Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2245
This file received at Hops.Stanford.EDU 1996/10/24 PDT
Homebrew Digest Thursday, 24 October 1996 Number 2245
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Mike Donald, Digest Janitor-in-training
Thanks to Rob Gardner for making the digest happen!
Contents:
Rye again. (Steve Alexander)
Critiqueing the AHA (Jim Liddil)
Braukunst Rant (TMartyn@aol.com)
Plastic carboys (Miguel de Salas)
Chiller Convection Top-Down (KennyEddy@aol.com)
Re: Mash temps, quick ferment (Barry Vanhoff)
Optimize my Oatmeal Stout (Alan)
Re: Mash temps, quick ferment ((Charles Burns))
[none] ()
[none] ()
[none] ()
Re: Chlorine/Yeast Ptiching (Paul Mansour)
Dart Frog Pumpkin,Spiralling ("David R. Burley")
Re: Calcium and pH in wort ("David R. Burley")
Re: water source, frozen (chocolate) malts, Mash temperature, ("David R. Burley")
[none] ()
Beer Label Graphics ("Steven J. Bortnick")
[none] ()
[none] ()
Re: HBD and AOB (Dave Beedle)
[none] ()
Associations (Derek Lyons)
Re: What is a neck pumpkin?? ((Robert Marshall))
Using "ancient" lager yeast (Rick Dante)
[none] ()
Plastic use in HB'ing (John Lifer jr)
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: Steve Alexander <stevea@clv.mcd.mot.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 17:23:47 -0400
Subject: Rye again.
Rod (beerdog) asked a few posts back asked ...
>3) back to the rye tread for a minute, rye, i beleive was aleged to have
>the same precusors to that clove-like character we all know. am i correct
>in this? also, does rye have the same head retentive properties as wheat?
>my experience leads me to beleive it does not, however, i may not have used
>a sufficient quantity.
The presence of the enzyme that produces ferulic acid from malt in rye
is speculative, but my 63% rye beer does have a substantial clove
(4-vinyl guaicol) component, and I'd guess that the amount is similar
to a barley beer using this yeast. Don't know - good bet.
As for head retention - rye doesn't have the heading capabilities of
wheat but has much more than barley malt. Rye falls between wheat and
barley here.
Rod also asks ...
>4) i still dont know what RIMS stands for. please, help!
depending on context ...
RIMS - Radical Investment of Money and Sweat
RIMS - Rube_goldberg Is My Shaman
RIMS - Really Ingenious Mashing System
Steve Alexander
------------------------------
From: Jim Liddil <JLIDDIL@AZCC.Arizona.EDU>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 14:29:31 -0700 (MST)
Subject: Critiqueing the AHA
OK this is my last rant. Hit return or page down now if you have had it with
reading this stuff.
> Bryan asks:
>
> Jim Liddil <JLIDDIL@AZCC.Arizona.EDU> writes:
> >
> >I think based on what is happening at the AHA now that that HBD be moved
from
> >the AOB server.
>
> Jim, exactly what do you see is happening at the AHA?
>
> You posted last week that James Spence was fired, but with no reasons given,
> either speculative or official, what conclusions should we draw?
>
> You want to be more specific? I'm curious.
>
> - Bryan
> grosbl@ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu
> Nashville, TN
>
This is a list of the "benefits" of being an AHA "member"
National Homebrewers Conference
After having attended 3 of these things I am now convinced there are better
ways for homebrewers to get together. the conference is expensive and really
does not provide much in the way of new or interesting information. I've
personally had enough of listening to Charlie Papazain telling about his
travels. He is not the President of the AHA anymore, so he is traveling using
whatever money is provided by the AOB (which includes the AHA). I think Charlie
has gotten out of involvement with the AHA since professional brewing is where
the money is. Homebrewers are cheapskates for the most part. Save your money
and buy a Pico Brewing System. :-)
Also the AHA provides not roommate matching service which can create problems
if you want to go and are trying to find a roommate to save some money.
National Homebrew Competition
The only advantage to an AHA membership here is that you get a discount on
entry. But the awards except for the big winner are not all that great. Just
because someone wins in the "Nationals" means nothing more that any other
competition. A large number of good brewers do not enter competitions
particularly the Nationals.
Sanctioned Competition Program
This is not much. You are much better off sanctioning with the Beer Judge
Certification Program. A "sanctioned " competition may or may not be run well
so don't be fooled into thinking this means anything. Some at the AHA are not
happy that the BJCP did not dry up and blow away. Remember all the talk about
the AHA judging program etc?
Members Information Service
This can be a help to newbies. But after awhile it is pretty useless,
particularly if you are the type who reads Brewing Techniques etc.
Homebrew Club Network
There are plenty of sources of club info now. Various beer rags, homebrew
shops, the net etc.
Periodic discounts on books published by Brewers Publications
This is a joke because they then want to charge $3-4 for shipping an $11 book.
You are better off waiting for it to show up in your local shop.
A Full Guarantee
Which brings me to the point that you can cancel your AHA membership and get
your money back or simply not renew.
CompuServe Beer Forum
The AHA never has had much of a presence on this forum. They were given free
access for a while. Essentially most of the sysops on the forum know alot more
than the folks at the AHA. James Spence was the only person who even
participated on any regular basis. He is gone.
GABF entry in to members-only tasting
As Kelly pointed out this is no longer a free-benefit. Like AHA members go in
such large numbers that they are really going to contribute a large amount of
revenue to this thing? I think not. Dilbert in action.
Zymurgy
Good for beginners. Special issues used to be something you got to use as a
reference. Not this year. This magazine is entirely support by the writing of
homebrewers. This makes for articles that may need large amounts of editting
and correction that is also done by members. There are problems with the
editting process for Zymurgy and without the use of e-mail I don't see how it
ever got done in the past. This is not to say BYO and BT don't have editting
problems either.
The AHA powers that be have made no formal mention of the firing of James
Spence. Good or bad he was with the AHA for five years. It has been almost
a month since he was let go. There are various political reasons for his
firing. The details are such that it is best not to discuss them at length
since he still has to get a new job. The AHA has not given me any formal
response to my queries about this. Some may say it is none of my business.
There are those at the AOB who feel that James was an important contact for
many MEMBERS of the AHA and that these MEMBERS deserve a formal explaination.
The President of the AHA feels differently. It was just decide that James
"wasn't working out anymore" and was let go. The Winter issue will have no
mention of his firing or the fact that he is even gone, last time I contacted
the editor.
AHA Board of Advisors
This is another joke. The AHA does not listen to them. any suggestions are
ignored except for those that follow the AHA/AOB party line.
Lifetime memberships
I know a person who has been openly critical of the AHA.
He refuses to advertize his homebrewing business in Zymurgy. what does the
AHA do, they give him a lifetime membership. Huh? This is how my membership
dollars are being spent?
>
> From: Kelly Jones <kejones@ptdcs2.intel.com>
> Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 14:34:16 -0700
> Subject: GABF policies
>
This points out why the HBD should not be on the AOB server. Not only is the
AHA ignoring members but so is the parent organization. More of the wonders of
the Charlie Papazian empire.
Karl wrote:
>Now as far as the latter part of your note, there are
>alternatives to the HBD. There is the newsgroup
>rec.crafts.brewing with so much noise and other problems, it
>makes the AOB sponsered HBD look like the best game in town. (I
>rarely go there anymore.) Being a long time reader of the HBD, I
>should point out that Rob Gardner went through LOTS of problems
>while going through his learning process of providing the HBD.
>There are also other discussion forums popping up on the 'net
Indeed their are a number of excellent alternative digests out there. So I
guess if I don't like the weather I can move. I would again just point out
that I do not think it is a good idea to have an internet digest under the
control of the Papazian empire.
Also I would point out the The Brewery has done an excellent job of providing
an extremely useful archive of good homebrew info. But you have to have net
access. For a while magazines will be a better means of disseminating info
and fortunately there are alternatives to Zymurgy.
So I guess it is your own choice whether you think the AHA "membership" is more
than just a subscription to Zymurgy. And I still believe homebrewers need to
have an alternative to the AHA. Homebrewing has made great advances, the AHA
has not.
Jim
1994 AHA Homebrewer of the year
www.u.arizona.edu/~jliddil
------------------------------
From: TMartyn@aol.com
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 17:56:45 -0400
Subject: Braukunst Rant
Does anyone have an alternate phone number for Braukunst that is answered by
a HUMAN BEING instead of a disfunctional and non-responsive voice mail
nightmare?
I tried to order a counter pressure bottle filler six weeks ago, voice mail
cut me off. I then faxed the order in. Fax went through, no goods delivered
yet. Left a voice mail last week asking about the status of the order. No
response.
I HAVE BEER TO BOTTLE FOR COMPETITIONS UPCOMING. Hello, hello, anybody
there? Is this a real company or an electronic version of purgatory?
Private e-mail is fine - no need to start a new rant thread here. Thanks.
Tom Martyn
TMartyn@aol.com
Brattleboro, VT
------------------------------
From: Miguel de Salas <mm_de@postoffice.utas.edu.au>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 08:57:41 -1000
Subject: Plastic carboys
Guy Gregory asks what kind of plastic we use for brewing in
Australia. Here in Tasmania the easiest thing to get is food grade
polyethylene, which is what I have used for well over 30 batches of both
extract and partial mash brews without any problem at all. I've had beer
sitting in the plastic for up to a month without any noticeable change in
flavour.
Of course I should point out that I don't brew lagers, only ales. In
a lager, which is brewed much colder, there would be the potential for more
oxidation, since permeability would increase at lower temperatures. Also it
would be much more likely to notice an off flavour or oxidation in a light
flavoured lager.
Cheers.
- ---------------------------
Miguel de Salas, in Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.
------------------------------
From: KennyEddy@aol.com
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 18:32:24 -0400
Subject: Chiller Convection Top-Down
Charles Burns asks:
"Does this mean that we could get more efficient cooling by making sure that
the chiller "water input" side is the "bottom" of the coil and the exhaust
comes out the top?"
Actaully the opposite is true for the vertical coil. Colder water at the top
cools wort which "sinks", displacing warmer wort to "rise" into contact with
the cooler top coils. Running the cold water in at the bottom would result
in the cool wort staying on the bottom and the warm wort at the top staying
at the top.
------------------------------
From: Barry Vanhoff <bvanhof@eecs.wsu.edu>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 15:40:48 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Mash temps, quick ferment
<Barry had a hot mash and a quick fermentation (12 hours)>
Charles Burns writes:
> I think you're lucky that you had any fermentables left at all with 165F
> mash. My guess is that its done too. Take the gravity readings to make sure,
> but since you mashed at such a high temp, its probable that you had very
> little fermentable sugars and the yeast has finished them off quickly.
The OG was 1.052. I am bottling tonight (no activity for a couple days)
and I'll let you know if its drinkable, however, I just graduated from
college, so you might not trust my idea of drinkable! :)
I was shooting for a 2 1/2 to 3 gallon batch ...
5.5 lbs 2-row pale
1 lb munich
1/2 lb 120L crystal
trace of chocolate malt
hops + yeast starter ...
and ended up with just short of 2 1/2 gallons. The wort looked rather thin,
and the resulting OG is due to a purposely long boil (90 minutes).
Thanks for the response,
Barry Vanhoff
bvanhof@eecs.wsu.edu
------------------------------
From: Alan <amf@ktb.net>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 15:39:14 -0700
Subject: Optimize my Oatmeal Stout
Brew enthusiasts,
I humbly submit the following for comments and suggestions.
Re-creating a successful oatmeal stout recipe that my brew
partner and i had made last year, we used:
29# klages
1.5# black patent
1.5# Belgian chocolate
1.5# Belgian roast
2# flaked oats
some northern brewer (i think) bitter
small amount fuggles flavour
1/2 gal Wyeast London ale starter
Lately i've been adding 1 tsp gypsum per 6 gals of RO water
used (sparge water too).
Added 160f water and re-circulated with a heater to 150f (took
about 30 min). Noticed ph was quite low (about 5.0 or less) probably
due to excessive dark grains used. Re-circulate, don't worry, drink
homebrew, maintain 150f, eat pizza, smoke cigar, for 2 hours
(RIMS are cool).
OK, back to work. Increase temp to 168f and sparge with 170f
water. Boil 90 min. reduce to 12 gals at SG 1.075. Chill to ~70f,
pitch.
In an effort to improve my yeast performance (attenuation) i've
been experimenting with aeration. So, this time, i used the aquarium
pump for 8 hours (no stone, hopefully filtered air). As i removed
the air, the foam was just starting to come out of the top of the
15 gal bucket air lock hole. While by brew buddy bailed foam, i
rushed out and got some 1 1/2" blow off tubing. The air temp was
70f but the foam felt much warmer squishing between my fingers.
After 12 hours the volcano subsided. Week later SG was 1.023.
Another week, still 1.023. Tastes great flat and warm out of the
fermenter.
Would like to improve the following: lower FG (too sweet),
better yield, final yield (lost a lot of beer due to foam!) TIA.
al
Haphazard Brewing
Costa Mesa, CA
------------------------------
From: cburns@egusd.k12.ca.us (Charles Burns)
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 96 15:56 PDT
Subject: Re: Mash temps, quick ferment
At 03:40 PM 10/23/96, Barry Vanhoff wrote:
>
><Barry had a hot mash and a quick fermentation (12 hours)>
>
>Charles Burns writes:
>
>> I think you're lucky that you had any fermentables left at all with 165F
>> mash. <snip>
>
>The OG was 1.052. I am bottling tonight <snip>
Question is, what's the FG? I'll guess that its really high, like 1.014-1.018?
>
>Thanks for the response,
>
>Barry Vanhoff
>bvanhof@eecs.wsu.edu
>
>
>
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Burns, Director, Information Systems
Elk Grove Unified School District
cburns@egusd.k12.ca.us, http://www.egusd.k12.ca.us
916-686-7710 (voice), 916-686-4451 (fax)
http://www.el-dorado.ca.us/~cburns/
------------------------------
From:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From: Paul Mansour <pmansour@mansours.com.au>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 11:36:51 -0700
Subject: Re: Chlorine/Yeast Ptiching
Chlorine:
Michael Gerholdt wrote:
>The county inspector made the comment to me last week during our annual
>inspection that if you can smell chlorine in the water supply, you should
>add more chlorine to the water to kill it. This sounds backwards, but his
>explanation was that the chlorine that produces the smell is combined
>chlorine. Free chlorine will chemically neutralize combined chlorines and
>the odor. Just how is getting out of my area of knowledge.
I have also been told that when you can smell chlorine there is not
enough in the water. The explanation I heard was that when there is not
enough chlorine in the water to kill the bacteria they absorb it and
when they die (and presumably rot) it is released and we can then smell
it. Strange but true - I think!
I have also been told that as chlorine is a gas if you just leave the
water sitting there without a lid on the gas will just evaporate off. I
think it was John Carsten who wrote that the chlorine is bonded with
ammonia so this may stop the evaporation from happening. I don't know
if that is true or if all chlorinated water is "bonded". Even if it is
bonded, if it is the rotting bacteria that produce the smell (& taste?)
maybe that makes a difference.
Over to you experts.
P.S. Definition of "Expert" (pronounced "Ex-spurt" of course): An "Ex"
is a "has been" and a "spurt" is a "drip under pressure".
- -----
Yeast:
Bill Graham asked about which part of the yeast solution to use. I
wasn't sure if he was talking about a yeast starter or about using the
"left-over" yeast in the ferment to start one. If it is the former then
I swish it all around and use it all. If it is the latter, I have read
people advocating each of these and would like to know which is best
too. The guy who said not to use the stuff on the bottom said that this
was all the dead yeast that had settle and that the live yeasties would
still be floating around. Sounded logical to me.
Cheers,
Paul
- --
Paul Mansour
EMAIL: pmansour@mansours.com.au
------------------------------
From: "David R. Burley" <103164.3202@CompuServe.COM>
Date: 23 Oct 96 21:52:23 EDT
Subject: Dart Frog Pumpkin,Spiralling
Brewsters:
Well the phone system is still out and it is Wednesday. Last Saturday our power
was out so I couldn't work on the computer. I did some on Sunday and Monday was
brew day, Tuesday brewing class. SO I now have some time and the phone system
is completely gone. The phone line was noisy all weekend such that the modem
wouldn't work. My apologies for being so tardy in responding
Phil Wilcox' description of how he didn't make pupmkin ale was entertaining and
I know how he feels. Some days in the nano-brewery are like that. He said (
after lots of descriptions of lots of things that went wrong):
>I feel alot like charlie brown. I had a few problems brewing last night, The
>recipie is the Pumpkin Ale posted in Cats Meow................right on
schedule.
>Proceeded to chill as advised and to my suprise I could'nt
>get a decent siphon going at all. Only a trickle. Tried the chorboy, the
>inverted racking cane stoper, Whirlpooling...Nada. Painfully slow. 15
>min/gal!
I said in an HBD prior to his Pumpkin Ale Production:
>Best way is to cool the 2.5 gals of hot wort before transfer ( it is more
efficient), siphon it - through a >Choreboy scrubbing pad to strain out the
hops
and hot break and some of the cold break - into that cold >water, letting the
cold wort pass through the air to oxygenate it. Or siphon directly to that
copper cooling >coil/ice cooler is the best.
I don't understand your reference to the "inverted racking cane stoper", but I
have on occasion had problems with siphoning the wort with a Choreboy in place,
but only when I let the tip of the cane get next to the outside of the
Choreboy.
It is impossible for the Choreboy itself to slow the flow, since it is so open.
When the cane tip is near the outside of the Choreboy, hops can collect around
the cane entrance and slow the flow. The ideal place is for the tip of the cane
to be at the center of the Choreboy ( like the center of a sphere) . When you
get it going it is an amazingly fast and efficient way of removing the wort
down
to the last drop and getting none of the hot break or hops over. It can strain
wort you can't even see from a pile of hops and trub on the bottom of the
boiler.
A 3/8" cane is plenty big enough. Avoid putting the cane hard up against the
edge of the pot so you don't push the tip of the cane to the outside of the
choreboy. The cane tip should be near the outside edge of the boiler, but not
pressed against it. Clear the cane tip by letting the wort run backwards
through it, adjust the choreboy so that the cane tip is halfway into it and
place it on the bottom of the boiler, just off the outside edge, and siphon
away. Better luck next time - with everything. Persistence will bring success.
I guarantee it.
Just say Dart Frog Dortmunder three times when you are getting frustrated and
remember you could be doing something like mowing the lawn or shovelling snow.
So smile.
- -----------------------------------------
AlK says to me:
>You are spiraling out of control (as I've done in the past). Get a grip
>and start posting only what you know for sure.
No disagreement that you have spiralled out of control in the past and appear
to
be now, based on my observations and comments from others. I would like YOU to
get a grip, Al. We ALL want you to go back making some of those excellent
contributions you used to make here and knock off this attack mode you have
been
in lately. Take a vacation or finish your book or drop whatever is bugging you.
I bear you no grudge, but wish you would step back a little and get less
personally involved in what's happening here.
I stand by everything I said. I don't have the advantage of peer review before
I submit my comments, so they do have the possibility of being "misleading" to
someone looking for an "error". If they were truly misleading or wrong, which
does happen sometimes (at least to me), a simple comment will bring an apology
and a correction from me. I am not an idiot, nor bad intentioned, nor am I
perfect - no matter how hard I try.
Weren't you the one who objected to my backing up everything wih a reference?
And lately you haven't even believed my references. What's a body to do?
Anyway, thanks for your concern. We love you, but the tank is heading toward
empty. Fill it up again with some good, positive contributions.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
103164.3203@compuserve.com
------------------------------
From: "David R. Burley" <103164.3202@CompuServe.COM>
Date: 23 Oct 96 21:52:19 EDT
Subject: Re: Calcium and pH in wort
Brewsters:
Please note my phone service has been too poor or totally nothing since that
Nor'easter last week so I can't receive HBD or send my comments. Some of the
comments below may be a little out of date or overlap others' comments. Sorry.
Bill and I continue our thread ( where's everyone else?) on calcium in beer.
> If an acid rest works, why not lactic acid?
Should work fine. Given your premise, which I have always assumed requires some
calcium in the water.
> Is the alpha amylase enzyme
> stability a function of pH or calcium?
Both I believe. But the alpha is unusual in that calcium is involved.
> Another question, how much calcium does malt have?
M&BS p 194 1st ed says:
"In lager brewing, the adjusting of the wort pH is achieved largely by addition
of acid to the liquor and/or the partial removal of carbonates to give 50 - 100
mg/l ((aka ppm)) calcium *carbonate* ((or 50X40/100 = 20 ppm {Ca++} to
100X40/100 = 40 ppm {Ca++}))................
The practice in pale ale breweries on the other hand is to to pay more
attention
to the addition of gypsum, although removal of carbonates is often carried
out.........Gypsum is added to the brewing water to bring the calcium ion to 50
mg/l ((aka 50 ppm)) and a further charge of gypsum is made to the copper,
equivalent to 50mg/l of calcium because too high a level of calcium ions in the
mash is disadvantageous........
The concentration of calcium in beer will be on the order of 60-80 mg/l ((60 -
80 ppm {Ca++} ))"
(( my comments))
I cannot find an analysis of malt or barley that gives me a calcium content,
and
it not is obvious from the above comments that the malt is supplying any. In
the absence of any information to the contrary, and based on the need for
calcium to stabilize the alpha amylase in mashes where acid rests are used, I
would guess the malt is supplying 10-30 ppm of calcium to the beer.
This would explain how acidifying the mash with either an acid rest or lactic
acid would get the {Ca++} in the 20-40 ppm range ( when you add in, say, 10 ppm
from the water) used in lager brewing.
Let's try thinking of it this way:
Any phosphate that is available will definitely precipitate the calciuim, since
the insolubility ( something on the order of 10^ -33 as a Ksp) is such a force
in removing calcium and phosphate. Now, if there is an excess of calcium and
we add more phosphoric acid we wil get more calcium phosphate and the protons
from the phosphoric acid will remain in solution. If we don't have an excess of
calcium we will still get acidification. If we have an excess of calcium and
the pH is still too high, it will mean the total amount of naturally occurring
phosphate is all gone. Yeast need phosphate. Adding an excess of calcium to
the point of getting a pH of 5.2 or so must not deplete the natural phosphate
content.
The mechanism is different with lactic acid, since the calcium salt of lactic
acid is pretty soluble. Therefore, the lactic acid will not strip the mash of
calcium (needed by alpha amylase) and should be better at providing the proper
mash pH and leaving calcium in the solution for a more stable alpha amylase (
hence a more efficient mash is likely), better flocculation of the protein
breaks and flocculation of yeasts at the end of the fermentation. My vote goes
for lactic over phosphoric acid.
In the course of reading aout this I came across reference that is a little off
course, but it relates to better beer and puts in a vote for acidifying the
mash with lactic acid.
M&BS p209, 1st ed.
"The flavour of the beer is altered by the quantities of chloride (full flavor)
and sulfate (dry flavor) and lactate (softer flavor) ions that are present in
the mash."
The first two (Cl, SO4) I was aware of, but until now, I don't remember seeing
a
reference to lactic acidifications producing a "soft" taste. I did notice a
softer, less dry, taste, however, especially in my IPAs, which are Burtonized,
when I began using lactic acid to acidify my sparge and at the time assumed it
was due to a reduction of husk tannins. This sounds like acidification of the
mash with lactic acid could be of benefit for beers like some lagers, German
and
other beers which benefit from the full, soft mouth. It may be out of place in
the firmer mouthed, drier pale ales, etc.
It would be interesting to make a low calcium, low sulfate, high lactate pale
ale and see what results.
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
103164.3203@compuserve.com
------------------------------
From: "David R. Burley" <103164.3202@CompuServe.COM>
Date: 23 Oct 96 21:52:54 EDT
Subject: Re: water source, frozen (chocolate) malts, Mash temperature,
Brewsters:
My phone has been out since Sunday and just fixed - whatever day this is, so
please excuse the tardiness or possible redundancy.
- -------------------------------------------
Brian asks:
> As a begining home brewer, I was wondering if the use of bottled "Drinking
> Water" is better to use when making beer. If so, when it is better to use,
> if not, why?
Brian,
You wouldn't be the first HBer to ascribe a higher quality and mystical nature
to someone else's tap water. Unless you have a problem with your own tap water,
say extreme hardness or high iron content, don't bother. If you have very
permanently hard water and want to make lagers, dilute your tap water with
distilled water used for drinking. In most cases cooled boiled tap water is
sufficient if you are making extract brews. When you make all-grain, brews
water quality increases in significance.
- ----------------------------------
Chuck Bernard asks
3. If I get one of those vacuum sealers at a garage sale or flea market
somewhere I this a better way to store grain than frozen/refridgerated?
What about vacuum and cold storage?
Chuck,
When you say grain, I presume you mean malts? If so, there isn't really a need
to do any more than keep them cool (say your basement), in a closed container (
I use lidded trash cans, Rubbermaid storage boxes and plastic shoe boxes) to
keep out the mice. They will slowly lose their enzymatic powers, but it will
take several years, based on my personal experience.
- ------------------------------------
>1) is it feasible to keep the temperature at a constant 155 degrees
> in a $1.50 bucket (noninsulated)?
NO. Even a 5 gallon mash tun inside a styrofoam box drops about 2 degrees per
30
min. Wrap several layers of bubblewrap around to help and don't forget to
insulate top and bottom. Why not use a 5 gallon boiler and mash there. You can
heat periodically to bring the temperature back up.
>2) if the temp in the bucket drops from 155 to 150 in a one hour
> period, is that a problem?
It will make a drier beer than one held at 155F
>3) if the temp drops to (say) 145 degrees in 30 minutes, is it OK
> to pour hot water into the mash to reheat it to 155?
Of course, but see above. Adding hot water during the mash speeds up the
saccharification by reducing the product concentration which can block enzyme
action.
>4) for a single stage mash (infusion?) is it necessary to do a mash-in
> before the actual mash?
Not really.
> what will this gain for me?
Enzymes will be hydrated before being exposed to high temperature. Better
predictability.
>5) is a mash-out necessary too? (i think my friend anton just
> asked this same question ... but somehow i missed the answer).
Yes, to keep the composition of the wort constant during the sparge.
and lastly ...
>6) how much volume of wort needs to be recirculated during sparging?
>100%? the first 2 quarts (dependent upon the false bottom)?
Recirculation is important to prevent any starchy residue from clouding the
beer
during the boilup. I generally recirculate 1/2 to 1 gallon, reheating to 170F
before putting it back into the sparger, depending on how cloudy it looks and
how fast it is running.
- ------------------------------------------------
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
103164.3203@compuserve.com
------------------------------
From:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From: "Steven J. Bortnick" <automan@ici.net>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 21:59:03 -0400
Subject: Beer Label Graphics
I am looking for gif or jpg images of mexican beer bottles or just the
label is fine. Beers I am looking for are Dos Equis, Corona and Tecate.
If you have these can you email me them or give me the website they are
one.
Thanx in advance
Steven
- --
"I Am The Lizard King, I Can Do Anything"
"Relax. Don't Worry. Have A Homebrew"
"Opinions Are Like Assholes...Everyone Got One"
"I Am The First Truly Automatic Man"
"Use The Force..... Trust Your Feelings"
http://www.ici.net/cust_pages/automan/automan.html
------------------------------
From:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From: Dave Beedle <dbeedle@bacchus.net.ilstu.edu>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 22:12:50 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: HBD and AOB
In a recent message Alex Santic wrote:
>
> The only perennial problem around here (as with all mailing lists) is
> signal-to-noise ratio, not who happens to host the list. Certain people
> who put a lot of time and effort into posting meaningful content seem to
> be favorite flame targets, yet I don't see many complaints about people
> using the list for grandiose political posturing over petty matters,
> casual banter, stand-up comedy, beating dead horses.
Hear hear! I'll drink to that...and I will too (got a pale ale on tap
in the brew fridge)! 8-) Anywayz, most lists are like that, there are a
few folks who post the majority of the traffic and they, due to exposure I
suppose, get the heat. I'm an AHA member and president of an AHA
affiliated club but, I don't see the source of the "AHA problem". I also
don't know the details of the situation or politics (if you must) involved
causing the problems. Until those details come to light I'm willing to say
thanks for the effort and resources for the digest and leave it at that...
> Very easy to say stuff like that, but who gives a shit. Let's talk about
> brewing, please. I'd rather hear George DePiro's advice on decoction
> mashing.
As a decoctor (?) debating the merits of doing a double decotion, me
too! Gotta get that bock book...
and...Alex Santic sez...
> [Bill]>>HBD was much better before the advent of the AHA into our world.
>
> I don't get it. Does the AHA edit the HBD, or ban good posters from
> posting?
Exactly. Aside from technical problems that folks may have with the
digest, is the AHA really influencing what goes on here?
TTFN
- --
Dave Beedle - dbeedle@ilstu.edu - Network Services
http://www.ilstu.edu/~dbeedle Illinois State University
"The world is scarce on time, she said... 136A Julian Hall
And Guinness gives it back." - Shann Weston Normal, IL 61761
------------------------------
From:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From: Derek Lyons <elde@hurricane.net>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 20:35:48 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Associations
At 12:03 PM 10/23/96 -0700, you wrote:
>
> Perhaps it's time to start up the "Independent Association of Home-
>brewers" or the "International Association of Home Brewers." Once done,
>we would have an organization that more truly represents the concepts of
>an Association. Perhaps we could "Adopt" BT as our magazine!
>
BT is nice. *IF* you are an all grain brewer, or a LARGE scale homebrewer,
or a REALLY anal-scientific brewer, or a brewpub brewer, or a small
microbrewery brewer...... But that leaves out about 90% of the brewing
community. More importantly BT totally ignores the newbie brewer.
Why do we *NEED* another organization? What will it do that the AHA does
not? (Other than providing a nebulous sense that it is 'ours'.)
------------------------------
From: robertjm@hooked.net (Robert Marshall)
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 04:23:33 GMT
Subject: Re: What is a neck pumpkin??
Someone asked recently what a neck pumpkin was. I was curious too so I
posted a question on a local newsgroup. Here's the answer I got:
>It's actually not a pumpking, but a squash. It's the type used for
>pies and such. It has kind of a bulb on one end with a thinner neck
>that curves around a bit. The are more of an orangish-yellow color
>instead of the that deep orange color. We always called the
>crook-neck pumpkins.
>Jack-o-lantern type pumpkins are not particularly tasty to cook with.
>The seeds are good toasted when you clean them out to carve.
>Hope you can find some,
>Kathy
Later,
Robert Marshall
robertjm@hooked.net
homepage: http://www.hooked.net/users/robertjm
- ----------------------------------------------
"In Belgium, the magistrate has the dignity of a prince but by Bacchus, it is
true that the brewer is king."
Emile Verhaeren (1855-1916)
Flemish writer
- -----------------------------------------------
------------------------------
From: Rick Dante <rdante@pnet.net>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 21:38:49 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Using "ancient" lager yeast
It's been some time since I've been an active brewer and I was digging
around in my yeast bank amonsgt a pile of agar plates with mostly dead
yeast. These plates date back to July 1994...over two years ago!!
My Wyeast 3068 is dead (well, I restreaked a colony, we'll see how that
goes, but a culture tube I've started last friday is dead), as is my
chico. I already got a new plate of chico going (looked at the brown
colonies sunday, so went to the local deli and got me a bottle of SNPA.
Aleady have me some nice baby colonies, not even white yet hehe, but
visible with the right light).
Enough of my banter, here's what survived. I have a couple of 2+ year
old plates that I cultured from Wyeast 2206 Bavarian Lager. The stuff on
antibacterial agar is dead. The stuff on my wort agar plates (my wort,
chinese agar...a hell of a lot cheaper than wort agar from a science
supplier and probably healthier for the beasties too!) is mostly dead but
for over a dozen survivors. This plate basically has hundreds of colonies
that died while they were small but some must've mutated to brave the cold
long winter of two years in my beer freezer at 40 degrees. I cultured one
of these survivors on sunday and it's kicking out bubbly and forming nice
solid flocculated colonies which I gleefully resuspend etc etc. The
stuff's growing in the culture tube at a toasty 80 degrees (I was
incubating it with a CSU/DSU to protect it from the cold wave that kicked
through here for a few day hehe, I'll be sure to drop the temp as I step
it up).
My question to any and all yeast experts is: Should I risk a batch of
beer on this two year old mutant child of Wyeast 2206? What I stand to
gain: 1. Free yeast! 2. Maybe I've got myself a superior yeast. What I
stand to lose: 1. A batch of beer! A wasted plate if I decide to reculture
this 2206 child and it turns out swill.
Cast yer votes!!
Rick Dante
/-----------/
/ **** / ^
/ / / / ^^ ^^
/ **** / Rick Dante ^^^^^^ rdante@pnet.net
/ ____ / Pinnacle Internet http://www.pnet.net
/ | | INnacle San Juan Bautista, CA (408) 623-1040
/ | | inTERNET
/ |RE| serving the spirit of the internet!!
------------------------------
From:
Date:
Subject: [none]
------------------------------
From: John Lifer jr <jliferjr@blue.misnet.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 05:54:05 -0500
Subject: Plastic use in HB'ing
As an engineer with an injection molder of HDPE and PP food containers, I
feel that I can offer some insights into this current discussion.
First of all, IMHO, if you are brewing ales, does it really matter whether
or not the container is 02 permeable? what about open fermentation? what
about all the hoopla about aeration using pure o2 or air? There should be
absolutely no problem with using a food grade plastic to ferment your beer.
I have been using several containers which have a volume to the rim of 8
gallons. I usually use 6 gallon brews. This gives me a lot of air contact
with the beer. Maybe my tastebuds are dead, but my beer is not oxidized. I
also rack into identical containers for secondary. I usually use 7 to 10
days in primary and 14-21 days in secondary. Absolutely no problems that I
can trace back to the containers. Scratches on the containers should be of
relatively little consequence unless you trap crud in these areas and don't
clean the containers. As long as you sanitize and pitch a good starter you
should overcome anything left.
Back to the plastics... I would recommend that if you are trying to locate
containers, look at the bottom of the potential container. It should have
NSF-2 or FDA Approved or FDA Approved Materials, molded into the bottom.
NSF (National Sanitation Foundation) approves the materials used and the
actual containers molded from the various plastics. The constituents have
to be listed as acceptable for food contact by the FDA. Don't under any
circumstances use a container that is colored and does not have one of the
above approvals on it. There are a lot of paint buckets out there that you
should NOT put food into. There were until recently heavy metals used in
the colorants. There are probably still a lot of these floating around
being used in paint or other containers which are not food safe. Clear or
natural white containers are Probably safe even if they are not listed as
food safe. If food was shipped in the container, then it should be safe.
This is where you may have a problem with the reuse of a container, past
odors and contaminants.(pickles) If you want a good container, go to a
restaurant supply company and purchase a container. Sorry I went on and on,
but I do believe that brewing in plastic is safe in more ways than one, I
have dropped a glass carboy while cleaning it, it was empty but shattered
into a few thousand pieces. I wasn't cut and I sure won't be cut with my
plastic and I bet you can't tell I don't brew in glass.
------------------------------
End of Homebrew Digest #2245
****************************
