Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2400
HOMEBREW Digest #2400 Fri 18 April 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:
wooden casks, selection of wood (rjlee)
Bathroom scales (Rick Olivo)
Minnesota Brews (erikvan)
Re: Steeping versus Partial-Mash (Mark Riley)
Re: Accessibility ("Moyer, Douglas E")
Care and Feeding of a Cajun Cooker (MaltyDog)
Got Beer? (Rust1d)
Cloudy keg beer (Curt)
Accessability (Steven Lichtenberg)
Coolers / Mech Stirring / JOE (DAVE BRADLEY IC742 6-7932)
clarification - ph and minerals (BAYEROSPACE)
The Krausen that would not die... or, It came from the local brewpub... (Charles Burns)
Clearing time (korz)
RE: Accessibility (Steve Snyder)
Re: N2 Nyyyyyaaaaaagggggghhhhhhh (pbabcock.ford)
Enzyme location, husk tannin, that woody taste ("David R. Burley")
Thermometers- The Results ("Craig Rode")
temperature contoller help ("Bryan L. Gros")
140F Rest (Nicholas Dahl)
Wow! (pablo)
Rims Questions (Mark & Marya)
stuck ferment? (James Moncsko)
Dishwasher detergent ("David Root")
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 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 from:
brew.oeonline.com /pub/hbd
ftp.stanford.edu /pub/clubs/homebrew/beer
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: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 07:48:03 -0500
From: rjlee@mmm.com
Subject: wooden casks, selection of wood
I was just reading (I think) Michael Jackson who opined that the oak in
the US is not of the right sort (?). Something like too many tannins or
some such thing, unlike the English Oak. (or the European).
I am assuming that there is more than just English chauvinism at work
here.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 20:16:45 -0500
From: Rick Olivo <ashpress@win.bright.net>
Subject: Bathroom scales
Just so everyone knows, I am NOT an enemy of entrepreneurial capitalism. I
do not advocate shutting down homebrew stores for being a few grains shy on
their measure. Certainly, the first step is to discuss shortages in grain
caused by inaccurate scaling with the merchant in question. My point is
that if someone is going to be in business, they owe it to their customers
to provide accurate measurement of grain, hops etc. This is NOT asking too
much; it is in fact a moral as well as legal obligation that any commercial
operation bears to their customer. A certified scale or at the very least,
a scale that is checked with a reference weight frequently is, in my view,
a cost of doing business, not an option. Accurate measure protects the
fair-dealing merchant from preditory operators as much as it does
consumers. It is in everyone's best interests to play by the rules; that is
the reason for fair weights and measures regulation, not to stifle the
God-given right to turn an honest buck. I do not believe there are hordes
of unscrupulous barley mongers out there waiting to entrap the unwary. I
fully recognize that most homebrew shops (at least the ones I have seen)
will bend over backwards to please their customers. I also recognize that
with as much effort as I invest in my beer, I want to as careful with
getting the correct amount of grain as I am with sanitation. That's why
certified scales give me a warm fuzzy feeling. It's one less variable for
me to worry about.
Strange Brewer aka Rick Olivo
ashpress@win.bright.net
Vita sine cerevisiae suget!!!
(Life without beer sucks!!!)
(With apologies to Cicero)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 22:45:38 -0500 (CDT)
From: erikvan@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Minnesota Brews
Andy Kligerman wrote in #2398
>Just a quick note, I will be visiting Minneapolis next week and would like to
>know of any good homebrew, brewpub, brewery, etc. related sites that should
>be tried. Please respond by e-mail to save digest space.
Forget saving space, everyone should know about Sherlock's Home,
in Minnetonka. At least 7 ales and lagers, in traditional english
style, from the malt, to the cask conditioning, and not to mention
hand pulled from the beer engines. They also have great food, too.
No affiliation, just a great place to visit. I plan on going back
in June AND August! And I live in CA...
Erik Vanthilt
The Virtual Brewery
Http://www.netcom.com/~erikvan/brewery.html
News, recipes, hints, games, a free newsletter, and more...
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 00:03:52 -0700
From: Mark Riley <mriley@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Steeping versus Partial-Mash
Sorry I'm a little tardy with this followup but here goes:
Dave Riedel writes in HBD #2395:
>John Sullivan <sullvan@anet-stl.com> writes that he feels steeping specialty
>grains is "not a sound method for a brewer looking to advance his technique"
>because "Steeping grains is:
>
>> Limiting (i.e. you cannot steep all types of grains)
>> A crapshoot (you do not know how much extract you will get)
>> Potentially Problematic (unconverted starch)"
>
>I don't agree with this. Understanding the benefits of moving to steeping as
>a method requires that you keep in mind that the brewer is likely coming from
>'kit-brewing'. Steeping allows much greater control over the brewing process
>than does kit brewing. I think it's the natural step in improving brewing
>technique and understanding. True, you cannot steep all types of grains, but
>crystal, chocolate, roasted barley and black patent offer the improving
>brewer with a myriad of recipe possibilities.
[snip]
>Unconverted starch is only a problem if 'mash-
>only' malts are steeped.
In an informal steeping experiment using chocolate malt and roasted
barley I wasn't able to detect any starch with an iodine test. However,
when I performed a test with crystal malt, I got a distinctly positive result.
There *was* starch released by the steeped crystal malt.
Whether or not a little starch is acceptable in beer, I can not say
for sure (anyone care to comment?) but I wouldn't consider it a
flavour enhancer and the starch is a likely food source for some
unwanted microorganisms. When I used to do extract batches,
I'd use the Papazian method of pouring the hot wort into the
a carboy full of cold tap water (big time HSA, I know). There
could easily have been a bunch of starch-loving-beer-ruining bugs
in that tap water. I think the starch introduced by steeping
may have been responsible for some of my extract batches
getting gassier and developing off flavors over time. The partial
mash recipes I did using similar sanitizing procedures did not
suffer these same symptoms. Of course, YMMV.
>>It is a simple move from steeping to partial mashing. Partial mashing
>
>Perhaps this is true in retrospect to an all-grainer, but I beg to differ.
>Steeping takes little more than 30 mins to accomplish.
Perhaps there is some middle ground here. What about a 45 minute
no-sparge partial mash? Mash some 2-row pale with the rest of the
specialty grains at 155F for 45 minutes (1.5 qt./lb.). Add some 175F
water to dilute and remove the grains. You'll get the color and flavor
extraction like steeping, perhaps a little sugar and (hopefully)
no starch.
This would typically take 15 minutes longer than steeping, you'd
get to use additional types of grain, and the novice homebrewer
would be more familiar with mashing when it comes time to do
a partial mash proper or move to all-grain.
Mark Riley
Sacramento, CA
http://alpha.rollanet.org/recipator
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 8:28:06 -0400
From: "Moyer, Douglas E" <moyer-de@salem.ge.com>
Subject: Re: Accessibility
Amused, I passed on Patrick G. Babcock's tirade about Joe Six-pack and
"better beer accessibility". Her responded:
"Remember that Joe may not agree that micro beer IS "better" once he gets
access to it, and that we might not like Joe hanging out in the same
brewpub we're in because Joe might be a very annoying person..."
More food, more thoughts...
Doug Moyer
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 08:43:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: MaltyDog@aol.com
Subject: Care and Feeding of a Cajun Cooker
Now that the weather's starting to get nice (sort of, anyway), I'm thinking
about brewing outside, and I am considering getting a Cajun Cooker for
outdoor brewing. A friend of mine, who is a very good brewer, told me that he
had a lot of problems with cooking with them, though, especially with soot,
and scorching beneath the cooker. Is this a common difficulty with these
devices? Is there anything special you have to do with them to avoid this?
Are there any particular models that are more highly recommended?
I would be very interested in the collective wisdom on these matters. Thanks
in advance.
Bill Coleman
MaltyDog@aol.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 08:20:38 -0500
From: Rust1d <rust1d@usa.net>
Subject: Got Beer?
Pat ponders,
>What will it take to make better beer accessible to more people?
I was just thinking last night about how the mirco industry needs to form a
coalition much like the dairy industry. We could then be entertained by cute
commercials about running out of beer at the least opportune moment.
Consumers should be aware of just what 'beer' is and can be. It would be
cool to see 30 seconds spots on tv about different beer styles.
This was spurned by a coors ad which had two guys walk into a bar. One says
something like 'Hey this place has a beer menu.' in a sarcastic voice and
proceeds to read off words like honey, espresso, wheat, fruit, blah, blah,
blah while his partner orders two coors. He slide one across the bar and
says 'Know what this beer has in it? Beer.' and I scream 'and Rice!'. This
stuff preys upon the ignorance of the masses.
John Varady http://www.netaxs.com/~vectorsys/varady
Boneyard Brewing The HomeBrew Recipe Calculating Program
Lafayette Hill, PA * New email address ***> rust1d@usa.net
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 10:32:42 -0400
From: Curt <curtcip@interstat.net>
Subject: Cloudy keg beer
Hi
I just kegged my first batch of beer (a Palesener--Pilsner with Ale
yeast) about 2 weeks ago. I primed with 3/4 cup DME and let it sit for
1 week at @62 degrees. Monday, I put it into my fridge (@35-40 degrees)
and added some CO2 to bring it to proper CO2 drinking levels.
It tastes great, it's properly fizzy, however, it's very cloudy (did a
protein rest at 122, then brought temp to 140 and decocted to get to
158. Forgot Irish Moss, though). I'm having a party this weekend, and
would love to have clear beer to serve. Would it be feasible (sp?) to
de-pressurize the keg, remove the top, and add isinglass(sp?) and/or
gelatin?
Private e-mail preferred. I'll post results.
Thanks,
Curt
"When I was seventeen, I drank some very good beer,
I drank some very good beer that I purchased, with a fake ID,
My name was Brian Magee,
I stayed up listening to Queen,
When I was seventeen."
-Homer Simpson
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 10:39:20 -0400
From: Steven Lichtenberg <slichten@mnsinc.com>
Subject: Accessability
Pat Babcock wrote: =20
Joe's thirst for good beer could spawn corner brewpubs where once =
=20
stood corner bars. Joe could redirect the efforts of mainstream =
=20
brewers across the country. Joe is a very powerful individual. =
=20
This just ain't going to happen. We have educated ourselves to beer =
because we like it and we have become beer geeks because it is fun. The =
average person on the street could care less. Education may help in =
time but will never fully make the transition.
As long as the big boys are making the beer that drives the market, you =
will not be able to change the perceptions of the general public. That =
plus the fact that Budweiser sells an unbelievable amount of beer should =
tell you something.
I offer two anecdotes to support the case that the "public" will not =
change.
My wife and I got into a discussion a while ago about brewpubs etc. She =
was incredulous over the fact that people would go to a brewpub and =
order Miller Lite. She refused to believe that such a thing would =
occur. She later ate her words when we were at the local brewpub for =
lunch. There were many people ordering Miller Lite, Coors, Bud etc. =
Here in a place where good beer was not only available and accessible =
but maybe even a little cheaper.
When I was at the brewery last week to get some yeast, I was talking to =
the brewer about this and he told me he will regularly go through 25-30 =
cases of Bud and 15-20 cases of Lite on any given weekend. That is =
still a lot of standard commercial Light American Lager. Of course, =
this is on top of 15-20 kegs of house brew a week. There are a lot of =
people that want the good stuff but just as many that want the tried and =
true.
The second story came from my dad. I was over his house last week =
helping him with his computer. He has just put his house on the market =
and is trying to clean out the basement. He insisted I take a six pack =
of Sam Adams he had in his card room. This sixer was left over from my =
sisters wedding and when I checked the date (at least SA is dated) it =
said Sept 1994! I told him the beer was way out of date and would =
probably not be nearly as good as it was when fresh. his response was =
"hey its wet. should be fine. Beer lasts forever anyway.". How can you =
argue with your dad over something like that. not for me. I then asked =
him why he didn't serve the SA to his poker buddies. I figured, free =
they couldn't turn that down. his response was "Oh they only like =
'beer' . The plain old regular stuff."
While I am not of this mindset and have become knowledgeable, the truth =
is we all are the exception, not the rule. We will never be able to =
convert all the unwashed masses. Fortunately there s room for both. I =
will enjoy my hobby and my good beer. The rest of the world can enjoy =
whatever they want. I'll leave you alone, you leave me alone and we =
will all get along fine.
Just an opinion (mine....)
**** ---- "There's always time for a Homebrew!" ---- ****
O| | -------------- Steven Lichtenberg ---------------- | =
|O
\__/ ------------ slichten@mnsinc.com ------------- =
\__/
----------- Programmer at Large ------------
---------- Lichtenberg Consulting ----------
----------- Gaithersburg, MD -------------
----------- BJCP Recognized ------------
---------------------------------------------
ENJOY LIFE -- THIS IS NOT A REHEARSAL
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 14:09:40 +0000 (GMT)
From: DAVE BRADLEY IC742 6-7932 <BRADLEY_DAVID_A@LILLY.COM>
Subject: Coolers / Mech Stirring / JOE
A couple of HBD issues for comment:
IGLOO vs GOTT
I have 2 10gal coolers, one orange Gott and one brown Rubbermaid sold
expressly for coffee use. Inner linings of both warped substantially
within months from exposure to mashes/sparge water. The temp of
liquids never exceeded 185F. As with most things, YMMV.
STIRRED CHILLING
I use a small propeller/motor with my immersion chiller, primarily
to cool more rapidly, but also to keep the bitter wort covered
and to provide a good cold break. My propeller turns at 180rpm,
and with the small blades (1.25"x3 blades), the liquor surface
is fairly smooth. That is important because a vigorous whirlpool
would introduce oxygen to the wort. Balance the cooling efficiency
of a faster stir with the need to prevent oxidation of hot/warm wort.
JOE'S FREEDOM OF CHOICE
Pat, you clearly miss your all-grain brewing. Convert some more
JOE'S into brew-O-phytes, and in a couple months, they won't mind
the cost of real beer. And you'll be back home, brewing away!
Seriously, the volume to cost ratio is far from uniform. The
only time this clearly changes is when a Micro is "invested" in
by a Macro, and we see things like Celis or Red Hook for $5-6.
It is certainly more expensive to brew these than X-lite.
The Macros have spent there time being the best they can be at
efficiency, upping profits. The 'beer' has suffered. These
same 'brewers' then offer Micro-esque products at sub-Micro $,
effectively using profits from X-lite to subsidize the processing
of Micro-esque. Market share, ya know. Good beer costs more to
make, and X-lite is optimized to give 'that taste' at the lowest
COPS. Heck why don't you just brew enough homebrew to give away
to all JOE'S? They'd switch then, by golly;)
Dave in Indy
Home of the 3-B Brewery, (v.) Ltd.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 09:52 -0600
From: M257876@sl1001.mdc.com (BAYEROSPACE)
Subject: clarification - ph and minerals
collective homebrew conscience:
yesterday, i wrote:
>mineral content is more important than ph for mashing.
this could be taken out of the context i was intending. what i mean is, the
mineral content of your water supply is more important than the ph of your
water supply, for mashing. really, for brewing in general. this is why it's
a very good idea to get a water analysis, if one is available.
ph is crucial, once you've mashed in the grains.
brew hard,
mark bayer
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 97 08:51 PDT
From: cburns@egusd.k12.ca.us (Charles Burns)
Subject: The Krausen that would not die... or, It came from the local brewpub...
I pitched 12 oz of 5th Generation 1056 from the local brew pub into an
American Brown last Saturday afternoon. Bubbled within 45 minutes. Fireworks
under 2 hours. Four inch Krausen the next day. Well its been well over 4
days now and this morning I still have a 4 inch krausen that refuses to
fall. The bubbles have backed off to about 1 every 45 seconds and I assume
this evening it'll be down to less than 1 per minute.
But the head on this thing will not fall! Am I going to have great head or
is the beer just acting weird? Anyone see this before? I did have 4 lbs of
crystal malts along with lots of munich and pale in only a 5 gallon batch.
Would that account for this anomaly?
Charley (not relaxed and worrying now about this brown in N. Cal.)
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Burns, Director, Information Systems
Elk Grove Unified School District
cburns@egusd.k12.ca.us, http://www.egusd.k12.ca.us
916-686-7710 (voice), 916-686-4451 (fax)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 12:38:48 -0500 (CDT)
From: korz@xnet.com
Subject: Clearing time
Jethro writes:
>>From: Chris Storey <cstorey@knet.flemingc.on.ca>
>>The problem is that both batches are very
>>cloudy. The first is 1 week old and is not clearing at all. My second
>>batch is the same way. What did I do wrong?
>Patience, mate, patience. The fastest clearing times I've seen is at least
>a week in secondary at 38 degrees F., and this is with Isinglass, and
>gelatin in secondary, then 48 hours in pressurized serving with another
>dose of Isinglas. (This is a generalization, many factors, including but
>not limited to Yeast strain, grist bill, etc, will influence this.)
<snip>
You forgot a big one, Jethro: fermenter depth. I've seen yeast clear
in 2 days (Windsor dry yeast from Lavlin) at 65F! This was with a
12" beer depth... in your commercial-sized fermenters/bright beer tanks
the depth must be at least four or five feet, no? That will take four
or five times longer (less with chilling and Isinglass, of course).
I agree that yeast strain is the #1 factor (and if your yeast simply
won't clear in a month, you probably got a wild yeast in there). Jeff
Frane pointed out a year or two ago that Irish Moss can help decrease
yeast settling time. I was skeptical, but he was right. My experiments
showed that that no Irish Moss took longer to clear than the right amount.
Incidentally, "too much" was worse than the "right amount," but better
than none at all. Sorry, I don't recall the numbers, but I posted them
before, so they are in the archives.
Let's also not forget the other sources of permanent haze: iron, tin,
oxalate (from insufficient calcium), starch (from too-short mash time,
balled starch, too-hot sparge, unsufficient recirculation...), and
permanent protein-polyphenol haze. This last one I read about last night
in MBS and Pollack. Both texts said that oxidized polyphenols can
complex with proteins to form chill- and *permanent* haze! MBS went
so far as to say that research seems to be pointing to oxidation of
polyphenols to be *required* to actually form these protein-polyphenol
hazes. In other words, if you don't oxidize your beer, you may have
significant protein and significant polyphenol content, but still have
crystal clear beer. Astringency from the polyphenols may still be a
problem, but I've read elsewhere that unoxidized polyphenols can give
beer a "fresh" flavour and that it's the oxidized polyphenols that
give harshness. I think this was still far from proven as fact, but
it's an intersting concept anyway.
Finally, just food for thought: MBS said that decoction mashes were
higher in oxidisable (i.e. unoxidized) polyphenols and that infusion
mashes were higher in oxidized polyphenols. Remember someone here
in HBD was speculating that perhaps the maltiness of the no-sparge
mashes was due to less tannins (a.k.a. polyphenols) which perhaps were
"covering up" the maltiness? Hmmm...
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz@xnet.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 10:46:03 -0700
From: Steve.Snyder@wwireless.com (Steve Snyder)
Subject: RE: Accessibility
Pat wrote:
>Accessibility. What about beer? Is there a "right" to good beer?
>Recently, a friend of mine summed up something that has bothered me
>about brewpubs and microbrews for quite a while: they are not
>accessible. Sure, you and I - the readers of this publication - buy
>micros and patronize brewpubs, but we're not the ones that need to be
>"converted". And what do those of us without the means to do so give
>up in order to have better beer? Is it right for those that have
>learned to appreciate good beer to push our snoots into the air and
>snobbishly think that Joe Six-pack couldn't possibly do the same?
It's the same as with the food and wine industries. It's about snob
appeal. Although beer is considered a working man's drink, many
brewpubs and microbreweries know where the money is and will appeal to
those people. A classic example of how pricing effects sales: In the
late 1980's Borland used to sell their software at unbelievably low
prices, while IBM and Microsoft continued to sell their software at
higher prices. Guess who sold more software? Not Borland. Even though
they were widely considered to have a superior product. Microsoft and
IBM were perceived to have a better product because of their pricing
strategy. This is the same thing with Microbrews. There are some
really bad microbrews out there, but because of a higher price, the
snob appeal kicks in an people are will to pay it. At a Redhook or Sam
Adams level they should be able to lower their prices, but they won't.
They should be able to make their beer more accessible, but they
won't. But if they did lower prices, you can bet that we would see
more "Joe-Six-Pack" drinking them. They are appealing to the snob in
all of us. Just the same as what is happening in wine industry.
Expensive wine is very, very profitable. Until the major breweries
start making better, cheaper beer, Joe-Six-Pack won't drink them
because he can't afford them. I know more than a couple of people that
can't afford to drink Micros, even though they prefer them, they are
just too expensive.
Steve Snyder
steve.snyder@wwireless.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 15:03:53 EDT
From: pbabcock.ford@e-mail.com
Subject: Re: N2 Nyyyyyaaaaaagggggghhhhhhh
Pat Babcock Internet: pbabcock.ford@e-mail.com
VO Body Launch Specialist- PN150/1 EAP
****>>>> PLEASE USE PF5 WHEN REPLYING TO THIS NOTE!!!! <<<<****
Subject: Re: N2 Nyyyyyaaaaaagggggghhhhhhh
"There are several theories as to why bubbles form in the first place.
In a pure static fluid such as blood in a beaker that undergoes sudden
decompression, bubbles don't form. Why they form in people (and
animals) may have something to do with excess nitrogen entering gas
nuclei, sub-microscopic pockets of gas that are said to exist
naturally. There are other theories, all too complex to bother with
here. Whatever the exact mechanism of bubble formation, the following
statements reflect current understanding of decompression sickness."
This was swiped from http://www.acci.com/scuba/sectiong.htm
Note the comment on the static fluid and the "gas nuclei". So, again:
will nitrogen dissolve in beer? Any takers on the experiment?
Best regards,
Patrick G. Babcock PN150/1 Launch - Edison Assembly Plant
(908)632-5930 x5501 Route 1 South, Edison, NJ 08818-3018
Fax (908)632-4546 Page 800-SKY-PAGE PIN: 544-9187
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 15:10:33 -0400
From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: Enzyme location, husk tannin, that woody taste
Brewsters:
AlK says:
>, but my concern
>Really was in the "location" of the alpha and beta amylase. My
understanding
>Is that all the soluble enzymes (if they're not soluble, how can they
>Be involved in the reactions?) are in the liquid part of the mash and that
>The thickest part of the mash contains a small fraction of the enzymes
>Of the liquid part (the enzymes would simply be in the liquid that is
>*between* the insoluble bits in the thick part of the mash). Right?
>Am I missing something?
Remember that the liquid part of the mash is INSIDE the grains as well.
Based on my estimate a few weeks ago here in the HBD, at least 30% of the
enzymes are in the malt grain, since 30% of the mash liquor is in the
grains. Given the potential for enzyme/substrate complex formation and
trapped liquid in the malt which would increase the enzyme content of the
grain, I peg it at more like 50% of the enzymes are in the grain portion
and not hopelessly floating around in the liquid where they are useless
by-in-large.
- ----------------------------------------
In response to tannin in the wort after sparging, AlK says:
>1. You don't. You are extracting some tannins throughout the sparge.
>At the beginning of the sparge, your mash still has some buffering
>Ability and the pH is hopefully above 5.5.
I'm sure you mean BELOW Ph 5.5.
>2. Polyphenol extraction is a necessary evil. Charlie Scandrett suggests
>Crushing less and making do with poorer yield to minimise polyphenol and
>Silicate extraction.
I was puzzled by Charlie's comment on this. Surely the size of the husk
could have no effect on the extraction of phenols since the husk is so
thin. I have noticed that when I give a second pass through the mill that
many crushed malt particles are released from the husk. This could expose
more of the husk to fluid from both sides, but I still think it is a
stretch.
- -----------------------------
On the subject of wooden casks and beer, there is apparently a HUGE
misunderstanding about how wood casks were employed. The beer did not
INTENTIONALLY touch the wood. The barrels were lined with pitch and later
with synthetic coatings and even occasionally rubber liners until plastic
came along according to De Clerk. All were abandoned in favor of stainless
steel. Even though it was substantially more expensive, it gave a more
stable and predictable product.
>Wooden casks can lend flavors unobtainable in glass or stainless, but they
>Are a bunch of work..
I'll agree, but they aren't necessarily flavors we would like in our beer.
>Ballantine burton Ale is said to have been aged in wood, and when amounts
>Were drawn off for bottling, the next batch was then transferred to the
>Remainder of the beer in the wood. Sort of a continual process. I'm told
>That once they were bought out and the new owners got rid of the wood in
>Favor of stainless, the thing that made the beer great was lost forever!
Maybe it was the pitch coating on the inside of the cask no longer lending
that superior flavor to the Ballantines! Maybe it was nostalgia.
>This is the result of the activity of bacteria in the
>Wood that can get air through the wood.
It is the bacteria in the cracks between the staves not in the wood.
Bacteria cannot pass through the wood in a cask. The oak in wine casks
allows water and air to pass through but not bacteria. Many brewers
relined their casks with pitch after each use because the rough handling of
the barrels broke the lining at the stave line and opened the beer up for
attack from bacteria residing there. This pitch was melted with a hot air
stream, usually, followed by a re-lining spray of hot pitch which helped
sterilize the surface. At least.
> My understanding is that American
>Oak imparts a harsher 'wood' note than the preferred French Oak
You're confusing wine barrels with beer barrels. Wine barrels are not
pitch lined (although paraffin lining is available for show barrels and
white wines)but lightly toasted with a direct oak fired flame so they can
impart a flavor of tannin and vanillin to the wine, while allowing the wine
to undergo a controlled oxidation. Wine staves are MUCH thinner than beer
barrel staves and are not pressure tight, just water tight. I doubt they
could stand the pressure. Sorry, forget using wine barrels for beer
barrels.
> I have been told that the McCormick (sp?) Distillery of
>Westin, Missouri,
Whiskey barrels are completely unusable as is - for wine, especially.
These barrels are used only once by the distilleries and is the reason you
see them cut in half and used as flower planters. During a recent trip to
Jack Daniel's distillery I learned that some wineries are recently re-using
these whiskey barrels as a cheap way to aerate their wine as a part of
aging. They have to take the barrel apart, plane off the inner layer of
burned wood from which all tannin, vanillin and color have been extracted
by the whiskey and re-assemble. To get that oakey taste in their wine they
add oak chips. If you add oak chips to beer you will get a severe
lactobacillus infection unless the chips are boiled or preferably pressure
cooked . What's the difference? Lacto can't easily start at the alcohol
content of wine - no problem in beer and Lacto city..
> sells their casks after use for 15 to 20 $ each, but that
>You have to wash out the charcoal
This "charcoal" is the barrel which has had its insides burned and won't
wash out. The highly roasted wood is largely what gives whiskey its color
and taste. The much touted charcoal used by whiskey producers like JD is a
separate operation to remove the fusel oils by passing the whiskey over a
column of charcoal before kegging and storage.
- -----------------------------------------------
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
103164.3202@compuserve.com
Dave_Burley@compuserve.com
Voice e-mail OK
------------------------------
Date: 17 Apr 1997 15:27:08 +0600
From: "Craig Rode" <craig.rode@qmcin4.sdrc.com>
Subject: Thermometers- The Results
A few days ago, I posted about two thermometers that didn't agree. As a
result of this, I have recieved many e-mails with suggestions. However, I'm
going to keep brewing anyway. But seriously...
There is no consensus, but many feel the glass thermometers are more accurate
over a wider range than the bimetal dial type. The dial thermometers, it's
suggested, should be calibrated for use over a narrow range, say 150-170.
Some people suggested that both kinds are cheap and therefore inaccurate, and
suggested purchasing a laboratory quality thermometer. Others reported
excellent results with bimetal types, but indications are there are "cheap,
lousy" bimetals, and "better quality" ones. I had numerous suggestions of
calibration using freezing and boiling water, and several suggesting using a
medical thermometer to compare. I presume an oral one.
Advantages to glass thermometers:
More linear
Can be more accuarate
Advantages to Bimetal:
Much faster
Unbreakable
Thanks for the feedback, hope this is interesting to you all.
Now about my two hydrometers.....
Craig Rode (aka Milwaukee Brewer)
Still waiting for spring on the shore of Lake Michigan
------------------------------
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by ctrvax.Vanderbilt.Edu
From: "Bryan L. Gros" <grosbl@ctrvax.Vanderbilt.Edu>
Subject: temperature contoller help
I recently bought a temperature controller to use with my chest freezer.
This is a Johnson Controls model A19, Grainger part number 4E047. ($37)
Unfortunately, the thing doesn't come with a cord.
Another Johnson controller comes with a "piggy back" cord, but it
is a heater controller (switch only thrown when it gets too cold). I
can't find anyplace that has one of these piggy-back cords.
I think I can hook it up without much trouble, but I don't want to bet
my compressor on it. Does this sound reasonable to anyone:
Get a three pronged extension cord, strip it in the middle. I leave
the ground and common wires intact and cut the hot wire.
Then I hook the ends of the hot wire to the controller terminals.
I plug it in the wall and plug the freezer into the other end of the
cord. When the temperature rises, the switch is thrown and the
circuit is connected and the freezer comes on. Will this work?
I'll test it on a lamp first.
Thanks.
- Bryan
grosbl@ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu
Nashville, TN
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 16:15:20 -0500
From: Nicholas Dahl <ndd3@psu.edu>
Subject: 140F Rest
Does anyone use a 140F rest when brewing ales to break the big proteins
into medium-sized proteins, to improve mouthfeel and reduce cold break
volume?
If so, how long of a rest is sufficient, before raising the mash
temperature to the upper 150s?
Truth in brewing,
Nick
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 16:55:10 -0500 (CDT)
From: pablo <pjm@milliways.uark.edu>
Subject: Wow!
Fellow "bier" aficionados,
I just want to thank publicly those kind HBD'ers that took the time
out to answer my query regarding beer in Germany. The responses _far_
exceeded my expectations; I was (am) impressed! I learned much in
preparation for my trip, for which I am grateful.
Not surprisingly, it turns out that beer-wise, it's hard to go
wrong in Germany. I appreciate the tips and suggestions of those who've
"been there." FWIW, the Klosterbraueri Andechs (slightly south & west of
the Munich city centre) was much lauded by several respondents; it sounded
good to my wife and has been added to the itinerary!
Again, a hearty thanks to all who answered my questions; Hombrew
Digest subscribers are the best! Prost!
-Paul Morstad
Fayetteville, AR
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 16:17:09 -0700
From: Mark & Marya <mbolyana@slonet.org>
Subject: Rims Questions
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
- --------------5F5C70D46FAB
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi brewers,
Here are some questions that my internet impaired friend has.
Murdoc
- --------------5F5C70D46FAB
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="Q1.TXT"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="Q1.TXT"
Hello Peoples:
I'm in the process of building a three tier 1/2 barrel home brewery
with RIMS. Now that most of the major obstacles have been hurdled I have a
few questions. After boiling the wort I plan to pump it through a counter-
flow chiller and back into the mash-tun that doubles as a floation tank.
My first question has to do with hot break removal; I'm thinking the best
way to remove the wortr without the break material is to have my drain tube
from my boiller bent away from the center and to whrilpool the wort, prior to
pumping, I'm afraid though whirlpooling might cause hot side aeration.
Any suggestions?
After cooling the wort I plan on aerating with clean compressed air,
pitching my yeast and then tranferring to fermentors. This is where a number
of questions arise. I think it would be best to aerate in-line, as opposed
to using a diffussion stone, but I also want to add the yeast to the floation
tank before I start pumping the wort into it so that when I transfer the wort
into carboys the yeast concentration will be homogenous between the two car-
boys. I think this will be beneficial, in that the escaping gases will move
the yeast around, but I also wonder if the gases will carry the yeast out of
suspension and into the foam along with the cold break.
I also have another 1/2 barrel keg that I could use as a primary fer-
menter, but I'm not sure how to clean it. The kegs I'm using for brewing
vessels had a lot of gunk in the inside.
I've also been looking to get an upright freezer that I could attach
an external thremostat to for cold storage and lagering, but all the used
ones I've looked at have the cooling line directly underneath the shelves.
Is there any way to modify these to work (i.e. bending the cooling lines
against the back)?
An early thanks,
Wes Jacobs
- --------------5F5C70D46FAB--
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 20:48:07 -0700
From: James Moncsko <jimsbrew@bellsouth.net>
Subject: stuck ferment?
Hey! A friend brewed a BIG STOUT last weekend, but seems his ferment has
stuck. what can he do? Hi sent me this to post on the HBD:
I checked over my notes last night. My initial specific gravity was
1.064. When I transferred to my glass carboy the specific gravity
was
1.031.
FYI-
I started out with the regular stout kit, 6.6 lbs extract &
specialty grains. I added 1 lb. of powdered dark malt extract & 8 oz of
malto dextrin (sp?). I brewed the batch Thursday 4-10, but I pitched a
packet of liquid Scottish style yeast when my wort was about 89 degrees.
The next afternoon I didn't see much action so I added a packet of dry
yeast. Saturday I had plenty of bubbles, about 17 in 15 seconds. Monday
4-15, I transferred the beer to my glass carboy. At that time there was
one bubble every 34 seconds. I have not seen any bubbles since Tuesday,
as a matter of fact, I haven't even seen the water level shift in my
tri-bubble air lock.
As I stated yesterday, I am worried that the action stopped so
suddenly. I do not think the alcohol may have killed the yeast
because as of Monday, the alcohol content was only 4.3%.
So anybody please help this guy, if you have any idea. Please email me at
the above address.
Thanks for your help in advance!
Jim Moncsko, alive & well in Morrisville, N.C.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 21:02:37 -0400
From: "David Root" <droot@concentric.net>
Subject: Dishwasher detergent
I have read a few times that dishwasher detergent (for electric
dishwashers)
is good to use as a cleaner for brewing equipment. I am tired of paying $2
for 4 or 8 ounces of homebrew cleaner. The automatic dishwasher
detergent cleans great. I use a generous amount and everything seems to
clean right up. Am I hurting anything by using this stuff? Its $2 for 3
pounds.
The side of the box says 8.7% Phosphorous.
The ingrediants are Sodium carbonate,sodium silicate, neutral inorganic
salts,sodium dichloroisocyanurate, and sodium tripolyphosphate. Is this
safe to use on my brewing equipment?? Does it have any sanitising power?
Is my beer ruined?
Private Email and I will post a summary if anyone responds
Thanks to all in advance
David Root Droot@concentric.net Lockport NY
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2400, 04/18/97
*************************************
-------
