Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2410
HOMEBREW Digest #2410 Fri 02 May 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:
easy decoction for beginners (Gavin Scarman)
RE: nitrogen/co2 (erikvan)
Broken Thermometer. Arrrgh!! (RedlackC)
Re: Secondary fermentation... (Spencer W Thomas)
Got a Recipe? (Brad Kazmer)
Mash Tun Insulation (eric fouch)
garage sale draft system (Barrowman)
135 F Rest in not-so-pale malts (Russ Brodeur)
Cornies/Mini-kegs/Biting Yeasties/Maris-Otter ("C&S Peterson")
Hefeweisen (Brian Deck)
re: Brew Clubs ("Bridges, Scott")
Homebrew potency & flat brew (Dave Bartz)
Yeast Autolysis (DAVE BRADLEY IC742 6-7932)
Small Batches and Recipes ("John Penn")
Gelatin Clarifier ("Nathan L. Kanous II")
Help me clarify myself! (Matt Harper)
Corked Beer Flavor / Vienna&Maerzen Info (David C. Harsh)
Great Canadian Homebrew Competition correction / web page (Eamonn McKernan)
Stupid Questions, Poor eyes ("David R. Burley")
Corn Grits or Meal (Darren Gaylor)
Pin Lock and Ball lock connectors (Cory Chadwell)
Piranha solutions (Kevin Kane)
botulism redux (OH NO!) (SClaus4688)
RE: Gelatin as a clarifier (John Wilkinson)
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, 01 May 1997 10:59:10 +1500
From: Gavin Scarman <scarman@box.net.au>
Subject: easy decoction for beginners
I've read a lot about people having trouble with decoctions, and saying
they are too difficult. My first ever all-grain (with 50% wheat) was a
decoction and was a complete success and very much easier than I thought it
would be. My equipment is as simple as you can get. So here is my method
that has worked well for me over a number of decoction mashes.
Equipment-
20l (5 gal) SS pot (cost me A$30,US$25)
8l (2.5gal) SS pot (quality A$40)
old plastic fermenter/ bottling bucket with homemade 'ez masher' for lautering
put crushed grain in 20l pot with 13l of 104F water, hold for 10 min.
heat to 135 in 15 minutes (gas stove makes this rate easy to control)
rest for 25 min, and then pull decoction;
I do this by taking first just the grain via a strainer until decoct pot
is 2/3 full, then I top up with just liquid so the decoct is 2:1 grain:liquid
I then put the lid on the rest mash and wrap in an old blanket - the
thermal mass
of the main mash means it drops only a few degrees at worst.
heat the decoct in 15 min to 160F and rest until iodine test negative
heat in 15 till boiling, hold for 20 mins.
slowly add decoct back to rest mash over 10 minutes. (It never seems to
overshoot the next temp but if I think it's going up too fast I add some cold
water to the main mash - maybe a cup or 2).
heat to 147F if not already there, rest for 20.
heat in 7min to 160F, wait til iodine test negative.
heat to 170F, hold for 5 then transfer to lauter-tun.
The thing that makes this easy is that the mash is done on a gas stove
meaning I don't have to worry about getting quantities exact. Mashing in a
picnic cooler must be a nightmare in comparison. Regardless of choice of
temperatures the method is still easy and I have done double decoctions the
same way. All my beers have come out very well.
BTW, "my method" was developed with a lot of tips from here and the R.C.B.
newsgroup.
- ----------------------------------
http://www.satech.net.au/~scarman
mailto:scarman@satech.net.au
- ----------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 20:27:24 -0500 (CDT)
From: erikvan@ix.netcom.com
Subject: RE: nitrogen/co2
Jeff Sturman asks:
One of my customers is hell bent on using nitrogen to serve his homebrew.
He wants to know if he can carbonate the beer with straight co2 and then
serve the beer with straight nitrogen. Mainly because pure nitrogen is
considerabely cheaper than a mix of nitrogen/co2. Will this work? I told
him the reason for the mix probably has something to do with keeping the
beer carbonated. Pure nitrogen pressure on the keg probably wouldn't do
this. Did I lie to him? Help, anyone?
Jeff,
>From my experience with nitrogen beers, you must actually force carbonate
the beer with the nitrogen, which by the way, is harder than force
carbonation with co2, due to the smaller bubble size, causing a more
difficult time getting into the liquid. If you simply co2 carbonate the
beer, then dispense with nitrogen at say, 8 psi, all you're doing is
pushing the beer out the tap, not giving it that famous Guinness head.
Yes, nitrogen might be cheaper, but you just can't put it into your
co2 bottle. You need a different regulator, (big bucks), and, if you
want the Guinness effect, you need a special tap (more big bucks).
Simply, you want to force nitrogen the keg, and dispense with co2.
You may however, depending on how soon the beer is consumed, have to
re-carbonate (with nirtogen) the keg. Is it all worth it? I think so.
Erik Vanthilt
The Virtual Brewery
Http://www.netcom.com/~erikvan/brewery.html
Games, hints, reviews, recipes, a free newsletter, and more...
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 22:22:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: RedlackC@aol.com
Subject: Broken Thermometer. Arrrgh!!
Friends and beer lovers,
I have run into a small dilemma. I broke off the tip of my floating
thermometer into my partial mash the other night. The thermometer itself is
encased in a long glass housing and has a host of lead beads at the bottom
that are held in place by an unknown red substance. Only the glass case broke
and a few dozen of the lead balls fell into the wort along with a few bits of
glass. The thermometer itself did not break, and it is of the alcohol
variety. The mash temperature never exceeded 170 degrees.
I strained the wort through a *very* fine nylon hop bag which caught any of
the unwanted glass and lead (almost all of which had settled to the bottom of
the lauter tun. I'm 100% percent sure that I removed all of the glass and
lead from the wort. But, I don't know what the hard red substance (not the
red alcohol in the thermometer itself) is that may or may not have entered
the wort. If any did end up in the wort, it was a very minuscule amount. Less
than half a drop at most.
My question is this: What is the hard red substance that holds the lead beads
and thermometer in place inside of a glass floating thermometer? Is it
harmful, toxic, deadly? Has anyone ever experienced this before? I'd prefer
not to throw out the batch unless it's going to make someone ill.
Any help would be appreciated. Private email is more than welcome.
Thanks,
Chris Redlack
Rockville, MD
"Shut up brain, or I'll stab you with a Q-tip." - Homer
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 May 1997 03:29:04 -0400
From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer@engin.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Secondary fermentation...
Generally, I'd agree that "session" ales don't need to be racked to a
second fermenter before packaging (this being what we homebrewers
incorrectly call a "secondary fermentation"). Big ales will benefit
from getting off the primary yeast & trub after a week or two, even
though they're not finished fermenting.
However (you knew that was coming, didn't you), there are
circumstances...
I made a "party beer" last week. Tonight, I racked it from the
plastic bucket to a carboy. Later this week, I'll keg it. Why?
Because it had big chunks of yeast and/or trub floating on top. These
will hopefully settle in the "secondary", and in any case more of them
will get left behind in the second racking.
It certainly didn't need any further fermentation. It went from an OG
of about 1.040 to a FG of 1.006. I think it's done. :-)
=Spencer Thomas in Ann Arbor, MI (spencer@umich.edu)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 04:23:53 -0500 (CDT)
From: Brad Kazmer <kazmerbn@vuse.vanderbilt.edu>
Subject: Got a Recipe?
I've searched Cat's Meow amongst others and haven't been able to find a
good clone recipe for Sam Adams Stock Ale. I would appreciate any help I
could get. Extract recipes preferred. Private e-mail okay. Will post
results. Thanks in advance.
Brad
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
| '|E Brad Kazmer |
| # kazmerbn@vuse.vanderbilt.edu |
| # |
| _#_ "Mister, I ain't a boy, no I'm a man, |
| ( # ) and I believe in the promised land" |
| / O \ |
| ( O ) -Bruce Springsteen, |
| ` ----- The Promised Land. |
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 May 1997 06:45:45 -0500 (EST)
From: eric fouch <S=fouch%G=eric%DDA=ID=STC021.efouch%0004972576@mcimail.com>
Subject: Mash Tun Insulation
- --Boundary (ID i.g+01I_ICREDA,R4K9-0MVK.4DGI2IG)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
- -----------------------------
Application message id: STC010 970501074243624061
Posted date: THU MAY 01, 1997 3:42 am GMT
Importance: Normal
Grade of Delivery: Normal
- -----------------------------
- --Boundary (ID i.g+01I_ICREDA,R4K9-0MVK.4DGI2IG)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Description: 7 BIT ASCII
Date: Thursday, 1 May 1997 7:41am ET
To: STC012.PREQUEST@STC010.SNADS
From: Eric.Fouch@STC001
Subject: Mash Tun Insulation
In-Reply-To: The letter of Friday, 25 April 1997 2:04am ET
HBD-
Just some anecdotal data on tun insulation- I built a neat little box to fit
around my tun out of 1/2" insulation. It didn't work well at all. The best
insulation system I found is to lay two beach towels down on the counter in an
"X". Then, set the pot down in the middle of the "X", and wrap the towels up
and around the mash tun. Works great, and is pretty cheap.
This weekend I'll be brewing up a Belgian brew, either a wit or an old strong
using Wyeast 1388. Any info on this yeast?
Eric Fouch
Bent Dick YactoBrewery
Kentwood MI
- --Boundary (ID i.g+01I_ICREDA,R4K9-0MVK.4DGI2IG)--
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 08:30:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: Barrowman@aol.com
Subject: garage sale draft system
My father (bless his heart) just picked a draft system at a garage sale for
$20. It was used to deliver soda to one of those bar server things with all
of the buttons on the nozzle. He has described it to me over the phone and
there is one piece that doesn't make sense. The system includes a pump the
has a name plate on it reading 'Carbonizer'. It has a brass body and 1/3 hp
motor. If it weren't for the name plate I would assume it would be used to
recirculate cleaning fluids through the lines. Does anyone know what this is
and what it might be used for?
Laura
Charlotte NC
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 May 1997 08:38:13 -0400
From: Russ Brodeur <r-brodeur@ds.mc.ti.com>
Subject: 135 F Rest in not-so-pale malts
Some of the recent discussions regarding head retention and body
enhancements (or lack thereof) due to use of a rest at 135'ish F has
once again piqued my interest. I believe this rest will indeed result
in beneficial high molecular weight protein (HMWP) degradation in PALE
malts, ie. lager and pilsner malts; but I am not so sure about the
benefits of using this rest with higher-kilned malts, such as pale ale,
Vienna, Munich etc. which are also commonly used base malts.
Are the proteolytic enzymes responsible for HMWP degradation denatured
in these malts during kilning and/or roasting??
This reminds me of an off-line discussion between myself, AlK and Steve
Alexander a few months back, but the question was never definitively
resolved. Since then, I have been incorporating ~10% pils malt to an
otherwise all-Munich grist to boost its "proteolytic power" (PP) and
using a 135-40 F rest. I also use a double-decoction mash schedule, so
I get a great deal of BA activity in this range as well. This procedure
has been yielding well-attenuated, crystal clear lagers, but I am not
100% sure HMWP degradation is responsible.
Does anyone out there have any information to share regarding the
proteolytic enzyme content of various malts, both pale and not-so pale??
TTFN
- --
Russ Brodeur in Franklin, MA
mailto:r-brodeur@ds.mc.ti.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 May 97 12:39:09 UT
From: "C&S Peterson" <CNS_PETERSON@msn.com>
Subject: Cornies/Mini-kegs/Biting Yeasties/Maris-Otter
HBDers -
As for a source of cheap cornies, I was able to get mine for $10 apiece from
my local Pepsi distributor. You have to call around a bit, but Pepsi is
trying to get rid of these things and were plenty happy to sell them for more
than what they'd get for scrap. They even ran the things through their
cleaning system (a caustic washer, I believe). I did replace the large 0
rings and the exterior 0 rings ($4/each for the large o-ring, Home Depo #9
rubber washer in the faucet dept for the in/out seals).
Before taking the cornie plunge, I developed a large inventory of mini-kegs
and taps. I definately recommend the metal tap if you go this route, but have
had plenty of problems with this kind of system. First, the kegs (I have the
Frass-Frisch varitey) tend to give the beer a tinny flavor after several uses.
I took one of these kegs apart and found small spots of exposed steel along
the seam. I only use iodaphor for cleaning/sterilizing, so I don't think
these rust spots were caused by my cleaning agents. Second, the taps
themselves tend to develop leaks. I would load a cartridge, dispense for a
few days (4 pints or so), and then find my beer flat -- no gas. When this
happened with my plastic tap, I eventually found that shear stress fracture
developed where the cartridge handle screws into the tap -- I almost shit my
pants when the thing broke free while I was screwing on a fresh cartridge! My
metal tap seems to work a bit better, but has also developed leaks around the
inlet. IMHO, the mini-taps aren't bad for a short term solution, but in the
long run it's cheaper to go with the cornie from the get go, since that's
probably where you'll end up.
I just wanted to add a datapoint to some of the discussions on yeast bite and
how long you can keep you beer on its yeast. I have keep beer on secondary
yeast for lenghy periods (like two months), but have taken steps to keep it
cool (<60F) without any problems. Now that I'm filtering some of my beers, I
have experienced another interesting phenomenon with suspended yeast. An
experienced German-trained brewmaster (from Fordham BC in Annapolis, MD) once
told me that there is a slight harsh bitterness that yeast will contribute,
and that is one reason he likes to filter via DE (nominally a 5u filter).
So armed with my cartridge filter, this year I compared several bottled
versions of the same beer -- one version unfined and unfilted, one version
filtered and bottle conditioned with a small amount of yeast/sugar. I noted
that the filtered/bottled conditioned beer had a somewhat less bitter flavor
than the unfined and unfiltered beer. So, the lesson (for me anyway) is that
if you plan to filter, you need to add a few more IBUs to the kettle if you
are working from a recipe designed for unfilted/unfined beer. I guess if I
were to do this again, I'd like to see if there is a difference between a
fined beer and a filtered one -- maybe next year!
This year I have brewed extensivly with many varieties of Beeston Malts,
including Maris Otter Pale Ale, Golden Promise Lager, and Halyceon (sic). I
initially had trouble with the Maris Otter during sparge, but found that I was
simply grinding the grain too closely. My theory is that these malts grind
very easily, so it "feels" like you aren't working hard enough when you are
cranking on the mill handle. My reaction was to close the gap on my mill till
it "felt" right, and I ended up creating too much flour. Since adjusting my
mill back to its "Klages" setting, I have had no problem with stuck sparges.
FWIW, I use a slotted manifold in my mash/lauder tun. The only thing I
noticed with the Beeston malts is that they are a little short on conversion
power. So if I'm including say a pound of barley flakes in the mash, I'll use
a pound of Briess Klages in the grist.
Chas Peterson
Laytonsville, Md
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 08:16:57 -0500
From: deck@pathbox.wustl.edu (Brian Deck)
Subject: Hefeweisen
Hey Folks:
I don't recall anyone ever talking about homebrewing a hefeweisen,
or maybe I don't pay enough attention. Anyways, do any of you make them?
I have collected a few hefewiesen yeasts (ie. Paulaner, Franziskaner (sp?),
even Michelob) that I could easily propigate. Now, both the Paulaner and
Michelob state on the bottle that they are ales, and I must admit I was
never sure if a hefewiesen yeast was ale yeast or lager yeast. If I wanted
to make an extract batch, I assume I would just substitue wheat malt
extract plus some hops (what hops are in authentic hefeweisen?) and brew
and bottle it as if it were a standard ale...or should it treated
differently?
Thanks in advance for any sagery,
Brian Deck
"I drank what?"
-Socrates
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 May 97 09:15:00 EDT
From: "Bridges, Scott" <bridgess@mmsmtp.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM>
Subject: re: Brew Clubs
George De Piro writes:
> I believe it was Pat Babcock who started this thread by telling us
> about the great guest speakers at the Princeton area homebrew club. I
> thought that some of you who are just starting your own clubs might
> find this interesting, so I'll talk about some of my experience.
[snip]
> I hope this was useful to somebody, have fun!
George and others,
While this discussion may outside the normal bounds of this group, I'd like
to encourage it. Maybe as an off-line email-type exchange. Our club seems
to struggle with ways to keep things lively. We are in a relatively small
city (Columbia, SC) and have not been able to attract a large number of
members. We have about 20 regulars and a number of others who attend
sporadically. With this small number of people involved, it's difficult to
pull of anything that takes a large amount of organization. I'm very
interested in hearing about what other clubs do for programs and activities.
As the brand-new president, I want to make some things happen for the club.
If anyone has some specifics about stuff you do that works (i.e., fun,
educational, fund-raising, etc), please send email. If there is any
interest, I'd like to generate some off line dialogue. I'll post a summary
unless there is a major objection.
Scott Bridges
President, Palmetto State Brewers
scott.bridges@columbiasc.ncr.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 08:32:11 -0400
From: Dave Bartz <gbrewer@iquest.net>
Subject: Homebrew potency & flat brew
Brewing madmen/madwomen
Eugene Sonn asked
>>I've been brewing for over 5 years and one thing continues to
surprise me about homebrew is how quickly you may feel its alcohol
affecting your system........... Are there any explanations for this? Is
the alcohol in homebrew more easily metabolized than in commercial beer?<<
I've def. noticed this as well and in rapping with homebrewing friends, we
have concluded that it must be the relative freshness of the alcohol. Is
the younger alcohol more potent. My guess is yes.
Ellery Samuels asks:
>I recently made an IPA using extract with specialty grains. Followed
procedure that I've successfully used for 8 other batches. This time the beer
came out flat (minimal carbonation) and there was NO head in glass when pored.
Any suggestions as to what happened? The beer has been in the bottle for wo
weeks now and I plan on leaving a while longer to see if there is some
improvement. Do you think that will help?<
This could be the result of a number things. First of all I would be
patient. It will more than likely become more carbonated as time goes on.
This of course depends on the amount and type of primer you used. Also,
serving temperature of the brew dictates how much CO2 stays dissolved in the
beer. If there is any oil or soap that has been inadvertently introduced
into the beer this would have an negative impact on the quality of head and
carbonation as well.
Dave Bartz
The Gourmet Brewer
"Beer is Good" - 5000 BC
Thanks and keep on brewin'.
Dave Bartz (Prez)
The Gourmet Brewer
P.O. Box 20688
Indianapolis, IN 46220-0688
Visa, Mastercard, A E and Discover welcomed.
(317)924-0747
(800)860-1200 X166739
e-mail:gbrewer@iquest.net
Home of Bartz' Beer Brewery
"Beer is good" - Unknown, around 5000 B.C.
OOOOOO
OOOOOOOO
/_| OOOOOO
// | OOO
\\_| OO |
\_| O|
|______|
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 May 1997 13:30:10 +0000 (GMT)
From: DAVE BRADLEY IC742 6-7932 <BRADLEY_DAVID_A@LILLY.COM>
Subject: Yeast Autolysis
Nathan writes that he has 'yeast bite' in some of his beers, and
wonders if this is similar to the autolysis I've been troubled with.
I _think_ I've tasted beers with 'yeast bite', some older bottle
conditioned beers of homebrew and commercial origin. To me it is
a taste something like a powdery sourdough bread, but that's just me.
I can unequivocally say I have autolysis in my beers. The yeast slurry
I have collected (see original post) is repugnantly sulfurous.
This taste _fades_ over a period of months from the actual beer, but
there is a hint of this exact flavor residual in some of my lighter
beers. I believe this autolysis is emphasized in my conical bottom
fermenter because the yeast cake is 2-4" deep, and the bottom layers
of yeast are quickly compacted and deprived of nutrients. Commercial
conical systems have coolant on the cones. Can anyone tell me if such
commercial systems have the cones cooled below the temp of the actual
fermentation? IE, are the cones held at 50F and the beer at 60-65F?
What other factors do we know may induce autolysis within 1-2 weeks?
Oxygen levels? Metals? Use of gelatin? Thanks for your help!
db
------------------------------
Date: 1 May 1997 09:43:01 -0400
From: "John Penn" <john_penn@spacemail.jhuapl.edu>
Subject: Small Batches and Recipes
Subject: Time:9:11 AM
OFFICE MEMO Small Batches and Recipes Date:5/1/97
Recently I've seen requests for recipes like SNPA which are on the Cats
Meow. I hope everyone in HBD knows where to find those at
http://alpha.rollanet.org/cm3/CatsMeow3.html.
As for small batches I could not relate to that one homebrewer who makes 5
gallon batches and throws some away to make a small batch. I'm trying to keep
expenses down so I'd rather scale it down, especially when trying a new recipe
that I'm not sure if I'll like or not. I once made a 1 gallon batch to see if
I liked liquid smoke and would probably do likewise for extracts like spruce
or hazelnut in the future. I scale linearly except for hops which I use
Rager's formula to compensate for bittering hops in concentrated boils, such
as boiling a 2 gallon extract version of a 5 gallon all grain full boil for
instance:
I hope I get this right. If not, check the Brewery pages. For a 45 minute
boil (Rager)
IBUs = 74.62 * HBUs * 0.269 / (total gallons) (((est OG - 1) * concentration
factor) - 0.05)/0.2 + 1)
Step 1) Calculate expected gravity of original recipe, then calculate expected
gravity of scaled down recipe and iterate to match gravity. I use 34 ppg for
liquid extract, 45 ppg for dry extract, and 20 ppg for crystal malts. Miller
and Papazian have numbers for other adjuncts.
Step 2) Compensate bittering hops for a change in the boil concentration. If
you scale a 3 gallon batch from a 5 gallon batch and keep the boil
volume/final volume ratio the same, just scale the hops by 3/5! When
adjusting for a change in boil concentration, for a 2 gallon boil of a 5
gallon all grain batch it usually works out to about 25% more hops than what
is called for in a full boil. Use Ragers to be more precise.
Hope this helps, I've mostly made 3 gallon batches but I've used this
technique to scale a 5 gallon batch upwards too!
John Penn
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 May 1997 09:47:17 -0400
From: "Nathan L. Kanous II" <nkanous@tir.com>
Subject: Gelatin Clarifier
George DiPiro mentions his positive results while using gelatin
as a clarifying agent in the secondary. Two questions.
First, will this leave enough yeast in suspension for natural
carbonation? I suspect it will, but will this lead to the
second problem. You've taken care of your problem in the
fermentor, will the yeast in suspension recur when the beer is
subsequently bottled and naturally carbonated? Does this become
an exercise for force carbonated keg beer only? This relates
to my question yesterday about finings and Wyeast Thames and
London yeasts. TIA.
Nathan in Frankenmuth, MI
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 10:19:55 -0400
From: Matt Harper <matth@bedford.progress.com>
Subject: Help me clarify myself!
Ok, I'm a bonehead.
Made a nice (I hope) Belgian Dubbel this weekend and forgot to put
the Irish Moss into the boil. It is still fermenting away nicely
and I'm trying to decide what, if anything, I might do at this point
to help clear up the brew before I bottle it.
I see a couple of possibles:
1) Boil up the Moss and add it. Won't get the full affect, but due
to the way it works (positive <-> negative ion attraction) I
should still get some benefit
2) Use some geletin or some other 'normally-added-to-the-fermentor'
approach
3) Chill the snot out of it and review when the dust (yeast) settles
4) Just ignore it and claim any haze is due to the 1 lb of wheat I
added that was in the recipe. :-)
Any and all help appreciated!
-Matth
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 May 1997 09:51:49 -0400
From: dharsh@alpha.che.uc.edu (David C. Harsh)
Subject: Corked Beer Flavor / Vienna&Maerzen Info
Greetings collective-
I've noticed an off flavor in Biere de Gardes (Jade, opened last
night) and Belgian ales (Roman Dobbelen, had about 6 mos ago) that are in
corked bottles. Specifically, the taste is metallic and the aroma is quite
reminiscent of "moldy corks" in a too old bottle of white wine. I'm
curious if beers tend to dissolve flavor and aroma components from the
corks if they are too old. I know that some compounds are water soluble (I
remember doing an extraction from cork in organic chemistry) - the question
is whether this is a rapid process.
Personally, I know that wines need to be stored with the cork wet
to insure a good seal and prevent oxidation and I've always assumed that
the same would go for beers.
Has anyone else noticed this? I'm somehow suspecting that its
because the beers are too old.
- -----------------------------
I'm looking for information about recipe formulation for Vienna and
Maerzen styles. I've read the AHA style volume and found it to be fairly
unhelpful. Any other sources that people recommend?
Dave Harsh
Cincinnati, OH
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 11:50:46 -0400
From: Eamonn McKernan <eamonn@atmosp.physics.utoronto.ca>
Subject: Great Canadian Homebrew Competition correction / web page
Sorry about this folks, seems Michael Stirrup of Wellington will NOT be
speaking at the conference. We're still finalising speakers since we had
so many good suggestions.
I'm sorry about the message format too. One of my e-mails was
fine, the other wasn't. Go figure.
Thanks for all the Black and Tan discussion earlier. Beer is truly a
mysterious creation. Time for more study...
- ----------------
On another note, CABA (the Canadian Amateur Brewers Assoc.) is looking for a
volunteer to design and or maintain a web page. We're non-profit, and
operate on a small budget, so this would be an unpaid position (as are
all CABA positions). Anyone interested please contact me at the address
below.
Cheers,
Eamonn McKernan
CABA Secretary
eamonn@atmosp.physics.utoronto.ca
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 12:06:02 -0400
From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: Stupid Questions, Poor eyes
Brewsters:
"Charles Rich" says about my comment on poor quality experiments and
drawing earth-shaking conclusions from a single poorly constructed
experiment:
" The only stupid question is the unasked one"
Of course, I agree 100% with this, but it has NOTHING to do with my comment
at all. Had Charlie said "I got these results and I don't quite understand
them in light of brewing technology I have read." That is very legitimate
and I encourage these sorts of questions as you do. But to say that all
brewing technology, enzyme holds, etc. should be questioned as a result of
one poorly constructed and carried out experiment, as Charlie did, is what
I objected strongly to and still do.
- ---------------------------------------------------
John Wilkinson, Wilkerson or whatever of Grapevine,TX sent me this note (
after the double carats) and I responded as indicated ( after the single
carats):
>John,
>> I was just chuckling over Scott Dornseif's response to your misspelling
>> his name.
>I have to admit I didn't understand it that way, just thought he was being
funny and I laughed along.
>> I don't know if this applies to you but I am the owner of a
>> rather old pair of eyes
>It does! Been brewing since before it was legal.
>> and unless things are at the right viewing distance,
>> an "eif" could easily be taken for an "ett". Wait until their eyes get
stuck
>> at one focus, then they may understand.
>May they live that long!
>Thanks for your comment.
>If you don't mind I'll pass this above note, properly documented to HBD as
a form of apology. Any problems?
John didn't mind and said his name was often being mis-spelled also. I do
not like to mis-spell anyone's name and apologize to Scott DornseIF as well
as anyone else whose name these tired eyes have mis-read. Let me know,
please, but I guess you'll have to be more direct than Scott. Maybe its
not just my eyes that are tired! {8^)
- ---------------------------------------------------------
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
103164.3202@compuserve.com
Dave_Burley@compuserve.com
Voice e-mail OK
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 May 1997 09:45:29 -0800
From: Darren Gaylor <dwgaylor@pacifier.com>
Subject: Corn Grits or Meal
I plan on making some lawnmower beer using corn as an adjunct.
I've used flaked maize before but want to try a double mash with
a non-gelatanized corn adjunt. The bulk food section of our grocery
store carries both corn meal and grits. Which would be better
for brewing purposes?
Darren
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 11:41:13 -0500
From: cory@okway.okstate.edu (Cory Chadwell)
Subject: Pin Lock and Ball lock connectors
THX to the collective,
Aside from some good natured ribbing for missing the painfully obvious
I now feel confident that I can now tell a pin lock from a ball lock
connector. I decided to pass along the info in case anyone else going
to keg has the question sometime. The info is as follows...
Ball locks look like:
The attachment points on the keg have a little groove running around
their circumference. The connector has a spring-loaded sleeve with
little ball-bearings inside. It is attached by putting your thumb on
top of the connector, pull up on the sleeve -- this takes the pressure
off the little ball bearings. Push down on the keg connection point,
and let the sleeve go. The sleeve going down should force the little
ball bearings to lock into the groove on the attachment point.
Pin lock connectors:
The attachment points on the keg have pins sticking out of the sides,
near the base. 2 on the gas in and 3 on the liquid out.
Thanks to all for finding delicate ways of saying "Hey goofball, pin
lock connectors have pins!!!" :)
THX, Cory
Black Cat White Stripe Homebrew
"It might seem like a skunk but I swear it's not!"
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 10:33:07 -0700 (PDT)
From: Kevin Kane <kkane@uidaho.edu>
Subject: Piranha solutions
A word of caution about mixing acid or base with hydrogen
peroxide: be sure to use GLOVES and GOGGLES when mixing or using this
stuff. Even with the 3% H2O2 available to the public, this stuff is
aggressive. It's true that "piranha solution" is an excellent cleaner
for glass, but in my laboratory we discourage it's use because of the
risks.
More importantly, don't use the "more is better" approach with
this stuff. Keep the amounts small, because the mixing can generate LOTS
of heat. I once diluted acid with water IN a carboy and cracked the
bottom from the heat generated. Do not mix Piranha with ammonia or
bleach, either.
Brew on!
Kevin M. Kane, Ph.D.
Department of Chemistry
University of Idaho
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 15:19:20 -0400 (EDT)
From: SClaus4688@aol.com
Subject: botulism redux (OH NO!)
"It was the salmon mousse!" -Mr. Death (from Monty Python's "The Meaning of
Life").
Anyone up for a congenial discussion of botulism?
Okay, before I get into this, I just want to say I'm really, really, really
sorry to reopen this can of worms. I saw a post last week (from Dave Burley)
mentioning botulism potential in boiling water bath canned wort. Having used
the boiling water bath method for several years, I became concerned that it
may be only a matter of time before I unwittingly serve my friends a batch of
Jonestown Punch Ale. I subsequently searched prior HBDs for a discussion of
botulism, and,
wow, I certainly found it. As some prior debate was contentious, I truly
hesitated bringing it up again (I'm now setting my flame shield at maximum).
However, as it's literally a matter of life and death, I think additional
discussion is warranted.
It is clear from the prior posts that the toxin created by botulism infection
is outrageously powerful and, for that reason, although it is very rare, the
risk cannot be ignored. It was also clear from those posts that canned wort
appears to have characteristics that make it a candidate for botulism
infection (e.g., pH above 4.6, presence of vacuum to encourage anaerobic
activity, thin enough consistency that "water movement" is not impeded).
However, having scanned the internet, I found no reported case or study of
botulism infection in wort. I find this unusual, given
the considerable body of microbiological research done on the various
bacteria that can spoil wort. This, together with the fact that no one
apparently has died from wildly fermented Belgian ales, makes me wonder the
following:
1) The toxin created by botulism infection is known to be heat labile. How
stable is it in other respects? Does it degrade in the presence of oxygen?
If so, would it be dissipated by a couple days in a well aerated yeast
starter? Similarly, do alcohol, carbon dioxide or any other
products/byproducts of fermentation have any affect on the toxin?
2) Botulism's toxin seems adept at killing just about any living organism it
encounters. Will it kill yeast? If so, could a non-starting yeast starter
function as a "canary in a coal mine" that would warn us of the presence of
the toxin?
3) The literature I found on the internet focuses on canned meat and
vegetables as the hosts for botulism infection. Is there any difference in
the chemical makeup of these items from that of wort which makes them more
hospitable to botulism (e.g., presence of unconverted starch in vegetables,
absence of some substance that is isomerized out of hops into wort ...)?
4) Most of the HBDers involved in the prior discussion of this said "I'm no
microbiologist, but ..." Well, I know there are some microbiologists who
read the HBD, and maybe they could give some input. Possibly, someone could
innoculate a beer wort sample with Clostridium botulinum and see what
happens!
5) The prior discussion said something about mortality of heat resistant
bacteria increasing with the length of exposure to 100C temperatures. Is it
possible to eliminate botulism risk in canned wort by simply increasing
processing time? If so, what is the proper processing time? (Note that this
is a more viable option for wort than for vegetables or meat, which would
likely be cooked to mush by long processing times).
6) There was a difference of opinion in the prior discussion on whether gases
would be given off during botulism toxin production. Such gases would either
swell the jar lid or give off smells that would warn against use. What's the
straight answer on this?
7) As others have noted, the two most popular homebrew texts seem to be
completely oblivious to any potential botulism danger from storing wort that
isn't pressure canned. From a liability standpoint, I would guess their
publishers would be concerned if they were disseminating info that could lead
to the tragic death of an entire party of beer drinkers. Has anyone tried to
contact Dave M. or Charlie P. about this?
I'll shut up now (and let the fur fly).
-Steve "I didn't mean to kill 'em" Claussen in PDX
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 1 May 97 15:39:32 CDT
From: jwilkins@imtn.tpd.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson)
Subject: RE: Gelatin as a clarifier
George De Piro said:
>I have read that gelatin is not the best clarifier to use on its own,
>simply because it doesn't work well. My recent experience with it is
>somewhat different, however.
I have to agree with George, I have been using gelatin alone as a clarifier
for the past several months and have been experiencing crystal clear beer.
I use Irish moss in the kettle but always have. I have not done any scientific
experiments to know for certain it is the gelatin but will on a batch I have in
two secondaries. I will fine one and not the other and compare them over time.
If one turns out cloudy I can always fine it later.
I have noticed a remarkable clarity in my beers, however, and it coincides with
my use of gelatin.
John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkinson@imtn.dsccc.com
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2410, 05/02/97
*************************************
-------
