Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2355
HOMEBREW Digest #2355 Sat 22 February 1997
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Digest Janitor: janitor@brew.oeonline.com
Many thanks to the Observer & Eccentric Newspapers of
Livonia, Michigan for sponsoring the Homebrew Digest.
URL: http://www.oeonline.com
Contents:
Raspberry Cream (Cody Payne)
Re: Zinc anti-skunking (Steve Alexander)
Yeast Culture Conditions... (Brian Deck)
"Yow-yowing" ("Val J. Lipscomb")
re: Stainless Steel Pots + botulism + ("C.D. Pritchard")
Re: Cold Break separation using CF wort chiller ("Alan L. Edwards")
Re: dry hopping in the bottle? ("Alan L. Edwards")
Composition of extract from steeped versus mashed grains (Brian and Carol Dixon)
brew dogs.. (Dckdog)
joining the digest/ (Russell Robinson )
summary re: whole hops source (Sharon/Dan Ritter)
Skunkiness; Kegs on stovetop (Ron Gasik)
Warming up a stout ("Tim M. Dugan")
Re: Mash methods (Geoff Scott)
AHA/AOB: the $100,000 Question (Part 1) (Louis Bonham)
AHA/AOB: the $100,000 Question (Part 2) (Louis Bonham)
Re: mixing bitter and mild (Mark Peacock)
Homemade RIMS question ("Mike Szwaya")
siphon filter thingies (mark evans)
Semi-RIMS (Jay Ward)
RE: HBD protocol / chemotherapy and beer ("Keith Royster")
Water Quality Web Site (James_Nachman_at_USCC__P3)
home unitanks ("Bryan L. Gros")
partial mash/old hops (Paul Brian)
sierra nevada ale yeast (HOUCK KEITH A)
NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS: brew.oeonline.com
Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew@brew.oeonline.com
(Articles are published in the order they are received.)
Send UNSUBSCRIBE and all other requests, ie, address change, etc.,
to homebrew-request@brew.oeonline.com BUT PLEASE NOTE that if
you subscribed via the BITNET listserver (BEER-L@UA1VM.UA.EDU),
you must unsubscribe by sending a one line e-mail to listserv@ua1vm.ua.edu
that says: UNSUB BEER-L
Thanks to Pete Soper, Rob Gardner and all others for making the Homebrew
Digest what it is. Visit the HBD Hall of Fame at:
http://brew.oeonline.com/
If your account is being deleted, please be courteous and unsubscribe first.
Please don't send me requests for back issues - you will be silently ignored.
For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to lutzen@alpha.rollanet.org
ARCHIVES:
An archive of previous issues of this digest, as well as other beer
related information can be accessed via anonymous ftp at
ftp.stanford.edu. Use ftp to log in as anonymous and give your full
e-mail address as the password, look under the directory
/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer directory. AFS users can find it under
/afs/ir.stanford.edu/ftp/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer. If you do not have
ftp capability you may access the files via e-mail using the ftpmail
service at gatekeeper.dec.com. For information about this service,
send an e-mail message to ftpmail@gatekeeper.dec.com with the word
"help" (without the quotes) in the body of the message.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 15:12:46 -0700 (MST)
From: Cody Payne <paynec@ucsu.Colorado.EDU>
Subject: Raspberry Cream
I just recently had a raspberry cream brew made by Bluemoon. I was
wondering if anyone could tell me what gives the beer its cream flavor? Is
it lactose like in a sweet stout or what?
Thanks,
Cody Payne
paynec@ucsu.colorado.edu
http://ucsu.Colorado.EDU/~paynec/Home.html
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 17:48:25 -0500
From: Steve Alexander <stevea@clv.mcd.mot.com>
Subject: Re: Zinc anti-skunking
David Burley wrote ...
>Steve Alexander comments:
>> I came across a patent application in a food sciences book that
>> describes adding 0.5 ppm to 5 ppm of zinc to wort (added as zinc
>> sulphate) to decrease hops skunking. The claim is that the zinc
> ...
>It is a nice thought and thanks, Steve, for passing it along but, in
>the absence of real data, like, did they actually skunk a beer by
>shining light into it and analyzing for prenyl mercaptan?
> I am skeptical.
Patent applications don't contain that sort of info. This was
strictly a FWIW suggestion. I can't recommend it as a sure cure for
skunkiness, just an interesing note for the experimentally inclined
brewer. Might work - might not.
>patent authors learned how to screw up yeast metabolism causing the
>generation of hydrogen sulfide by adding zinc salts to the ferment. If
>so, this has absolutely nothing to do with the photochemical reaction
>of iso-alpha acids to produce prenyl mercaptan.
Prenyl mecaptans contain sulphur, humulones don't. So where does the
mercaptan sulphur come from ? Doesn't seem likely to come from the
X-methyl-sulfides in the hops oils to me. Without knowing more about
the chemistry producing the mercaptans from isohululones I'd be
hesitant to state what is or isn't involved in this sequence of
reactions.
>Before adding zinc to my beer, I would like to have some actual data
>from the patent or book that it really stopped or reduced
>photochemical skunking. Any idea of the RDA for zinc? Toxicity?
>Pharmacists...
Actually ~0.5ppm zinc is a yeast growth requirement. 5ppm (5mg/L)
will keep you well below any harmful dose unless you're planning on
drinking more than 20 L/day regularly. 100mg/day is suggested as an
upper limit for human ingestion. Note that a lot of zinc is lost in
the yeast layer too.
For a brief but referenced discussion of light-stuck beer see G.Fix's
PoBS, I believe he may sites the references you seek. George says
400nm to 500nm light will skunk beer. 400-500 nm is well into the
visible range and soft glass will be transparent to these wavelengths.
Fix also stated that these reactions are well understood (tho not by
me).
Steve Alexander
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 16:50:27 -0600
From: Brian Deck <deck@pathbox.wustl.edu>
Subject: Yeast Culture Conditions...
Howdy:
I have been subscribing to the Digest for over a year now and have
been just a quiet observer, but lately I have been having a problem some of
you old pros may be able to help with (hopefully) or at least find
interesting.
My problem is, apparently, contamination. There is a terrible
"winey" taste in my last two batches, and they are <WAY> over-carbonated,
sort-of like cola. I have been brewing almost three years now and I have
never contaminated a batch since right as I was starting up brewing, and
that was a different contamination. (That one had the characteristic white
ring of bacteria in the bottle-necks at the surface, these do not. Also
tasted different.)
That said, I want to say that I am very cautious in my yeast
culturing technique and I have a slight advantage: I work in a boilogical
research laboratory. My yeast cultures are glycerol-frozen and stored in
liquid nitrogen, and every time I thaw one to make a starter, I
streak-plate in a sterile culture hood to make sure it is pure. I have
caught low-level contaminations this way in the past before they could do
any damage. I am also able to autoclave my carboys and bottles. (For
those who may not have heard of one, an autoclave is a special pressurized
oven used to sterilize instruments and heat liquids to boiling temperatures
without them actually boiling.) At home I thoroughly soak in bleach
anything that cannot be autoclaved eg. tubing. I realize some of you
pooh-pooh bleach, but the problems with bleach are usually "over-doing" it,
arent they?
The only two things that I can think of are #1: I have just had
poor luck lately and my sterile technique at home could use even more work
(suggestions?), or #2: my yeast, specifically brewers yeasts that we all
know and love, were never meant to be treated like laboratory yeasts, and
they are somehow losing their "good" properties? NOTE: I culture them both
in liquid culture (including my starter) and on solid agar plates here in
the lab using a yeast propigation medium called YPD. It consists of 1%
yeast extract and 2% bacto-peptone (both common laboratory media
ingredients), and 2% glucose. That is all; it's very bare-bones stuff.
Could the lovely brewers' yeasts be getting "sick" in this media, somehow
becoming no longer capable of making my wort taste like beer? I have
discussed this with some of my brewmeister freinds, and we just don't know.
I HAVE made good beer in the past this way, but certainly not recently.
Please feel free to criticize me in any way you feel like, I certainly need
the help. I am getting <GASP> turned off on the whole homebrew thing
lately because of this.
P.S. Has anyone tried the yeast cultures from the Yeast Culure Kit Company
in MI? I used these for the aforementioned last two batches, but surely
that cant be the problem?
Gratefully & Sorry So Wordy,
Brian
"I drank what?"
-Socrates
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 17:37:32 -0600 (CST)
From: "Val J. Lipscomb" <valjay@NetXpress.com>
Subject: "Yow-yowing"
Back when my brothers-in-law were pre-teens and fighting,
yelling and hitting each other with large weapons, my Mother-in-law
would say, "If you kids are gonna keep up that yow-yowing (sic),
take it outside"
To Dave, Bill and Al, I say, If you guys are gonna keep up that
yow-yowing, take it outside the HBD. You are all learned and usually
helpful, but the rest of us are tired of the &%$&^##$% "yow-yowing"!!!
Val Lipscomb-Brewing in San Antonio
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1997 12:04:09 +0700
From: "C.D. Pritchard" <cdp@mail.chattanooga.net>
Subject: re: Stainless Steel Pots + botulism +
re: Stainless Steel Pots, William Rich noted he had large quantities of foam
when the boil started and noted:
>The bottom line is, I think anything less than a 10 gallon pot is too
>small for 5 gallon batches. Opinions?
I use a 33 qt. enamel pot with success for boiling 6 to 6.5 gal all grain
worts. Over a propane burner, with a cover over the top and left
unattended, it would very readily boil over. I remove the cover just prior
to the onset of boiling (it's 2/3 on during preboil) and gently stir the
foam back into the wort as it is formed during the first 5-10 mins. of the
boil. After this initial crop of foam is taken care of, there's very little
subsequent foaming. Others recommend skimming off the initial foam.
- -------------------------------------------------
re: the ongoing wort canning and botulsim debate:
I kinda started this juggernaut of a thread so, I feel like I own the
readership a followup. I've have always canned starter worts via processing
30 minutes in a boiling water bath instead of the recommended pressure
canner. Based on Scott's and others cautionary posts and some outside
reading, I popped the top on a recently canned bottle of starter and tested
it with pH paper. ~5.0! I've been lucky with this and the previous batches
(~7 gals. total) 'cause I've not been "botulized" even tho' I always sample
the starters before pitching and (usually) before stepping up.
Henceforth, I'm continuing to use a boiling water bath for processing but
I'll adjust the wort pH to <= 4.5 with lactic acid.
- -------------------------------------------------
Bill Griffin flamed Al K. for proposing a web page listing of the errors in
popular brewing texts and impugned Al's brewing expertise. Oh yeah, there
was that alledged spelling error dig re: "compleat" (it may not be in
Bill's spelling checker it is in the '79 Webster's New Collegiate
Dictionary). Bill also said:
>Instead of nitpicking you should praise the effort of those who are
>honestly trying to help improve homebrewing. Or aren't you a big
>enough person to do that?
Finally, Bill wants any flames via private e-mail to "save bandwidth"!
The brewing text authors in question are human as far as I know and hence
can and do make errors. Other than buying a more expensive subsequent
edition (when and if available...), I know of no errata published for the
inevitable mistakes. For this reason, I'm eagerly awaiting Al's listing
even tho' it too will probably have mistakes or items we disagree with.
Also, we can question Al about his ideas and get feedback. Al posts
regularly herein and I've learned alot from him and the threads spun from
his posts. Other than George Fix (THANKS George!), I've never seen any
Digest postings from the other authors defended by Mr. Griffin. I'm
certianly not denigrating their HUGE contributions to homebrewing- it's just
that one learns alot from the dialectic thesis/antithesis type of forum this
Digest affords while books are largely a one-way exchange of ideas. An
excellent example of this is the aforementioned botulism thread- the boiling
water bath canning method w/o pH adjustment is straight out of Miller's
book. I've also learned a little something about Bill Griffin from his
unwarranted flaming of Al...
Three cheers for Al's endeavor!
- -------------------------------------------------
re: mass bottling Nathan Moore posted:
>I think I will go with the PET bottles... I plan on using an
>adaption of the PET keg system...I'm going to test this first but my
>idea is to simply insert a hose through the bottom of the PET and use
>silicon to seal it.
If this method is tried, consider the following:
- --Make sure the edges of the hole in the PET bottle are very smooth. Jagged
edges will function as stress risers and hence greatly weaken the PET bottle.
- --Hydrostatically pressure test the bottle before you use it.
- --At least until you've some experience with completed kegs, put the
completed keg into a larger, covered container in case the joint doesn't work.
- --Roughen the surface of the penetration tubing to get a better bond with
the silicone.
I've had good luck with 3 liter PET soda bottles modified for use as short
term (1 month) beer kegs and longer term (3 months so far) soda storage;
however, the CO2-in and beer-out lines are in the caps instead of in the
PET bottles themselves. Details are accessable via the URL in the sig. line
below.
c.d. pritchard cdp@chattanooga.net
My brewing page: http://caladan.chattanooga.net/~cdp/index.html
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 16:24:57 -0800
From: "Alan L. Edwards" <ale@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Cold Break separation using CF wort chiller
Nathan asks:
| >
| >Two things. Does anyone out there that uses a counterflow chiller have a
| >system for removing break material from the fermentor?
Harlan adds:
| Yes, but it may seem a bit unorthodox.
|
| 1. Chill the cast out wort to ~45-50*F and transfer directly to a CO2-purged
| carboy, careful not to admit any air.
|
| 2. Cover, and allow to sit overnight to settle trub and to reach pitching
| temperature.
|
| 3. In morning, siphon wort off trub into primary fermenter, aerating well.
I do this also, with all my beers except I only cool it to 65-70 and only
wait a few hours for the trub to settle. (Also, I don't think that CO2
purging is necessary, if you make sure the tip of the racking hose is
under the surface of the beer when you rack.)
How do I get the trub to fall out of suspension so fast? Wheat.
I add a half-pound of malted wheat to every batch solely for this purpose.
I don't know the scientific explaination, but it works. I have experimented
with different amounts of wheat (none, 4oz, 8oz) and adding the 8oz of
wheat in my 5 gallon batches *definitely* makes the trub fall out of
suspension much faster.
I've also noticed a big difference in cooling methods on the action of
trub percipitation. When I replaced my immersion chiller with a
counter-flow chiller, I noticed that the trub fell *much* quicker, and
was more compact.
| >Second, can anyone describe what sort of "off flavors" end up in the final
| >product if the break is not adequately removed?
|
| This I can't answer, but I'd like to ask the corollary: What are the
| dangers, if any, to removing ALL the cold break? I don't have any hard data,
| but with Wyeast 1968, I seem to be getting more active ferments WITH the
| cold break.
I noticed a marked improvement when I started removing the trub before
fermentation, but have since forgotton what the difference is--I've been
doing it this way for a few years now. Next beer I make, I'm only going
to rack half of it off the trub. I'll let you all know what differences
I find.
However, I don't try to remove every trace of trub, as I have been told
that that would be a bad idea. I let a little of the lighter trub siphon
over toward the end of the racking.
Alan Edwards (ale@cisco.com) H3CO.____ O CH3
Systems Administrator / / \ || |
Chile-Head / Homebrewer HO-< >-C-N-C-(CH2)4-C=C-C-CH3
Cisco Systems Inc 408-526-5283 \____/ H2 H H H H Capsaicin
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 16:42:54 -0800
From: "Alan L. Edwards" <ale@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: dry hopping in the bottle?
Jeff Beaujon askes:
>
> Has anyone ever tried dry hopping in the bottle ? I just
Yep! When I had fresh hops growing in my backyard, I bottle- hopped IPAs
on two different occasions. I directly compared the hopped bottles with
the unhopped and there was a big difference in the nose (surprise).
> bottled a batch of American Brown Ale and got to wondering
> what effect putting a couple hop pellets (they were some left-over
> Northern brewer) into the bottle would have.
I did it only with whole hop cones. The only problem is that the hop
cone is a good nucleation site for the CO2 bubbles, and you get some
foaming when you open the beer (but not gushing).
> Will it add to the hop aroma/flavor?
Definitely.
> Will the three bottles get a nasty infection?
No, in my case. I would say the risk of infection is *very* small.
(Do you sterilize your hops when you dry-hop?)
> Will it have any effect other than to cause
> me to have little green things floating in my glass ?
Probably some extra foaming like I mentioned earlier.
Brew on,
-Alan
Alan Edwards (ale@cisco.com) H3CO.____ O CH3
Systems Administrator / / \ || |
Chile-Head / Homebrewer HO-< >-C-N-C-(CH2)4-C=C-C-CH3
Cisco Systems Inc 408-526-5283 \____/ H2 H H H H Capsaicin
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 18:03:59 +0000
From: Brian and Carol Dixon <just_say_no@no.spam.com>
Subject: Composition of extract from steeped versus mashed grains
Looking for information or scientific info on the relative
compositions of the extract gained from specialty grains and
malts (crystals, brown, chocolate, black barley, black patent,
roasted barley etc. etc.). I want to compare the composition of
the extract gained by mashing the specialty grains and malts with
the base malt(s) to the extract gained by steeping them in
untreated water at 150-160 F. I have some references already,
but am highly interested in verifying the results that I've read
and experienced. Any experts out there? Noonan? You there? How
about you, Dave Miller? (I just ate at your pub about a week ago
on a business trip to Nashville...nice brews, nice food! See you
next time!). George Fix? Meyers, Daniels, Richman??? Any other
experts out there hanging around that I wasn't good enough to name?
FYI, when I say 'composition' of the extract, I'm referring to color,
flavor, fermentable, nonfermentable, and any other solubles or
suspended solids that may end up in the extract.
If you want to get very particular, then the question to answer is,
can I get away with mashing only the base malts and then steeping
the specialty grains and malts? The technique would be to calculate,
using your known extract efficiency, the expected contribution to
the SG in a mash. Then, knowing your extract efficiency for
steeped grains, increase the amount of specialty grains and malts
to derive the same contribution to SG in the wort. Or is it your
opinion that even though the SG contribution was the same for each
of the specialty grains and malts, that due to a different composition
of the extracts (balance of the various components), the wort
would not turn out to be the same after all?
TIA!
- --
Brian
Bierkiester Brewery, Corvallis, Oregon
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 22:10:48 -0500 (EST)
From: Dckdog@aol.com
Subject: brew dogs..
Have to agree with a previous poster, labrador retrievers are my brewing
pals. Just look at the colors, yellow, chocolate and black. Is there any beer
color not represented here? I have a pair, a black and a yellow. They are
both booze hags, don't dare leave a bottle or glass around or a slobbery
tongue will find it's mark!
Cheers,
Dean
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 19:44:54 -0800 (PST)
From: Russell Robinson <rob@mail.wsu.edu>
Subject: joining the digest/
I would like to join the digest. How can I do this?
Russ
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 20:09:24 -0800
From: Sharon/Dan Ritter <ritter@camasnet.com>
Subject: summary re: whole hops source
In HBD #2351 I posted this question:
>My favorite supplier of whole hops went out of business a few months ago.
>Can anyone recommend a mail order source for imported and domestic whole
>hops of the highest quality?
The feedback fell into two categories. Several people asked me to forward
any responses I received (I assume they were also looking for a hops
source) and everyone else (4) recommended Hop Tech as a source that met my
criteria (it was unanimous!). Hop Tech's phone number is 1-800-379-4677
and they have a site on the WWW <http://www.hoptech.com>.
Dan Ritter <ritter@camasnet.com>
Ritter's MAMMOTH Brewery
Grangeville, Idaho
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 15:53:43 -0600
From: Ron Gasik <ronster388@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Skunkiness; Kegs on stovetop
Dave Burley wrote:
>I am skeptical, even though I have read it, that a few minutes
>exposure of beer to bright sunlight can produce skunkiness.
>It is especially hard to believe since it is through soft glass
>which is not a good transmitter of ultraviolet in most cases.
It's happenned to me, even on a cold Chicago winter day! Last winter on
a bright, sunny, but cold (about 20 deg. F) winter day I poured a
home-brewed Munich Helles into a clear mug and took it outside with me
to go and split some firewood. After about 5-10 minutes of chopping, I
went over to the beer and took a sip. It had turned into a skunky
Beck's light in that short period of a time! I thought it was pretty
cool, so I tried it again that same afternoon with an Oktoberfest and
the same thing happenned. The beers were perfectly "un"skunky prior to
taking them outside.
Spencer asked:
>Ok, so now I've been contradicted twice by folks who DO use converted
>kegs on their stoves. I still don't see how, unless you've got
>nothing above the stove. It certainly won't fit under my (stove)
>hood. And do you stand on a stool to see inside the kettle, or what?
Mine did fit, just barely, under the range hood. I usually would pull
the stove about 1 1/2 feet away from the wall to give me more room. And
yes! -I did have to stand on a stool to stir and to look into into the
kettle. I forgot to add in my last post that I was able to maintain a
12-13 gallon boil on the stovetop.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 00:27:31 -0600
From: "Tim M. Dugan" <tdugan@netins.net>
Subject: Warming up a stout
OK, so maybe I've "relaxed and had a home-brew" a bit much tonight, but I
was wondering what would be the effect of warming a 35 degree Fahrenheit
beer (specifically a stout) in a microwave for oh say 10-20 seconds?
Tonight I decided that I wanted one more home-brew, but all my beer was
still quite cold. Dilemma. I'm sitting here with an empty glass, full
bottle, waiting for the beer to warm up, thus the above question comes to
mind.
On a related, but a bit more serious note, which warms up faster an opened
or an unopened bottle? Or does it really matter? I would think an opened
bottle, but I don't have a good reason why.
Well, my "Black-Lab Stout" is getting to a drinkable temperature, so I'll
leave it at that. TIA
Tim M. Dugan
tdugan@netins.net
M.U.G.Z. - Mississippi Unquenchable Grail Zymurgists
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 07:43:44 -0500
From: ibex@interlog.com (Geoff Scott)
Subject: Re: Mash methods
In HBD 2353, Tad Seyler <tad@bimcore.emory.edu> wrote:
>I have seen somewhere on the web, a homebrewer's site describing a mash
>system where the mash is recirculated through a copper coil in the hot
>liquor tank, for temp boosts. I am interested in hearing from anyone who
>uses this method, or the location of the web site.
Tad's looking for Rick Calley's site:
http://www.pressenter.com/~rcalley/index.htm
And perhaps more specifically:
http://www.pressenter.com/~rcalley/how.htm
regards,
Geoff Scott
ibex@interlog.com
Brewing Page http://www.interlog.com/~ibex
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 07:31:56 -0600
From: Louis Bonham <lkbonham@phoenix.net>
Subject: AHA/AOB: the $100,000 Question (Part 1)
As the AHA has responded here to the issues raised in r.c.b., in the
interests of completeness here are some of the r.c.b. replies to the
"response" of Mr. Papazian to the questions about the AHA's operations.
Again, if any HBD readers lack newsserver access, I'll be happy to
e-mail them the r.c.b. threads.
Louis K. Bonham
lkbonham@phoenix.net
==========================================
In article <330A1899.5872@aob.org>, charlie <charliep@aob.org> wrote:
[a heartwarming story about warm and fuzzy genesis of the AHA.]
That's a very nice story, Charlie, but it doesn't answer
the question. Is the AHA an *association*, or a *company*?
If it's the latter, why don't you say so? I'm sure if it
were called "The American Homebrewer's Corporation" nobody
would be very upset that the fees they pay - which are now
somewhat deceptively referred to as "dues" - subsidize your
travel.
If the AHA is to be a real association of members, the members
are the ones who should run it, through elections of officials.
If it's a corporation, it should not be masquerading as an
association.
-A member (membership number on demand) - or is that a "customer"?
- ----------YoYo-------------yoyo@tezcat.com--------------------------
"Whenever A annoys or injures B on the pretense of saving or
improving X, A is a scoundrel"
-Mencken's Law
==================================================================
cathy wrote:
> Again, I attempted before to explain the organizational structure of the
> AOB many months ago. Please understand that we are a business with a
> board of directors made up of business and professional people in the
> Boulder/Denver area. These people take their board positions very
> seriously. They do not answer to Charlie, in fact, it is exactly the
> opposite, he answers to the board.
I have a very basic question that I believe will cut to the heart
of the matter. If the AOB is a business, who owns it? There are
no stockholders. If the membership "owns" the AOB, they should
have direct control over how it is structured and run through the
election of officers and board members.
Today, our involvement is limited to funding the business and none
of the board members, officers or staff are in any way accountable
to the membership. So again I pose my question: Who owns the AOB?
As to Charlie's epistle, I can't feel sorry for *anyone* who makes
six figures drinking and writing about beer. By the way Charlie,
there are some of us working a lot more than 50 hours a week for
much less money having much less fun.
Rich Scotty (membership number available on request)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 07:33:39 -0600
From: Louis Bonham <lkbonham@phoenix.net>
Subject: AHA/AOB: the $100,000 Question (Part 2)
[more r.c.b. replies to Charlie]
Recall the the admonition I received last year from longtime AHA
Board of Advisors Member Jeff Frane (posted in full an earlier
message):
>The people running the AHA are not going to give up control or
>money, period. If you think they might, you're deluding yourself.
After reading Charlie's recent posting, there should be no doubt in
anyone's mind that Mr. Frane was 100% correct. We can add that not
only will the people running the AHA never give up control or money,
they won't even discuss those issues.
>I can recall the days [snip]
As Yo-Yo inquired, what does this history have to do with the price
of tea (or beer)? The questions that I and others have been asking
for months are essentially (1) why can't AHA (and IBS) "members"
have any role whatsoever in selecting the officers or directors of
the AOB/AHA, (2) why should this organization be paying Charlie
in excess of $100,000 for a position that apparently involves little
or no management, oversight, or apparently much else other than why
globetrotting and promoting his Avon-published books, and
(3) WHY WON'T THE AOB ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS??
(BTW, per Charlie's confessions of how much he has made in the past
from non-AHA jobs, perhaps in the interest of completeness he would
also tell us how much he makes from Avon and his other publishers --
and whether these for-profit publishers are ever asked to reimburse
the AHA for all the free press the AHA gives gives TCNJOHB.)
>For those of you who are aware of the personal attacks on me, I must
>sincerely admit I am very uncomfortable defending what I hear has been
>said about me (I haven't personally read these messages, but have been
>told about their general nature). I don't feel it necessary to defend
>my personal lifestyle, philosophy, reasons for being involved in the
>beer business, my salary, or my position at the Association of Brewers.
This really sums up the problem at the AOB/AHA. The head of the
AOB won't even bother to *read* -- much less respond to --
complaints about that organization, and feels it is not necessary
to explain to AHA members why they are getting their money's worth
by paying his stratospheric salary and benefits.
And the AHA wonders why its membership is declining!
>There's really nothing in my life that I feel the need to defend. I
>enjoy it immensely [snip]
No one doubts that you're having a good time, Charlie. The question
is whether a nonprofit organization should be paying you that much
money to do so.
>Finally, I'd like to tap out a few most important words of thanks to all
>those beer enthusiasts and brewers out there that provide the
>Association of Brewers the support and continuing confidence that has
>allowed us to provide the educational and informational services,
>products and events that millions of Americans have benefited from or
>have been touched by.
And, of course, pay Charlie in excess of $100,000 per annum, for which
he will thank you but won't explain why he should be receiving it.
When this thread started last year, it was entitled "Boycott the AHA."
A number of readers indicated that critics should try to work and fix
what everyone (even the AOB) acknowledges are problems in that that
organization, rather than simply grousing about it. As Charlie's
posting makes crystal clear, that recommended course of action is
illusory: as several Board of Advisors have told me repeatedly, Charlie
and his minions simply won't do anything that they don't want to do --
even something as simply as answering questions. And there's nothing
AHA members can do about it.
So what do we do? It is now apparent that trying to work with
the AHA is a waste of time. I suggest first putting your time
and money into your local homebrew club, rather than the AHA.
Second, I suggest reminding the AHA of their response (more
accurately, their lack of a response) to this thread the next
time they come looking for volunteers (and certified beer
judges) for their various events (as Steve Moore noted, most
of what they do could not be done without *lots* of volunteer
labor). Third, if you've not already do so, switch your
reading from Zymurgy to BT or BYO.
And fourth, maybe invest in shirts, buttons, and bumperstickers
that read:
Relax, don't worry, just send money
(and don't ask any questions)
Louis K. Bonham
lkbonham@phoenix.net
=======================================================================
Charlie Papazian wrote:
> I enjoy it immensely and the fact that I've been part of a team here
> at the Association of Brewers that has helped increase the quality of
> life for millions of people in the United States and in other parts of
> the world. It feels really neat to have a great staff, supporting
> members who offer constructive comments and to see positive results.
> "It's cool." And I would wish this for anyone else who has the notion
> of helping others improve the quality of life.
It was a good speech. Unfortunately, I don't think he's going to
do that well in the swimsuit competition.
Steve Moore
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 07:35:16 -0400
From: peacock@webspun.com (Mark Peacock)
Subject: Re: mixing bitter and mild
> Rob Moline's articles on Porter are much appreciated. He mentions mixing
> stale and mild for Porter, and he mentions mixing modern-day mixing of
> bitter and mild. I confess to being largely ignorant of BOTH practices
> (actually *each* practice).
Here's an anecdotal data point -- A friend of mine from Lancashire used
to mix draught bitters with bottled brown ale to make (naturally) a
"brown and bitters". The bottled brown ale was low in alcohol -- I seem
to remember the label saying about 2.5%, though I'm reaching for some
very dusty neurons. His rationale for the mixture was: 1) Lower alcohol
content meant a longer and more social evening at the pub (he was a very
slight man); 2) He liked the taste.
Regards,
Mark Peacock
Hinsdale, Illinois USA
peacock@webspun.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 08:54:00 -0800
From: "Mike Szwaya" <mike.szwaya@coler-colantonio.com>
Subject: Homemade RIMS question
This is an open question to those out there who have constructed their own
RIMS system. I constructed mine pretty similar to the one outlined in the
1995 All-Grain Zymurgy issue "Mash Systems & Components" by John Roberts. I
used the same Little Giant pump and Vulcan heating element.
My question/problem is this: I initially mounted my heating element inside
1 inch PVC which, in retrospect, was a pretty stupid idea. After 4 or 5
brews, the heating element melted the PVC and split the pipe, luckily at the
tail end of a sparging session. Not only that, but after I disassembled the
unit, I found that the very small volume of the 1 inch pipe caramelized the
wort and left quite a bit of scorched residue on the element (I wouldn't
doubt if I left the heater on once or twice while the pump was off). I
initially wanted a bigger housing for the element but had a hard time
locating equipment.
In the article, John Roberts has the heating element is mounted inside a 1
1/2 inch copper tubing but the Vulcan element has a 1 inch NPT(M) fitting.
Can anyone give a schematic of the materials they used for their heating
element housing and suggestions as to where I could get them?
Thanks.
Mike Szwaya
mike.szwaya@coler-colantonio.com
Watertown, MA
"Yellow snow, yellow beer? Hmm, you make the call."
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 08:04:08 -0600 (CST)
From: mark.evans@midplains.net (mark evans)
Subject: siphon filter thingies
Brew Howdy!
I'm back after a several year absence and glad to see that things are still
rather... lively.
I'm siphoning secondary today (dry hopped IPA) for bottling, and as I
monkey-rig a filter on the end of my racking cane, I'm wondering how other
brewers have dealt with (in clever ways) this problem. Some small
descriptions of hop flower/pellet/trub filtering methods might be nice --
including materials, etc.
thanks!
mark
=========================================================
"I do a lot of different things.
I just can't remember what they are right now."
mark.evans@midplains.net
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 09:05:52 +0500
From: Jay Ward <jaywward@gate.net>
Subject: Semi-RIMS
Tad Seyler asks:
>I have seen somewhere on the web, a homebrewer's site describing a mash
>system where the mash is recirculated through a copper coil in the hot
>liquor tank, for temp boosts. I am interested in hearing from anyone who
>uses this method, or the location of the web site. I am interested in
>setting up something similar but I have questions including: How hot do
>you maintain the hot liquor tank? How long is the coil and what's the
>rate of flow through the coil?
I use that method and the location of the web site is shown below.
It came about as a result of various leftovers in my equipment
developement. The bucket I use is not really my hot liquor tank though
it started out as one. It's nothing more than a 5 gal bucket with a
1500 watt water heater element installed in the side. The web site has
links to Dion H's excellent document on how to build an elctric brewery.
I plug this puppy in when I start heating my mash water. By the time I
need it, the bucket is at 200-212 degrees. BE CAREFUL, do not allow
this device to run dry, potential fire and health risks aside, my wife
would kill me if I burned down the house.
I've installed a water heater thermostat as a saftey precaution. I
bolted it to the mounting flange of the heater element. Due to poor
heat coupling it's calibration is way off but it will shut down the
element if the bucket boils dry.
The copper coil is 25 feet of 1/4 inch line originally designed as an
immersion chiller. It consists of two spirals with gradually increasing
diameter, about 6 inches high, tied together with 12 gauge solid copper
wire.
I recirculate from the mash tun through a pump into the coil and back
into the MT. A ball valve on the inlet side of the mash tun allows me
to control the flow rate. A desired addition would be an inline
thermometer on the outlet side of the coil. When mashout is reached, I
remove the coil from the bucket and continue to pump till the wort
clears. Once this happens, I disconnect the coil from the mash tun
inlet and attach it to the boiling kettle inlet, continuing to pump as I
sparge.
- --
Jay Ward
Ft. Lauderdale, FL
check out the Three Boys Bathtub Brewery
http:\\www.gate.net\~jaywward
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 09:45:14 +0500
From: "Keith Royster" <keith.royster@pex.net>
Subject: RE: HBD protocol / chemotherapy and beer
Dave Burley responds to Bruce Baker:
> > 4. As a newcomer to the HBD, I wonder about the protocols. There
> > are lots of questions asked with scarcely any replies.
>
> Too many replies to the same question is almost as bad as no reply.
Worse, IMO.
> > My earlier questions on yeast received lots of private answers
> with even more private mailings requesting the answers. Why don't
> answers go on the HBD? Is this because the questions are deemed
> too elementary to answer? The other lists I'm familiar with (BBQ,
> chile-heads) have a lot more answers.
>
> It's up to the author of both the question and the answer. No
> protocol that I've been able to discern.
Actually, Dave, there is a protocol. Perhaps you've been following
it and just didn't know it. And it is precisely because of this
voluntarily followed protocol that the HBD has such a high
signal-to-noise ratio. After joining the HBD as my first email
discussion group I have become spoiled and can not tolerate other
discussion groups that don't follow these simple rules. Here is the
gist of this protocol as I understand it:
1) If you have a response to someone else's post, first ask yourself
if it is of general interest? If not, then private email is probably
most appropriate. This especially goes for flames and arguments!
2) If it is of general interest, then next ask yourself if you
anticipate that a lot of other people will also throw in their $0.02?
Nobody likes to see 20 posts to the HBD all containing the exact
same info because that wastes space that other information could
have been posted to. If you expect that you have a unique answer,
then go ahead and post to the HBD directly. But if you think your
answer is more mundane and others may offer the same advice, then
private email is more appropriate.
3) If you receive a lot of private email responses to your question,
and some of this information was not also posted to the HBD, then
perhaps a summary post to the HBD is appropriate. Share the
knowledge that you have gained *in a digested format* with the rest
of us. To determine if this is appropriate or not, see steps 1&2
above.
4) And finally, if you are interested in the responses to someone
else's question but don't have anything to offer, then send them
private email asking them to either forward responses to you or
better, to post a summary to the HBD.
These four simple rules are what keeps the quality of the HBD so
high by keeping out redundant posts, "Me Too" posts, and posts that
are not of general interest!
=================================
Now a question: Has anyone else out there experienced a loss of
taste/interest for beer related to chemotherapy? If so, was is
temporary (God, please say yes!)? Lately, I have not had much
interest in drinking beer especially the more bitter kinds like APA,
normally my favorite. Porters and stouts, however, I still enjoy
for the most part. And I do still enjoy the brewing process (I'm in
the process of upgrading my RIMS to be more automated by adding a
PID temp controller!). I know that chemo can do weird things to your
taste buds, but beer is really the only thing I have noticed that I
have had a decreased interest in. Luckily my treatments will only
last for another 6 or 7 months assuming things go as expected, so
I'm just hoping that this is just another *temporary* side effect of
the chemo!
=================================
Don't forget about the 1997 U.S.Open homebrewing competition this
April 26th in Charlotte, NC sponsored by the Carolina BrewMasters.
Visit our club page below for more info on how to enter!
Keith Royster - Mooresville, North Carolina
"An Engineer is someone who measures it with a micrometer,
marks it with a piece of chalk, and cuts it with an ax!"
mailto:Keith.Royster@pex.net
http://dezines.com/@your.service -@your.service
http://dezines.com/@your.service/cbm -Carolina BrewMasters club page
http://dezines.com/@your.service/RIMS -My RIMS (rated COOL! by the Brewery)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 97 09:10:10 EST
From: James_Nachman_at_USCC__P3@CELLULAR.USCC.COM
Subject: Water Quality Web Site
I was watching the news last night and they were doing a
piece on water filtration systems. They listed the web
site for the Water Quality Association, www.wqa.org.
It has all kinds of information about water quality as
well as filtration systems. Their mailing address is:
Water Quality Association
4151 Naperville Road
Lisle, Illinois 60532
There is also a 1-800 number but I was not fast enough
to write it down.
Enjoy,
Jim
james.nachman@cellular.uscc.com
RF Engineer
United States Cellular Corporation
Chicago
\\/////
(.) (.)
------o000---(_)---000o-------------------------------
------------------------------
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by ctrvax.Vanderbilt.Edu
From: "Bryan L. Gros" <grosbl@ctrvax.Vanderbilt.Edu>
Subject: home unitanks
Last week, stevek@propwash.co.symbios.com (Steve kemp) wanted
a home conical fermenter. I mentioned that small, stainless unitanks
have been advertised in the literature, and I got several requests for
the details.
I finally remembered to bring my BT to work, so here's what I got.
>From the Nov/Dec 96 issue, under new products. Northwest Brewers
Supply sells stainless unitanks in 11, 15, or 20 gallon sizes. The
smallest one is less than 3 ft. tall. and goes for $549. It looks like
a corny keg with a conical bottom, valve on the apex, and three
removeable legs.
Call them at 1800-728-ALES or brewdog@wolfenet.com.
No, I haven't seen these things in person nor do I work for
this company.
- Bryan
grosbl@ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu
Nashville, TN
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 10:52:29 -0500
From: pbrian@ctc-fund.com (Paul Brian)
Subject: partial mash/old hops
I plan on doing a very partial mash with the following
grain bill:
2# Pale Malt
1# Munich Malt
.75# Crystal Malt
.75# Cara-Pils Malt
.5# Chocolate Malt
In 1.25 gal. of water(1 quart per pound of malt?) I plan on
mashing for 1 hour at 155 deg.(or as close to that as possible
on my stove top with a hand-held thermometer). I will then sparge
with hot water through a standard kitchen strainer. Nothing fancy
here.
My question- What kind of yield should I expect? In other words,
if I would like 7 pounds worth of liquid malt extract, how much LME
should I add after I do this? Also, need I worry about HSA during
my not-so-sophisticated sparging technique?
I've also had some hops in my freezer for over six months in nothing
more than plastic baggies. Since they've probably lost some of their
"hop power", what percentage more should I use to equal the same
bitterness as fresh hops? (I will buy fresh hops for aroma).
TIA and a special salute to those who helped bring back HBD.
Cheers,
Paul Brian
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 14:54:14 +0000 (GMT)
From: HOUCK KEITH A <HOUCK_KEITH_A@Lilly.com>
Subject: sierra nevada ale yeast
Out of curiosity, does anyone know the origins of this yeast (aka chico
yeast, WY1056)? Is it an English ale yeast? Something cultured from the
clean and slightly fruity Sierra Nevada air? On a related note, a local
brewpub, reportedly using this yeast, has somehow created several ales
reeking of diacetyl. In the many ales I tasted made with this yeast, I've
never found this. Anyone ever experience this and have an idea what caused
it?
Cheers,
Keith Houck
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2355, 02/22/97
*************************************
-------
