Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2250
This file received at Hops.Stanford.EDU 1996/10/26 PDT
Homebrew Digest Saturday, 26 October 1996 Number 2250
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Mike Donald, Digest Janitor-in-training
Thanks to Rob Gardner for making the digest happen!
Contents:
Mashing specialty grains/Munich malt (Ian Smith)
US brewers going to metric (Matt Wise)
Cutting stainless steel (Tim Martin)
Extract to grain conversion (mikehu@lmc.com)
Re:Lactoagain ((Scott Abene))
Constructive criticism (Jim Busch)
UV sterilization of brewing utensils (Ken Sullivan)
Re:Lactoagain (RUSt1d?)
Glass vs Plastic or Blue vs Grey (Tim Martin)
So Long and Thanks For All the Fish! (Bill Rust)
ccMail SMTPLINK Undeliverable Message (David Raitt)
Flavors and Screwups and Fl ("Craig Rode")
re: Let's Smoke 'em ("Marc Hugentobler")
re: Welsh Ale (John Reese)
Re: Let's Smoke 'em (Andrew Lynch)
[none] ()
[none] ()
[none] ()
[none] ()
[none] ()
[none] ()
[none] ()
[none] ()
[none] ()
[none] ()
[none] ()
oxygen solubility (Peter Ensminger)
O2 in Plastic Buckets ("Chuck and Grace Burkins")
Tempering of Malt (Kathy Booth )
[none] ()
Kombucha tea to beer? ((Ken Coppleman))
Molasses beer ((Ken Coppleman))
Re:Dry-Wet hopping ((David Hill))
Blowoff hose infections... NOT! ("korz")
Wave of things to come ? ("Robert Petersen")
Dixie White Chocolate Brew (Robert Johnson)
Extract v All Grain (David Brockington)
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,
homebrew-digest-owner@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: Ian Smith <rela!isrs@netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 09:57:47 -0600 (MDT)
Subject: Mashing specialty grains/Munich malt
What is the concensus regarding mashing specialty grains such as Munich
and crystal ? Do I put them in with the regular malt and mash for the
full 90 minutes (or whatever) or do I put them in for 15 minumtes at mash
out ?
Also what is the enzyme potential of Munich malt - does it have usable
enzymes and if so what is the pts/lb/gall ?
Cheers
Ian Smith
isrs@rela.uucp.netcom.com
------------------------------
From: Matt Wise <matt.wise@kwsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 14:50:27 -0400
Subject: US brewers going to metric
In response to Graham Stone's suggestion about US brewers converting to =
metric:
Graham, why would you expect a whole country to consider your suggestion =
of going to one system of measurement (metric) when your very name is a =
mixture of the two different systems of measurement (a stone being appx. =
6.4kg for those who didn't know)! Just kidding! I, as an American, =
wish the metric system would become the primary system of measurement. =
I think US manufacturers are slowly converting to metric. As this =
transition continues, it will slowly trickle down to the general public. =
I don't know where other homebrewers stand on this issue. At this =
point, much of our equipment is based on the US Customary system, so =
recipes will show little change until equipment is upgraded to metric. =
I feel there is no reason for equipment designs not to be metric, unless =
the design comes from an older, Customary design. You must also =
remember that Americans are very stubborn and seem to resist the move to =
the metric system of measurement even though it is a much more organized =
and meaningful system than our current one. In conclusion, don't expect =
Americans to change just to suit the rest of the world and if you find a =
metric recipe or equipment design from one of us, consider yourself =
lucky.
I feel your pain,
Matt Wise
KWSoftware
Red Lion (named after a nearby tavern), PA
------------------------------
From: Tim Martin <TimM@southwest.cc.nc.us>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 15:10:21 -0300
Subject: Cutting stainless steel
Hey Neighbors,
The tool that many of you have described is a pneumatic chisle. The tool
works like a regular chisle but is driven by air. In experienced hands it
slides right through stainless. I took my stainless steel drum to our auto
shop teacher here at the community college where I work and he cut my
lid off...real impressive. The tools are often used by auto body shops
and mechanics, check them out in your area. I used a 60 grit belt on my
belt sander to smooth the metal. I had no luck with my recipricating saw
(Sawzall) maybe it depends on the hardness of the stainless used or
finding the correct blade.
Good luck,
Tim Martin
Cullowhee, NC.
------------------------------
From: mikehu@lmc.com
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 96 12:10:19 PDT
Subject: Extract to grain conversion
Ron S. of the "Continous Flow Brewery" Asked if there is a way to convert
extract receipes to all grain. I haven't seen a formula to do this, but I
think this may be a solution.
First you will need to know two things:
1) The efficency of your brewing system
2) The O.G. that the extract receipe is shooting for.
To compute the efficency of your system, use the following formula:
(pts = Original Gravity - 1.000)
pts X Gallons
extract_rate (efficiency) = -----------------------
lbs of grain
Lets say you brew a batch using 10.5 lbs of grain, and end up with a O.G.
of 1.042. Your efficency would therefore be:
42pts X 5gallons
------------------- = 20 points/pound
10.5 lbs of grain
Now lets say the extract receipe is shooting for a O.G. of 1.045.
45pts X 5gallons
-------------------- = 20 points/pound
unknown lbs of grain
So,
45pts X 5 gallons 225
unknown lbs of grain = ------------------- = ----- = 11.25 lbs of grain
20 pts/pound 20 (for 5 gals)
As far as what types of grain to use, you are on your own.
Just do some research on the style you are trying to emulate.
The key to this of course is taking good notes, so you will know
your efficency for different types/combinations of grains.
- --Keep it flowin'
Mike H.
Portland, Or.
------------------------------
From: sabene@fcg.net (Scott Abene)
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 14:20:31 -0600
Subject: Re:Lactoagain
Nathan Moore Wrote:
>
> I've also been doing some research into Lacto Brewing. It seems
>the best idea I've come upon is to use a yogurt culture from a health food
>store. This seems like the safest method to me. There is an excellent
>articale in the Library in the Cat's Meow that talks about making Sour
>Mash.
> Good Luck
> Nathan Moore
> Denver, CO
I always get my Lacto Brewing cultures right off the tap at the WeinKeller
in Berwyn, Il.
They have the best examples of Lacto Brewing that I can think of off-hand.
Later,
- -Scott "Keep those FLAMES Coming" Abene
###############################################
# Scott Abene #
# skotrat@wwa.com #
# SKOTRAT'S HOMEBREW "BEER SLUT" WEBPAGE #
# http://miso.wwa.com/~skotrat #
# SKOTRAT'S HOMEBREW RECIPE ARCHIVE #
# http://miso.wwa.com/~skotrat/recipes #
# SKOTRATS BREW RAT CHAT HOMEBREW CHAT #
# http://miso.wwa.com/~skotrat/Brew-Rat-Chat #
###############################################
------------------------------
From: Jim Busch <busch@eosdev2.gsfc.nasa.gov>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 15:35:25 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Constructive criticism
Derek continues his diatribe:
<I find BT utterly useless.
You have your opinion and I have my own. Rather than get into a
public pissing match with you, why dont you respond to the points
I made that demonstrate how Brewing Techniques serves all levels
of readers, both amature and professional?
I know its hard on the 'net but cant we try to keep the S/N ratio
a little higher? I concur completely with Georges comments a few
issues back at how much more rewarding it used to be to participate
in this forum. Ever wonder why folks like myself are so silent
these days? Its exactly due to thoughtful posts such as Dereks
that encourage me to share my time here. ;-(
Jim Busch
------------------------------
From: Ken Sullivan <kj@nts.gssc.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 13:43:47 -0600
Subject: UV sterilization of brewing utensils
Hi world :-)
Okay.. I have a friend with a pond. He is constantly
cleaning and filtering the water to remove the
algae and bacteria. Seems like a pain in the butt.
Well, he has been talking about buying a real nifty
UV light gadget which effectively recirculates the
pond water through a tube housing a quartz shielded
High-intensity UV lamp.
Here's the idea.. what about sanitizing those 'delicate'
plastic barrels with a dose of UV?? It's gonna kill
all the bad stuff, then just rinse it out. Several
kinds of plastic drums are made out of UV resistant
material AND FDA approved. Either swipe the interior
with the UV lamp or suspend the lamp inside, turn it
on and go have a homebrew! Turn it off when you're done
and flush with water. No more messy/toxic chemicals.
No more residuals left in the drum that might upset
or kill your yeast.
So World?? Whaddya think??
And yes, you had better wear those UV blocker glasses :-)
KJ
------------------------------
From: RUSt1d? <rust1d@li.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 15:55:44 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re:Lactoagain
I made my sour mash last night. Mashed in at 110F and let sit for 15 hours.
This morning it was at 95F and stinky! I know it was soured because when
my hose got clogged I had to suck on it to get it flowing. Sucking too hard,
I got a big mouthful of grain/liquor and almost puked from the unpleasantness.
I was gaging and choking and spitting everywhere. Lautering this mess (12 lb
pilsner/7 lb bulgar/3 lb wheat flour) is not going too good. It stuck several
times. I had to scoop out and reset the bed several times. I was up to my
elbow in soured grains. Ack. It was going so bad, I left it to lauter and
went to work. Hopefully, I will be done went I get home so I can boil. Next
time I make a wit I think I will definately add lactic acid at bottling just
because this soured mash stinks so much.
If I'm not drinking it, I'm thinking it,
John Varady http://www.netaxs.com/~vectorsys/varady/index.html
Boneyard Brewing Co. "The HomeBrew Recipe Calculating Program"
"Ale today, Gone tomorrow."
------------------------------
From: Tim Martin <TimM@southwest.cc.nc.us>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 16:19:50 -0300
Subject: Glass vs Plastic or Blue vs Grey
Hey Neighbors,
I think I've come up with a "civil" way to settle this war between the
fermentors. Come this fourth of July, everyone with a fermentor meet at
Gettysburg. Those with glass fermentors paint theirs blue and those
with plastic paint theirs grey. Each side will be given rocks, nails, brillow
pad, oxygen grenades and chlorine bombs. The side with a fermentor
left standing and still bubbling...WINS.
Too silly, OK. I would love to use plastic, except, not all plastic is created
equal. I mean...there is HDPE, ABS, CPVC, PVC, polycarbonate, etc.etc.
you get my point but glass, well it's just glass. Don't get me wrong I use
plastic buckets to bottle, sparge and to clean in but glass to ferment.
On a recent camping trip I pulled out my trusty plastic canteen and to my
chagrin the water tasted like it had come out of a water hose lying in the
sun all day.
The only disadvantage I see to glass is that it will break. But no one has
mentioned that you can see through glass and that is one of the main
reasons I like glass. I like to be able to see my beer. Watch the first
bubble come to the surface, monitor the trub depth, the yeast work, the
beer change from cloudy to clear, I mean...hell it's a great show. Then
there is the sensuous shape of the glass. Yes...I do love my carboy.
Enough said, I'll see all you bucket boys in Gettysburg.
Remember, for rice cakes, let's all be "civil" to each other, we're all just
discussing BEER not a cancer serum.
Tim Martin
Buzzard's Roost HB
'with that strong predatory taste"
Cullowhee, NC.
------------------------------
From: Bill Rust <wrust@csc.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 96 16:23 EDT
Subject: So Long and Thanks For All the Fish!
Brewmeisters,
I have to take a break for a while. The Digest has just gotten too
voluminous for me to keep up with. I got back from a 5 day honeymoon and
there were at least a dozen issues! As I read thru several messages of
complaining, whining, and name calling, I realized that I need a break.
Maybe the digest will heal itself after a while; who knows. I appreciate
all the great info and my hat's off to Jim Busch, Dr. Fix, George De Piro,
and many others for all the enjoyable reading.
And now back to your regular broadcast... (Hey, Al K., I think Dave Burley
just called you a liar again...).
Skol.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
-= BILL RUST - JACK PINE SAVAGE BREWERY, http://www.i1.net/~wrust =-
The New Atlas bar in Columbus, Montana features a giant wall-mounted
herd of deceased animals, including a mutant two-headed sheep, which
looks at you with all four eyes as if to say: "Either I have two
heads, or you have had a lot to drink." - DAVE BARRY
--------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
From: David Raitt <raitt@spec.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 15:37:34 -0500
Subject: ccMail SMTPLINK Undeliverable Message
I tried to send this privately, but the address didn't work. It is actually
possible that it is of interest to a general audience. I am also interested
as to whether or not I can now send mail to the HBD. A few weeks ago (from a
different address) I couldn't.
>To: carter@mail.hq.faa.gov
>From: David Raitt <raitt@spec.com>
>Subject: Peat-smoked malt
>
>Hi,
>
>In the HBD you asked about experiences with peat smoked malt. About 6 weeks
>ago, I made a peat-smoked porter (I got the recipe from a calendar). The
>recipe called for 1.25 lbs of peat-smoked malt, but the homebrew shop guy
>convinced me to cut it back a bit, so I used 3/4 of a pound.
>
>The beer came out really well. It has a distinctive smoky character that
>isn't overpowering, and was ready to drink after two weeks in the bottle.
>Since it is a porter, there are quite a few dark grains in there which
>probably help cut the smoke factor a bit, but I can't really imagine that a
>smoked beer wouldn't be dark.
>
>One thing I was warned about in the homebrew shop is that all peat-smoked
>malt is not created equal. There are different levels of smokiness, and you
>should be at least somewhat aware of how heavily smoked yours is.
>
>David
>
- --
David Raitt, Systems Scientist | raitt@spec.com
Systems & Processes Engineering Corp | Voice (512) 306-1100 x172
401 Camp Craft Rd. | Fax (512) 306-1122
Austin, TX 78746 |
------------------------------
From: "Craig Rode" <craig.rode@sdrc.com>
Date: 25 Oct 1996 15:46:59 -0600
Subject: Flavors and Screwups and Fl
Hey folks, I really enjoyed the thread a few weeks back on the ideal six pack
for the non-believer. Not too many surprises, we all seem to agree on many of
the excellent beers out there. I'd like to suggest another one.
One of the most difficult aspects of judging my own beer is not being able to
tell just what that slightly off tang/flavor/odor/sensation is. I've made
beer that is *almost* SNPA...but something was missing, or worse, something
else was added.
I have no way of knowing what diacetyl tastes like. What's phenolic, exactly?
Astringent? Estery?....I mean, I understand the words, but I can't get the
taste or odor from a book. So...Could some of you judge types identify beers
which carry these characteristics? I already know PU is skunky...
How did you BJCP guys get to know these by smell? Homebrew clubs? Scratch and
sniff pocket samples? Making your own bad beer?
Sure would appreciate any feedback. Just trying to improve my brewing....
Craig (Milwaukee, WI, now known as the 47th largest brewing city in the US)
------------------------------
From: "Marc Hugentobler" <MARHUG@MDLS.USU.EDU>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 14:47:46 GMT+700
Subject: re: Let's Smoke 'em
> Smoked ales, specifically Scottish smoked ales, are my new object of
> attention. What experience do you fellow homebrewers have with
> peat-smoked malt?
I have used it a bunch. and find, particularly in this application it
is entirely appropriate.
> Smoked ales generally have 2 lbs (or so) smoked malted barley, and are
> smoked with fruit wood or beechwood (according to the Cat's Meow and
> the Victory Circle recipe book). An article on Scottish Ales (SAs)in
> Brew Your Own stated that peat-smoked malt was mistakenly used in
> certain brewer's recipes for SAs, and the brewer's ended up with
> something they couldn't give away. (BTW, the article noted that the
> "smoky" flavor in the beer was actually from roasted barley).
You can get a smoke flavor from roasted malts however it is not the
same IMNSHO. Peat malt is the trick for scotch ales( and even
scottish) but you need to tap 'er light. .75 pound is about the max I
personally would use. anything else is pushing the edge of the
envelope.
> With all due respect, I'm forging forward with peat-smoked malted
> barley. Why? Because the ingredients listed for the Sam Adams
> Scottish Ale (which I would gladly drink, whether or not the brewer
Yessir, even if ol' jimmy gets some guff round here I'll still buy
his scotch. You also will not achieve that flavor profile without
peat-smoked malt. So, Indeed forge ahead.
> One fine storekeep noted that peat-smoked barley should be used
> sparingly, like 1/4 lbs in a 5-gallon recipe, and increment by 1/4 lbs
> if it is not enough. He was quite sure that using two lbs in a recipe
> would be WAY TOO MUCH.
I would say again this is true. I would use .25 pound for a scottish
at most, makes it pretty interestin' and .75 pound for a scotch.
Good luck,
Marc
:-):-):-):-):-):-):-)
Marhug@mdls.usu.edu
------------------------------
From: John Reese <John_Reese@mail.campbell-mithun.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 15:48:40 +0300
Subject: re: Welsh Ale
Responding to Mr. Moore's query concerning Welsh Ale the other day.
I've had Welsh Ale in Wales and locally here in Minneapolis. It once
was marketed under the name 'Double Dragon', and there were some
inquiries and comments made about DD it in old HBDs under that name.
The Welsh Ale I had in Cardiff was somewhat tannic. The tannic
harshness was not rounded by a full malty body, as the OG was only 1.038
or so. I suspected that careless brewing techniques were responsible,
as I tasted the same harshness in other wimpy bitters and milds in
Britain. Later, I learned there might be another cause for the tannic
flavors.
The bottled Welsh Ale obtained here in the US is more robust, weighing
in around OG 1.050 according to Jackson. The style appears to be closer
to ESB than pale ale. I found the first bottle pleasingly sour, a nice
complement to the fuller body. Another bottle, enjoyed many months
later, also struck me as slightly sour, but that time it seemed to be
the product of higher hopping than fermentation by-products. A local
bar (Johnny's, if you've been through St. Paul) stocks it and has found
it to be quite popular with the patrons.
------------------------------
From: Andrew Lynch <lynch@synopsys.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 96 13:54:36 PDT
Subject: Re: Let's Smoke 'em
Hi Greg,
I too was smitten by the idea of peated malt in homebrew, after
touring distilleries and breweries in Britain. I can confirm that 2
lbs in 5 gallons is _WAY_TOO_MUCH_. If you are here in the Silicon
Valley, I can prove it to you by giving you a bottle. I used 4 pounds
in 10 gallons of malty, lightly hopped brown ale. I now have 4 cases
of really great cooking beer, but it's still undrinkable after two
years in the bottle. I would guess that 1/4 lb in 5 gallons would
give a noticable, if faint flavor.
- -Drew
Drew's Brewing, Home of "Drew's Brew, Beer Worth It's Malt" (tm)
------------------------------
From:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From: Peter Ensminger <ensmingr@npac.syr.edu>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 23:50:26 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: oxygen solubility
Duff Hickman asked about the solubility of oxygen in water at different
temperatures ...
Yes, oxygen and other gases are more soluble as the temperautre
decreases. Some data from the Handbook of Chem & Physics:
O2 dissolved from
Temp (C) CO2-free air at 1 atm (uM)
- ----------------------------------------------------
0 455
5 398
10 352
15 314
20 284
25 258
30 235
35 213
Some more data for the solubility of PURE O2 or PURE CO2 gas in a
solution of water:
O2 CO2
Temp (C) (ml gas/ml water) (ml gas/ml water)
- -----------------------------------------------
0 0.04889 1.713
5 0.04287 1.424
10 0.03802 1.194
15 0.03415 1.019
20 0.03102 0.878
25 0.02831 0.759
30 0.02608 0.655
35 0.02440 0.592
Cheers!
... Peter A. Ensminger ...
............................
------------------------------
From: "Chuck and Grace Burkins" <burkins@oa.net>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 23:50:48 -0400
Subject: O2 in Plastic Buckets
About a week ago, while we were all hashing out why Australians can
brew in plastic buckets without suffering from beer oxidation I
posted this:
>How about the solubility of Oxygen being nil in a solution which is
>saturated in carbon dioxide? If this was the protective mechanism,
>how long into the lagering period would it last?
As has been pointed out by several posters, I was dead wrong about
oxygen solubility being affected by the dissolved CO2. These
corrections sent me back to my chemistry textbooks and the users
manual for one of my HPLC's, and from these sources I believe I now
understand why the oxygen permeability of plastic is unlikely to
cause any oxidation of the beer during the primary fermentation. This
is a long story but bear with me.
I work with high performance liquid chromatographs which are
instruments that are highly sensitive to gasses dissolved in the
running solvents. To keep these solvents degassed one common method
is to bubble helium through them. This actually works quite well. I
assumed that this was because the saturation of a solution with one
gas would prevent any other from dissolving- Wrong! (Doh! and I'm a
working chemist!) This is what actually happens. The bubbling helium
blankets the surface of the solvent reservoir and displaces all other
gasses. Now the amount of a gas dissolved in a liquid is
proportional to the partial pressure of that gas above the liquid, as
has been mentioned in several posts. The helium displaces the other
gasses lowering their partial pressures to zero. All other dissolved
gasses (besides helium) will outgas to the head space and leave with
the vented helium, which happens to have a low solubility and voile
degassed solvent.
Now why did I just tell you that (besides relating my own potential
for idiocy)? Consider a beer fermenting in primary. For the purposes
of this post I will assume closed primary fermentation. After
vigorous fermentation begins, CO2 bubbles start to rise to the
surface, and we get airlock activity. The CO2 carries away all other
gasses contained in the head space, making their partial pressures
nil. Gasses other than CO2 that are dissolved in the beer will outgas
to the head space and be carried away. The oxygen permeability of the
plastic then is not much of a factor, because as long as the head
space is filled with CO2 the O2 will outgas and be carried away out
the airlock. Note this effect would only last while CO2 is coming out
of the beer creating that CO2 blanket above the beer. Thus I can say
nothing of open fermentation or secondary fermentation.
I think that this shows that O2 permeability is not much of a concern
when using Plastic bucket as primary fermentors. I can say nothing
about
contamination concerns although several good posts in the recent past
have matched my experience: strong bleach or such to dissolve the
crud and some gentle wiping and your plastic bucket is ready to
sanitize.
My thanks to Al Korzonas, Andy Walsh and Matthew Karpinski for
pointing out the Error of My Ways.
Chuck Burkins, Dedham, Mass. USA
burkins@oa.net
The aforementioned chem texts and users manuals are. _University
Chemistry_ by Bruce Mahan; _Physical Chemistry_ by P. W. Atkins; and
_The Users Manual for the 600 Series HPLC Pumps_ published by Waters
Inc.
------------------------------
From: Kathy Booth <kbooth@waverly.k12.mi.us>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 00:43:08 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Tempering of Malt
Last summer I asked if any brewers tempered their malt like flour millers
do (add small amounts of water to the grain and let it toughen the bran).
Got a response that wet milling of grain is done but nothing on
tempering.
I added two tbs water per pound to my pale ale malt, stirred it and let
it rest two hours in a closed container before running thru my Coronna.
The results were excellent!! Big flat clean hunks of bran and a lot of
fine white flour. This was described as the ideal grind for brewers.
Excellent performance in the lauder tun.
I ground a pound of untempered mash and screened it through a window
screen sieve and got over 4 oz fines thru the sieve. The same amount of
malt tempered put over 7 oz of fines thru the same sieve.
The inner part of the tempered malt seemed to collapse into flour and rub
off the bran which stayed relatively whole. Very few kernals split in
1/2.
I tried 4 tbs water/pound and it was impossible to grind.
I plan to temper all my malt at 2 tbs water/pound.
Note...I didn't test it with pils malt, wheat malt, etc.
I'd be interested in the test results if someone has the sieves they use
for testing ideal particle size distribution. Also, the results with
other makes of mills. M My address at the top of this is probably wrong,
so email me at kbooth@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us
Cheers jim booth, lansing, mi...email at kbooth@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us
------------------------------
From:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From: ken@axis.jeack.com.au (Ken Coppleman)
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 17:32:48 +1100
Subject: Kombucha tea to beer?
Thanks to the people who responded to the above post. In the end I boiled
the Kombucha and added beer yeast (still awaiting outcome :)
- --Ken
------------------------------
From: ken@axis.jeack.com.au (Ken Coppleman)
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 17:35:18 +1100
Subject: Molasses beer
I find myself with 25kg of Molasses. Can this be used as a basic ingredient
for beer - if so, how so?
Many thanks
- --Ken
------------------------------
From: davidh@melbpc.org.au (David Hill)
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 18:04:02 +1000 (EST)
Subject: Re:Dry-Wet hopping
PROBLEM an underhopped boring bland brew.
SOLUTION, I put 40 gms SAAZ pellets in a plunger coffee maker
filled the coffee maker with boiling water and left stand for
10 mins before depressing the plunger and decanting the liquor
into 18 lit Cornelius keg resulting in a pleasant hop aroma
beer without having to worry about hop residue in the keg.
best wishes
David Hill
David Hill :-)>
------------------------------
From: "korz" <korz@xnet.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 08:16:52 +0000
Subject: Blowoff hose infections... NOT!
Dave writes:
>In my opinion, poorly cleaned carboy primary fermenter
>and overflow tubes are the major source of infection and
>have ruined more batches of beer than any other source.
Sorry, Dave, your opinion means nil to me and although you have
posted many correct concepts, by my count, 1 out of 5 "facts" you
post are incorrect or misleading, so I urge everyone to be as skeptical
of Dave's posts as I am.
Short and to the point: Glass carboys and blowoff hoses are NOT a
likely source of infection. I don't scrub the ones I use (although
Dave wants to think I do), I simply soak them in bleach water for a
few hours and let the yellow stains be. The blowoff is always
traveling OUTBOUND and even when it does collapse, the brown material
sticks to the closest surface, which means that any bacteria or wild
yeasts that may have survived the bleach water soak have no way of
traveling from the surface of the blowoff tube to the beer.
Dave's misguided concern about blowoff tubes is similar to the
unnecessary concern for things growing in the blowoff bucket. Some
change their water daily or put bleach in the blowoff bucket to
prevent infection. I ask: how is anything going to climb up the hose
and into the fermenter?
Sorry to burst your bubble, Dave... since I've switched to filtered
air and oxygen, I have brewed 25 batches (14 this summer) and none of
them had that faint clovey character that I had when I was simply
shaking and pouring my wort to aerate it. This was all with the same
glass fermenters and the same stained blowoff tubes.
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz@xnet.com
------------------------------
From: "Robert Petersen" <StoneRidgeFarm@msn.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 96 20:54:16 UT
Subject: Wave of things to come ?
A recent posting highlighted:
"Tuesday morning this past week, my university officials decided, without
prior warning, to cut me off from server access. My homepage files and my
email account were seized and placed under lock and key. I have no idea if
the account has been accepting new messages or what, because the university
won't let me know anything at all. "
While I certainly don't know the details, I suspect that there may be more of
this to come as Corporate Systems people start to monitor the extreme recent
increase in LAN/WAN activity. I know that at my "day job", systems designed
to run at under 50% are reaching daytime averages in the 90s and forcing
timeouts. As a result, I've tried to cancel my subscription at the office and
started up a new home/personal account. The new account set up fine, but the
cancellation has not taken affect yet.
Is anyone else having problems with subscribe/unsubscribe and how do we get
assistance? I enjoy this group and don't want to see it become a problem.
------------------------------
From: Robert Johnson <bobbrews@earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 08:37:02 -0700
Subject: Dixie White Chocolate Brew
I have tried the White Chocolate Brew from Dixie Brewing and would like
to try and create this at home. Before I try and figure this out, I
thought I would see if anyone has done this or tried doing this. Not
much info out there on this yet that I can see.
I thought maybe I could make a light ale and add a chocolate Liqueur
extract. Am I on the right path or way off on this.
Robert
bobbrews@earthlink.net
------------------------------
From: David Brockington <dbrock@u.washington.edu>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 11:22:47 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Extract v All Grain
Friday, October 25, Derek Lyons penned:
>>was: I think of myself as a fairly decent cook, able to follow a recipe,
>>able to modify one to suit my needs, etc. Extract brewing is just about
>>exactly that.
>
>This is absolutely off track.
That is absolutely a bit strongly stated.
>
>I have created beers from scratch using extract, and the process is no
>different than creating beers from scratch using all-grain. I choose the
>I have created beers from scratch using extract, and the process is no
>different than creating beers from scratch using all-grain.
Sorry, but I have to disagree strongly with this assertion. I,
too, was an extract brewer at one time; I brewed 29 extract batches before
graduating to all grain. I designed my own recipes with extract. Arguing
that the "process is no different" is patently false. The process is very
different.
>I choose the
>malts, (extract rather than grains, but there are a *lot* of extracts to
>choose from.), specialty grains, hops, yeasts, adjuncts...... I decide
>the steep/sparge sequence for the specialty grains and adjuncts, the hop
>schedule, the fermentation method and sechedule.....
But you do NOT choose the malts. That has been done for you by
the company that manufactured your extract. Furthermore, you have no idea
what those malts were, in the vast majority of cases. Were they domestic
6-row or continental 2-row? A wort made from each would have vastly
different characteristics -- characteristics that you are unaware of when
choosing extracts. You do not mash your specialty grains either,
you simply "steep" them, resulting in a different characteristic from
thsoe grains. Furthermore, you do not choose the mash schedule. Even
within the single infusion technique, there are plenty of variables to
play around with, if one chooses, and by reconstituting a wort from
extract as opposed to creating it from a real mash you have little
awareness that these variables exist AND you have zero control over them.
>
>With the sole exception of the source of the sugars, there is no
>difference in the recipe formulation process.
Superficially, the above is mostly true. Substantively, though,
the "source of the sugars" is the heart, soul, foundation, plumbing,
frame, and wiring of the beer. It all starts there. When brewing from
extracts, you lose control over the type of malts used (continental,
british, domestic, 2-row, 6-row) the maltster used (there is appreciable
variability there as well; Crisp Maris Otter has a different flavor
profile than Hugh Baird Pale Ale etc. etc.) the mash schedule employed
(single, step, decoction; rests designed to accentuate fermentability or
dextrine production?) and so on. Give me the same ingredients, and change
the primary sac rest temperature from 149F to 158F, and I'll give you a
different beer, even when everything else has been held constant.
I do not intend to argue that it is impossible to brew good beers
from extracts. Several of my later extract batches easily surpass
several of my all-grain batches, and I have judged competitions where
extract beers competed well against all-grain beers. HOWEVER,
suggesting that recipe formulation, brewing process, and the average
resulting beer is the same is a very tenuous position at best.
David Brockington Seattle, USA
UW Political Science & dbrock@u.washington.edu
Beer Reviewer @ The Brewery: http://alpha.rollanet.org/taproom/DBindex.html
------------------------------
End of Homebrew Digest #2250
****************************
