Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2386
HOMEBREW Digest #2386 Mon 31 March 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:
Wyeast 1275 (Ken)
Petard (My Own)/Ichiban (A. J. deLange)
Re: They Just Don't Get It (Jim Dickinson)
AHA/AOB - a final word (joe-sysop)
Kent Dog Hops/Thanks to all/Spam-o-rama (John C Peterson)
Fermenting in Sankey kegs ("Nathan L. Kanous II")
Decotion Kick-ins ("C&S Peterson")
Need Help:Belgian Masters ("Frederick L. Pauly")
lager or not?/oxidation effect? (Bruce Johnson)
Decoctions and Enzymes (Lorne P. Franklin)
6th ann. NYC Spring Comp Results (Ken)
AHA Competition (Tom Pope)
re: Screen Saver (J. Matthew Saunders)
water analysis (Tom Neary)
RIMS Step Mashing/Trip to Wales/Homebrewer's Diet (Randy Reed) ("Reed,Randy")
Chemicals (jim_anderson)
Decoction ("David R. Burley")
5-Gallon Plastic Electric Brewery & Fermentation Chiller Updates (KennyEddy)
Re: Decoction mashing (Martin Wilde)
What are these chemicals? (Randy Erickson)
Re: AHA NHC, and entering competitions in general (Nathan Moore)
The benefits of competition (Hugh Graham)
Re: Keg questions (DGofus)
Motorising a Phil's Mill (Denis Barsalo)
Hemacytometer (A. J. deLange)
Starch in crystal? (Mark Riley)
Re: re: Hemacytometer ("Robert Marshall")
Re: Square Vs. Round Tuns (Mark Thompson)
Hydrometer Correction Formula (Jim Thomas)
AHA and Recipe copyright (Leo Girardi)
Vitamin C, Oxygen and Homebrew (Dan Cole)
Clothes Washer to RIMS conversion ("C.D. Pritchard")
Oxygen Tanks (Richard Klug)
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: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 20:06:43 -0500
From: Ken <kbjohns@oscar.peakaccess.net>
Subject: Wyeast 1275
I would have disagree with Charles Epps conclusion of problems with 1275. I
have used it in 4 batches and found that my comments mirror those of Alex
Santic below:
"I've made 3 fine batches with 1275 and experienced no imbalance of esters
or phenolic off-flavors. In fact, it seems like a relatively neutral
strain. The reported results can be easily explained on the basis of
common procedural problems. In particular, many people ferment ales at
relatively warm room temperatures.
Alex Santic
NYC"
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 01:19:51 -0500
From: ajdel@nospmindspring.com (A. J. deLange)
Subject: Petard (My Own)/Ichiban
It seems I am hoist upon my own petard WRT not receiving acknowledgements.
Three guys figured out the obvious (to them - not me): that it's my
"antispam" header which prevents me from getting responses.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
This from a little ad placard on the sushi bar was too good not to share:
What Makes [Kirin] Ichiban Truly Distinctive?
Imported Ichiban beer is brewed entirely from the "first press" of wort.
Other beers use the same wort twice or more and combine the results. Using
wort just once makes Ichiban the purest, most flavorful beer in the world.
A. J. deLange
- Numquam in dubio, saepe in errore.
- --> --> --> To reply remove "nosp" from address. <-- <--
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 03:04:30 GMT
From: jdickins@baste.magibox.net (Jim Dickinson)
Subject: Re: They Just Don't Get It
>I just tried the Michelob Pale Ale and Pilsner for the first time. The
>Pale Ale does have a fairly noticeable hop flavor and aroma. Problem is
>the hop aroma and flavor is saaz. And the bottle label says this fine =
pale
>ale is made with Saaz, Tettnang and Hallertau hops. The pilsner also =
has a
>noticeable hop presence. Cascade hops that is. I thought the Pale Ale =
was
>a poor example of a pilsner, and the Pilsner tasted like a thin, fizzy
>attempt at an American Pale Ale. Why on earth would AB do this? Each =
beer
I have been drinking the Michelob hefeweizen (am doing so now) and I
think its a wonderful example of an american wheat beer. I really like
this beer and I think its the best thing I ever out of a container with
the AB initials on it. I can recommend this beer to anyone that likes
wheat beer. I just wish they woulda used a german wheat beer yeast.
One thing though, I think they might have used a tad bit too much
bittering hops. I would like to have seen about 20-25% less. Check out
www.hopnotes.com for a full description of the beer, along with all the
AB drivel that goes along with a marketing web page.
No affialition with AB, just (for once) a satisfied customer.
jim dickinson
Memphis, TN
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 23:41:01 -0500
From: joe-sysop@cyberbury.net
Subject: AHA/AOB - a final word
Hi, again;
Several Digests ago I made the comment that complaining about
the AHA was not going to get things done. If folks were truly
dissatisfied, then they should do something. I said (sorta) that the
time had come to fish or cut bait, put up or shut up, **** or get off
the the pot.
In response to my offer of meager assistance, I got exactly
two (2) answers. Both guys said that they egreed with me, and had as
little time as I. Since I have no ax to grind, and no burning ambition
to start something...well, that's that.
I'd also like to thank the HBD software for NOT cancelling me
when I requested it. It seems to be back to its old self, again.
Joseph M. Labeck, Jr. joe-sysop@cyberbury.net
Writer, House-husband, Dad
"If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember what you said!"
Net-Tamer V 1.08X - Registered
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 05:31:20 EST
From: petersonj1@juno.com (John C Peterson)
Subject: Kent Dog Hops/Thanks to all/Spam-o-rama
I first want to THANK the few that helped me pass on the "don'ts" of
homebrewing to the newbies. I have made a web page for this. It's a
little rough right now, but please visit it and critique me (private
email). www.geocities.com/Yosemite/6841. Then follow the link to Don't!
I also have some good recipes there.
Now on to the Dog Hop. I just got done with making a Bitter and thought
I'd try out this killing theory on my bird dog. First, the only time he
not right at my feet in the kitchen is when I'm brewing beer. Second, he
loves beer. So, while cleaning up, I had dropped some of the, now cold,
hop leaves on the floor (after soaking in wort for 60 minutes). If this
was food, he wouldn't have allowed it to touch the floor. He sniffed it
and snorted (his way of saying he's pissed off). I did this with Kent
Goldings and Cascades. My prognosis, until I hear from someone who's
dog died eating hops fresh or just out of the wort, the subject is dead.
As for the Ad-spams everyone seems to be getting. I have one email
account that I use for this sight and another that I use for the web and
newsgroups including rec.beer (Aol :-( ) I haven't been spammed on
this account, but I have started getting unsolicited mailings on the aol
account. Could it be the newsgroups? Experience alone tells me Unix has
an easier time extracting mail headings from newsgroup than from email
digests.
John C. Peterson
Aurora, Colorado
petersonj1@juno.com
http://www.geocities.com/Yosemite/6841
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 07:01:02 +0000
From: "Nathan L. Kanous II" <nkanous@tir.com>
Subject: Fermenting in Sankey kegs
Greetings to the collective:
I was thinking of removing the dip tube, etc. from a Sankey keg
so I could use it as a fermenter. I thought it would be much
more practical to have a stainless steel fermenter with two large
handles for moving beer in and out of my chest freezer (a.k.a.
fermentation/lagering "room"). For those of you out there that
use these, there must be some, how do you clean them and how do
you know that they're clean? TIA
Nathan in Frankenmuth, MI
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 97 07:52:14 UT
From: "C&S Peterson" <CNS_PETERSON@msn.com>
Subject: Decotion Kick-ins
HBDers:
Several posts to follow......
Chris Cooper asks about tannin extraction in the decoction process. He is
quite right in that many texts warn of boiling grains, and then turn around
and speak of the virtues of decoction mashing without stessing two points:
1. keeping you pH low in the decoction is of paramount importantance. I would
not recommend decoction mashing unless you had a very reliable way to measure
your mash pH (eg: don't trust the el-cheapo test strips, get the expensive
ones!). I pH of 5.8 or higher (measure a cooled sample) will extract tannins
and phonols, turning you beer into slug bait.
2. Some tannins are extracted in the decoction but most precipitate out (I
think other HBDers suggest this happens as well).
Brian Pickerill goes out on a limb and suggests the following categories for
making beer malty:
1) Using lesser modified lager malts and decoction.
2) Using No-Sparge brewing.
3) Using munich malt.
Now I'd like to jump out of the tree........
My $.02 is that the malty flavor decoction comes from maillard
reactions/carmelization of the mash (BTW, are these two flavor sources one in
the same, or should they be considered different?). An intereresting point
here is that you can simply carmelize the first runnings of your mash to get
some (and maybe all) of the benefits of a decoction. So maybe #1 here should
be maillard/carmelization.
The no sparge brewing is simply a low (ideally zero) ratio of sparge to grain.
So what you're really doing is using extra malt and stopping the mash run-off
at a high gravity. Isn't the "no sparge" process the same as I use for a
doppelbock (e.g.: for a high gravity wort, I lose a little efficiency and stop
the sparge early). Brian is definately on the right track here; I think that
the "no sparge" is simply the logical extreme of the sparge to grain ratio.
Maybe a beer made from second runnings would be the other end of this logical
range.
Using colored malts clearly adds malty character.
But I think there's something missing here. Malt complexity. Every been to a
single-infusion brewpub and had one of their "maltier" selections? Kind of
one-dimensional. I think the thing decoction brings to some beers (and not
all beers -- a "simple" malt profile is great in a bitter, IMHO) a complexity
in the malt profile that is desireable. Step infusion does this too, but IMO
to a lesser degree.
Louis Bonham posts the results of his experiment, which I find very relevant
to this discussion. It seems to support the hypothesis above, e.g.: that
although the RIMS beer was "maltier" in flavor, the decoction was more
pleasing to some. Louis suggests that maybe the formation of phenols in the
decoctoin is responsible for this. [Big Note: Louis, this sounds like a great
experiment. Not to mention a Munich Helles is one of my favorite beers --
Yum. It may be though that significant carmelization occured during your RIMS
process? Especially if the RIMS beer was darker than the decoction, which
given a tripple decoction was used is surprizing. You may not want to hear
this, given all the work already put in to your experiment, but it might have
been interesting to compare the decoction with a traditional step infustion
via boiling water. While there are more and more homebrewers building RIMS,
my guess is that most considering a decoction are moving from an infusion or
step-infusion process. In short, decoction is a quick and dirty way to create
carmel and perhaps other interesting flavors in beer.]
So maybe there are 4 ways to describe malt flavor volume and complexity:
1. boiling of grain (malliard + phenol production)
2. boiling of wort (malliard/carmelization)
3. sparge to grain ratio
4. malt selection (e.g.: munich, crystal, etc)
Note that in a dopplebock (deoction mashed), all four are used. In a kolsch
(infusion mashed) maybe only #2 is used if you want to add a little maltiness
via carmelization of the first runnings. And I agree with Louis -- great
beers can be made from single, step, or decoction mashing. Not to mention
extracts.
Finally Jim Wallace asks about a Weizen mash strategy. My suggestion is to go
with a rest mash of 135 to 138, as suggested by many here in the HBD. In an
all-wheat beer I made in December, I used the 122 rest and regretted it -- the
body was OK but the heading properties were so-so. Clearly, I denatured the
proteins too far in my protien rest. My mash strategy for next time? I'll
rest at the 135-138 range, and try to keep the mash as thick as I can at this
point (like 1Q/# of grain). And remember this was for a 100% wheat beer (I
used Durst) -- you should have less of a protein problem with a 60% wheat
grist; I would think you would want to stay away from the 122 even more.
Chas Peterson
Laytonsville, Md
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 08:34:06 -0500
From: "Frederick L. Pauly" <flp2m@avery.med.virginia.edu>
Subject: Need Help:Belgian Masters
In my quest to brew a Rochefort #8 I have searched the digest
archives for info on grain bill and yeast. In one of the few
posts on this subject someone suggested that the Wyeast AbbeyII
was the Rochefort yeast. Imagine my dissappointment when today I
tasted the beer in my yeast starter and found it to be much
closer to Chemay or Corsendonk.
Does anyone have anyother recommendations for a yeast that will
be close to Rochefort?
Thanks,
Rick PAuly
Charlottesville,VA
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 08:58:07 -0500 (EST)
From: Bruce Johnson <brucej@arches.uga.edu>
Subject: lager or not?/oxidation effect?
I just started brewing in Jan. I have a few newbie questions.
First, is a beer a lager if you use lager yeast and the normal ingredients
for a lager, but you brew at ale temp. and don't age it? If not, what is
it?
Second, what affect does aerating your beer while racking to
a secondary have on the beer. I didn't do this on purpose obviously. How
will it affect the taste? It is still in the fermenter.
Third, I haven't been filtering out the hops(pelletized) from the wort
before putting it in the fermenter. Should I? What difference will it
make?
Fourth, my friend just made a pale ale that has a lactic taste to it. What
could be responsible for that? He said the temp. fluctuated during
the fermentation. Could that be the cause?
I know these are pretty simple questions for this group, but any info.
would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.
"Emancipate yourself from mental slavery, none but ourselves can
free our minds." ... Bob Marley.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 09:00:05 -0400
From: lachina@mindspring.com (Lorne P. Franklin)
Subject: Decoctions and Enzymes
Regarding enzymes and decoction:
>>but I think removing 80-90% of your viable enzymes is really "pushing
>>it", [...] --or have I missunderstood your description?
Steve Alexander states:
>A misunderstanding. I've suggested and personally pull virtually all
>of the *grist* (less than half of the mash) for a single decoction.
>This occurs after some sort of dough-in or other rest that permits
>hydrolysis of the enzymes. The enzymes in solution are largely left
>behind in the mash liquid. The proof of this is that my
>saccharification after decoction is almost as fast as an infusion
>mash.
>It's probably worth noting at this point that the important brewing
>enzymes are all part of the water soluable or albumin portion of the
>mash protein. Also that the beta-amylase is concentrated in the
>allurone layer(sub husk) and the outer portion of the endosperm.
>Alpha-amylase is formed in the embryo and concentrated near the
>embryo/endosperm barrier tissues. Both have a great opportunity to
>soluablibize in even moderately crushed malt.
My question is, if all, or most of the enzymes are in the liquid mash
portion, why do most decoction brewers bother to hold the removed grist at
conversion temperatures rather than going directly to the boil?
Lorne Franklin
lachina@mindspring.com
Cleveland, OH
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 09:34:37 -0500
From: Ken <kbjohns@oscar.peakaccess.net>
Subject: 6th ann. NYC Spring Comp Results
Results for the 1997 NYC Spring Regional Competition can be found at the
HOSI web site. URL http://www.wp.com/hosi/
BOS was won by a Frank Salt with cider. 1st runner up was Matt Wyss with an
Americxan light lager and 2nd. runner up was Ken Johnsen with a dry stout
Total entries were 224
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 06:38:38 -0800
From: popeman@webtv.net (Tom Pope)
Subject: AHA Competition
Bill Giffin has again criticized the the AHA and their competition.
It's evident Bill doesn't like the AHA, and he is entitled to his
opinion and he certainly doesn't have to enter the competition or buy
the magazine. I do believe, however, that his remarks concerning the
judging are unfair and untrue, at least in my experience. I can only
speak with respect to the AHA regionals held in California each year.
I have judged or helped organize the California event for the past
three years, and I can state with certainty that highly qualified and
experienced BJCP judges work very hard to give each entrant the benefit
of their expertise. Each entry is judged fairly and competently. If
this has not been Bill's experience with the AHA competition held on
his side of the continent, so be it. It is not the case here. For Bill
to maintain otherwise is an insult to the integrity and the hard work
of all the judges who participate in the California AHA regionals
each year. Frankly, Im a little surprised that judges who participate in
some of the other AHA regional sites haven't voiced their disagreement
with Bill on this issue. I am not defending the AHA per se, but I do
feel slighted by Bill's remarks about the judging.
The Pope of Corte Verona
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 10:17:31 -0500
From: saunderm@vt.edu (J. Matthew Saunders)
Subject: re: Screen Saver
Kathy,
I use AfterDark. It comes with options to plug in your very own images.
You can scan what ever beer related stuff you want and use it as your
screen saver.
Cheers!
Matthew.
=======================================================================
J. Matthew Saunders--The Arts in Technology
saunderm@vt.edu
"We have to work in the theatre of our own time,
with the tools of our own time"
--Robert Edmond Jones
Check out: http://dogstar.bevd.blacksburg.va.us/virtual/virtual.html
=======================================================================
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 10:39:24 -0500
From: thomas.neary@peri.com (Tom Neary)
Subject: water analysis
I just obtained a Water analysis for my area. Could somebody tell me how to
interpret it and what I would need to do to neutralize the water.
PH 7.4
chloride (mg/l) 21.6
hardness (mg/l) 92
alkalinity (mg/l) 76
C02 Calc. (mg/l) 6.6
Nitrate (mg/l) 4.84
Sodium (mg/l) 14.2
Iron (mg/l) .16
manganese (mg/l) .01
Total Dissolved Solids (mg/l) 162
Aggressiveness Index 11.2
TIA,
Tom
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 10:41:51 -0500
From: "Reed,Randy" <rreed@foxboro.com>
Subject: RIMS Step Mashing/Trip to Wales/Homebrewer's Diet (Randy Reed)
I have always wondered if there is an effect on the wort composition due to
the timing of increasing temperature steps. I mash in a propane fired ?
barrel (ten gallon brew length) RIMS system. I recently did a step mash as
recommended by Dr. Fix's literature. In order to not scorch the wort, I
raised the temperature of my mash each time very slowly.
I always try to mash in a few degrees low and bring the temperature up
slowly so as not to overshoot the rest.
1. The main question is, how important is it to raise the temperature to
the next step relatively quickly, or are gradual increases in temperature
not a problem? What says the collective?
2. In about two weeks, I will be in Cardiff, Wales area (reading HBD from
the laptop). Can anyone recommend to me (via private e-mail) the best way
to spend my beer hunting time? I am looking for brewery tours (Brains does
not offer one this time of year) and the best pubs.
3. Can any nutritionists out there recommend the best diet for an
over-weight home brewer? I drink about 2-3 pints of home-brew or craft brew
a day. Since beginning my brewing 4 years ago, my weight has steadily
risen. Light beer will never be brewed in my basement, and I do not wish to
drink less beer. After all, a beer judge must do his research... What
portion of my diet that I can reduce in order to better balance the
wonderful empty calories of beer? (Less bread, carbohydrates?...)
Cheers
Randy
=====================================================
"Homebrewers are like dogs teaching each other how to
chase cars."----------------------- Ann Reed
=====================================================
+-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
+Local*Brewing*Company++++++++++++++++++++++++
+ESBITTER@AOL.COM++++++++++++++++Surfing*the++
+Randy*Reed++++++++++++++++++++++Information++
+BJCP*Recognized++++++++++++++++SuperBikePath+
+Beer*Judge/Potscrubber++++++++++++++++&++++++
+South*Shore*Brew*Club+++++++++++++Web*Wired++
+(Boston,*MA*Area*-*South)++++++++++++World+++
Visit SSBC at http://members.aol.com/brewclub/ Results of the SSBC
Brewoff
+-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- '97 are
posted!
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 97 08:36:00 -0700
From: jim_anderson@state.ut.us
Subject: Chemicals
Thanks to all who responded to my inquiry about the use of the SANI-COM
towelettes, here and through email both. The (loose) concensus seems to
be that they may be okay for countertop surfaces, but that's about it.
For those with apparent concerns about "stealing" from my employer, this
is not the case. Through a typical corporate snafu, a case of these
were sent to my office. Upon being informed, they do *not* want them
returned (go figure). In short, they will sit in my office for about
three years, get a nice coating of dust and then someone will throw them
out during a housecleaning binge. I'm not worried -- are you? ;)
- Jim
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 12:00:43 -0500
From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: Decoction
Brewsters:
Charlie Rich partially quotes me and gives me the opportunity to once again
say - if one is giving advice on temperature and holds it is necessary to
indicate the type of malt and grist composition being used. In my
discussion I was addressing predominantly the case for people who wanted to
decoct pale ALE malt. Malts that do fine in single malt infusions - AKA
pale Ale malts already have plenty of protein and parking at the protein
rests at 135F will produce perhaps more Mid-Mw protein than desired. This
could lead to excessive chill haze.
I suggested for pale ALE malts to avoid this problem, move to 145F and
allow it to drop to 140F or so over the time it takes for the decoction.
The reasoning being that If this malt is fine for a single temperature
infusion it already has the correct protein balance, etc. Moving to 145F
is in the middle of the beta amylase region, but so what? Limited alpha
activity at this temperature does not give the beta anything to operate on,
so very limited simple sugars get produced. The reason for moving to 145F
was to denature all the proteinaceous enzymes so as to not upset the
protein balance in this malt intended for a single infusion.
BTW it is not the purpose of the decoction to "cook" the malt, but rather
to carry out a reaction that proceeds rapidly at the boil and ultimately
produces melandoins, gelatinization of the starch is a side benefit If
sufficient enzyme capacity is available in the main mash. The whole point
of taking less than all of the grist from the mash and decocting it was to
make sure that enzymes still were there after even a triple decoction as
your calculations confirm. This is exactly the point. It was never intended
that all the malt would be decocted, even in a triple decoction in which
one-third of the grist was taken each time. Taking a decoction on 8 -10
lbs of wet grist has to be extremely difficult, not to mention the heating
problems, preventing scorching, etc. I estimated in a previous HBD
submission that at the very minimum one-third of the enzymes are in the
malt. I suspect as much as 50% enzyme content in the grist, in the absence
of real data. If you start with a pale ALE malt which has an inherently
lower enzyme content, then starch conversion could be slowed considerably.
High temperature saccharification ( @158F which I favor) in the main mash
may suffer in this case because of a diminished beta concentration at the
outset of the saccharification step.
- ----------------------------------------------------
Like Bill Giffin I think the AHA's attempt to grab publishing rights ( and
who knows what else) to your recipe by copyrighting it is sneaky, sinful
and no one should do it. I'm not sure how they propose to do it since you
created the recipe. If the AHA really only wants to be able to publish it,
the brewer should be asked to sign a release to the AHA to use it in
Zymurgy only upon entering the contest. If they want to use it in a book,
video tape or other publication method, they should share royalties with
the authors. If it makes it to the top do they get a share of something
which they signed with Boston Beer and we know nothing about? Also, if
they do copyright it as they plan, what share does the author get of the
royalties?? Lots of poorly thought out things here. Sign a contract which
has all of this stuff worked out OR even better copyright it yourself
BEFORE you submit your beer, make a date record by having a notary public
certify the date and send them a release, including a statement similar to
that used on software packages. If they accept your beer in the contest,
they agree to your terms. To maintain what little credibility they have in
this matter, the AHA needs to think this through clearly, make sure
everybody gets what they deserve - and nothing more - and carry on with the
contest.
- ---------------------------------------------------
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
103164.3202@compuserve.com
Dave_Burley@compuserve.com
Voice e-mail OK
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 16:02:40 -0500 (EST)
From: KennyEddy@aol.com
Subject: 5-Gallon Plastic Electric Brewery & Fermentation Chiller Updates
I've updated the subject pages on my website.
The change to the Chiller page was to reformat the graphics to much smaller
GIF's -- the old document took FOREVER to load...much quicker now...
The update to the Electric Brewey page is substantial. I've rewired it for
greater safety & convenience, so check it out if you're interested in how my
Electric Brewey works now.
*****
Ken Schwartz
El Paso, TX
KennyEddy@aol.com
http://members.aol.com/kennyeddy
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 97 13:49:00 PST
From: Martin Wilde <Martin_Wilde@ccm.jf.intel.com>
Subject: Re: Decoction mashing
Text item: Text Item
Greetings!
I enjoyed reading the threads on decoction mashing recently.
I have tasted many locally brewed Helles Bock style beers and Pilseners and
brewed many of them myself. I can definitely taste a difference in decocted
ones and non-decocted ones. There is a definite "breadiness" which results from
the decoction. A local brewery - Saxer produces a dopplebock which uses a
single step decoction and once again the breadiness shows up from the decoction.
This flavor which I call "breadiness" is what separates some of the great
German/Czech style lager beers from the rest. I've been to Munich and tasted
Munich Dunkel's brewed with both decoction and non-decoction - there is a
difference in flavor. The non-decocted ones are bland and the decocted ones are
terrific. If you have ever tasted Ayinger AltBarisch Dunkel you will know what
I mean. I don't believe all the Munich malt in Munich can give you that flavor.
I don't know how you can brew a Czech pilsener using Munich malt and get that
decoction flavor since the Munich malt is ~6 to 10L in color and most pilseners
are 2 to 4L in color. Budweiser Budvar is an example of this. For the last
several years the Oregon Brew Crew has had a pilsener competition and you can
definitely taste the difference in pilseners which are decoction mashed and
those which are not. I am not talking about "malty-sweetness" but about more
mouthfeel and overall more complex flavors from the Maillard effects of
decoction.
Martin Wilde
264-4328
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 13:55:59 -0800
From: Randy Erickson <RANDYE@mid.org>
Subject: What are these chemicals?
Jim Anderson, who works for a "major airline", perhaps the one centered
in SLC from the looks of his domain, informs us that the radio
microphones and other cockpit controls are sanitized with these nifty
little towellettes that contain, among other things, a spermicide!
Is it just me, or did other frequent flyers' confidence levels just drop a
couple of notches? ;-)
I always wondered where the term "cockpit" came from (sorry, tried
hard, but couldn't resist that one).
Randy in Modesto
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 15:20:04 -0700 (MST)
From: Nathan Moore <moorent@bechtel.Colorado.EDU>
Subject: Re: AHA NHC, and entering competitions in general
I promised myself I would avoid posting letters that dont contain
usefull info or a request for usefull info on brewing but I feel that Bill
Giffins post slaming the NHC, the Longshot comp, and as it apears to me
homebrew comps in general demands a reply. One comment in general
paticularly bothered me.
> Why would anyone want to enter either of these
competitions? Both are only
> for the gradification of the competition
not the brewer who enters..
Bill, just because you dont enjoy competition dosn't mean others
dont as well. I truley enjoy hombrew competitions and have recently
started judging and I find your comments insulting. Asuming others feel
the same way as you do could turn off alot of homebrewers from entering
and participating in competitions and enjoying the process immensely. To
make this short I will not continue to argue but instead urge brewers to
decide for themselves (interesting concept Bill). Dont just enter a
competition, take part in it. Talk to the organizer about stewarding or
just stop by and observe. Its a great way to socialize and learn about
HB, and its always fun to win, or just to get some interesting feedback
from the judges and other brewers. If you dont have fun, dont do it
again, if you do you might find yet another rewarding aspect of brewing.
And just remember, judges are simply fellow brewers and there opinions are
simply that, educated opinions.
Nathan Moore
Denver, CO
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 15:29:02 -0700
From: Hugh Graham <hugh@see.sig>
Subject: The benefits of competition
Yippee. We just won our first medal in a homebrew competition,
the Ft. Collins Mash Tongues Mashfest. Got a silver for an ESB.
(http://www.fortnet.org/~smills/mf-win97.html)
We first entered this competition last year and got nowhere but
the judges comments were invaluable. We started controlling
fermentation temperature and added more aroma hops
to our recipes and our beers improved dramatically.
So, might I recommend to one and all the advantages of
entering competitions? It's nice to win but the main benefit
was to hear impartial constructive criticism of one's beers.
It's possible to learn a lot of brewing theory and practice from books
and the HBD but before entering the competition last year all I'd heard
about my beer was that it was unequivically great, usually from
friends and family. And they're never going to be rude! Or insightful.
Here's a brief version of the recipe.
Rebate Ale
Recipe Makes : 11.0 gallons Total Grain : 20.50 lbs.
Hop IBUs : 53.5 OG/FG : 1.050/1.014
Malts/Sugars:
18.25 lb. Pale Ale (Hugh Baird)
0.50 lb. Wheat malt (Belgian)
1.50 lb. Crystal 80L - British (Baird)
0.50 lb. Brown Sugar (Dark)
Hops:
1.00 oz. Goldings 5.0% 90 min
2.00 oz. Columbus 10.0% 90 min
1.00 oz. Irish Moss 0.0% 20 min
1.00 oz. Goldings 5.0% 10 min
1.00 oz. Goldings 5.0% 0 min
Mash Grain/Water Ratio: 1.25 quarts/pound
(Water treated w/gyspum, epsom salts and lactic acid)
Mash Temperature: 153F. Recirc. to clarity. Caramelize first runnings.
CF chill. Aerate well, pitch yeast. Ferment at 65 F.
Yeast: London ESB slurry in 1qt wheat beer wort starter.
Hugh
- --
Anti spam .sig : hugh at lamar dot colostate dot edu
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 17:56:26 -0500 (EST)
From: DGofus@aol.com
Subject: Re: Keg questions
I have a few questions asked by a non homebrewing pal ( never around when it
is time to brew, always there when ready to drink ). He wants to know if you
could take a 1/4 keg and put the beer into empty bottles, cap and savor? He
figures this would be a great bargain if possible. Also, what is a
brewmeister? He said it is a type of refrigderator with keg holding/tapping
abilities. Where can you get them and $ ? I know it is not directly related
to homebrew but I was stumped.
Thanks in Advance!!!!
Bob Fesmire
Dgofus@aol.com
Pottstown, PA
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 18:50:06 -0500
From: Denis Barsalo <denisb@cam.org>
Subject: Motorising a Phil's Mill
I just got a Phil's grain mill. How do I remove the handle? How do
I attach a pulley? What's the maximum RPM motor I should use when I
motorize it? What else can you recommend? I didn't get any documentation
with it!
Denis
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 23:56:45 -0500
From: ajdel@nospmindspring.com (A. J. deLange)
Subject: Hemacytometer
Wolfgang Wedel asked about use of a hemacytometer. See The Microbrewery
Laboratory Manual - Part I by Fal Allen in the July/August 1994 issue of
Brewing Techniques. A fair part of this article is dedicated to the use of
the hemocytometer (as it is spelled in the article and that is probably the
preferred spelling). In a nutshell, the hemocytometer contains a well 0.1mm
deep and the floor of this is ruled forming a counting area 1 mm x 1 mm.
The counting area times the depth (0.1 cm x 0.1 cm x 0.01 cm) is .0001 cc
(mL). The counting area is subdivided into 25 squares (let's call them
"little squares") by multiply ruled lines and each of these is in turn
subdivided by single lines into 16 squares ("tiny squares"). To use the
device place a cover slip over the well and intoduce a drop of pitched wort
under the coverslip. Capillary action will draw this into the wells (there
are 2) and float the coverslip at the correct depth. Look at the slide
under low power and start counting the cells in one of the 25 little
squares. Use the rulings for the tiny squares to help you keep track of
where you are in the little square. A hand counter is very, very helpful
here. Count cells which touch the upper and left walls of the little square
but not the lower and right walls. These will be counted when you do
adjacent little squares. Count daughter cells only if they are at least 2/3
the size of the mother cell. Count all 25 boxes in this way and multiply
by 10,000. That is the number of cells per mL. For better statistical
stability, count the other well also and average.
If the cells are dense you can count only 5 little boxes (the four corners
and the middle) and then multiply by 50000.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Chris Cooper asked whether boiling the grains in a decoction causes the
leaching of tannins. Indeed it does but the boiling allows some of these to
complex with proteins to form a precipitate which is trapped during
subsequent lautering and sparging. The remainder complex and fall out
during lagering. Note also that the pH in the decoction boil is usually
close to 5 so that helps some.
A. J. deLange
- Numquam in dubio, saepe in errore.
- --> --> --> To reply remove "nosp" from address. <-- <--
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 17:08:46 -0800
From: Mark Riley <mriley@netcom.com>
Subject: Starch in crystal?
Hiya HBD,
Lately, I've had a few questions regarding the steeping of grains. One
of the things I have been interested in determining is what "efficiency"
you get when steeping crystal for an extract recipe (I need this information
so I can fine tune the calculations for extract recipes in the Beer Recipator -
see the URL below). So, I did a little experiment where I basicly
steeped one pound of 40L crystal in one gallon of room temperature
water and then brought this just to a boil (about 20 minutes), at which
point I removed the grains. I used this steeping procedure for this first
experiment since it is used a lot in TNCJoHB and I assume since
there are lots of copies of this book in print, a good number of extract
brewers probably use this method. I ended up with an SG of 1.014
for this "wort". The Zymurgy Grain Special Issue tells me the
threoretical SG is 1.034 for 40L crystal so I have a 41% efficiency.
That's good to know and I plan on doing more experiments to get
better numbers.
That 1.014 SG represents the dextrins, sugar, starch, etc... that
were released while steeping the grain. Yep, you heard me right,
STARCH! I did an iodine test, and somewhat to my surprise, got a
distinct positive result. Now, I've read here and elsewhere that starch
in your beer is not a good thing. Starchy beer supposedly doesn't
taste good (haven't had any myself - that I know of), but as George De
Piro noted earlier, starch may encourage a low-grade infection
since some bugs (bacteria) can process it and not have any
competition from the yeast.
While steeping crystal certainly adds flavor to an extract recipe,
perhaps using this method of steeping, which seems to be releasing
some starch, may cause the beer to deteriorate quicker if any
starch munching bugs are present.
In any case, I'm going to try this experiment again by steeping the
crystal at 150F for 30 minutes and see if I don't see different results
regarding the starch. BTW, the crystal I used had a good crush,
the same I've been using to get 85% efficiency in a regular mash.
Prior to this, I did another experiment where I steeped some
crushed chocolate and roasted barley for 15 minutes at 170F
to 180F and got a negative result on the iodine test, as far as I
could tell, since the "wort" was pretty dark.
Mark Riley
Sacramento, CA
http://alpha.rollanet.org/recipator
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 19:40:01 +0000
From: "Robert Marshall" <robertjm@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: re: Hemacytometer
Wolfgang asked:
>Does someone have any source, which describes how to use a
>hemacytometer in practice?
While I don't have a source, I can describe it as I've used one.
The Hemacytometer has a grid pattern on it. There are 5 large
vertical and 5 large horizontal lines across the face of the device,
which is about 2.5 inches tall by 3.5 inches wide. This makes large
squares on its face.
Within each of these squares are smaller lines, which create 25
squares within EACH of the larger squares.
You put a sample of your beer in the hemacytometer, and then place it
under the microscope. You can count the number of single cells within
the squares to guesstimate your yeast concentration.
The suggested accurate way to estimate your cell content is to count
every yeast cell within all the smaller squares within a checkerboard
pattern of the larger squares.
Hope that's easy to follow.
In addition you can stain your yeast with methalyne blue.
The dead yeast absorb this blue dye, while the live
ones don't. This way you can not only figure out your actual cell
concentration, but also the viability of them.
Later,
Robert Marshall
robertjm@hooked.net
homepage: http://www.hooked.net/users/robertjm
- ----------------------------------------------
"In Belgium, the magistrate has the dignity
of a prince, but by Bacchus, it is true
that the brewer is king."
Emile Verhaeren (1855-1916)
Flemish writer
- ------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 21:49:32 -0600
From: Mark Thompson <markt@bga.com>
Subject: Re: Square Vs. Round Tuns
Pete quotes someone:
>>You will have to find a way to provide a good seal for the CPVC pipe that
>>extends through the wall of your cooler.
and then writes:
>If you use 1/2" CPVC for your manifold, 3/8" tubing will fit tightly
INSIDE >the CPVC, and you can simply drill a 5/8" hole in the cooler wall.
and put >about 3 inches of the tubing (I use a total of four feet from the
cooler to >the kettle) through the hole in a drilled rubber stopper (use a
tiny drop of >mineral oil to help).
This is basically the same setup that I use except that I don't use the
drilled rubber stopper and I didn't drill a new hole in the wall of the
cooler. I use the existing hole from the removed drain. I had problems
with leakage with the drilled stopper no matter how tight I crammed the
thing in there. What I now use is a bung from a 5 liter minikeg. It's a
tight fit but once it is in there it forms a perfect seal. 3/8" tubing
fits tightly inside the bung and forms a good seal.
Mark Thompson, Austin Texas, <markt@bga.com>
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 11:20:54 +0000
From: Jim Thomas <jim.thomas@telops.gte.com>
Subject: Hydrometer Correction Formula
Greetings,
Anybody out there in HBD-land happen to have a formula for use in a
spreadsheet to correct hydrometer readings? I need something that
corrects to 60 degrees based on values input for temperature and
hydrometer reading. In other words, I plug in the wort temp and the
hydrom. reading and get a corrected figure. I plan to use MS Excel, so
a formula in that format would be great. Private replies are fine.
Thanks,
Jim Thomas
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 22:24:59 -0700
From: Leo Girardi <leo@cse.CUDenver.EDU>
Subject: AHA and Recipe copyright
>From the HBD:
>Oops! One more thing! Rule F of the NHC Rules and Regulations should read:
>"The AHA has the right to copyright the recipe to help ensure that the
>Entrant and the AHA receive all due credit whenever the recipe is
>published."
>
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that a recipe
CANNOT be copyrighted. Format, etc of it can. But the ingredient list/
procedures cannot. (This is a FAQ from rec.food.cooking... btw)
Leo
Leo J. Girardi leo@cse.cudenver.edu
UCD - Engineering (303) 556-2356
"I'm only responsible for what's not working right now." DoD# 0874
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 09:00:15 -0500
From: Dan Cole <dcole@roanoke.infi.net>
Subject: Vitamin C, Oxygen and Homebrew
Anyone have any information on adding Vitamin C to homebrew to reduce
oxidation? It is very popular in the food industry for that very use and
would seem to be a great addition to a homebrewer's bag of tricks.
Main questions: Will it directly affect the yeast in any way? (kill or
supress them)
If Vitamin C is good for scavenging oxygen from bottled beer, would it
remove the needed oxygen for the yeasts to naturally carbonate the beer?
Has anyone tried this, or have the chemical knowledge to explore this?
Dan Cole
dcole@roanoke.infi.net
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 10:06:44 +0700
From: "C.D. Pritchard" <cdp@mail.chattanooga.net>
Subject: Clothes Washer to RIMS conversion
Turn the little lady's washer into a RIMS. Details are at:
http://caladan.chattanooga.net/~cdp/apr_fool.htm
Happy April Fools Day!
c.d. pritchard cdp@chattanooga.net
http://caladan.chattanooga.net/~cdp/index.html
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 19:38:08 +0000
From: klugrd@ma.ultranet.com (Richard Klug)
Subject: Oxygen Tanks
About a week ago I submitted a request to the Digest:
>Does anyone have experience using Bernz-O-Matic (tm) oxygen tanks with
>their >Oxynator (tm) wort aeration system? I am looking for any specific
>information >about purity and such. Are the tanks made by the same
>supplier? They are >similar in appearance and volume (1.1# 02). The
>Bernz-O-Matic are available at >Home Depot for 8 bucks, Oxynator charges
>about 20.
I received about 6 responses via e-mail, all of which confirmed my
observation that the tanks were identical, and could, in the opinion of the
posters, be used as replacements. Two people cited other commercial
suppliers of aeration stones that recommend use of the Bernz-O-Matic tanks.
Thanks to all respondents, and to the collective wisdom of the HBD! Happy
aeration.
Richard Klug
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2386, 03/31/97
*************************************
-------
