Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2085
This file received at Hops.Stanford.EDU 1996/06/27 PDT
Homebrew Digest Thursday, 27 June 1996 Number 2085
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Shawn Steele, Digest Janitor
Thanks to Rob Gardner for making the digest happen!
Contents:
Closed fermenter (Jose Getino)
Fw: Water Analysis ("Terry Tegner")
Honey Beer (CPT Paul Fischer)
Re: Questions about fruit wines (aesoph@ncemt1.ctc.com (Aesoph, Michael))
idophor ("Dave Higdon")
Arizona supply shops (JRAkers@aol.com)
and More Enzymes (correction) (Steve Alexander)
brewster ("Allan Rubinoff")
Re: Kettle headspace (O2 or Steam) (Bob Waterfall)
RE: Distilling Dangers ("Derrick Yacavone")
Morrone / jet propane burners (DAVE BRADLEY IC742 6-7932)
-No Subject- (Michael Mahler/Shiva Corporation)
re: World Beer Cup winners ("Curt Speaker")
Milwaukee water,enzymes,etc. ("David R. Burley")
Re: Fruit wine recipe (gmccarthy@dayna.com (Gary McCarthy))
Re: enzyme stability ("Tracy Aquilla")
HSA/1-4 links vs 1-6 links/grapefruity IPA (korz@pubs.ih.lucent.com)
DMS (Bill Giffin)
oxygen (DANIEL RICARD)
Grapefruit flavor and honey malt (Dean Larson)
Problem with the digest/one lump or two (Tim Martin)
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: Jose Getino <getino@pinon.ccu.uniovi.es>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 10:13:11 -0200
Subject: Closed fermenter
Im trying to build a closed fermenter/conditioning tank from a second
hand SS container from the dairy industry, but I first need to get some
technical information on these points:
1. Im planing to install beer out and yeast out valves, so I need to know
the yeast/beer volume ratio in a fermented wort.
2. What other gas/beer lines do I need for the task of desplacing the air
in the closed fermenter, replacing it with CO2, and then replacing the CO2
with wort?.
3. What is the best place for install a pressure relief valve?.
I you know where to find some information (and maybe plans) on this subject,
please e-mail me or post it to the HBD.
------------------------------
From: "Terry Tegner" <brewtec@global.co.za>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 01:16:32 +0200
Subject: Fw: Water Analysis
- ------ This message appears to have got lost. Hence I'm sending it again.
Thanks for your patience.----
> From: Terry Tegner <brewtec@global.co.za>
> To: homebrew@aob.org
> Subject: Water Analysis
> Date: 24 June 1996 09:03
>
> Greetings collective,
> I have just received my water analysis from the local water board and
very
> extensive it is. They ,in fact, sent me the last years monthly analysis.
> I understand most of it as does my computer program "brewers workshop"
> except that the report did not have a TDS figure. When I queried this,
> they told me to take the "conductivity" figure and multiply it by 6.2.
Can
> one of the water experts please explain the theory, in lay-mans terms,
> behind this.
> One other figure which bothers me is "total trihalomethanes = from 13 to
> 58 mg/l". Don't know what they are but they sound nasty.
> Regards
> Terence Tegner
------------------------------
From: CPT Paul Fischer <fischerp@emh1.gordon.army.mil>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 07:36:16 -0700
Subject: Honey Beer
Received: from ws041047.gordon.army.mil by host.emh1.gordon.army.mil id
aa02837; 27 Jun 96 7:26 EDT
Message-ID: <31D29A07.6AE7@emh1.gordon.army.mil>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 07:26:15 -0700
From: CPT Paul Fischer <fischerp@emh1.gordon.army.mil>
Organization: U.S. Army
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win16; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Homebrew Digest SUBMISSIONS only <homebrew@aob.org>
CC: fischerp@emh1.gordon.army.mil
Subject: Re: Homebrew Digest #2083 (Wednesday, 26 June 1996)
References: <9606262150.aa19563@bacchus.aob.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: U
X-Mozilla-Status: 0011
> From: Mike Foster <mfoster1@voyager.net>
> Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 15:35:37 -0400 (EDT)
> Subject: Ales and Lagers with honey. And a hops question.
>
> I am a novice brewer (first batch due to be bottled in a week), and I was
> wondering about the addition of honey to brews. Specifically, will the end
> product take longer if I add honey to the wort? (I know a good mead takes a
> year or more to reach completion)
> Should the honey be boiled with the malt, or added after boiling?
> What about priming with honey?
> Primarily I'm looking for something with just a hint of honey to it, like
> J.W. Dundee's Honey Brown (I believe that is the name of the stuff...). The
> brew I was thinking of in particular would be a Belgian Strong Ale with
> honey. Playing around with my SUDS 4.0 program, I arrived at 4 cans of light
> malt extract and 1 lb. of honey... Any comments are more than welcome, but
> please remember that I am just an extract brewer...
>
> And for hops, I really have no idea what kind of hops adds what kind of
> flavor... Is there any listing of various hops and their respective
> flavors/aromas?
>
> - -Mike Foster mfoster1@voyager.net
> Lord Wulfgar Silberbar proto-incipient Shire of Altenberg
> #88 goalie for the SPC Flyers
> Jessica Benson Virtual Adept extrordinaire
> What? Me? Schizophrenic? Am not!
>
Well Mike...I had the same question when the Honey Brown beers hit the
market with such popularity (my wife loves it). I actively pursued a
recipe that would duplicated it. After much consultation with brewers
and my supply store I found out the following. Because most commercial
beers are force carbonated at the brewery with CO2 gas, the breweries can
add virtually anything to the beer after the brewing process, ie. honey.
Thus the Honey Browns are only beer with a drop of honey in each bottle
for flavor.
-Paul
------------------------------
From: aesoph@ncemt1.ctc.com (Aesoph, Michael)
Date: 27 Jun 96 08:48:54 EDT
Subject: Re: Questions about fruit wines
Regarding Fruit Wines:
First, I am relatively new to this. Most of my wines are less than a
year old, so I really can't comment on aging. They do get significantly
better during the first 6 months however.
1) what kind of container I'm supposed to mix all the ingredients in
Fermenting bucket - same as beer.
2) how long do I age it for
My first batch was gone before 6 months and it was just starting to taste
better.
3) how long can I drink it for
It won't spoil with 10% alcohol or so.
4) is there a health risk if I do it wrong
I don't know, but everyone I know claim NO. A saying among wine makers
is that "There's no such thing as a bad bug!!!" The exact opposite of
beer brewing.
5) what's the difference in taste with the different fruits or veggies
As of now, most of my wines are very strong and taste mostly of alcohol..
Ooops!!! I'm going to cut back on the sugar and raisins for subsequent
batches. They taste like the fruit that you use to make them with a
typical wine taste as well. A friend of mine swears he can always taste
the raisins, but I don't believe him.
6) which fruits/veggies should I stay away from
None that I know of. 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.
==================================================
Michael D. Aesoph Associate Engineer
==================================================
------------------------------
From: "Dave Higdon" <DAVEH@qesrv1.bwi.wec.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 08:50:10 EST
Subject: idophor
This is for the brewers out there who use iodophor to sanatize with.
I just used it to clean everything with, bottles too.
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.
Will this taste go away? The beer was not even carbonated yet, do you
think the minute bit of iodine killed the yeast? I used 3/4 cup of priming
------------------------------
From: JRAkers@aol.com
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 09:10:48 -0400
Subject: Arizona supply shops
A homebrewing friend of mine is moving to Casa Grande, AZ (about 50 miles SE
of Phoenix, or so I'm told). I'd like to be able to give him a list of
homebrewing supply shops in that area. I'd appreciate any help I can get,
e-mail is fine.
TIA,
Jeff Akers
New Brunswick, NJ
------------------------------
From: Steve Alexander <stevea@clv.mcd.mot.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 10:03:19 -0400
Subject: and More Enzymes (correction)
I wrote ...
> Actually a 15 minute rest at 70C (=158F) in a pCA=4 (calcium rich)
> solution has been used as a method of isolating alpha-amylase (AA).
the correct figure is pCa=2.5, or 3mMol of Ca, which is roughly 120ppm.
Steve Alexander
------------------------------
From: "Allan Rubinoff" <allan_rubinoff@mathworks.com>
Date: 27 Jun 1996 10:37:49 -0400
Subject: brewster
In HBD #2081, David Burley takes Andy Walsh to task over the etymology
of "brewster":
> According to The Oxford Dictionary of Etymology:
>
> "BREWSTER - brewer - survives in Brewster Sessions licensing sessions
> and as a surname, also Browster.
>
> In those days when the word brewster was in common use, the female
> brewer was called a housewife. Now the word is asexual.So by using
> brewster I was referring to both sexes.
I don't understand what this statement means. Brewster certainly did
originally mean a female brewer, as it was formed using the feminine
ending -ster. (Other examples of the ending include baxter, a female
baker, and webster, a female weaver.) Usage was gradually extended to
mean a brewer of either gender. But *etymologically*, it definitely
means a female brewer. See the definition in the Oxford English
Dictionary; also see the OED's discussion of the -ster ending.
Allan Rubinoff
rubinoff@mathworks.com
------------------------------
From: Bob Waterfall <waterr@albany.net>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 10:40:29 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Kettle headspace (O2 or Steam)
Charlie Scandrett wrote in hbd2084:
>If your kettle is ~350mm in diameter, steam is leaving
>your kettle surface at 115mm/sec or about 4.5 inches/sec. This is a "steam
>wind" protecting the surface of your wort. You would need a healthy cross
>draught to get air in contact with the surface of your wort?
Before Charlie made these calculations, I had a gut tendency to agree that
the steam from a rolling boil would protect the wort from HSA. Now I'm not
so sure. His figures show that it's rising at only about 0.25 mph (0.4
kph). To be conservative let's say it could be as high as 1 mph (1.6 kph).
If you boil outside, it seems like it would take only a light breeze of a
few mph to overwhelm that flow and mix some air into the headspace as David
Burley suggests. Thinking about what the vapor rising looks like typically,
calm days (or indoors) would yield little or no HSA from the boil (vapor
goes straight up) while a breezy day (>5mph?) might cause a bit of HSA
(vapor blows aside at a steep angle). This is a fine reason for me to get
going on that keg conversion so I'll have higher boiler walls to protect my
wort. Of course then I'll probably just start making bigger batches.
Bob Waterfall <waterr@albany.net>,
Troy, NY, USA
------------------------------
From: "Derrick Yacavone" <dyacavon@southeast.net>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 11:06:42 -0500
Subject: RE: Distilling Dangers
One more note on the dangers of home distillation: The copper tubing one
would buy at your local hardware store to assemble a still is NOT 100%
copper, it is an alloy(Danger Will Robinson !!! Danger ! Danger !).
Once again, sorry this isn't beer related, but it is important for anyone
following this discussion.
------------------------------
From: DAVE BRADLEY IC742 6-7932 <BRADLEY_DAVID_A@LILLY.COM>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 15:21:04 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: Morrone / jet propane burners
In Digest 2083, some responses about the Morrone Cook-All
from Dan Aldrich and Keith Royster prompt this note from me.
I have used this jet-style burner for lots of brews, and it
has worked wonderfully on all batches. Not to heap praise on
this particular cooker, but it works great for me as a heater
of the mash (step mashing) and the boil. My real incentive to
post lies in my experience with using a jet burner.
I've had good results, observing none of the commonly-cited
troubles with these high-power jet burners. I don't believe
my success comes from the Morrone specifically: its burner looks
exactly like all the others I've seen. I also second Keith's note
that you *must* have a needle valve in the propane line between the
regulator and the burner to control the flame intensity. Most of
these burners come with such an arrangement (including the Morrone).
BTW I routinely have boils of 9 gal in a 10 gal pot on this Morrone,
which exceeds the "50 lb" limit quoted by Morrone...YMMV.
Yes, ring burners provide greater flame control and consume
less propane. But those on a budget needn't dismiss the cheaper and
readily available jet burners, that's my only point. Long-term, the
ring burner may actually be cheaper anyway if it saves enough propane
versus the jet burners (I get ca. 5 batches per tank). Oh, and Keith's
point about these burners (usually King Kooker's) being cheapest at
local homebrew shops is true in my area also.
Dave in Indy
------------------------------
From: Michael Mahler/Shiva Corporation <mmahler@shiva.com>
Date: 27 Jun 96 12:04:44
Subject: -No Subject-
>That wasn't restarting fermentation. The CO2 in the headspace warmed up
>from 68 to 75F and expanded, which is what restarted your airlock. I don't
>use DME for priming, but for a Weizen I would use about 1 cup of corn sugar.
Thanks Al - this seems to be the unanimous conclusion - and it did indeed stop
the next morning. Hope there was/is no harm at having it out of it's water
bath for a couple of days (at 72-ish degrees according to the stick on
thermometer)...
>Michael Mahler asks about Peltier junction solid-state thermoelectric coolers
>(alright, not exactly):
SO that's what they are called...
>That gets to be an expensive power supply. Your car can deliver this from the
>alternator or the battery (though maybe not from the battery for long!), but
>a homemade line-powered supply would probably be bulky and expensive.
Ok then, that's it - I'm gonna hook this up to my car. Y'know one of those
little portable generators aren't too expensive to run...
> Surplus power supplies are an option. You must supply a lot more power when
>cooling as opposed to "maintaining" a temperature; that must be taken into
>account. If you can wait two days to chill your 80F wort to 45F, that's one
>thing.
Hmmm, but what if about two days before I start lagering I fill the cooler 1/2
way with water and chill that? Sounds like an idea I guess.
>If not, you'll have to crank up the electrons. Finally, do these
>icechests have air circulating fans? I suppose they do but it'd be worth
>checking.
I think they only have exhaust fans, but I'll check when shopping tonite.
------------------------------
From: "Curt Speaker" <speaker@SAFETY-1.UNIVSFTY.PSU.EDU>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 12:12:17 EST
Subject: re: World Beer Cup winners
Is anyone else a little suspect of a few of the winners in the World
Beer Cup competition? In the belgian white catagory, (the new)
Hoegaarden to first (the old version was so much better), Wit! took
second, and Celis took third. When I tasted Wit! at Planet Beer last
year, I thought it was insipid: thin, tastless - a very poor example
of the style. Has it gotten better since then? Has Spring St.
reformulated it? Is it really better than Celis???
Some of the other winners I totally agree with: Goudenband is an
outstanding Oud Bruin; Kwak got a gold as a strong ale (one of my
personal favorites); Orval only got a bronze in the belgian pale ale
(how is that possible?); Leinenkuegel Red wins a gold as a Vienna
lager (give me a break!) - Miller Lite as the best lite beer in the
world was the last straw...I'd love to know a little more about this
contest, who was permitted to enter, and how it differs from the
GABF. And who judges these beers anyway?
Taste is subjective, and all judges have their own criteria, but some
of these winners leave a bad taste in my mouth (pun intended :-)
Puzzled in central PA
Curt
------------------------------
From: "David R. Burley" <103164.3202@CompuServe.COM>
Date: 27 Jun 96 12:36:41 EDT
Subject: Milwaukee water,enzymes,etc.
Brewsters:
Craig Rode of Milwaukee complains of his poor extraction and ponders the need
to
water treat.
It may be that the pH of the Mash is higher than 5.5 and rates of reactions are
slowed in the saccharification step. In which case, boil your water to reduce
the bicarbonate ( asuming there is enough calcium), remove the brewing liquor
from the sediment and add enough calcium sulfate or lactic or phosphoric acid
to get you in the range of 5.2-5.5 AFTER you have have added the grist. By the
way this range is not terribly critical, since pilsners are sometimes brewed as
high as 5.7, and some stouts lower than 5.2. However, this range is considered
to be the optimum.
I hate to say it, ( based on the flak I've been getting on my suggestion to
hold
longer at higher T's for greater efficiency in producing fermentable sugars)
but
it is more likely that you are not holding long enough in the saccharification
step to get a high rate of extraction.
It has been questioned here a month or so ago about how Dave Miller gets such
stupendous extraction efficiencies. Listen to this from Dave's "The Complete
Handbook of Home Brewing" (1988) Storey Pub.:
p.129 para3
"Mash Schedules
............I follow a schedule like this: Starting temperature150F, mash time
2
hours;starting temperature 153F, mash time 11/2 hours;starting temperature
156F,
mash time 1 hour. For a really high terminal gravity, you could start at 159F
and use a time of 45 minutes.
This schedule is for all recipes based on pale lager malt. For high
kilned malts, I mash for two hours with a starting temperature of 153F or 150
F.
To be sure starch conversion goes to completion, I bring th e mash back to
starting temperature after 1 hour. With lager malt this is not necessary, but I
stir the mash to even out the temperature distribution."
As an aside here, I disagree with Dave, the lower temperatures will probably
need less time than the higher temperatures since beta amylase is disappearing
faster at the higher temperatures. But that is another subject, sort of, that
we have been beating up here in the HBD lately. My point is he suggests longer
than 10-15 minutes at this temperature.
For Decoction Mashing ( to answer another question from last week at the same
time) we have a different picture because gelatinized starch is in the mash
after the first decoction, since boiling of some of the mash will gelatinize
the
starch in that part of the malt that is boiled and saccharification can start
at
lower temperatures in the main mash once the decocted material in replaced.
According to Malting and Brewing Science, Hough ,Briggs, etc. (1957) p268 fig
10.11 and p269 fig 10.12, 270 fig10.13, p271 fig. 10.14) Saccharification will
begin at about 100F if I read the diagrams correctly. In the classical three
decoction method about 1/3 of the mash is boiled for a total of three times
with
about 11/2 hours between decoctions. Total time is about 6 hours before
lautering. Total saccharification time is about three hours The two decoction
method requires about 3-41/2 hrs and has a saccharification time of of 21/2
hrs.
In the short time double decoction process requiring about 2-3 hours has a
saccharification time of 11/2 hours. In the double mash procedure used in the
US with lots of adjuncts, the saccharification process appears to be about 13/4
hours.
According to M&BS pp 259-261, after the proper temperature is reached, by
adding hot water and heating, the mash is allowed to stand for 15 min to 2
hours. How long it takes to get to that temperature is not estimated and would
obviously be dependent upon the plant.Remember that the British malts are
highly
modified and generally don't have the same mashing temerature/time requirments
as American and German malts.
In my own case, I start with a very stiff mash and add boiling water at various
times to get to the various temperatures ( with a minor heating adjustment).
This gives me a stiff mash at the beginning which increases the efficiency of
the proteases and a dilute mash at the end, so the sugars don't inhibit the
amylases and the sugars are in the solution at a lower viscosity, giving a free
running wort in the initial sparge step. I typically hold at the
saccharifiation temp for about 11/2 hours.
In summary, if it is OK for the big boys to have saccharification times ranging
from 11/2 hours to about 3 hours, it is probably OK for us. Be very sceptical
of anyone ( even if his name is Charlie Papazian "The New Complete Joy of Home
Brewing pp.298) who suggests that a saccharificatin time of twenty minutes is
OK. Look at your saccharification schedule, and if it is very short, i.e. less
than an hour, you can likely improve your extraction efficiency by a few
percent by holding longer during saccharification.
Another area in which you can gain improvement is in the sparging. Up to a
point, the slower the sparge ( at a high enough temperature, say 170 F) the
better. M&BS p.286 shows that 4 hours is required to get 100% extraction of a
laboratory prep batch (generally more dilute than a commercial mash), with 95%
plus at about an hour of runoff time. Having a dilute mash can also improve
your extraction efficiency.
- -----------------------------------------------------------
Charlie Sandrett is going to do some work on HSA. Is there a t*st procedure
available to t*st for HSA? Good luck Charlie we wil look forward to your
results.
- -----------------------------------------------------------
Steve Alexander asks me which enzyme I am talking about. Beta-Amylase does
disappear at high temperatures faster than alpha. However, it is more stable in
wort than in the pure state (see my post of yesterday quoting M&BS) in which it
lasts 40 min -1 hr at saccharification temperatures. Also see my comments above
about extending the sacharification to the same times as commercial brewers.
Also note that saccharification of gelatinized starch takes place at
temperatures MUCH lower than 149F. This is one of the origins for my comment
that we shouldn't be so myopic about the 144-158F as THE saccharification temp.
Maybe some really unique beers could result from taking advantage of this
information. I don't know, but let's not shut off the discussion, just because
it isn't in the current way of thinking.
Thanks for your comments about various properties of enzymes. Your comment
about needing to spend longer times at the higher temperatures is EXACTLY (
forgive the shout) what I have been saying and what somehow stirred up all this
alpha and beta discussion (which has been good for all of us- I think).
Obviously I wasn't clear enough or wasn't intepreted properly. I'll say it
again- a little differently. 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.
That's all I was saying. I am particularly concerned about people taking
Charlie Pap and others seriously about 10 - 20 min saccharification time,
running at high T's ( like 158-160) and wondering why they are gettting higher
FG's than they planned with poor extraction efficiency. As I kept saying, I
think we all agree on the basics, it is the practical applications where we may
have a different opinion. Me, I'll go with the professionals on this one.
- ----------------------------------------
Jeremy Bergman corrects me that they are "reducing" sugars. This clears up the
mystery in my own mind and makes me a believer in redox again. Thanks. All
those years in grad school weren't a waste after all.
- ----------------------------------------
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
------------------------------
From: gmccarthy@dayna.com (Gary McCarthy)
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 96 11:50:03 -0700
Subject: Re: Fruit wine recipe
Bertina Hou:
In HBD 2084, you ask specific questions about fruit wines:
>1) what kind of container I'm supposed to mix all the ingredients in
A regular plastic beer fermenter bucket is alright.
>2) how long do I age it for
Until its ready! Seriously that is truly at matter of your opinion. I
personally like to primary ferment in a plastic bucket, stirring the fruit
under every day, at least! After about a week or less, the fruit really
starts to rot! (Which answers someone elses question of how long to leave the
fruit in) So after a week or so, I rack the barely fermented wine to a glass
fermenter. Rack within a month, rack within two months, rack within 3 months,
and 3 months thereafter. You really want to get the SG down to below, oh,
about 0.995 before you bottle, and get the wine to clear, and I generally find
that takes one year. But you could get by with about 9 months. I would also
recommend highly correcting for acids. Generally in your wine grapes you
don't need to correct, but definitely in wines like cherry you need to measure
and correct acids. That should prob be done after the first rack.
>3) how long can I drink it for
Well, I still have some cherry wine from 2 years ago, very acidic because I
didn't correct for acids, but drinkable.
>4) is there a health risk if I do it wrong
I don't think so. The alcohol is generally high enough in wines to kill every
bad thing, IMO, but I could be wrong.
>5) what's the difference in taste with the different fruits or vegetable
I imagine the wine will taste like the fruit or vegetable. Cherry wine tastes
like cherries, pear wine like pears. I imagine potato wine would not have
much flavor at all, maybe you would need to do a mash on the potato starches?
>6) which fruits/veggies should I stay away from
Rutabaga?
Gary McCarthy in SLC Out on the road today, I saw a
Deadhead sticker
gmccarthy@dayna.com(not for long) on a cadillac. A little voice inside my
head said
gmccarthy@sisna.com "Don't look back!" You can
never look back! Don Henely
------------------------------
From: "Tracy Aquilla" <aquilla@salus.med.uvm.edu>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 96 14:50:58 CDT
Subject: Re: enzyme stability
In Digest #2084:
"David R. Burley" <103164.3202@CompuServe.COM>wrote:
>I lost track of who asked about enzyme stability in mashes of various
>thicknesses. I think it was Al K, but may have been Jim Busch. Sorry I lost
>your request. Anyway here is my reply.
>
>Two sources of information 1) a private e-mail discussion with Tracy Aquilla
>(hope you don't mind my paraphrasing, Tracy, I have deleted our exchange.)
>2)"Malting and Brewing Science", Hough,Briggs &Stevens (1971 ed) pp 220
>
>1) In the course of a conversation with Tracy, I addressed the subject of
>enzyme stability and concentration. Tracy replied to me that it was
>conventional knowledge in the enzyme industry that higher concentrations of
>enzymes were more stable than diluted versions. These solution are prepared
and
>shipped this way. When I stated that this didn't seem to match with my
>intuition, as I see denaturization as a single molecule action and therefore
>concentration independent. I asked him why, he stated, in effect, he didn't
>know why. This was concerning pure enzyme solutions.
While I'm generally quick to admit my ignorance, I usually follow-up by
doing some research to correct it. The stability of concentrated enzyme (or
any protein) solutions is based on the equilibrium between the native and
denatured states. As the protein in solution becomes more dilute, it tends
to unfold more readily, making it more accessible to degradive compounds,
such as O2, free-radicals, etc. Pretty simple, isn't it?
Tracy
------------------------------
From: korz@pubs.ih.lucent.com
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 96 14:07:29 CDT
Subject: HSA/1-4 links vs 1-6 links/grapefruity IPA
Geza writes:
>I would also be interested in proof of the level of the oxidation of the wort
>from the boil. Is the dreaded HSA nothing more then a momily?
Absolutely not. HSA is a real problem and I'm so convinced of it that I'll
bet that MOST of the "improvement" that many homebrewers experience when they
switch to all-grain brewing may be due the fact that when you do a full boil,
you pretty much have to use a wort chiller and then the aeration is done on
cold wort not hot. I started to do full boils a year or two before starting
to mash and the difference between hot aeration and cold aeration was a far
bigger jump in quality than the small step from extract to all-grain.
As I've said before and based upon Charlie's post, HSA during the boil is
virtually nonexistant, but oxidation during the mash, when taking runnings
and when you aerate before cooling are definite problems. If you don't
believe me, brew a 5 gallon batch, pour half (hot) into a sanitized bucket
aerating well, cool the wort the kettle and pour that into another sanitized
bucket aerating well. Ferment with a split yeast starter and taste the
difference for yourself!
>Is this why breweries use closed boilers?
Their boilers are not closed completely as this implies, but yes, I believe
that this is the reason that both the mashtun and kettle have covers and
doors. Consider that in most commercial lauter tuns the sparge water falls
a good one to four feet. What keeps this water from picking up oxygen
during the sprinkling? My intuition tells me it's the water vapour.
>Also; is there conclusive evidence for the temperature at which
>aerating the wort is safe so HSA does not occur? I've seen references
>that say that aeration during sparging causes HSA. So assume that introducing
>oxygen at 170 degrees is not safe, is 165 safe? Is 160?
>What is the highest temperature at which you can aerate wort without causing
>HSA?
HSA is a flaw in a process or a piece of equipment ("I'm getting HSA from
that darned bent valve body"), not a chemical reaction. What we should be
asking is: above what temperature will oxygen introduced to the wort cause
oxidation? Technically the answer is: at any temperature. Practically,
however, the general consensus is that above 80F the rate of oxidation is
fast enough so that there is noticeable damage to the finished beer whereas
below 80F the yeast seem to consume the oxygen before it has time enough to
cause *noticeable* damage (there *always* is *some* damage).
***
Steve writes:
>The point is that AA is selective about which 1-4 bonds is breaks. The
>well substantiated fact that AA won't cleave linkages in
>polysaccharides with fewer than 3 1-4 linked glucose units doesn't
>mean that it's equally likely to cleave a link in a G5 as in a G500.
>It is not.
There is also the factor of 1-6 links, which are the key (if memory serves
correctly) to "limit dextrins," the dextrins that can not be cleaved by
alpha amylase (although I believe that beta amylase does nibble off maltose
molecules from their ends). I faintly recall that the beta amylase only
cleaves off maltose from *one* end of the chain. Once it hits a 1-6 link,
that's all, folks. Is that right, Steve?
***
Dave writes:
>an IPA one of the judges noted a slight 'grapefruit' flavor which, he said,
>was appropriate (this beer scored fairly high and took second place, so I'm
>not complaining). Frankly, I hadn't noticed it. But in my most recent batch,
>where I used the same grain bill and yeast (Wyeast 1098) but substituted
>milder Challenger hops (for about half the IBUs of the IPA, which used
>Columbus) and dry-hopped with East Kent Goldings, the grapefruit notes are
>more noticable. In fact, they are fairly prominent. This is a good beer -
>very complex with good malt flavor and hop nose - but there's no mistaking
>that grapefruit. Where the heck does that come from? The yeast? Hops?
>Temperature?
In the beer hopped with the Columbus, I would have said that the hops
were the main source of the grapefruity flavour because Columbus have
some of this character. However, since you feel that it is stronger
in the second beer, perhaps it's not grapefruity per se, but rather
citrusy in general. Many British yeasts, including the Wyeast 1098,
can have a citrusy character -- a sort of tartness in the flavour.
Higher fermentation temperatures would probably tend to accentuate it.
Maybe what the judge tasted was indeed the Columbus and was indeed
grapefruity, but in this second batch you fermented a little warmer
and the citrusy character of the yeast came through more? Since you
didn't notice the grapefruity character of the first batch, maybe
you are just not sensitive to that particular hop compound.
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korzonas@lucent.com
Copyright 1996 Al Korzonas
------------------------------
From: Bill Giffin <billg@maine.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 15:27:55 -0500
Subject: DMS
Good morning
Al K answered my DMS question :
>Well, Bill, it depends on the level and the style. In most pale lagers
(American Pilsner, Munich Helles, Munich Hellesbock, Dort, German
Pils,Bohemian Pils, etc...) a level of DMS slightly above the human
threshold is acceptable and desirable. It often is considered part of the
malt character in these beers. On the other hand DMS in all ales and
dark lagers is generally considered a flaw.
DMS is found in all beers at various levels the levels in English ales is
just below the flavor threshold. Where in dark lagers from Germany it
maybe as high as 10 times the flavor threshold. Lagers that have no
DMS taste insipid. I also think that if DMS didn't exist in you ales
even though you can't taste the DMS you would miss it.
Too often things that are set forth as a defect in beers are only a defect
if they are in excess.
Bill
------------------------------
From: DANIEL RICARD <102507.3041@CompuServe.COM>
Date: 27 Jun 96 15:37:00 EDT
Subject: oxygen
From: 102507.3041@compuserve.com (Dan Ricard)
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 96
Subject: Oxygen
>I recently pruchased an Oxygenator(tm) from Liquid Bread(tm). It comes with
>a small cylinder of "aircraft-grade" 99.9% pure O2. The company sells the
>replacement O2 cylinders for ~ $12.00.
Much cheaper to go with a leased ozygen bottle and regulator from a local
supplier.
Make sure that you tell them you will be using the oxygen for a food
application.
I also started with the Oxygenator and noticed an improvement in my final
gravities.
However, those small cylinders become empty rather quickly. With the proper
fittings
you can continue to use the hose and stainless diffuser that came with the
Oxygenator.
Dan Ricard (102507.3041@compuserve.com)
Manchester, CT
------------------------------
From: Dean Larson <larson@chaos.cps.gonzaga.edu>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 13:27:09 -0700
Subject: Grapefruit flavor and honey malt
Dave Mercer recently posted asking about grapefruit flavor in an IPA he
brewed. I've had a similar experience recently. A while back there were a
number of posts regarding the use of columbus hops (which Dave mentioned
using in his IPA). This prodded me into brewing a batch of my usual pale
ale (SNPA clone), but substituting columbus for all hop additions. Used an
ounce each at 60, 12, and 5 minutes. Popped one open a couple of days ago.
Carbonation wasn't quite there yet, but there was a very distinctive
grapefruit aroma and flavor. I used my usual Wyeast #1056 fermented at
65-70F. Have never experienced this grapefruit character in any of my other
brews, so I'll speculate that it's the columbus hops causing it. Anyone
else have this experience with columbus?
While I'm here.... There was a short thread on honey malt about a month
ago. Lots of info on what it is and where to get it, but I saw no posts
from anyone who had used it. My usual partial mash pale is brewed with 4# 2
row and 1/2# each of dextrin and light crystal with a 4# can of Alexander's
pale syrup. To try out the honey malt I altered the above by using 1# honey
malt and cutting the 2 row down to 3#. That brew is now mature. My
impressions: The honey malt resulted in a slightly darker brew. Amber
rather than golden. It also seemed to add a bit of residual sweetness to
the flavor. I personally like it, but others might find it somewhat
distracting. I wouldn't mind hearing how others have used this malt and
what the results were.
Happy Brewing!!
Dean Larson
------------------------------
From: Tim Martin <TimM@southwest.cc.nc.us>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 16:54:55 -0300
Subject: Problem with the digest/one lump or two
Hey Neighbors,
It has been a while since I posted anything on the digest
because we had another son on May 18th, about the time
the digest changed hands. I named him "Sparge", well...I
wanted to but the little lady nixed that so I guess I'll have to
save that name for our next dog. We did name him Todd, so
would you all please hoist a cold one and toast my boy and
another future brewer.
Now to my point. This is not a complaint about the new
owners but I would like something cleared up for me, like
someone said, hey... it's free. I don't mind when I get the
digest late for three or four days in a row or when I get
Tuesday's before Monday's or even if it's upside down and
backwards. But I do get a little rattled when someone ask a
question and directly below it is another person's response to
the question.
For example: On digest #2079 Kevin Buttrum ask about
making a brew kettle from a keg, I scroll down to the next
post and whoa, Marty Tippin replies to his question. Their
headers both show Fri, 21 June 1996 except Marty's time
says he posted his answer almost an hour before Kevin ask
the question. Now mind you this happens about once on
almost all the digest I receive. One could perceive this as an
imporvement in service but I have not heard anyone else
raving over it. So what's the deal could this be on my end
with my email program, should I have stayed away from the
sugar cubes in college, could this be a miracle and soon I
will see the face of the virgin Mary on my computer screen
and everyone will flock to me to bless their beer. Does
anyone else out there have this problem or blessing, if so
what did you do to correct it?
Thanks
Tim Martin
Buzzard's Roost Homebrewery
"with that strong predatory taste"
------------------------------
End of Homebrew Digest #2085
****************************
