the US Postal system,
here is a quick idea for postcards. Instead of tossing out that
six pack carrier, carefully dissect the side panels out and use
them as postcards. The cardboard color backsides are fine
for a black pen or you can glue (spray adhesive works the
best) a piece of paper for a more pen friendly writing surface.
The cards will be bigger than the standard postcard size so
the post office will require a $00.32 stamp (when is the post-
master general going to come out with a series of stamps
dedicated to the great beer styles of the world?). You can
send a Coors Light postcard to the people you don't like
and reserve your favorites to your great beer loving
friends. Most breweries invest a lot of money for a good
looking product and it is a shame to waste it.
Daniel Goodale (yes that is my real name)
Biohazard Brewing Company
Sure it's gonna kill ya, but who wants to live forever?
------------------------------
From: "David R. Burley" <103164.3202@CompuServe.COM>
Date: 01 Jul 96 12:15:16 EDT
Subject: Message size,Reinheitsgebot,wild hops,Clinit*st
Brewsters:
What's next? Message size appears to be clipped to 10,000 bytes. Also, the
preamble to both parts of my recent submission was garbled. And worst of all
Part 2 came before Part 1. I'm really jealous because Tracy Aquilla's excellent
summary on esters had parts1 and 2 in their proper order. Where are the good
old days?
Seriously, I guess the troubles we are having shows just how difficult Shawn's
job is and I for one thank him. However, I ( as would most of us) would
appreciate hearing from you, Shawn, when you are making changes, so we can
adjust to them and not have to re-send messages. Also, as my most recent
posting
indicates, the automatic scanner you are using is not checking for gobbledy
gook
and something screwed up my preamble.. All I know is that it left here OK, but
that it was a file transfer (since I had to break it into two parts), not
e-mail.
- --------------------------------------------------
the preamble to my last post Temperature and Saccharification Part 1 didn't
contain much except my greeting and the subject matter, mentioning Gregory King
and George DePiro. Part 2 said"In a M&bs reference I published here it said
that beta amylase is more stable in the mash than in pure solution. Possibly
because they are complexed with starch and sugars?"
- -------------------------------------------------
Mike Foster asks how the Germans prime their beer and still keep to the
Reinheitsgebot.(which according to a recent German contributor, is,as a result
of the EC integration of laws, no longer the law in Germany, but is a guideline
forced on the breweries by the consumers and by the equivalent of the USFDA.)
They force carbonate in some cases. The only requirement is that the CO2 comes
from the brewing process. They use krausen( a newly fermenting beer) in some
cases, sterilized lauter cast-off in some cases or like some of the weiss
beers, sugars from various sources.
- -------------------------------------------------
Jim Anderson asks about experimenting with wild hops. My first comment is be
sure they ARE wild hops. Then as Daniel Boone ( or was it Davy Crockett?)
said,"Be sure you are right, then go ahead." Also, drying the hops can be a
pain and can lead to a loss of activity ( let alone begetting lots of mold and
mildew) if not properly carried out.
Papazian ( I think) in one or more of his books suggests using your clothes
dryer. Tie the hops up in a pillow case and dry away. Keep the temperature
between 130F and 150F( Malting and Brewing Science p. 309). The only
disadvantage is that your family's clothes may smell like they live in an oast
house. But then you can do like I do when my wife complains "This place smells
like a brewery.", I say "That's because it is!" I think I remember reading
somewhere that there is about a ten to one ratio between fresh and dry hops.
So, 10 oz of fresh cones will produce one oz of dried cones. Pick away! Please
let us know what happens. If your results are OK and your supply is really
unlimited, well, spread the wealth around....
- -------------------------------------------------
John Coopens asks about a non-Clinit*st sugar kit. He tried to test sucrose
with a peroxidase based test and got no response and asks why. He wants to use
a test method like this as a substitute for a broken hydrometer.
I am not familiar with this test nor do I know how it functions, but that won't
stop me from giving you my opinion.
First, based on the composition of the test, apparently it tests for the
oxidation of sugars by peroxide and not cupric ion and I suppose other
oxidisable matter, since it contains a vegetable-based peroxidase enzyme which
will catalyse a peroxide based reaction. It will possibly have a different
profile than the Fehling's test since it may oxidise things the cupric ion
won't
or vice versa. I guess the A. Niger mold (amylase?) is there to convert any
starchy substance to sugar which can then be oxidized? Or is it an indicator?
Is this test for glucose in urine or something else?
Try your test with some malt extract or do a quick small mash of a little malt
or the next time you make beer with some of your wort. Frankly I am puzzled by
the list of ingredients in the test - it seems incomplete to me. Does anyone
else have an answer?
Secondly, in my earlier post, I commented on the sugars that would be indicated
by the Clinit*st. It will not indicate the presence of sucrose, but will
indicate maltose, glucose, lactose, mannose- the aldoses and ketoses, but not
ketones.
The Clinit*st method is not a substitute for a hydrometer, since it will only
measure fementable sugar and the unfermentables will be not be indicated. If
you
dilute the wort to get into the range of the test which is 2% max you will
typically have to dilute quantitatively by about 2 or 3 times, which is no
problem. However your reading could be twenty to thirty percent too low, if
you convert your sugar readings to SG, since you will not have taken into
account the soluble unfermentables ( or should I say the non-oxidizables) in
your estimates. However, this t*st taken pre-fementation on the wort and
converted to an SG can be combined with a hydrometer readng on the same wort to
give you an estimate of the FG by taking the difference between the two.
A good substitute for a hydrometer - If you have a good balance available that
will weigh 10 grams to the second decimal place or 100 g to the first, you can
calibrate a container with water and weigh your wort to get an SG. A container
such as a testube or other container with a small mouth works best. Look up
pyncnometer if you want to see the really best way to do this. I do this when I
am making wine and the fruit interferes or when I am dealing with fermenting
liquids which have bubbles and screw up the hydrometer reading. It really
works!
Until Shawn tells me differently, I will use T*st where * = e in all cases,
since there is an error in his text reader. I spent too much time returning and
modifying messages, thinking that if the word t*st was contained in another
word
it would be OK. It wasn't.
- ---------------------------------------------------
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
------------------------------
From: Gregory King <GKING@ARSERRC.Gov>
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 1996 12:36:49 -0500 (EST)
Subject: warm weather brewing
Dear Collective,
I built a foamboard fermentation chiller designed by Ken Schwartz, and it
really
works beautifully. I've got a porter that's been happily fermenting at 65^F
while ambient temperatures have been fluctuating between 70 and 85. (An added
bonus is that the beer is kept out of the light.)
The chiller plans may be downloaded from http://users.aol.com/kennyeddy.
I'd like to thank Ken Schwartz for answering a nearly infinite stream of
questions from me regarding construction of the chiller, electrical wiring,
plumbing, and all-grain brewing.
I'd also like to thank the rest of you (i.e. the Collective) for sharing your
brewing knowledge here in HBD, which allows newbies and intermediate brewers to
really zip through that learning curve a lot faster.
Cheers,
Greg King
gking@arserrc.gov
------------------------------
From: "Bessette, Bob" <bob.bessette@lamrc.com>
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 96 09:23:00 PDT
Subject: Infected Brew Update
Fellow Brewers,
I posted an article probably 2 months ago to the HBD mentioning the fact
that my last 3 brews had been infected and that I was fairly sure that it
was the dry hopping with hop flowers that was causing it. Well, 2 batches
later I have not had an infection since leaving out the dry hopping. So I am
fairly convinced that it was the dry hopping that was introducing the
infection. I got a lot of suggestions from brewers to try a hop tea where I
boiled the hops prior to adding to the secondary to kill off anything that
may be on the hop flowers. Then I would pour the liquid into the secondary
after it has cooled. This should introduce the hop aroma I am looking for in
dry hopping without the possibility of contamination. I plan on trying this
hop tea with my next brew but am extremely happy that I have narrowed down
what was causing my problem. Thanks to all who responded to my "infected"
post. Losing a batch is so depressing, let alone 3 batches. I'm glad to say
that my beer is back and I'm lovin it...
Bob Bessette
bob.bessette@lamrc.com
- ------------------------------
------------------------------
From: "Tracy Aquilla" <aquilla@salus.med.uvm.edu>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 96 13:13:43 CDT
Subject: Re: end of the esters thread...
In Digest #2087:
awalsh@world.net (Andy Walsh) wrote:
>I discussed this ester thing with some brewers I know (from Hahn here in
>Sydney), and they told me "aeration produces esters".
Well that makes me feel a little better! Thanks for the reference.
>Other parameters:
>high pitching rate increased esters (opposite of what I said before)
>temperature increased esters.
Surprising, although 'high' is admittedly somewhat ambiguous.
>So, after all that, I guess I agree with Tracy when he says you cannot
>really generalise on this issue. Yeasts will behave differently, and unless
>you are very familiar with a particular strain, the affect of aeration on
>ester production will be indeterminate. The only factor that all studies
>agree on, is that an increase in temperature will increase ester production.
...and increased wort gravity?
>So, after all that, we're none the wiser!
Actually, I think I've learned quite a bit from the discussion, but I'm glad
to see it finally wind down.
Tracy
------------------------------
From: Bart Thielges <bart.thielges@xilinx.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 10:27:15 -0700
Subject: Celis Grand Clone
Hello HBDers -
I've been trying to emulate Celis Grand Cru for a few batches so far and
came reasonably close in the last experiment. The following recipe is the
result of suggestions and various tidbits of info from other homebrewers
interesting in emulating this recipe.
The batch that I got differs from the real thing in at least two ways that
my amateur palate detects : Its hoppier than Celis and also higher
alcohol. In the next batch, I'll back off on the bittering hops and sugar.
The batch I tasted was the one with 6 tsp of coriander.
Here's the recipe :
for 14.5 gallons wort :
29 lbs pale malt (USA domestic)
1 lb carapils
3 lbs Belgian Biscuit malt
4.5 lbs granulated sugar
3 tsp Irish moss
(can you say "full mash tun" ?)
mash temperature was about 151 F for about 70 minutes
boil schedule :
62 minutes 2 oz 5.6% Cascade whole hops
62 2 oz Curacao orange peel
32 2 oz 5.6% Cascade
32 3 tsp Irish moss
15 2 oz 3.3% Saaz plugs
10 1.5 oz 3.3% Saaz plugs
5 1.5 oz 3.3% Saaz plugs
This was split evenly into 3 five gallon glass carboys and innoculated with
Wyeast Belgian Wit yeast that had been stepped up to one liter the previous
day. In addition, ground coriander was added to two of the batches. One
batch got 2 teaspoons, the other got 6 teaspoons - both in the form of
a solution of boiling water with the coriander added for 1 minute. The
remaining batch had no coriander (the "control").
Original gravity was about 1.084 at 60 F
Final gravity was about 1.014 at 60 F
Cheers,
Bart
Brewing equipment destroyed in this experiment - 1 hydrometer.
------------------------------
From: "David R. Burley" <103164.3202@CompuServe.COM>
Date: 01 Jul 96 13:51:22 EDT
Subject: Iodine T*st and Celluose
Brewsters:
(*=e, Shawn is the text reader fixed yet?)
Regarding my recent post on extending high temperature hold and my speculation
that the iodine test could be the cause of the idea that saccharification was
finished in 15 min, Spencer W. Thomas commented to me privately that the
cellulose in cell walls and in the barley husks give a dark blue color reaction
with iodine. So I thought I'd better comment on this to HBD readers.
I remember seeing this comment in some home brew books, but I don't believe it,
in the absence of expert references (does anyone have any?). This idea may have
come about because most paper and cotton material is sized (coated) with a
dilute solution of starch during its production. This reaction is very
sensitive to starch, since the complex has a very high absorption coefficient.
Starch is composed of amylose and amylopectin, typically in the ratio of 1:4 or
1:5. It is the amylose which absorbs 18-20% of its weigh, as determined by
potentiometric titration, and is responsible for the dark blue typical reaction
between iodine and starch. The blue product appears to be an inclusion compound
in which iodine molecules fit into central open spaces of a helix of C6 units
that constitute the amylose molecule. Amylopectin gives a red to purple color
and absorbs only 0.5 to 0.8 percent of iodine. Iodine titration of whole starch
may be used to determine the relative amounts of the two components. Excerpted
from "Chemistry of Organic Compounds", 2nd ed. Noller (1957) W.B. Saunders,
pub.
Although this is no proof, on reading from the same text about celluose, there
is no indication that such a reaction between iodine and celluose exists. Also,
other than the HB texts, I have never heard of this. Which, again, is no proof.
This reaction of iodine and amylose seems very specific and it is unlikely that
celluose would give a similar reaction or this t*st would not be touted as a
t*st for starch.
Try out this t*st. Take a piece of thoroughly washed cotton ( maybe boil it in
water several times) and put some iodine on it. In my experiments years ago, I
do not recall getting the dark blue-black reaction typical of starch, but
rather the yellow-brown color of iodine.
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
------------------------------
From: Gregory King <GKING@ARSERRC.Gov>
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 1996 14:10:58 -0500 (EST)
Subject: mashing and enzymes
In HBD #2088 David R. Burley <103164.3202@CompuServe.COM> addressed my
question about why some brewers perform a mash step at 140^F:
>Resting at a temperature just
>below the gelatinization temperature allows the enzymes to be focussed on the
>pre-existing gelatinized starches, I suppose. Gregory, do you have any hard
>evidence that a rest at 140F improves the extraction efficiency?
I don't have any hard evidence on this. I used empirical reasoning, i.e.
brewers wouldn't waste their time with a rest at 140^F unless they got better
results with this step than without it.
Something else to consider: I was reading somewhere (it might have been
Miller's most recent book) that there are other enzymes (e.g. glucanase) in the
mash that degrade quickly at or above 150^F, so maybe the 140^F rest allows
them to do their thing before being destroyed.
Greg King
gking@arserrc.gov
------------------------------
From: Brian S Kuhl <Brian_S_Kuhl@ccm.fm.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 96 09:37:00 PDT
Subject: First all grain batch complete!
Hi all,
I completed me first batch of all grain brew. All went well, but it took
a long time. I'll get the time down next time though. Here's the
recipe...
Sister Star of the Sun by Dave Brockington
* 14# Hugh Baird English Pale malted barley
* 1/4# Hugh Baird 135L crystal malt
* 1/4# Great Western malted wheat
* 3 oz Chinook hops (60 minutes)
* 2 oz East Kent Golding hops (15 minutes)
* 2 oz imported Fuggle hops (while chilling)
* 1 tsp. Irish Moss (@30 minute mark)
* Wyeast 1028 (London Ale), pint starter.
(I added and extra pound of pale malt)
Hoppy indeed! All the grain and water barely fit into my converted 5
gallon Coleman drink cooler.
I have a couple of questions. While sparging, the wort fell into a
plastic bucket. The wart was splashing nicely. Is the splashing
detrimental?
Second, I made the starter and poured it into the cooled wort (~80-85
degrees). It took 24 hours to get the brew bubblin' at a good rate. I
have never used this yeast strain before. Is this normal for this yeast
to have such a long lag time? I normally only have a 10-12 hour lag for
a rapid bubble using extract and American Ale II.
Thanks to all who helped get me going all-grain.
CU
Brian
------------------------------
From: shawn@aob.org (Shawn Steele)
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 13:12:07 -0600
Subject: Re: te*t
> Subject: Copy of: Iodine test and celluose
> Brewsters:
>
> (*=e, Shawn is the text reader fixed yet?)
It actually only looks for test in the subject line, not in the body of
the message. Trust me, you don't want that to change or we'd have
"test" messages in almost every HBD:-) The message that the program sent
back to you was a bit misleading however since it mentioned the subject or
body without being more specific. I have corrected it to only look for the
word "test" all by itself without other letters around.
> What's next? Message size appears to be clipped to 10,000 bytes. Also, the
> preamble to both parts of my recent submission was garbled. And worst of all
> Part 2 came before Part 1. I'm really jealous because Tracy Aquilla's
> excellent summary on esters had parts1 and 2 in their proper order.
Message size has always been limited to 10,000 bytes, that isn't new. The
HBD has a 50K byte maximum, so that ensures that messages aren't too long.
Sorry about the part 1/part 2 problem, but that probably won't happen in
the future.
- - shawn
Digest Janitor
------------------------------
From: Tim Martin <TimM@southwest.cc.nc.us>
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 1996 15:39:38 -0300
Subject: Radiator hose for RIMS
Hey Neighbors,
I want to thank you all for the generous support in explaining
why I am getting a question and an answer on the same
post. If there is a concensous, I guess it would be that I am
getting the "undigested" version of the digest. How I got this
or can change I don't know... hell, it's only beer talk. Thanks
to those who toasted to my new boy also!
I am not a RIMS brewer but one day while mowing the lawn it
came to me, why can't those RIMS brewers use a radiator
hose to connect their tanks and pumps together. Listen
before you make that face...A one inch dia. hose cost about
a dollar per foot at the local auto parts store, comes in any
length you need and a wide range of diameters and will
withstand tremendous heat, there.
So you are probably thinking what about the funky taste I
might get from the rubber, well I don't know, but I would be
interested to find out if someone would try it. My only reason
for posting this is I often see people looking for cheak hose
to connect this to that so here is my contribution.
I've used the hose to connect two solar collectors together
and it worked great. Collectors put out a constant 150 dF
temp. with several stagnant days (breakdowns) where the
glycol antifreeze solution would boil off but didn't affect the
radiator hose. Hey, constant 150dF, how about a SRIMS, a
Solar RIMS.
************Have a Happy Fourth*************
Tim Martin
Buzzard's Roost HB
"with that strong predatory taste"
------------------------------
From: "Robert A. Uhl" <ruhl@odin.cair.du.edu>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 12:35:37 -0600 (MDT)
Subject: Re: headspace, etc.
On Mon, 1 Jul 1996, Homebrew Digest REQUEST Address Only wrote:
> I was reflecting on the fact that a British pint glass would hold a 16 oz.
> U.S. pint and still leave room for headspace. This made me wonder how the
> U.S. wound up using such bizarre (non-Imperial AND non-metric) units of
> liquid measure. Does anyone out there know?
Actually, it's Britain that uses an odd liquid measure. Instead of
the original 1 gallon = 8 lbs (8's a power of 2 &c), it was decided
last century that a gallon would weigh 10 lbs. The US uses the
original liquid measure system. Sort of, anyway:-) So for once, we
Yanks are right about something (and the only thing, if you ask me).
I remain
Yours,
Robert Uhl
Chief Programmer,
CR Systems
Dr. Dan Streetmentioner Chair of Linguistics
------------------------------
From: "Decker, Robin E." <robind@rmtgvl.rmtinc.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 96 16:48:00 -0500
Subject: "Hops in Spaaaace"
OK, you guys,
I've really enjoyed brushing up on chemistry, biology, etymology, and all
the other "ogy"s in addition to zymurgy. While I generally agree with
George & Rob that "it doesn't have to be rocket science", I am fervently
hoping that someday, it _will_ be "rocket science. Meaning, when we finally
get off this planet, one of the things I won't be abandoning is our favorite
hobby....
So how about it, oh great and wise collective? If I were reading (or even
writing) a story in which the hero/heroine were a brewster, what quirks
should I expect from zero gravity brewing? What types of yeast would
flocculate best, or will a filter be mandatory? Will there finally be a
market for better dry yeasts? Will an ordinary bubbler airlock still work,
assuming the fermenter is in a pressurized cabin? How will I get my OG and
FG readings? Will we have to adjust alcohol levels? Just what effect will
zero-g have on alcohol tolerances?
I assume extract brewing will be a tad more doable in the early days, but
I'm guessing we'll eventually all be using some variation of RIMS, and
pumping will replace siphoning for awhile, at least. Also, I expect to be
using PET bottles, as glass will be too expensive to ship (hmmmm, rethinking
the extract opinion above). Space (volume, not location) considerations
also have me thinking the phrase "beer in a bag" will no longer bring snorts
of derision from serious brewsters....most of our equipment will have to be
collapsible. The neat thing is, most of the early constructions/space
stations will probably have labs, so we'll have some resources handy.
Last, but not least, can we get anyone involved in the shuttle to champion
our cause, and do a little research in advance? <g>
Goldings
"I have to get off this planet!"
------------------------------
From: korz@pubs.ih.lucent.com
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 96 16:02:42 CDT
Subject: wines/iodophor/more on mashing/ancient beer/140F rest/flavour vs. taste
Michael writes:
>Check any wine recipe book, you'll be shocked at
>what you can make wine out of....... Onions, potatoes, corn, dandylions,
>rose petals, etc. etc. etc.
There are a great many books that contain misinformation. Unless you convert
the starches to sugars, all they will do is give your wine (or beer) a haze.
Onions, dandylions (sp?) and rose petals would add aroma and perhaps flavour
but potatoes, corn and other starchy vegetables will give you far more starch
than flavour or sugar for your yeast to eat.
***
Dave writes:
>This is for the brewers out there who use iodophor to sanatize with.
<snip>
>Now after a week in the bottle it has a slight iodine taste too it, I
>didn't rinse the bottles because everyone I have heard from said to
>let them drip dry. I used a 15 ppm concen.
If there is an iodine taste, then it is from something other than the
iodophor. Consider that even if you leave 3 ml of 15 ppm iodophor in
there, you will soon add about 330 ml of beer. That means that the
titratable iodine will be diluted to 0.14 ppm. I've tasted 25 ppm
iodophor and it does not have a strong taste. I don't believe that you
can taste 0.14 ppm of iodine.
***
David writes (again):
>As an aside here, I disagree with Dave [Miller], the lower temperatures will
>probably need less time than the higher temperatures since beta amylase is
>disappearing faster at the higher temperatures.
and:
>If one chooses to use high saccharification temperatures to get a high FG
>due to unfermentable carbohydrate content, then it becomes necessary to
>extend the saccharification time in order to get complete conversion
>( i.e. efficient saccharification) at the higher temperatures compared
>to the time needed to get the same conversion at lower temperatures.
WRONG!
David... it's about time you admitted that you are wrong. I'm sorry, but
everything I've read in every book and article is contrary to what you are
proposing. My personal experience is also compleatly opposite to what you
have written. Beta amylase does virtually no conversion at 158F+ and alpha
amylase is doing all the work. Under ideal conditions, alpha amylase can
indeed convert all the starches in 15 minutes, but few people are suggesting
that we actually mash so short a time. Please stop confusing the issue.
Brew how you like, but don't keep posting this misinformation.
You are confusing a lot of readers on what is an extremely simple procedure:
mash around 150F (for about 2 hours) to get a low FG... mash around 158F
(for about 1 hour) to get a high FG. If you are getting a positive (black)
iodine test after these times, then your water chemistry is at fault. Check
the pH, adjust with Ca or acids and if you are still getting low yield,
look at some other part of your process (grain crushing, lautering, malt
quality, bad thermometer, bad hydrometer, volume or weight measurement, etc.).
***
Michael writes (quoting a Reuters article):
>``It has taken us five years to get this far, but eventually we have
>bought a legend to life. It's literally the liquid gold of the pharoahs,''
>Jim Merrington, commercial director of Newcastle Breweries, said Monday
>in a telephone interview.
>
>The ale, developed by an Egyptologist, two scientists and Britain's
>largest brewer Scottish & Newcastle, is based on sediment from old jars
>found in a brewery inside the Sun Temple of Nefertiti, queen of the Pharoah
>Akhenaten, believed by Egyptologists to be Tutankhamun's father.
I saw a program about this beer on either Discovery or TLC. Clearly, the
people doing this work are not aware of how to rank the importance of
various ingredients that make up beer. They grew and malted some grain
that may have been (I don't recall exactly) found in a tomb in Egypt and
then bittered it with various spices based upon something or another.
Fine up to this point. So far so good...
...and then they dump in some ale yeast from Scottish & Newcastle.
Duh! I thought they were going to implant some DNA they found in some
sediment in an old jar, but no... they simply used modern ale yeast and
in the test batches, they were using their thumbs to shove the yeast into
the clay flask (good... at least they'll get some of the requisite
lactobacillus I'm sure was in the ancient beer), but I think that they
used more conventional sanitation on the subsequent 1000-bottle batch.
Save your money.
On a bright note, they said that their research was continuing. Perhaps
they are going to try to get some yeast DNA and implant into modern yeast?
I hope so... *then* I'll be ready to try this ancient beer.
***
Greg writes (quoting George):
> "Yes, Dave is right about the amylases being active well below 149F,
> but starch isn't gelatinized till 149, so there isn't much for the
> enzymes to do below 149."
>
>It does seem strange to perform a beta-amylase rest at 140^F (60^C) in an
>infusion mash if there isn't any gelatinized starch for the enzymes to work
on.
>Yet, some brewers (maybe you're one of them) perform this rest and get better
>extract efficiency than they would have if they had omitted this step.
I cannot find it in my files here, but I know someone posted a list of grains
and their gelatinization temperatures. I know the 149F temperature comes
from Noonan. I believe that Malting and Brewing Science lists quite a few
more and I don't know if the gelatinization temperature for malted barley
in MBS agrees with Noonan... perhaps it does.
On the other hand, remember that 140F is at the high end of the proteolytic
enzyme range. I suspect that the use of the 140F rest was meant by the
brewer for protease activity and not beta amylase. 140F also ensures that
peptidase would be denatured very quickly and would cause mostly small- and
medium-sized protein production (as opposed to the amino acids that peptidase
produces).
***
Tracy writes (responding to my post):
>I believe the idea that the tongue can only detect sweet, salty, sour, and
>bitter is very old and has been disproved. It is also essentially impossible
>to separate taste from smell, as smell contributes significantly to taste.
>Esters do have flavor. If they didn't, most foods would taste very bland.
I got some private email on this also, so I clearly was not clear in my post.
Flavour (as I think of it, not based upon any book or anything) is a mixture
of the aroma and flavour of something you eat or drink. Your tongue can
indeed sense primarily sweet, salty, sour and bitter. Your nose can
distinguish hundreds (thousands?) of aromas. Your sense of smell and taste
work together to produce what we interpret as flavours. If your nose is
plugged up with a cold, you are severely limited in your ability to
distinguish various flavours.
What Tracy refers to as being "disproved" is that "taste map" of the tongue
that has been published hundreds of times. The original was in German (I
believe) and due to a mis-translation everyone believed that certain parts
of the tongue only tasted one of the four distinct tastes (sweet, salty,
sour, bitter). The exclusivity of the regions is the part that was disproved,
not that the tongue could only taste those four tastes.
What my point was that the tongue itself is not what distinguishes between
say banana esters and apple esters. It's your nose that you need to
distinguish various esters. So, I agree that esters have flavour, but you
can't tell them apart using only your taste buds (tongue).
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korzonas@lucent.com
Copyright 1996 Al Korzonas
------------------------------
End of Homebrew Digest #2089
****************************
