Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2290
Homebrew Digest Wednesday, December 18 1996 Volume 02 : Number 010
1 Re: FWH and IBUs
2 Re: Depressed Homebrewer
3 re: Depressed HomeBrewer
4 Non metal kettle brewers.
5 two hole stoppers
6 Re: Homebrew Digest V2 #8
7 Re:Question for Metallurgists
8 re:Depressed Homebrewer
9 Thanks for all of the infection responses...
10 "unscubscribe"
11 Fermenting in 5-gal kegs
12 RE: Wort aeration
13 Volume and more
14 Mill Suggestion
15 Re: Depressed HomeBrewer
16 Sticke
17 Skimming Wort
18 When to stop sparging question (Tim Martin)
19 belgian yeasts/ archival Q
20 Coffee in Beer
21 RE: Wort aeration[or, beating my wort]
22 Tiny bubbles
23 Experience with yeast slants?
24 [No Subject Provided By Sender]
25 Shelf-life of yeast on slants
26 2 Hole Bungs
27 Decoction mash
28 Flour mills vs. malt mills
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 10:22:53 -0500
From: Joe Shimkus <shimkus@sw.stratus.com>
Subject: Re: FWH and IBUs
In HBD V2 #6 Barry Wertheimer <wertheim@libra.law.utk.edu> asks...
>
> What I am wondering about is the bitterness contributions from FWH.
> As I recall the original discussions about FWH, it was speculated
> that first wort hops add some bitterness, but not as much as if they
> had been thrown in the kettle after the boil had begun. Again, my
> observations seem to support this, but I was wondering what others
> have experienced. Anyone have a guess, or data, as to the IBUs
> contributed by first wort hops v. the IBUs that would be contibuted
> if the same hops were instead added when the boil commences? Do you
> get 1/2 the IBUs? 3/4? Any ideas?
>
The one time I tried FWH I used the bittering hops as FWH hops and did the late
kettle additions as usual. All I can say is that this method produced a beer
that I found had a pretty good hop character but was woefully underhopped
as far
as bitterness is concerned for the style.
I've been considering giving FWH another go and so have been reading up on it.
I now realize that the recommendation is to use the flavor and aroma hops for
FWH and not the bittering hops. Also, the literature claims that although
there
is a greater total IBU contribution through the use of FWH, the nature of that
contribution is different and doesn't lead to overhopping. My one foray
(so far)
into FWH would appear to support this.
In regard to your particular question...
While it would be interesting to know the degree to which the 'bitterness' of
bittering hops is affected through the use of FWH (and if anybody has
quantitative info about that rather than my qualitative data I'd love to hear
about it), on a practical level it would appear that FWH should be done w/ the
flavor/aroma hops and that the bittering hops should be used as usual to
hit the
target IBUs.
How's that for drawing conclusions from a single data point? :-)
- - Joe
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Command, Don't Demand.
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joe Shimkus shimkus@sw.stratus.com
Stratus, VPG TPF/FIO 508/490-6705 (ph), 508/460-0397 (fax)
- -------------------- Stratus disavows my opinions. ---------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 10:36:38 -0500 (EST)
From: Todd Kirby <mkirby@bgsm.edu>
Subject: Re: Depressed Homebrewer
Bob,
I also have a well and had similar infections my first
few batches. I was confident in my sanitizing and concluded it was my
water as well. After switching to Iodophor, all my problems were
eliminated since I was able to eliminate the rinsing step. You don't
mention your sanitization technique, but if you're not already using
Iodophor, I highly recommend you give it a try. It's fairly cheap, easy,
and faster than most other sanitizers. Others mention rinsing with boiled
water or even cheap beer, so maybe you could try those methods as well
(or other no-rinse applications).
Good Luck and Happy Holidays,
Todd Kirby.
P.S. I'll be thinking of all you homebrewers as I'm downing a few Guiness
in Ireland over the holidays! Can't Wait.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 10:03:28 -0600
From: AJUNDE@ccmail.monsanto.com
Subject: re: Depressed HomeBrewer
>Now I am starting to think it is my water. We have well water. I
>haven't had it checked in about a year or 2 but in my first 2 years of brewing
>I did not get one infected batch. Now almost every batch gets infected. I am
>thinking of going out and buying bottled water for my brewing.
>Does anyone have any words of wisdom?
Bob, I also use well water from the next door neighbor, since my house is newer
and is on county water. However, I boil the well water for 10 minutes as well,
unless I am doing a full 5 gal mash. Then I only do a couple of gallons,
usually a few nights in advance, and place the water in sanatized plastic milk
jugs with caps. This way I always have some sterile water around.
Bacteria from the soil can fall/creep down the well casing and into the water.
There are a lot of factors that affect this, and it may not affect you or your
family by drinking it, but the beer however..
I also do not know what your santization techniques are, but I sanatize
EVERYTHING in iodophor. Bottles, tubing, airlocks, etc. sometimes twice, if I
touched it. Worst case, I rinse with boiled water. Yes, everything has a nice
brown tint to it, but I really don't care that everything look clean, I care
that it IS clean.
I hope you find this info helpfull. I posted this to HBDV2 for others who may
have similar problems.
Good Luck!
| Allen Underdown - ajunde@ccmail.monsanto.com |
| ITSS WAN Group - Monsanto World Headquarters - St. Louis, MO |
| Amateur Radio Operator, computer geek, homebrewer and outdoor enthusiast! |
| Try My BBS at 314.939.9445! |
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 11:04:46 -0600 (CST)
From: Daryl K Kalenchuk <dkk886@mail.usask.ca>
Subject: Non metal kettle brewers.
I would like to ask those who _use_ or have knowledge of plastic, what would
be an appropriate plastic 'kettle'?
What do most people use?
The reason I ask this is that the working temperature of polyethelen is
listed at only 88C and the only containers I have found are 1) HDPE barrels
which have been used for other things and I would have to try clean them.
and 2) LDPE roto-moulded buckets. Material 1 is stronger I believe, but the
container is 1/3 the thickness. How well would either of these materials
tolerate boiling wort(temp ?) inside? And would the material become so soft
as to worry about any fittings used in them failing?
Please don't bother telling me that: stainless or copper is the only thing
that should be used, the wort will scorch using an imersion heater, the
kettle will melt when placed on the stove/cajun cooker especially if it
covers two burners...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 11:35:55 -0800
From: biohazrd@graceba.net (biohazrd)
Subject: two hole stoppers
>question : do rubber stoppers exist with 2 holes? i checked my hb store
last
>weekend but they didn't have any 2-hole stoppers. i'd like to put the gas
>in one hole and keep an airlock in the other so i could see the bubbling and
>have some sort of idea of the volume of gas i'm putting in.
Yes two hole stoppers do exist, I have some. They are from a fluid
dispensing system used in pharmacies. I would check scientific supply
houses for them, like Fisher.
Ron Montefusco
Biohazard Brewery
(Drink To Your Health)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 11:43:34 +0000 (CSZ)
From: tina turbo <MEADEF@acad.ripon.edu>
Subject: Re: Homebrew Digest V2 #8
stop sending me this i usubbed ages ago and i am really sick of
recievens messages from you people!!!!!!!
______________________________________________________________________________
Diane: Do you find that this approach usually works? Or let me guess,
you've never tried it before. In fact, you don't normally approach girls
- -- am I right? The truth is that you're a quiet sensitive type but, if I'm
prepared to take a chance, I might just get to know the inner you. Taxi!
A little bit crazy, a little bit bad. But hey -- don't us girls just
love that?
Renton: Eh?
Diane:Well, what's wrong boy -- cat got your tongue?
(Trainspotting)
______________________________________________________________________________
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 09:52:46 -0700
From: John Palmer <johnj@primenet.com>
Subject: Re:Question for Metallurgists
Kent Wrote (gist):
> I am getting a calculated 36ppg from my mash but suspect thermal
>expansion of the pot as a factor.
The linear coefficient of thermal expansion of 304 stainless steel is 9.6
microinches per inch per 'F. Since I didnt know the exact dimensions of
your pot other than it holds 50L, I took the cube root of 50 to give me a
vessel of 36 cm on a side. This converts to 14.5 inches per side and when
you multiply 9.6 x10^(-6) x 150F, you get a change in length of .0209
inches, which when cubed results in a change in volume of less than a drop
in the bucket.
So, by my mash calculations assuming a Mash efficiency of 85% which gives a
yield of 32 ppg for the Pale Ale malt, 22 ppg for the Roast Barley and 28
ppg for the Flaked Barley and a final volume of 5.75 gallons, that would
yield a calculated OG of 1.046. You got 1.055.
BUT! You did not collect 5.75 gallons of runnings you sparged with 4.4 and
collected an unknown amount and then added an additional gallon in the
boiler. After the boil had cooled you measured 1.055 for 5.75 gallons per
your calibrated stick.
I theorize that either:
a. you had a lot of trub still in suspension that really upped your gravity
reading.
or
b. Your calibrated stick is way off
or
c. you were actually reading 4.75 gallons which works out to an OG of
1.056, based on my previous OG calc.
Take your pick, hope this sheds some light on the problem,
John
metallurgist for International Space Station Program.
Note: as of Jan.10th, I will be leaving McDonnell Douglas and taking a job
with 3M. The palmer@ssdgwy.mdc.com address will no longer apply of course.
My home address, johnj@primenet.com will remain active.
John Palmer - Metallurgist for MDA-ISS M&P
johnj@primenet.com Huntington Beach, California
Palmer House Brewery and Smithy - www.primenet.com/~johnj/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 12:54:04 -0500
From: PVanslyke@aol.com
Subject: re:Depressed Homebrewer
Bob Bessette wrote in HBD #8 that he was "increasingly depressed due to a
number of 'infected' batchesx".
Bob, first go back through your process step by step concerning sanitation of
equipment. If you are doing primary in plastic, maybe somewhere along the
line the container has become scratched and now does not clean up properly.
Possibly the problem is in the bottling process, caps, or bottles.
I can't get behind the idea that the problem may be your water unless
something drastic has happened to the aquifer supplying the well. I have been
brewing with gravity flow spring water inwhich I know live newts and frogs
(sometimes - they keep down the cricket population) without a problem.
Don't despairx there are better days ahead.
Paul VanSlyke >>> Farnham Springs Brewery
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 17 Dec 96 12:45:44 EDT
From: Bob Bessette/PicTel <Bob_Bessette@smtpnotes.pictel.com>
Subject: Thanks for all of the infection responses...
Fellow HBDers,
I knew there was another reason why I enjoy brewing so much. Not only is it
because when I do brew an un-infected beer it is a glorious experience but it
is the sensitivity of the home-brewing community which makes this such a
rewarding hobby. I received MANY responses from my brethren on why I am
getting
infected brews. There were a wide range of responses and I will try to
synopsize here. One thing I did learn was that I was not alone. Many
homebrewers have had "infected" brews consistently until they had modified
their process or sanitizing procedures. Here are some of the suggestions
that I
received:
> Soak bottles in bleach solution overnight and use the dishwasher afterwards
making sure the heat button is turned on.
(I do this...)
> Replace all siphoning equipment including the bottling bucket (including
spigot).
(I will do this...)
> Do not let any unboiled tap-water (in my case well water) get in contact
>with
the cooled beer.
(I still do some rinsing with the tap water, this could be a problem)
> Use iodophor and do not rinse hoses etc with the tap water. Iodophor will
>dry
without rinsing with water.
(I will do this)
> Use rubber gloves during the brewing process.
(I will buy some)
> Ferment only in glass, not plastic.
(I only ferment in glass, never plastic)
> Use only liquid yeast.
(I only use liquid yeast)
> Do not dry-hop with fresh hops, always boil the hops to sanitize first.
(I boil my hops first)
Out of the above suggestions I think that using iodophor rather than rinsing
with my well water may be the solution. I am constantly rinsing with my tap
water even after the colling down of my wort. I will rinse the hoses and use
them to siphon from my cooling bucket into the carboy. This is unfiltered well
water being introduced to my cooling beer. I do this all the time and was
never
really warned by others probably because they don't have well water. One email
I got from Todd Kirby really hit home:
>I also have a well and had similar infections my first
>few batches. I was confident in my sanitizing and concluded it was my
>water as well. After switching to Iodophor, all my problems were
>eliminated since I was able to eliminate the rinsing step. You don't
>mention your sanitization technique, but if you're not already using
>iodophor, I highly recommend you give it a try. It's fairly cheap, easy,
>and faster than most other sanitizers. Others mention rinsing with boiled
>water or even cheap beer, so maybe you could try those methods as well
>(or other no-rinse applications).
I think the steps I will take are the following:
1) Purchase all new tubing, and a new bottling bucket.
2) Buy iodophor and only use this as a rinsing agent from cooling of my
wort to
bottling.
I think I've pretty much been doing everything else as far as sanitation is
concerned. It just makes sense that
the untreated well water, even in very small quantities(rinsing of hoses), may
be introducing bacteria into the beer.
I want to thank all of you for your responses. I will keep you updated on my
next batch. YES, I will be brewing again.
If not for all of your very helpful,caring posts I don't know whether I
would've jumped back into brewing so quickly
again. Thanks again and hopefully in the near future I will be brewing the
beer
that I am accustomed to...
Cheers,
Bob "formerly depressed brewer" Bessette
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 96 10:08:34 -0000
From: Stacey Jueal <jueal.s@apple.com>
Subject: "unscubscribe"
jueal.s@applelink.apple.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 12:18:36 -0600
From: Gary Eckhardt <gary_eckhardt@realworld.com>
Subject: Fermenting in 5-gal kegs
Hello all!
I've been thinking of starting the policy of doing my secondary
fermentations in 5-gal kegs, but I had a few questions about how
to modify them for fermentation use.
1) I understand that when used as a primary, I should have a blowoff
tube. Is this really necessary for a secondary? Most of my
batches, unfortunately, do not equal exactly 5 gallons, so there
is a little room on top for any krausen that might build up.
2) What's the suggested way of attaching an airlock onto one of the
valves?
3) Do I have to modify my "liquid out" diptube, i.e. cutting it off
shorter? Should I leave this tube in while fermenting, or
leave it out until I'm ready to rack off the beer?
4) I've read conflicting opinions on the effect of the physical
size of the fermenter (i.e. tall and skinny) and the ability
for yeast to flocculate, etc. Anything I should be worried
about?
Thanks for any information!
- ---------------------------+----------------------------------------------
Gary Eckhardt | "in this day & age...music performed by
Database Consultants, Inc. | humans...hum!?" --wilde silas tomkyn
dcigary@txdirect.net | R,DW,HAHB!
gary_eckhardt@realworld.com| R^3 = "Real World. Real Smart. Real Quick."
(210)344-6566 | http://www.realworld.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 16:33:59 -0600
From: John Wilkinson <jwilkins@imtn.tpd.dsccc.com>
Subject: RE: Wort aeration
In HBD V2 #8 Jim Priebe said regarding aeration by pouring between buckets:
>While this method would indeed aerate the wort, it is only by the luck 'o
>the brewing gods that he hasn't experienced a nasty infection in his beer.
Well, the gods must like me because I always use this method and have yet
to have an infection. Since I started using it many batches ago I have
not had problems with high FG, a problem I had before. I use large starters
and aerate well by the pouring method and have had good complete ferments
without infection. I brew summer and winter outdoors in East Texas. Cow
manure and all. I do sanitize everything that touches the wort including,
of course, the buckets used for aeration.
John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins@imtn.dsccc.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 17:42:53 -0500 (EST)
From: Jim Busch <busch@eosdev2.gsfc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Volume and more
Dave writes about measuring volume in kettle:
<In planning my batch, I use the equation to calculate desired levels
<at various states in my process: strike water: 167 mm from top
This is fine but I suggest a simpler method was noted in the
same digest, use a wooden stick to notch the measurements. Thats
what I do with my pilot system and also on our micro. A dip stick
as it were!
Bill writes:
<PS. Many thanks to Jim Busch for his advice on wheat beer
<brewing. Mine didn't quite come out like the Victory Brewing
<Comapny's but it was surprisingly close and mighty tasty.
You are most welcome and thanks for the continued support of
Victory Brewing! I think you are now ready to clone Victory's
Old Horizontal Barley Wine!! (think American IPA brewed to 25P,
ummmmmmm).
Prost!
Jim Busch
http://www.victorybeer.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 96 14:46:27 PST
From: mikehu@lmc.com
Subject: Mill Suggestion
Greetings new HBD readers -
Bill Giffin mentions that he prefers the Corona mill over roller mills:
>I still prefer the Corona mill over the roller mills that are available.
>Since the last go around on mills I acquired a Malt Mill, adjustable, and
>used it for about five batches. The crush was no better then the crush
>that I was getting with the Corona and the extraction was not as good.
>In the same period of time I got out the Phil's mill that I had had for
>some time an used that for five or six batches, while the Phil's Mill
>preformed better then the Malt Mill, it didn't do any better then the
>Corona.
I just wanted to second this observation, and make a suggestion for anyone
who may be looking for a mill to use in their brewery. I have used a Corona
in the past, and would agree that it gives good results when used correctly.
The best thing I have found to use, however, is an antique mill used to grind
flour or coffee. These are the big old ones with a large motor in the back that
turns a grinding wheel against a stationary front, adjustable wheel. (just like
the Corona) You will usually see them with a large hopper feeding the grinder
from the top. There is a knob for adjusting the crush on the front of the
grinder. (Also just like the Corona) The one I have was actually used for
grinding coffee. It was made by Hobart somewhere around 1930. (The knob on the
front says "adjust for type of brew before grinding" cool - huh?) Anyway, I got
mine for $25, and it is indestructable. A friend of mine uses an old flour
grinder that looks exactly the same. I have found the crush produced by these
grinders to be ideal, as well as cheap and efficient. (Turn on the motor, and
feed it grain) Grinding the grain is now a joy, instead of a chore.
If you can find one of these, grab it. You won't be dissapointed.
Mike H.
Portland, Or.
"They don't make 'em like they used to..."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 11:23:08 -0800
From: Steve Christiansen <steven@sequent.com>
Subject: Re: Depressed HomeBrewer
> From: Bob Bessette/PicTel <Bob_Bessette@smtpnotes.pictel.com>
> I am becoming increasingly depressed due to a number of "infected" batches I
> have had recently. The thing is that they are fine up until about 3 weeks in
> the bottle and then they start going downhill.
I had the same problem a few years ago. After many infected batches and
a lot of time spent searching for the cause, I finally thought to disassemble
the drum tap on my bottling bucket. I found the parts coated with a foul-
smelling crud. My beer was fine out of the fermenter, but getting infected
as I bottled it. I was sanitizing the bucket with bleach followed by a
boiling water rinse, but either those liquids were not reaching all parts
of the inside of the tap, or they were not they staying in contact long
enough by just running them through the tap. When I started taking the tap
apart and cleaning it each time, the problem was solved. Eventually I
got tired of fooling with it, bought a bucket without a tap, and went back
to siphoning. Maybe a different type of spigot would have worked too,
but I didn't try that.
Steve Christiansen
Beaverton, OR
steven@sequent.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 14:25:23 -0600
From: Algis R Korzonas <korzonas@lucent.com>
Subject: Sticke
Jeff writes:
>First, Al piqued my interest in V2 #3 when running though beers he dry hops
>he wrote "Sticke (a dryhopped version of Duesseldorfer Altbier)". Sounds
>great! Al would you have a grain profile and hop/yeast suggestions?
Sure, but forget about entering it in the AHA Nationals ;^).
Sticke is a "special" batch of Duesseldofer Altbier which is brewed
as a reward for the regular customers. "Sticke" in the local slang
means "secret" and the tie-in with the beer is that there is no big
ad campaign when the beer is on-line. If you are a regular, you get it,
if not, then you probably lose out. It's brewed once or twice per year
by the various brewpubs in Duesseldorf and each has their own way
of making the beer special. Commonly, it is slightly higher gravity
and has more IBUs than the brewery's regular Altbier and is often dryhopped.
Based upon what I've read and spoken to brewmasters in Duesseldorf,
Spalt hops are commonly used (Spalt and Spalter Select are the only
two hops used by Zum Uerige).
Standard Altbier is mostly Munich malt to about 1.050 OG, fermented
cool and lagered cold. It is not strongly attenuated, so it has a
hint of sweetness, but it is so intensely hopped that it can taste
dry. It should not be decidedly sweet -- it must be refreshing.
Typical hop rates for the most traditional Duesseldorfer Altbiers
are 40 to 55 IBUs and they don't have any flavour hops added (although
some flavour is bound to slip through with those kinds of hopping rates).
Sticke is slightly higher in OG, say 1.055 or 1.057 perhaps. If you
can do a decoction mash, use 99% Munich and 1% black malt. If you
plan to do an infusion mash, I'd go with 89 to 94% Munich malt, 1%
black malt and 5 to 10% DeWolf-Cosyns Aromatic or Weyermann Melanoidin
malt. Hop the heck out of it: 55 to 60 IBUs, all for a 60 minute
boil and all Spalt if you can get it. I would suggest dryhopping
with 1/2 oz of Spalt. If you can't get Spalt hops, I would use
Saaz, Tettnanger or Hallertauer.
As for yeast, I really like the Wyeast European Ale #1338, which, to
my taste, seems hauntingly like the Zum Uerige yeast. Ferment it
at about 60F and then, after fermentation, slowly cool to 45F for
a few months of lagering. I would add the dryhops for the last
three weeks of lagering. Roger Deschner tells me that the Zum Uerige
yeast is quite prone to temperature shock, so this is why I suggest
*slowly* cooling the beer to lagering temps. Bearing this in mind
you should really try to get the starter and wort around the same
temperature. I, personally, have not experienced any temperature shock
problems with this yeast, but I'm always very gentle to yeast in that
respect, so I'm just going on suspicion.
Coincidentally, I had a Zum Uerige last night. It was my last bottle,
purchased at the brewpub. I was celebrating the sale of my retail
store Sheaf & Vine Brewing Supply. The flavour is still very clear
in my head. Yum!
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korzonas@lucent.com
korz@pubs.ih.lucent.com
korz@xnet.com
P.S. To save myself a lot of private email and since I have absolutely
no financial ties to the business now, let me take this opportunity to
answer a few questions. Sheaf & Vine Brewing Supply's retail "branch"
is now going to be called "P. T. Barley Brewing Supply" and will still
be located inside Mainstreet Wine and Spirits in Countryside, IL. They
currently plan to keep on all the current malts, hops and extracts and
will probably be adding a few more. They may do mailorder (as I did
back in 1992 and 1993) but not at least until after the Christmas rush.
I sold the store because I need more time to be a better husband and
to actually be able to brew more than once per month (although it usually
was two or three simultaneous batches!). I'll continue to do the other
non-retail stuff that S&VBS used to do, but under the name "Sheaf & Vine."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 12:44:00 -0700
From: Narvaez Ronald <RNarvaez@phs.org>
Subject: Skimming Wort
Hi there fellow brewers, I need a question answered.
I recently noticed after making several batches, some extract, some all
grain that there is a foam that appears durring my boil. I use only
unhopped dry extract, or all grain so I use hops in every boil. I was
wondering if skimming off this foam will make a big difference in my
final brew. If I skim of the foam on a IPA will my beer be less bitter?
Thanks
Ron Narvaez
Life is like good beer, you will only cherish it if you enjoy it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 15:44:30 -0500
From: Tim Martin <TimM@southwest.cc.nc.us>
Subject: When to stop sparging question (Tim Martin)
Hey Neighbors,
Sorry to interrupt the no sparge thread but I am still trying to get the old
sparge technique down. When I mashed and sparged recently my
technique was to keep adding sparge water to my hot liquor tank until I
collected my predetermined amount. My concern with this method is
leaching tannins from the grain. I noticed that the last gallon of runnings
were quite clear, which probably means no more sugars were being
extracted so I was just basically running 170 df water through my grain
and to top it off I forgot to add gypsum to the sparge water.
I know that it is recommended to keep checking the gravity and stop at
1.010 or taste the runnings and stop when you can longer detect any
sweetness but this seems like a real PITA. I suppose if one were to
follow this method one would stop at this point and top off your collection
tank with water. Is anyone still with me?
Question 1) why would I start extracting tannins just because I reach the
magic number of 1.010. 2) why does one extract tannins at all 3) would
anyone take an educated guess whether I probably extracted tannins
with that last gallon of clear runnings 4) is there an easier method to
determine when to stop sparging that I have over looked 5) I'm I being too
anal.
The no sparge looks interesting but the calculations look to complicated.
Well thanks for listening and any help would be appreciated.
Y'all have a cool yule!
Tim Martin
Cullowhee, NC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 10:01:45 -0700
From: sara&rod <dawgs@sirius.com>
Subject: belgian yeasts/ archival Q
1)i have missed the last few HBD's and wouldn't you know it, they're really
relevant. can someone tell me if and where there is an archive of back
digests? i cant find it at the brewery.
2)what the he** happened anyway? i missed the whole drama that unfolded
with the hbd in the last four weeks. if someone wouldn't mind updating me,
i would be appreciative. is this still with the same sponser, just
software updates or something??
3) i just brewed a saison with wyeast belgian strong 1388. it fermented
for a week and i took a reading. to my surprise it was 1.030. i racked to
secondary and it has been slowly but steady fermenting since sunday (ie. 2
days). is this characteristic and is this because it is highly focculant?
wyeast info says it is not. what is the mechanism at work here? i would
be amiss if i didnt mention that the yeast packet was four months old.
however, i made a starter, and it wasnt like this. does old yeast behave
like this? what kind of conditions exist within that golden mylar crypt?
i know i;ve asked a mouthful, so if someone could point to resources, that
would be helpful.
thanks
prost, nozdrovie, salud and
Cheers to you,
the brewers formerly known as beerdogs (sara&rod)
*** "[the] supply of beer was exhausted somewhat earlier than the
organizers of the migration scheme had anticipated, and that, therefore, a
landing was effected at the rather uninviting spot since then immortalized
in song and story as Plymouth Rock." -G. Thomann, New York,
November 1909 ***
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 16:05:27 -0800
From: "Kevin R. Kane" <deviator@aracnet.com>
Subject: Coffee in Beer
New to the HBD, have a question on adding coffee to beer.
My geuss is that the best technique would be to add fresh ground coffee
to the wort just after I stop boiling (and after I strain out most of my
hops), and steep it for 15-20 min.
HOW MUCH COFFEE ??
I am planning on using Starbucks Espresso Roast, in a fairly strongly
flavored sweetish porter. References range from 1/4 cup to 1/2 pound!
-Any help is appreciated.
personal e-mail OK
deviator@aracnet.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 19:17:18 -0500 (EST)
From: Bill Macher <macher@mail.lm.com>
Subject: RE: Wort aeration[or, beating my wort]
I am new at brewing, having only six batches under my belt...er, not
literally, since one is carbonating naturally in a keg, and the last is in
the secondary.
Anyway, this last batch I tried something new, after reading the "dump it
from one bucket to another" approach to aeration. What I did was use what (I
think)is called a "french whip," a common kitchen utensil [I think, since I
know nothing about cooking, and the only thing that get me into the kitchen
is the need to be there to brew], which I used to beat the cooled wort
vigorisly, before syphoning it into the primary. There was three inches of
foam on top when I started syphoning.
When the primary carboy was about half full I pitched in the yeast, as the
wort dropped in from the top. I had done a full boil, and had cooled the
wort with an emersion[can't spell either] chiller down to about 70 deg. F.
The frementation was the most vigorous to date. OG was about 1.046 and it
was down to 1.014 in 24 hours. I pitched yeast which was 2 packs of Edme dry
yeast, rehydrated in water only for about an hour as the boil was going on.
Is beating the **** out of the wort like this advisable?
Seemed to work good this time...
Boy does my beer taste good after commuting to work and back on my bicycle
32 miles round trip!
Bill
When climbing slowly, with 90 LB of bike and gear
Or flying down the other side, sailing through the air
There is no question; in MY mind it's clear
I am both the turtle, AND the hare!
( macher@telerama.lm.com Pittsburgh, Pa. USA )
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 16:53:57 -0800
From: homebrew@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Tiny bubbles
Hello again,
I was wondering if someone could comment on the following observations:
When priming and subsequently bottle conditioning homebrewed alcoholic
beverages, I have noticed that the CO2 bubbles produced are of the very,
very fine persuasion. Does force carbonating said beverages produce a
larger bubble of CO2 (and thus a bigger head)??
Additionally, at room temp the head is full, dense, rich and has great
staying power. However, under refrigeration, there is virtually no head at
all. It was explained to me, per the comments I recieved via the RCB
regarding the head on my homebrew (pun? no pun?), that when refrigerated the
CO2 has been absorbed into the liquid and when opened and poured is not
expressed as readily as the room temp beer. So here is the question: When
beer is force carbonated, does one add "additional" CO2 so that when a cold
beer is poured, a full, dense, rich head forms??????????
Do any of you homebrewers experience the same condition??? Can this be
resolved with say additional priming sugar (I use the published 3/4C corn
sugar or 1-1/4C DME), or extended conditioning time (i.e. two weeks then
consume)????
Maybe someone could explain or point me to a suitable reference.
Kevin
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 18:56:48 +0000
From: Paul Kensler <pkensler@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Experience with yeast slants?
Anybody care to comment on the various yeast slants available, and/or
your experience with them?
I recently began using yeast cultured off of slant, and have had
mixed results. I have been very happy with Yeast Culture Kit Co.
yeasts. So far, I have used their Irish Ale and Belgian Ale yeasts
(the Irish yeast is my new "Stout yeast of choice"). Both fermented
stronly and quickly and flocculated well. Both yeasts have made
positive contributions to the flavor profile.
I have not had success with Brewtek's yeasts. I have had three
batches (using two different slants) with the same problem -- poor
flocculation, high final gravity, and a "solvent" like taste (I have
never had these problems before). All three batches were made using
Brewtek yeast slants -- their American Ale #1 and British Pale Ale
#2 specifically. The only variable I can see that is responsible
would be the new yeast strains. Currently, I have a brown ale aging
in the keg, hoping that the aging time will reduce the thin,
solvent-like flavor.
I would like to hear any feedback about these or other yeast slant
manufacturers.
Thanks,
Paul
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 20:45:03 -0600 (CST)
From: Aaron Sepanski <sepanska@it.uwp.edu>
Subject: [No Subject Provided By Sender]
Hey, my name is Aaron. I am starting a homebrew club at my university.
I was wondering if any of you had suggestions on things that this club
could do. Anything! Don't be afraid to send me crazy ideas. My email
address in case it doesn't show is sepanska@it.uwp.edu (I am not so
familiar with the new format). Please, any idea would be great.
Thank you for your time,
Aaron Sepanski
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 19:23:10 -0700
From: "Maribeth_Raines, Asst_Prof" <raines@radonc.ucla.edu>
Subject: Shelf-life of yeast on slants
Most of the published references on storage of yeast ( including those
written by Barbara Kirsop from National Collection of Yeast Cultures)
suggests subculturing slants after 1 year. I routinely check the BrewTek
slants that are sold for viability, contamination, etc. After six months
the viability is still well over 65%. I have successfully resuscitated
yeast after 2 and 3 years on a slant. Viability does vary between
different strains. There are also other factors which can also will affect
the shelf-life such as the media on which they are stored and the amount of
exposure to air. In our hands (and using BrewTek media), brewing yeast
remains viable for at least a year.
MB Raines-Casselman
raines@radonc.ucla.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 23:17:27 -0400
From: "Pierre A. Dumont" <pierre_dumont@unb.ca>
Subject: 2 Hole Bungs
In reference to the question about obtaining a two hole bung (rubber
stopper) you can find one in the Ficher Scientific Catalog. Its a
catalog with chemistry laboratory supplies.
If you can't thier address let me know and I'll dig it out for you.
_________________________
Pierre A. Dumont
221-602 Graham Ave.
Fredericton, NB E3B 4C3
phone/fax: (506)455-4988
pierre_dumont@unb.ca
_________________________
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 20:50:14 -0800
From: Sharon/Dan Ritter <ritter@web.camasnet.com>
Subject: Decoction mash
I'm attempting my first decoction mash after 30 all-grain batches - "Why
has he waited so long?" you're probably asking. I've been in a blissful
infusion mash routine but unhappy with the lack of background malt flavor
in my pilsners. Here's my plan - any suggestions would be appreciated.
(I'm using De Wolf-Cosyns pils malt for the primary portion of the mash
(80%). DWC Aromatic, CaraPils, and Munich make up the remainder.)
Strike temp at 145F. Rest for 20 minutes. Test and adjust pH if
necessary. Pull 3/4 (or more?) of the thickest part of the mash. Heat
decoction to 155F. Rest for 20 minutes. Bring decoction to a boil for
25-30 minutes. Add decoction back to main mash and stabilize at 155F.
Rest for ~60 minutes. Add infusion of boiling water to reach mash-out temp
of 168F. Sparge as usual. Call fire department to clean kitchen.
I modeled this procedure after Marc de Jonge's micro FAQ on decoction
mashing - <www.alpha.rollanet.org/library/decoctfaq.html>.
What do you think? Will this procedure noticeably darken the final color
of the beer? I'm right at the upper edge of the color limit for this
pilsener if I were doing an infusion mash.
Dan Ritter <ritter@camasnet.com>
Ritter's MAMMOTH Brewery
Grangeville, Idaho
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 1996 03:33:39 -0500 (EST)
From: Alex Santic <alex@salley.com>
Subject: Flour mills vs. malt mills
Bill Giffin says:
>It is my sense that the folks complaining about the Corona don't know how
>to use this piece of equipment. As with many tools it has to be set up
>properly,
>
>I sold the Malt Mill cheap. I am back to using the poor old Corona
>with wonderful result. Perhaps Mr. Noonan needs to have more attention
>paid to his writing.
When "Even Newer Brewing Lager Beer" comes out, Noonan will probably
devote more space to roller mills. While you may be perfectly right, those
percentage points you're getting aren't what's driving the market. A
reasonably priced mill that's simple to adjust for a good crush, and can
be driven by a power drill out of the box, is rightly considered a
homebrew advance. The market will probably continue to move in that
direction.
The double-crush method works well if you really want ideal results with
the inexpensive roller mills, but they're quite acceptable with a single
pass as well.
- --
Alex Santic - alex@salley.com
Silicon Alley Connections, LLC
527 Third Avenue #419 - NYC 10016 - 212-213-2666 - Fax 212-447-9107
http://www.salley.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Homebrew Digest V2 #10
*****************************
