Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2180
This file received at Hops.Stanford.EDU 1996/09/09 PDT
Homebrew Digest Monday, 9 September 1996 Number 2180
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Shawn Steele, Digest Janitor
Thanks to Rob Gardner for making the digest happen!
Contents:
[none] ("Gregory, Guy J.")
Fruit beer too sweet ((Billy Cole))
Yeast not getting older, getting better (Eugene Sonn)
Re: All-Grain Efficiency (John DeCarlo)
SN Porter Yeast ((Alan P. Van Dyke))
Motorizing Malt Mills (Kurt Schilling)
[none] ((Shawn Steele))
Beer Hunter.com (Moncsko@aol.com)
re: SPAMM Problem/Limit posting ((Bill Giffin))
Sparging/bees/LOL ("Ray Robert")
force carbonation (scotty@rand.nidlink.com)
RE: weighing propane/CO2 tanks (John Wilkinson)
Brewed a beer I don't like; Can I improve this (beer(not)) (Randal.Dusing@uswau01msg.med.ge.com)
Freshness Dating (montgomery_john@CCMAIL.ncsc.navy.mil)
Re: Summer Brewing (jhilliard@juno.com)
Spam and Exclusivity/Barleywine Starter/CO2 levels (Jeff Stampes)
Deep Thoughts (KennyEddy@aol.com)
Re: SN Porter Yeast (RUSt1d?)
Effects of high temp fermentation, SPAM (Dave Mercer)
NYS Comp Announcement (tgaskell@syr.lmco.com)
Re: flow vs extraction (lheavner@tcmail.frco.com)
Scouring SS Kegs (Cuchulain Libby)
Gummy Bears/Rain/Bees (RUSt1d?)
carb. in barleywine/legality/spam ("Curt Speaker")
Another 'Bad Yeast?' Question (Paul Brian)
For SUBMISSIONS to be published, send mail to:
homebrew@aob.org
For (UN)SUBSCRIBE requests, send mail to:
homebrew-digest-request@aob.org
and include ONLY subscribe or unsubscribe in the BODY of the message.
Please note that if subscribed via BEER-L, you must unsubscribe by sending
a one line e-mail to listserv@ua1vm.ua.edu that says: UNSUB BEER-L
If your address is changing, please unsubscribe from the old address and
then subscribe from the new address.
If your account is being deleted, please be courteous and unsubscribe first.
For technical problems send e-mail to the Digest Janitor, shawn@aob.org.
OTHER HOMEBREW INFORMATION
http://www.aob.org/aob - The AHA's web site.
http://alpha.rollanet.org - "The Brewery" and the Cat's Meow Archives.
info@aob.org - automated e-mail homebrewing information.
ARCHIVES:
At ftp.stanford.edu in /pub/clubs/homebrew/beer via anonymous ftp. Also
http://alpha.rollanet.org on the web and at majordomo@aob.org by e-mail.
COPYRIGHT:
As with all forums such as this one, copyrights are retained by the
original authors. In accordance with the wishes of the members of the
Homebrew Digest, posts to the HBD may NOT be sold or used as part of a
collection that is sold without the original authors' consent. Copies
may ONLY be made available at no charge and should include the current
posting and subscription addresses for the HBD.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Gregory, Guy J." <GGRE461@ecy.wa.gov>
Date: Mon, 09 Sep 96 08:56:00 PDT
Subject: [none]
Kelly Jones <kejones@ptdcs2.intel.com> responded to me Re: channeling
I wrote:
> I think channelling is first a flow issue, which affects
> extraction. If you try time per unit volume, you directly measure the
> channelling effect. The gravity issue is a reflection of this, as "faster
> flow extracts less stuff".
He said:
" The classic problem with channeling is that
a significant portion of the fluid takes a 'short cut' through the bed,
rather than being evenly distributed. In doing so, it quickly extracts all
of the solubles from that tiny region, and thus extracts nothing form the
majority of the bed. Picture a straw in your grain bed, running from the top
surface to the outlet. Whether the flow is fast or slow is unimportant, the
point is that this flow is not doing any extracting."
Well, Chuck, if you'll notice, flow through that straw is potentially a
great deal faster than flow through the grain. The channeling issue is
essentially formation of a preferential flow path through the grain, as you
said. That flow path, or short cut, conducts fluid much faster than the rest
of the grain. What is available to be extracted in that grain is extracted
rapidly. Per unit time, a higher volume will pass through that short cut.
This volume may have a lower gravity because it does not approach chemical
equilibrium with the surrounding grain as well as in the rest of the bed. It
may have a similar gravity intially because of leakage from the surrounding
bed, or some other reason which is beyond the control of the experiment.
Flow (volume per unit time) will always reflect channelling. Gravity may
not, in the duration of this experiment, given the volumes we're going to
use.
If you think of lautering in two components: chemical and physical, I think
you'll see we agree violently..
Guy Gregory
GuyG4@aol.com
Lighning Ck. Home Brewing
Just in time for Chukar Season.....Relentless Pursuit Rye!!!
------------------------------
From: Billy_Cole@dgii.com (Billy Cole)
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 09:44:07 +0100
Subject: Fruit beer too sweet
last weekend I brewed a strawberry blonde ale using wyeast #1056.
Ferementation was pretty wild for the first 2 days, then died down a
little. By the 4th day, there was no activity at all. I racked to
secondary on day 5. Before doing so, I added 3 more lbs. strawberries
to the secondary and racked on top of them. I took a hydrometer
reading yesterday and it was around 1.013 and the beer tasted very
sweet. Actually, too sweet. The reason I racked to secondary so
early was in hope of getting some more fermentation out of the new
strawberries - this didn't seem to happen. A friend suggested nutrients,
or maybe adding some more yeast. I think this is a good idea, but was
wondering if anyone here can share a little experience with me. I'd like
to bring the sweetness down a little bit. Also, if I do, will this remove
some of the strawberry character? Thanks alot.
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Billy Cole / Senior Engineer / Digi International
Redmond ISDN Development Group
ph: 206-867-3893x628 / pager: 206-663-0229
billyc@dgii.com
------------------------------
From: Eugene Sonn <eugene@dreamscape.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 12:56:40 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Yeast not getting older, getting better
Hey HBDers,
The guy at a local homebrew store was giving me a bit of advice about
yeast. I had planned to make a porter and a stout using the same yeast
from a Wyeast packet. I brewed the porter about 2 weeks ago and pitched
yeast from the porter batch into a stout last night. The guy at the
store said the yeast would actually be better the second time around. Is
this true? I know the advantages of larger pitching rates, but what
about quality. Does yeast really improve with use? I know there's
nothing I can do about the stout batch now, but I'm curious about whether
I should try to salvage some of the resulting yeast once the batch is done.
Eugene
eugene@nova.dreamscape.com
------------------------------
From: John DeCarlo <jdecarlo@juno.com>
Date: Mon, 09 Sep 1996 13:03:22 -0400
Subject: Re: All-Grain Efficiency
Dave Greenlee <daveg@mail.airmail.net> writes:
>Second, the global presumption: When translating a recipe from
>all-grain to extract one presumes, unless stated otherwise, that the
>brewer had a 75% efficiency.
Hmmm. I just wanted to note that I rarely see a recipe where I have to
guess the efficiency (or at least points/lb). If the recipe says it was
5 gallons, 1.050 OG, 10 lbs. of pale ale malt, then I say they got 25
pts/lb. If they used 8 lbs and everything else was the same, I say they
got 31+ pts/lb.
John DeCarlo, jdecarlo@juno.com
------------------------------
From: alan@mail.utexas.edu (Alan P. Van Dyke)
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 10:39:46 -0500
Subject: SN Porter Yeast
Howdy,
I'm planning on brewing up a porter soon, & I was wondering if anyone out
there knew if Sierra Nevada Porter yeast can be cultured, & whether it's
the same as the yeast they use in their Pale Ale.
Thanks!
Alan Van Dyke Austin, TX alan@mail.utexas.edu
------------------------------
From: Kurt Schilling <kurt@pop.iquest.net>
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 96 12:10 EST
Subject: Motorizing Malt Mills
Greetings all!
FWIW: Dave in Indy's positing in one of last weeks Digests got me to
thinking. Sometimes folks ask about putting a motor in their MaltMill(TM
JSP). OK, just how fast do you want your mill to run? Maybe the following
info will be useful to those who wish to get away from the sulime and zen
taks of hand cranking their mills.
Assuming that you are going to use a 1725 rpm electric motor:
Motor sheave/pulley Mill sheave/pulley resulting rpm mill
1.5 inches 12 in 196
1.5 in 10 in 236
1.5 in 9 in 258
1.5 8 in 296
2inches 12 in 269
2 in 10 in 324
2 in 9 in 360
2 in 8 in 406
2.5 in 12 in 342
2.5 10 411
2.5 8 516
A search of the archives of the HBD will show you that most people have been
gearing their mills to run about 400 rpm. I'm currentling using a variable
pitch sheave on a 1725 rpm 1/2 hp motor and an 8 in sheave on the mill.I'd
planned on using a 1.5 in motor sheave, but screwed up and didn't measeure
the motor shaft befor I ordered the sheave. Mill speed is approximately
390-410 rpm. Throughput of 1 lb grain in less than 15 seconds.
The mill and motor cabinet is constructed out of 1/2 OSB (Yeah, I should
have used 3/4 ply, but I had the OSB on hand). Bracing of the cabinet uses
2X4's and the whole thing is glued and screwed together with drywall screws
(#8x 1 in). The cabinet is finished with three coats of interior semi-gloss
enamel. The mill empties into a 5 gal bucket located on a shelf below the
mill. My design uses the weight of the motor to tension the pulley belt. The
motor is suspended from a 2X4 brace using three 4 in "T" hinges. The mill
will easily grind malted wheat and cara-pils (tm) malt with no problems. The
only modifacation to the mill has been to make an extended hopper from 1/2
in plywood. The new hopper holds 10 lbs of grain easily.
Total time invested in the project has been about 8 hours (not counting
paint drying time). Total cost was around $35 for everything.
Hope that this provides some help for those folks who are thinking of
motorizing a MaltMill.
Kurt Schilling
e-mail kurt@iquest.net
Kurt
------------------------------
From: shawn@aob.org (Shawn Steele)
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 11:26:12 -0600
Subject: [none]
approved: mypwd
From: "David R. Burley" <103164.3202@CompuServe.COM>
Date: 07 Sep 96 13:33:28 EDT
To: Shawn Steele Submissions <homebrew@aob.org>
Subject: Iodine Test
Message-ID: <960907173328_103164.3202_IHE49-2@CompuServe.COM>
Brewsters:
I'm puzzled. I read in Pap's books,and now in Greg Noonan's book that iodine
gives a reaction with the husk fragments. Greg's "New Brewing Lager Beer" p.
125 ....."husk fragments which always deeply discolor iodine".
I presume he means iodine deeply colors husk fragments? Or do the husk
fragments
remove iodine color from the iodine solution without discoloring themselves? Or
does the iodine turn dark in the presence of husk fragments???
Some years ago after reading this "fact" that husk fragments discolor with
iodine in Pap's book (copy no longer available to quote,since my son has it), I
tried to get husk fragments from a mash that had been fully converted, to
discolor in the presence of iodine - nothing. I had a discussion the other day
with a HBer and a HB store owner. When we talked about the iodine test the HBer
was using and how important it was to assess completion by testing the spent
grain as well as the soution,the store owner said to me "but the husks react
with iodine to give a color". So members of the HB community believe it from
somewhere.
I cannot find a reference that says that iodine turns celluose blue-black. From
my own experience I believe that starch free paper ( e.g. filter paper) or
un-sized cloth do not turn dark purple or blue-black in contact with iodine.
What is going on here? Did I do something wrong? Do I mis-understand? or is
this a momily?
What is your experience, opinion, etc ?. How do you do your test?. Greg ( p143)
floats the iodine solution on the wort sample placed in a porcelain dish " drop
by drop until a distinct layer of iodine (solution?) is formed." I just add
iodine solution from the drugstore which is soluble in the wort.
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
- --- End of forwarded mail from Homebrew
------------------------------
From: Moncsko@aol.com
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 13:27:43 -0400
Subject: Beer Hunter.com
Just read in todays paper about Michael Jackson's Web
page...www.beerhunter.com. Just thought somebody might be interested. BTW,
anyone know if the Pete's Wicked site is up & running yet?
Jim Moncsko, Brentwood, NY.
------------------------------
From: bill-giffin@juno.com (Bill Giffin)
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 13:26:20 cst
Subject: re: SPAMM Problem/Limit posting
Good afternoon all,
I agree with you Domenick that this forum is an inappropriate place to
solicit for any cause to a point.
I think that a good case can be made for a new and wonderful widget to be
presented to the group with explanation why this is the best thing to hit
beer and brewing since brown bottles.
As with any post if you don't like it hit the page down and don't respond
or buy from an inappropriate advertiser.
Bill
------------------------------
From: "Ray Robert" <Ray_Robert@bah.com>
Date: 9 Sep 1996 13:15:11 U
Subject: Sparging/bees/LOL
Goodday brew collective:
I wanted to get some ideas on how different people sparge. The reason I ask
is my phils auto sparger thingy (tm) gave up the ghost this weekend ( I think
it has lime/calcium build up.). I ended up standing over my lauter tun for an
hour hand-sparging, trying to keep the bees away from my wort. Any
ideas/suggestions?
Which brings me to my second problem. Whilst brewing in sunny VA on saturday,
the local bee population took a liking to my brew supplies. After just
finishing my boil, prior to chilling, an interested bee took a nose dive into
the brew pot. Needless to say, he died a happy bee. My question is IMBR?
And lastly, I wanted to thank "the coyote" for his recent post re: just brew
it. He comment about mopping up wort off the floor and boiling it had me LOL.
Regards
Robert Ray
ray_robert@bah.com
Centreville, VA
------------------------------
From: scotty@rand.nidlink.com
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 10:59:14 +0000
Subject: force carbonation
I have a batch of raspberry wheat(5 gal) in secondary right now. I
just bought a corny keg setup to go in my spare fridge. I would like
to force carbonate my beer and was wondering the best way to go about
doing this. I have the pressure/temp table from the Cat's Meow that
shows volumes of CO2 at given pressures and temps. My question is,
if I am working with chilled beer(~44dF), how should I go about
carbonating it? Should I figure out how much CO2 I want in the beer
and, using the table, set the system up to pressure and let it
sit?(How many volumes of CO2 in a wheat beer? How long should I let
it sit?) I have heard about shaking the keg with pressure on to
speed this process. Most people use a higher pressure than the table
suggests if they shake the keg to carbonate. Doesn't this
overcarbonate the beer? Please help.
Thanks,
Scotty
------------------------------
From: John Wilkinson <jwilkins@imtn.tpd.dsccc.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 13:14:28 -0500
Subject: RE: weighing propane/CO2 tanks
In an earlier HBD I had suggested weighing propane and/or CO2 tanks
prior to filling so you could better judge how much was left in the tank.
Several people commented that the tare weight stamped on the tank would
be the empty weight. I went home and looked at my tanks and could find
a tare weight on a new propane tank but not on an old propane tank or an old
CO2 tank. The propane tanks paint is pretty oxidized and perhaps the TW is
obscured but the CO2 tank seems to have all stamps readable and I find
nothing indicating TW. Is this a recent innovation? I have looked very
carefully all over my CO2 tank and find nothing labeled TW or any number that
would be a reasonable weight. This is not critical as I can weigh my tanks
on an accurate beam scale I have but I am curious.
John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas
------------------------------
From: Randal.Dusing@uswau01msg.med.ge.com
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 13:22:32 -0500
Subject: Brewed a beer I don't like; Can I improve this (beer(not))
Dear Brewmisters,
I don't think I've read any talk of trying this at home.
I brewed my first bad batch of beer, no contamination just an
all-grain brown ale
already in the bottle, or in this case bootled.
I attempted to make my first all grain, have made three since then and
they turned out great
But, between my low extraction and the incorrect grains amounts from
the local home brew store.
The result is a flat(it is lightly carbonated) highly hopped ale. The
body is very light.
I like a full bodied beer.
So it's not like I can't drink it, but it's nothing I would share with
others.
This is what I want to do; either mix up a batch of non-fermentable
grain to add body, then
pour out what's left of about 3 gallons in the bottling bucket give a
couple of good stirs add
brown sugar for priming, and rebottle.
or
Would I be better cooking the original beer in the pot with addition
fermentable and non frementables
and primary a second time.
Private e-mail is fine I'll sum up for the others
Radical
------------------------------
From: montgomery_john@CCMAIL.ncsc.navy.mil
Date: Mon, 09 Sep 96 13:19:40 CDT
Subject: Freshness Dating
Something's been nagging away at my tiny little brain and only
recently has come to the forefront of my consciousness. Please forgive
me if I'm flogging a horse that has long been killed on this forum.
What's going on with this freshness dating thing? It seems that is has
never been a concern (at least on beer beverages) until the
microbrewery revolution. Is it because most (if not all) microbrewed
beers contain no preservatives? Then why, pray tell, have some of my
own homebrewed beers maintained their "drinkability" for up to years
when secquestered in the deep dark cool reaches of my "beer closet"?
They don't contain any preservatives (except the alcohol :) ). Is this
really a matter of concern or a marketing gimmick?
Email flames directly to me please (save the bandwidth):
jbm
montgomery_john@ccmail.ncsc.navy.mil
------------------------------
From: jhilliard@juno.com
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 13:47:37 PST
Subject: Re: Summer Brewing
On Sat, 7 Sep 1996, Rick Willoughby <rickw1@mail.idt.net> said,
>Where do all the brewers go in the summer????
>Rick Willoughby
To the basement for another brew! This was a cooler summer than we're
used to here in Connecticut, but temperatures were regularly above 80.
Mid-July saw me brew my best batch ever- a dark olde english porter. I
don't drink much, but it's almost gone! Where did those two whole cases
go?
Jim Hilliard
------------------------------
From: Jeff Stampes <jeff.stampes@xilinx.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 11:40:44 -0600
Subject: Spam and Exclusivity/Barleywine Starter/CO2 levels
Domenick re-opened discussion of restricting posts to the HBD to
subscribers only. I've always been in favor of this idea, and
moreso now than ever.
If you wonder how bad it's going to get if we don't make this move,
I bring the following to your attention, especially in light of
the Viemaster spam last week.
If you'll remember, this spam came from someone at "juno.com".
I received a snail mail brochure form this company last week
as well. Who are they? They are a company providing FREE e-mail
access to anyone with a computer and a modem. You ask for it,
they give you the software to run, access #'s, and all the
e-mail you can handle, with all costs being footed by their
advertisers.
Think of the implication....if you don't pay for it, what better
way to get an account to spam with? You can post to any newsgroup
with just an e-mail account, and can hit any mailing list you can
find. No rules of usage, nothing.
Just more fuel for the fire
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
I'm building up a starter of the Wyeast American II for use in
a Barleywine we'll be brewing Saturday. It started in a full
batch of Pale ale I made (around 1.065). I've now built it up
in a 1.080 starter, and when it's done plan on trying a 1.120
starter. Anyone used this yeast in a higher gravity brew and
know how it's alcohol tolerance is?
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
What sort of CO2 levels are there in beers such as a Chimay? I
know my Abbeys taste better with a higher carbonation (more
appropriate to style as well :) and want to try and keg the
next batch with the right CO2 from the start. Any suggestions?
Jeff
------------------------------
From: KennyEddy@aol.com
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 14:31:10 -0400
Subject: Deep Thoughts
David Cummings asks what he thinks is a crazy question:
<<
When the beer is in the secondary the only thing that happens
is that the yeast/trub settles out (if it hasn't already) and there is no
actual "secondary fermentation." Am I doing something wrong, or is this
typical of most "secondary fermentations?"
>>
Not crazy at all, sir. I suppose them slow-fermenting lager yeasts might
still be actively munching away by that time, but with very few exceptions my
ales have been pretty much "still" by the time they go to secondary (I
give'em a week usually). I use the secondary as a clearing vessel. I don't
know how AlK and others do it with just a primary; even after finishing
fermenting my ales still have all kinds of splunge scattered from top to
bottom. Some small amount gets carried to the secondary but invariably
settles out to leave clear beer behind, suitable for kegging or bottling. If
I packaged right out of the primary I'd need to serve my beer with a spoon.
Perhaps the terminology springs from naming the vessel rather than describing
the process. Guess it could be just as well be a "clearing tank". Just
because it's a "fermenter" doen't mean there's any "fermenting" going on,
what? It's like, once the yeast is done, is your primary fermenter still a
fermenter? Now *that's* deep.
Ken Schwartz
El Paso, TX
KennyEddy@aol.com
http://members.aol.com/kennyeddy
------------------------------
From: RUSt1d? <rust1d@li.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 14:35:56 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: SN Porter Yeast
At 10:39 AM 9/9/96 -0500, you wrote:
>Howdy,
>
>I'm planning on brewing up a porter soon, & I was wondering if anyone out
>there knew if Sierra Nevada Porter yeast can be cultured, & whether it's
>the same as the yeast they use in their Pale Ale.
>
>Thanks!
>
>Alan Van Dyke Austin, TX alan@mail.utexas.edu
SN uses Wyeast 1056 American Ale for most of thier beers. The porter
and ale both use it.
John Varady
Boneyard Brewing Co.
"Ale today, Gone tomorrow"
------------------------------
From: Dave Mercer <dmercer@path.org>
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 08:05:30 -0700
Subject: Effects of high temp fermentation, SPAM
I've got a couple of batches in bottles now that were fermented in my
basement during the heat of July/August in Seattle (you Gulf Coasters, don't
laugh, the summertime temperature sometimes soars to 85F up here: I mean HOT
HOT HOT!). Anyway, ambient basement temperatures hovered around 75F for most
of the time these beers were fermenting. I used 1056, a yeast I don't often
use but one that I understood to be more heat tolerant than others. The
first thing I noticed at bottling was that in both cases the attenuation was
much higher than I expected, from around 1.060 down to 1.010-1.008. When I
tried a bottle from the first batch (a kind of strong brown ale) a couple of
nights ago after two weeks of conditioning, two things were evident: It
still needed time, carbonation and head were not there yet, and - much more
disturbing - there was a pronounced off-taste like 'bad' alcohol. Last night
I bottled the second batch, a more lightly hopped and flavored honey wheat.
The same funky chemical-alcoholic off flavor was there too. Was I tasting
fusel alcohols from high fermentation temperatures? Or is this likely
something else, like an infection? I don't suppose it will go away with
time, will it?
I wish someone had advised me not to brew during the summer. Jeez.
- ---
Regarding Domenick's spew on spams, I agree entirely with his view that they
degrade the HBD and the suggestion that posts should be limited to
subscribers. I also think the HBD should go back to being a D only. Allowing
undigested posts results in undigested responses, and the increasing amount
of noise in the digest (while still low compared to R.C.B) is giving me
indigestion. On the other hand, over the years I've become much more type
'B' regarding junk mail and now just pitch it (or PG DOWN) without reading
it and without letting it raise my blood pressure. Can't say the same about
the intrusive boiler-room army of telephone soliciters that harrass me at
home every night, though. But that has nothing to do with brewing...
Dave Mercer in hot steamy Seattle
------------------------------
From: tgaskell@syr.lmco.com
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 96 14:56:58 EDT
Subject: NYS Comp Announcement
Attention New York State homebrewers, judges, and stewards
CALL FOR ENTRIES
CALL FOR JUDGES AND STEWARDS
The 1996 Saranac Fall Fest Homebrew Competition
will be held Saturday, September 21, 1995
at the F.X. Matt Brewing Company in Utica, NY
This BJCP-registered homebrew competition is open to all New York State
homebrewers with entries in all 1996 AHA styles, except sake. In addition to
style category prizes, special prizes (personalized Saranac canoe paddles)
will be awarded to the five entries selected as closest to these members of
the Saranac family of beers:
Saranac Adirondack Amber
Saranac Golden Pilsener
Saranac Black & Tan
Saranac Pale Ale
Saranac Wild Berry Wheat
This competition is a part of the F.X. Matt Brewery's Fall Fest
celebration, the proceeds of which benefit the United Way. Your
competition entry also gets you a Fall Fest admission ticket, Saranac
sampling tickets, and Saranac T-shirt (available at the door).
The competition also kicks off the "NY State Homebrew Club of the Year" and
"NY State Homebrewer of the Year" awards competition season. Enter early
and enter often!
For competition entry forms by US Mail, call F.X. Matt Tour Center:
1-800-690-3181 ext. 2234
For judge/steward registration forms by US mail, or more information,
please contact competition organizer Tom Gaskell (tgaskell@syr.lmco.com)
at (315) 839-5004. Competition entry deadline is September 14th.
For more information about Saranac Fall Fest and the Saranac family of beers
(including Wild Berry Wheat), visit http://www.saranac.com/whatsnew.html.
------------------------------
From: lheavner@tcmail.frco.com
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 14:04:45 -0500
Subject: Re: flow vs extraction
Kelly Jones <kejones@ptdcs2.intel.com> wrote:
>>Guy Gregory wrote:
> I think channelling is first a flow issue, which affects
> extraction. If you try time per unit volume, you directly measure
the
> channelling effect. The gravity issue is a reflection of this, as
"faster
> flow extracts less stuff".
I'll have to disagree with this. The classic problem with channeling
is that
a significant portion of the fluid takes a 'short cut' through the
bed,
rather than being evenly distributed. In doing so, it quickly
extracts all
of the solubles from that tiny region, and thus extracts nothing form
the
majority of the bed. Picture a straw in your grain bed, running from
the top
surface to the outlet. Whether the flow is fast or slow is
unimportant, the
point is that this flow is not doing any extracting. <<
Sorry Kelly, flow may be important. I may be speaking out of turn,
since I'm an extract brewer, but this is a diffusion problem. At slow
enough flows, the radial concentration gradient will vanish, even
though the liquor in the "channels" isn't in contact with sugar rich
grain. There are actually 2 diffusion problems here. One is the
diffusion of liquor into the grain and the other is diffusion of sugar
through the liquor. What I can't tell you since I don't have the
practical experience, is how slow the flow must be to allow diffusion
to approach equilibrium. However, from following the digest, it
appears that a 1 - 2 hour sparge for a 5 gallon batch can result in a
pretty good extraction under a variety of grain bed conditions.
Lou
<lheavner@frmail.frco.com>
------------------------------
From: Cuchulain Libby <hogan@connecti.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 14:24:51 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Scouring SS Kegs
RE: Michael Gerholdt's suggestion to use green Scotch pads. IMHO, green
scotch pads will scratch just about anything, Especially SS. That stuff has
ruined many good knives of mine. Heck I used to use it to sand the enamel
paint prior to putting a custom lacquer job on vans. Try using one of those
plastic puff pads instead and NEVER use scotch pads on food grade pails,
spoons, etc.
*********************************************************************
* Cuchulain Libby * Connect International Inc. *
* Internet Marketing Executive * 45 N.E. Loop 410 *
* hogan@connecti.com * Suite 180 *
* Office: 210-341-2599 * San Antonio TX 78216 *
* 1-888-797-2424 * Fax: 210-341-6725 *
*********************************************************************
------------------------------
From: RUSt1d? <rust1d@li.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 15:24:57 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Gummy Bears/Rain/Bees
I had the mash from hell yesterday and I knew it before I started. But since
I hadn't experienced a stuck mash, I did it anyway. Heres how it happened.
I boiled 1 lb of rice and 1 lb of Bulgar wheat in 2 gallons of water for
1 hour thursday and left sit overnight, hoping to brew friday. Friday morning
this mess had turned into a solid chunk of mush (solid mush?). Since Fran
was beating up the coast I put off brewing until Sunday and refrigerated this
mess. Sunday morning I pulled it out of the fridge, and dumped it into a big
pot. It looked like one big gummy bear. Ack. Undeterred, I added a gallon of
water, heated to 160F and mixed in the rest of my grains. If this wasn't gummy
enough the rest of my grain bill didn't help.
Name: Adjunsix O.G.: 1.041
Style: Cream Ale I.B.U.: 21.8
Volume: 10.5 gallons A.B.V.: 4.1%
Grains/Fermentables Lbs Hops AAU Oz Min
Pale, American 2 Row 10.00 Willamette 5.0 1.50 90
Cara-pils, American 2.00 Willamette 5.0 0.50 30
Oats, Flaked 1.13 Cascade 4.4 1.00 0
Wheat, Bulgar 1.13 Perle 7.5 0.25 0
Rye, Flaked 1.00 Chinook 11.0 0.12 0
Corn, Flaked 1.00 Uk Target 10.0 0.12 0
Rice, Raw 1.00
Barley, Flaked 1.00
Needless to say, this set up like concrete in my mash tun. I had to lauter this
in small batches over the course of 3 hours. Stupid yellow jackets were having
a heyday with all the split grains and sugars everywhere. My arms where sticky
up to my elbows and the bees kept landing on me! Well to help everything out,
a huge thunderstorm came, washed away most of my spillage and drove away the
bees. I had lids over the many buckets holding the grains so no problems there.
As soon as the rain stopped the bees came back and brought all their friends.
I finally got stung as I was wrapping up the sparge. Just as I began to boil
the rains came back. This time worse (it rained 5 inches in 2 hours!). I was
afraid to stand next to my sankes with all the lightning. This brew took me
from 11:30 am to 7:30 pm to complete. The worst part is, I'm only making this
beer to appease the Coors drinkers that will inevitably be at my wedding.
This was spurned on from the comment of a bee landing in the wort. I watched
several go to their deaths in my hot mash and laughed at each one. Sting me,
die a sugar-coated death!
"Friends help you move, real friends help you move bodies."
John Varady
Boneyard Brewing Co.
"Ale today, Gone tomorrow"
------------------------------
From: "Curt Speaker" <speaker@safety-1.univsfty.psu.edu>
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 15:28:49 EST
Subject: carb. in barleywine/legality/spam
Regarding the carbonation level in barleywines - I have used Wyeast
#1056 in both the barleywines that I made, and it worked very well in
both; 1st with a S.G. of 1.088, the 2nd at 1.096. Both fermented
into the mid-teens in a reasonable period of time. Both also
carbonated well with 3/4 cup of corn sugar - but I also gave them
both a month at room temp. before moving them to the celler for
storage. The second one is kinda strange...It gets horrible chill
haze when first placed in the fridge, but after a week at 40F, it is
clear as can be????
Homebrewing is also illegal here in Pennsylvania, much to many a
brewers dismay. There is nothing wrong with a homebrew store,
however. Malt syrups, grains, hops and yeast are all legal
commodities; it's when you put them together and let the yeast make
alcohol that the trouble starts - blame it on the yeast!!! :-)
I have asked folks at the Liqour Control Board (state agency) about
problems with homebrewing. Their comment to me was that as long as
you don't try to sell your homebrew, there is very little reason for
them to go after an individual homebrewer.
I agree with Dom V. on the SPAM issue; only subscribers to the HBD
should be able to post to it...it is a minor thing to ask, and will
keep a lot of sh*t off of the digest. Most other lists that I
subscribe to operate that way...
Remember, life is too short to drink cheap beer!
Curt
------------------------------
From: Paul Brian <pbrian@Tudor.Com>
Date: Mon, 09 Sep 96 15:46:22 -0400
Subject: Another 'Bad Yeast?' Question
Hello Brewers
Last week I purchased Wyeast 1056. It was fresh(less than two weeks old).
I got home, popped the pouch and put it in my cellar where I ferment my
beer. Next day it was puffed up and I proceeded to make a one pint starter.
All is going well so far. I was drinking a homebrew. I was happy. I cut the
corner off the pouch and took a wiff before dumping it in the starter. My
smile disappeared. The only way I can describe it is it just didn't smell
right. It reminded me more of the area in back of my fraternity bar after
it hasn't been cleaned in a week than the sweet smell of fresh Chico yeast.
Since I already did all the work, I continued to dump the yeast in the starter
to see what happens. Since I was brewing the next day, I stopped by the
homebrew store to pick up some dry yeast. When I told the guy of my story, he
said "If it puffed up, then the yeast was fine." My only arguement back was
that an infected batch of beer will happily ferment along but it will still
taste like crap. Never really settling the issue, he gave me a couple packs of
Muntons dry ale yeast and I was on my way.
Finally, my question- Who's right? When I got home the starter still didn't
smell or taste like it should. Can the yeast go bad during temp. changes
during shipping or anything like that?
Anyway, if the beer turns out good I'm tempted to go back to using dry yeast.
Rehydrating a couple packs of yeast while the wort cools is a hell of a lot
easier than making a starter the night before. Also, after reading the thread
on two-stage vs one-stage fermenting, I think I'll just keep this batch in the
primary until I'm ready to bottle. That's two steps out of the brewing
process. Better yet, maybee I'll just go buy some Bud next time. NOT!!
Cheers,
Paul Brian
------------------------------
End of Homebrew Digest #2180
****************************
