Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2289
Homebrew Digest Tuesday, December 17 1996 Volume 02 : Number 009
1 Re: yeast banking question
2 Re: A question for the Metallurgists
3 No-Sparge Confusion
4 Belgian Abbey beers - part deux
5 Lactic Acid at Bottling?
6 RE: Belgian Abbey brews
7 Jethro Lives
8 Again mills
9 Homebrew Digest V2 #7 -Reply
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 1996 17:10:34 +0000
From: "Christopher V. Sack" <cvsack@mail.ican.net>
Subject: Re: yeast banking question
> I'm getting interested in yeast banking and I have a question that I
> can't find an answer to. How long can one maintain a specific culture?
> The Brewtek kit (http://www.brewtek.com) mentions that yeast on slants
> will remain stable for 9 to 12 months. What do you do after that? Do
> you buy a pure strain to culture from or can you reculture from your
> slants that are reaching maturity? It seems that you should be able to
> reculture since the yeast companies obviously keep one strain going for
> ages, but I'm not sure if this requires some special techniques or
> equipment (ultra sterile environment, strong microscopes, etc.) that
> wouldn't be an option for a homebrewer like me. Yeast ranchers, I'm
> all ears!
> Robert
A biochemist friend of mine mentioned that a slant will keep yeast
for about six months. After that, he advises that the yeast should
be re-streaked (purified). This can be done easily by snagging a
sample of the yeast from the old slant using a piece of thin wire with
a loop on the end (called a loop) that has been heat sanitized.
Spread this sample back and forth onto a new slant and allow the
viable cells to grow on the fresh growth medium.
Chirstopher V. Sack <cvsack@ican.net>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 1996 17:10:35 +0000
From: "Christopher V. Sack" <cvsack@mail.ican.net>
Subject: Re: A question for the Metallurgists
> First, the question:
> Will a 50 liter pot made of thin 304 stainless change (significantly) in
> volume over temperature?
> [snip]
> Kent Fritz
The pot will expand slightly over the 60^F - 212^F temperature range.
But don't forget, that the volume of the water will also expand over
the same temperature range. As a chemist, I would suspect that the
water would expand more than the pot so that the net effect would
be to raise the level of the water. Find out for sure. Fill the pot
almost full with cool water, measure the height/volume. Heat it to
boiling and measure again.
Chirstopher V. Sack <cvsack@ican.net>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 1996 18:32:21 -0500
From: KennyEddy@aol.com
Subject: No-Sparge Confusion
To add confusion to my previous post, I decided to take a look at Dr Fix'
data from his original article on the topic (available at The Library at The
Brewery, http://alpha.rollanet.org/library.html). Here's the goods:
Grain: 36.75 lb total
Mash Water: 11.6 gal (= 1.26 qt/lb thickness)
Drained wort and then added 5.3 gal water directly to kettle to get 14.8 gal
total
So he drained (14.8 - 5.3) = 9.5 gal of the 11.6 gallons originally added.
Therefore he left (11.6 - 9.5) = 2.1 gal behind. So his absorption rate was
(2.1/36.75) = 0.057 gal/lb or 0.23 qt/lb.
This is MUCH less than the 0.1 gal/lb (0.4 qt/lb) figure often quoted in
brewing literature and less than *half* of Alex Santic's 0.55 qt/lb figure.
This figures in hugely in the "no-sparge factor", since the amount of wort
retained versus that drained determines the amount of extra grain that you
need. Uisng Fix' results, you need 33% more grain. Using 0.55 qt/lb, you'll
need *77% more*!!!!
Moral of the story, I guess, is that one should benchmark his/her process to
determine absorption BEFORE trying to tweak in the no-sparge process.
Absorption may be due to many factors including crush quality that may vary
greatly between brewers. Take a certain amount of grain, mash as usual, and
measure the amount and gravity of the drained wort. This should give you the
figures you need to calculate future batches with better accuracy.
*****
Ken Schwartz
El Paso, TX
KennyEddy@aol.com
http://members.aol.com/kennyeddy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 1996 16:42:58 -0800
From: smurman@best.com
Subject: Belgian Abbey beers - part deux
I had one other thought/question about the Belgian beers that I wanted
to mention - bottling. Al K (TM), mentioned that he was bottling an
abbey beer in old Chimay bottles, and then corking them. This sounds
great to me, and I've been looking into doing that myself. Are you
using regular corks, or do you use the plastic ones? My homebrew shop
only carries the plastic mushroom style corks, so I may have to
mail-order the wooden ones. Al also mentioned soaking the corks to
soften them up before bottling. Any worries about infection? Also,
will any champagne bottle do? I can get as many of these from the
local recycling center that I want, but if memory serves (and it
usually doesn't), these only come in green glass. Does Chimay itself
come in brown glass?
SM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 96 21:00:02 EST
From: "Gregory C. Furlich" <gfurlich@pen.k12.va.us>
Subject: Lactic Acid at Bottling?
I have been working on an ESB from a recipe in a book
entitled The Homebrewer's Recipe Guide. This is to be a
Fuller's clone. It is an extract recipe. The kicker is that it
calls for two tablespoons of lactic acid to be added at
bottling. I've heard of using this stuff to adjust the ph of a
mash but never in bottling. I tried the stuff and I'm wary of
putting this stuff in without knowing why or being sure what it
will do. I've tried only one other recipe from the book, an it
came out great. Anybody have any input? Private e-mail okay,
too.
Greg Furlich
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 1996 23:52:45 -0600 (CST)
From: Richard Gardner <rgardner@monarch.papillion.ne.us>
Subject: RE: Belgian Abbey brews
I did a bit of research into "cloning" Belgian styles earlier this year
and found a plethora of contradictory information, which I've since learned
is mostly because every Belgian brewer does things slightly differently.
(thanks for the assistance from Tim Fields)
A great reference is "The Great Beers of Belgium" by (the) Michael
Jackson, rarely available at a bookstore near you. Latest revision 1994. I
haven't checked www.amazon.com for it, but they probably have it if you
can't get it locally. I picked it up last month at a specialty liquor store
for $12, ISBN 1-900131-35-8. Beautiful printing, 327 pages. No recipes,
but a wealth of information nonetheless. Says it was imported and
distributed exclusively by "Vanberg and DeWulf" Cooperstown NY 607/547-8184
- - who I think may be beer distributors/importers, not regular publishers.
Spencer's Beer Page (http://realbeer.com/spencer/) has the BURP
descriptions of the Belgian styles that is fairly extensive (look under
recipes).
Also, if you have the first printing of the Rajotte book, (and the 2nd
printing does not mention that it indeed is a 2nd printing) Rojotte posted a
list of corrections of all the typos in the Lambic Digest #558 (available in
the 1995 archives).
I'll heed your warning about carmelizing sugar in the microwave. Does
anyone know about the yellow crystal sugar from China available in oriental
stores that is real cheap? The source of the sugar (cane, beet, palm,
whatever) is not listed, but I thought it might do for some of the lighter
styles.
I made a strong ale (allgrain) about a month ago using Wyeast 1388,
"Belgian Stong Ale." Does anyone have any eperience with this yeast? OG
1.072, tonight SG 1.016, but still very cloudy. I'm wondering how long
untill it starts clearing. Also, any ideas on the pedigree of this yeast?
Ferment temp 60-65F (basement). This yeast is rather new on the market and I
haven't seen much on it (yes, I know I should do more yeast ranching
myself). -- The beer did taste rather good, but young still; I think I'll
bottle rather than keg it.
The secret to life is to die young, but to delay it as long as possible!!!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 00:14:32 -0600
From: rob moline <brewer@kansas.net>
Subject: Jethro Lives
The Jethro Gump Report
It pleases Jethro greatly to see the HBD revived...and while sad to
think that the AOB was overwhelmed by the task, I am VERY pleased to hear
the rumour that some "humourless bastard" is going to take the helm and
guide this vessel through the treacherous waters that lie ahead.....Pat, you
have my blessings!
Fatherhood is cool, especially with Jethro Junior...he is a really
happy baby, and a delight...
(I have been provoked by Jim Booth and/or Kathy....so, if I tick
anyone off, blame them!)
But please accept my best wishes to the collective, and to my
friends for a very grand Holiday season and a Golden New Year.....(I wish I
was just finishing dinner at Doyle's at Watson's Bay, and making my way over
to Lady Jane for a swim......)
Short-term reality is that a routine surgery, turned into anything
but, and Jethro had not just a disc extrusion removed, but also had a perf'd
dura, via Cobb elevator, with major CSF loss, and is only just regaining
strength. Many days FLAT on your back in hospital will drive you crazy; even
though my surgeon had written my orders to include "May drink one beer with
evening meal," I just didn't feel like it!
I must have been ill......
Jethro
"The more I know about beer, the more I realize I need to know more about beer!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 09:28:38 cst
From: Bill Giffin <bill-giffin@juno.com>
Subject: Again mills
Good morning all,
>> Ronald LaBorde said:
Also, I noticed he (referring to Greg Noonan) seems to be in love with
the Corona mill. That mill picture is in two of his books, with no
mention of any roller type homebrew mills. So I guess the idea here is to
listen to what he says and consider it good advice, but not gospel.
<<
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.
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,
Those of you who have the small roller mills be aware the the nip of the
rollers is not correct. The sharp knurling on the rolls cuts the husks
and truly is not suitable. Roller mills should have at least 250 mm of
diameter, about 10 inches, to be efficient.
For you doubting Thomas' out there screen you crushed malt that you got
from you roller mill. If 75% or more or the crushed malt don't make it
through a 0.039" screen then you are not getting anywhere near optimum
crush. 15% of the malt is hush +/-.
Bill
P.S. 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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 09:33:50 -0500
From: Patrice Wheeler <PATRICE@ICN.COM>
Subject: Homebrew Digest V2 #7 -Reply
DanO,
And my favorite is #26
Rice in Beer!!!!!
It sounds like I got really wasted
and drowned in my beer. Ha Ha!!!!!
Never!!!!!
Rice-Brew
[entire text of HBD v2#7 included by poster]
End of Homebrew Digest V2 #9
****************************
