Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2567
HOMEBREW Digest #2567 Wed 26 November 1997
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org
Many thanks to the Observer & Eccentric Newspapers of
Livonia, Michigan for sponsoring the Homebrew Digest.
URL: http://www.oeonline.com
Contents:
Datapoint on hop pellets/Philly area brewpubs ("Mark Nelson")
Water Softeners (JeffHailey)
Re: re: Boiling Specialty Grains (Steve Jackson)
air filter for aquarium pump ("Neal Parker")
Mississippi Microbreweries?? (Bob Tisdale)
First All-Grain/Justification/Priming Question (Andrew Ager)
kegging problem (Torque)
Oats? (Joseph Kallo)
Mississippi Micros (Eric Pendergrass)
looking for contests ("MICHAEL L. TEED")
Re: bubblegum & Brettanomyces (Al Korzonas)
RIMS sparging methods (Hans Geittmann)
Kegging question ("Kevin W. Aylor")
Air space replaced with Argon gas ("Layne and Katrise")
Brewing with corn sugar (John Wilkinson)
Traquair House Ale Attempt (Charles Burns)
RE: Rousing the wee beasties (John Wilkinson)
Wives and Brew (David A Bradley)
3 weeks of starters/female brewers (Al Korzonas)
Stout Efficiency, Extract Potential of Dark Grains (Rob Kienle)
Rock Bottom Brewery (was GABF sort of...) ("Michel J. Brown")
How do I clean the inside of an Aluminum pot? (Bob Sweeney)
Fermentation Temperatures (Jorge Blasig - IQ)
re: Nitrogen Dispensing (Jpilhoefer)
RE: Leaving Beer on Sediment ("Michael E. Dingas")
Re: Leaving Beer on Sediment ("Pat Babcock")
Announcement: 1998 Hail to Ale, AHA Club Only Competition (BernardCh)
NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS: hbd.org
Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew@hbd.org
(Articles are published in the order they are received.)
If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!!
To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to homebrew-request@hbd.org.
**SUBSCRIBE AND UNSUBSCRIBE REQUESTS MUST BE SENT FROM THE E-MAIL
**ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!
IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, the autoresponder and
the SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE commands will fail!
For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to brewery@realbeer.com
Homebrew Digest Information on the Web: http://hbd.org
Requests for back issues will be ignored. Back issues are available via:
Anonymous ftp from...
hbd.org /pub/hbd
ftp.stanford.edu /pub/clubs/homebrew/beer
E-mail...
ftpmail@gatekeeper.dec.com (send a one-line e-mail message with
the word help for instructions.)
AFS users can find it under...
/afs/ir.stanford.edu/ftp/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer
JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 08:51:19 -0500
From: "Mark Nelson" <menelson@mindspring.com>
Subject: Datapoint on hop pellets/Philly area brewpubs
Aaron S. asks about pellet hops. Here's a datapoint from an kit, then
recipe, then partial mash and now all-grain brewer. I can say that after
two successful all-grain batches, with only two (count 'em) stuck sparges.
(in case you're interested, one from my phalse bottom coming unconnected -
replaced flimsy hose with old racking can - and two from me letting my
sparge water drop to about 140 - restarted by mixing with couple of quarts
boiling water. Efficiency suffered on that one, but still got about 67%)
Anyway back to the question.
-<big snip>
-I then tried pouring the cooled wort through my funnel, straining out the
-hop slime. It was soon coated, and I resorted to a method of pour, clean
the
-strainer, pour, clean the strainer...
I've never been very successful with pellet hops and siphoning them out. To
make a short story long, I resort to funneling everything into the primary,
letting the ferment go with all that trub for the first 3 or so days, then
going to secondary. I figure this gets the beer off of the trub before it
can cause too many problems.
-1. Did I need to worry about separating the pellet hops from the wort for
-fermentation? Should I have done a trub removal by putting the wort in my
-carboy for 12-hours, and then immediately racking into my primary fermenter
-instead?
To me this is optional, and gives any infection a longer time to get
started. But, if your wort stability is high, and you're using large
starters and aerating properly after the transfer, your total lag time (say
12 hours, plus 4 before active fermentation starts) should be okay, though.
Give it a try if you're worried about my Keep-It-Simple approach above.
-2. Should I use the whole hops instead? Are they easier to work with?
Whole hops are definitely easier to siphon around, so if that is your major
concern then "Yes". But, they tend to trap more wort and (according to the
experts out there) can't be stored as well. Your choice really - I use both
depending on what I feel like buying, but primarily pellets.
-3. Is it better to siphon out of the boiler? I like the idea of using the
-"inline aerator" so siphoning seems attractive. I thought the "whirlpool"
-and siphoning through a bag would work, but...
I siphon when I use whole hops, but just funnel if using pellets. I haven't
done too many batches with both whole and pellets, by the way. A combined
hop bill might make for a good compromise.
- -------------------------------------
On an unrelated note, I'm off to Philadelphia for the Thanksgiving weekend.
Have searched HBD archives and PubCrawler.com. Any personalized
recommendations on brewpubs and beer stores would be appreciated. Private
e-mail to menelson@mindspring.com would be appreciated.
- -------------------------------------
Mark Nelson
Atlanta, Georgia, USA
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 09:05:33 -0500 (EST)
From: JeffHailey@aol.com
Subject: Water Softeners
Hello All! It's been awhile since I've written to the
brewing collective, or since I've had the chance to brew
for that matter. In the last 2 months, I've picked up
my roots and moved from Tulsa down to the Austin, Texas
area. I can now participate in my hobby legally! Also,
I can buy homebrew supplies here at reasonable prices.
Well, it's too late for my latest batch (I just HAD to
brew this weekend), but I need to know if anyone out
there knows what a water softener does to the water? The
house that I'm renting has one of those installed, and I
know absolutely nothing about it.
Thanks,
Jeff Hailey
Now brewing in Austin
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 06:06:28 -0800 (PST)
From: Steve Jackson <stevejackson@rocketmail.com>
Subject: Re: re: Boiling Specialty Grains
In HBD No. 2565 (Nov. 24), Charley Burns wrote:
>The common recommendation is to bring a
>few (2-3) gallons of water to 170F, place the cracked grains in a
>muslim bag
>into the pot and let them steep for about 30 minutes.
(Sarcasm mode on)
This is an interesting suggestion, but I'm unclear as to what a
"muslim" bag is, and whether or not Islamic leaders approve of such
usage of their bags.
(Sarcasm mode off)
Steve in Indianapolis (for the benefit of Jeff in Ann Arbor)
__________________________________________________________________
Sent by Yahoo! Mail. Get your free e-mail at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 08:56:34 -0500
From: "Neal Parker" <Neal.Parker.nsparker@nt.com>
Subject: air filter for aquarium pump
Where could I buy / How could I make a simple filter for my aquarium air
pump? Miller talks about an ultra-fine ceramic disk he used in-line to
prevent air-borne crap from infecting the wort as you aerate. Where
could you get one?
The only time I used my air pump I got an infected mess (which was the
ONLY batch I ever dumped). I'm back to shaking half full carboys now
but even that exposes the wort to wild yeasts and bacteria (or at least
I imagine in my most sanitation paranoid mind).
It's very tempting to chalk the air pump up to one to many gadgets and
leave it until the kids get a fish tank but I'd like to hear some HBD
opinion on the little beast.
P.S: 5 USG of boiling wort to 75 deg.F in 20 minutes with no cooler
yesterday. No trick except split the batch into two 5 USG enameled
canning pots and plop them into the double sink with lots of ice and
change the water often. Easier on the stove too.
Neal Parker
Senior Packaging Engineer
New Product Development Engineering Group
Nortel Microwave Modules
Nortel North America
OTTAWA, Ontario, Canada
Tel: (613) 763-9008 (Internal: ESN393-9008)
fax: (613) 763-8220
e-mail: nsparker@nortel.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 09:21:05 -0500
From: rtisdale@entomology.msstate.edu (Bob Tisdale)
Subject: Mississippi Microbreweries??
Ken Smith writes,
I have a friend going down to Mississippi (Jackson to be specific).
He has agreed to bring me back a six pack of beer from there. I am
not familiar with the local micros there and he knows nothing about
beer. So, if anyone has any suggestions for local or regional brews
from that area. I am most interested in British style pale ales,
stouts and porters. Please reply via E-mail... Thanks!
Well Ken,
Sorry to disappoint you, but there are no breweries, let alone
microbreweries, here in Mississippi. It is not legal to brew beer in this
state. There are, however, two wineries in Mississippi, but they can only
make wine from the native muscidine grape. There are still dry counties in
Mississippi. The town I live in does not allow the sale of cold beer at
all or the sale of beer on Sundays. The State Legislature has not yet
ratified the Federal Homebrewing Law of 1977/78?, so homebrewing is not
legal (thank goodness it is not enforced). However, Mississippi is
catching up with the rest of the Nation in other social issues; The State
Legislature recently (December 1994) ratified the Emancipation Proclimation
and I understand that a leash law for dogs is next on their agenda.
You will probably have to wait some time for a microbrewery.
Kep'n an eye out fer dem dadburn revenuers,
Bob Tisdale
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 09:32:29 -0600
From: Andrew Ager <andrew-ager@nwu.edu>
Subject: First All-Grain/Justification/Priming Question
Greetings all,
I finally got that first all-grain batch done! Damn, that was fun. I
decided to keep it small, so I brewed 2 gallons of a basic pale ale. I
wanted to keep things under control, and it worked. Mashed in a kettle in
the oven, used my Phil's mini-tun to sparge (worked VERY well!). I am
officially hooked. Glad I finally stepped up.
Seeing as hwo I spent most of Sunday afternoon in the kitchen (best part of
a 2-gallon batch: only 4.5 hrs start to finish, plus a little extra to
clean up later), I though I might add my 2 cents on the approval thing.
I'm a lucky man: my SO enjoys the fact that I brew. If everything's
cleaned up afterwards, there's no problem. I throw my lot in with the
hobbyists: hobbies cost money. Homebrewing is a relatively cheap one,
after equipment expenses (and thsoe can be mitigated). My SO, for example,
knits. Yarn ain't cheap, nor can a sweater be finished in an afternoon.
Monetary savings are slight to nonexistent -- there's just the satisfaction
of having made something yourself.
A question for later on: somewhere I read a formula for determining the
amount of sugar to prime beer with, expressed in grams/gallon. As I have
on odd-sized batch (probably more like 1.6 gallons), I'd like to know if
anyone has that formula on hand. Will make bottling day a little less
painful...
Cheers,
Andy Ager Brewer, beer geek, free-lance historian.
Hair of the Cat Brewery
Chicago, IL
http://www.devnull.net/~andy (slowly but surely in development)
"The Puritanical nonsense of excluding children and -- therefore --
to some extent women from pubs has turned these places into mere
boozing shops instead of the family gathering places that they ought to be."
--George Orwell
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 11:44:39 -0800
From: Torque <wieleba@pce.net>
Subject: kegging problem
I Have a small problem with kegging. I have 3 kegs hooked up using tee's
in the co2 lines. Currently a stout, IPA and a Pils. Problem is this:
The stout and IPA have a very low carbonation rate, almost cask like
and the pils did have a high carbonation rate. When all three are hooked
up together the co2 eventually leaves the pils and disperses to the
stout and ipa, any way, does anybody know where i can get in-line check
balls or 1 way valves to prevent this?
Dan, Brewing in the burbs of Buffalo
- --
*************************************************
Because Life is Too Important to Drink Shitty Beer
http://www.pce.net/wieleba/beerlink.htm
*************************************************
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 97 09:54:04 -0600
From: Joseph Kallo <jkallo@snaefell.tamu.edu>
Subject: Oats?
> Several of their *extract* kits contained unmalted adjuncts,
like
> flaked barley and oats. I would have thought this quite
appropriate
> in a pLambic (pseudo-Lambic) kit, but these kits were for
stouts!
Okay, now I'm worried. Whats wrong with unmalted adjuncts? I am
biting my fingernails waiting for my oatmeal stout to finish
conditioning. If the grain is geletanized (as I assume the flaking
process does, as per Papazian) and added as an adjunct before the
wort is boiled (and removed when it does), why is there risk for
infection? And why would someone worry much about haze in a stout?
As for starchy beer not being very good, I assumed that it was just
the starch content that gave an outmeal stout its characteristic
mouth feel. Is this incorrect? This is my second batch brewed, so
bear with me if my questions display my ignorance.
Joe Kallo
Down here in good ol' College Station Texas.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 10:57:21 -0600
From: Eric Pendergrass <eap@netdoor.com>
Subject: Mississippi Micros
It was written in HBD 2565:
I am not familiar with the local micros there and he knows nothing
about
beer. So, if anyone has any suggestions for local or regional brews
from that area.
Ken Smith
Ken, unfortunately you won't find any micros anywhere in MS. Beer
brewing is illegal in our state (though I'm not sure about wine). A
microbrewery bill came up in the state legislature earlier this year,
but failed due to the interests of the larger beer distributors and
fears of lost business by local beer sellers. What a shame.
If your friend has the time, I would recommend a sidetrip either to
Memphis or New Orleans. The Crescent City brewpub has some very good
local brews.
- --Eric Pendergrass
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 10:53:31 -0600
From: "MICHAEL L. TEED" <MS08653@msbg.med.ge.com>
Subject: looking for contests
.int homebrew@hbd.org
Greetings to the collective,
Im looking to get into some contests this year, its about time I get
some creative criticisms on my beers. Is there a place for me to find
listings of upcoming contests? I see some of them posted here, but
certainly there needs to be more. Is there a list of eligible contests
for the midwest homebrewer of the year or other contests of stature?
Any info would be appreciated.
Mike Teed, Dousman, WI ms08653@msbg.med.ge.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 11:28:43 -0600 (CST)
From: Al Korzonas <korz@xnet.com>
Subject: Re: bubblegum & Brettanomyces
George writes:
> Al K. writes about bubblegum being caused by the yeast Brettanomyces.
> This is not in line with my experience. While I totally agree that
> bubblegum is caused by yeast, I have fermented with Brett., and the
> resulting beer was not at all bubblegummy.
>
> Many subspecies of Saccharomyces yeast can produce bubblegum aromas
> (many Weizen strains and wild strains). Yeasts that do not normally
> produce bubblegum aromas can make it if they are abused
> (under-pitched, unaerated, high fermentation temp...).
>
> To my nose, Brett. contributes an earthy kind of character that some
> describe as "horsy." I am friends with a person that spends time with
> horses and also brews, and she doesn't think Brett character is at all
> "horsy." Perhaps that term was used by someone who had never been in
> a barn, and imagined that's what it was like, and now others use it,
> too. Just a theory.
I've used perhaps 50 strains of Saccharomyces over the years and I don't
recall a bubblegum aroma from any of them. However, if you smell Orval,
you will notice that "bubblegum" is a very strong component of its aroma.
I was lucky enough to culture the yeast from Orval that produces that
characteristic aroma. There are four things that lead me to believe that
this "bubblegum" yeast is Brettanomyces:
* it is extremely slow-growing (takes three months to ferment a 1.050 wort),
* and it is an acid producer,
* it is very attenuative, and
* I've read from Paul Edwards' posts that there is a Brettanomyces yeast in
the mix of yeasts that Orval uses to get its characteristic aroma.
Perhaps there is a strain of Saccharomyces yeast that produces these aromas,
but I have not run across it. I agree that it is Brettanomyces that is
responsible for the "horsey" or "horseblanket" aroma in Lambics/Lambieks,
but I believe that it only manifests itself after many months and that
*initially* several Brettanomyces yeasts that I've tried (from commercial
yeast labs) are intensely fruity.
In summary, I believe we both may be right.
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 10:12:24 -0800
From: Hans Geittmann <hans@whiterocks.com>
Subject: RIMS sparging methods
Dustin Norlund writes:
I mash using a RIMS system, I was talking to a guy at the local HB
meeting and he mentioned the following.
Instead of starting a sparge right after mash out he reccomended filling
the mash back up and starting another 5 minute RIMS cycle, then starting
the sparge. I have used this method two times now and seem to get a
better result in terms of extraction.
But, what are the drawbacks? Are there any? I have not drank the beer
yet so I dont know the full story?
Any comments?
+++
I sparge with my RIMS by piping the sparge water from my HLT (gott
cooler) to a T in the hose between the heater chamber and the return
manifold.
When I first started using the system I would sparge by first pulling
the manifold out of the mash tun, taking the hose off the heater chamber
and attaching it to the HLT. My concern was that I had to stop running
the pump and pull the manifold out of the grainbed before I could start
sparging, which could disturb the grain bed some. I haven't noticed
significant increases in efficiency- it's more of a convenience issue.
Taste is about the same as well, damn good.
When I want to start sparging, I open the valve that moves sweet wort
to the boil kettle, open the valve on my HLT and set my temperature
controller to 168 for the mash out- sparge water enters, and the wort
either recirculates or enters the boil kettle- it takes a little
practive twittling the valves just right to get good flow rates in all
the right directions. After about 1/2 the sparge water has been emptied
into it, I close the valve that allows wort to recirculate, so then the
sparge becomes a "normal" sparge with only sparge water entering and
sweet wort leaving the mash tun.
Hans
- --
Hans Geittmann (brewing in Palo Alto, CA)
hans@whiterocks.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 13:34:34 -0500
From: "Kevin W. Aylor" <kwa2r@nospam.avery.med.virginia.edu>
Subject: Kegging question
I have Kegged a few batches now and I just haven't been real happy with the
result. I just don't seem to get the mouth feel carbonation that I got
from bottle conditioning. I get plenty of foam but the beer just seems to
have little if any carbonation. I just do the standard kegging procedure,
35psi, cold shake, and leave it with presure at 35psi, Co2 bottle on, for a
couple of days and drink. I despence at about 4-5 psi.
My question is; Is this just the way kegging beer in soda kegs is? If
not, how do I get those tiny boubbles like in botttled beer? Any
suggestions would be helpful.
Kevin
remove nospam to respond
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 10:35:53 -0800
From: "Layne and Katrise" <wetpetz@oberon.ark.com>
Subject: Air space replaced with Argon gas
After reading the many posts lately on air space left in carboys I
remembered a product I saw in a wine shop in the last few months. I don't
recall the particulars right now but I can get them if anyone is interested
in the product.
I saw a can of argon gas mix. The directions on the can suggested a short
injection of the gas into a partly empty bottle of wine to prevent
oxidation of left-over wine. The only other application I have seen argon
in is welding aluminum. A welder friend told me that Argon is so heavy
that if inhaled you would need to stand on your head to get it out of your
lungs.
Maybe this gas in a can could be used to provide a protective barrier on
top of the beer surface for long term storage in carboys. Maybe even in
bottling.
The can of gas was very light and felt empty but the label said this was
normal and that the can could protect several bottles of unfinished wine.
I don't remember the cost or the number of bottles right now.
Layne Rossi
wetpetz@oberon.ark.com
Campbell River, BC
http://oberon.ark.com/~wetpetz
***********************************************************
To try and fail is better than
failing because we didn't try!
***********************************************************
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 97 13:01:55 CST
From: jwilkins@wss.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson)
Subject: Brewing with corn sugar
Bruce Taber asked about brewing with corn sugar.
Graham Wheeler's book Brew Your Own Real Ale at Home has a recipe for Fuller's
London Pride which calls for invert sugar. I tried making invert sugar with
cane sugar and citric acid but do not know whether it actually inverted or not.
I don't think it makes much difference anyway. In another of Wheeler's books
he substitutes ordinary table sugar for invert in recipes.
The beer I made was fairly light, as is London Pride to me, so that recipe
might be acceptable. I don't have the recipe on me but the book is worth
buying and is available from Brewer's Resource and, I think, All About Beer
magazine.
I don't have any connection to anyone mentioned, by the way.
John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins@wss.dsccc.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 97 11:21 PST
From: cburns@egusd.k12.ca.us (Charles Burns)
Subject: Traquair House Ale Attempt
Here's an update on my attempt to match the Traquair House Ale, the best
Strong Scotch Ale I've ever tasted (and most expensive too). It was an 8
hour brewday but appears to have been worth the time.
For 5 gallons:
22 lbs Hugh Baird Pale Ale
4 oz Roasted Barley
Water/Grain ratio 1.25 qts/lb.
My water is fairly hard (170ppm calcium) so I mixed it half and half with
distilled water to soften it up a bit.
Mashed at 158F for 90 minutes. PH 5.4
Recirc 1 gallon.
Collected 1 gallon of very thick first runnings.
Boiled for 1 hour until about only 1 pint was left, totally carmelized and
tasted delicious.
Sparged with 3 gallons of 180F water.
Added carmelized wort back to kettle.
Boiled Hard for another 2.25 hours.
30 IBU's East Kent Goldings at 60 minutes.
5 IBU's EKG at 30 minutes.
Added 1 gallon additional water at 30 minutes (kettle getting low).
OG 1.094
Pitched 1 quart starter Wyeast 1728.
Fermented at 60F for 14 days - airlock dead.
Racked to secondary FG: 1.028 (either yeast pooped out or carmelized sugars
didn't ferment).
Its cloudy as heck but man is it DELICIOUS, even with lots of yeast still in
suspension.
Appears a bit lighter than Traquair, may need a bit more roasted barley next
time.
Its in the secondary at 50F and will stay there at least one week before
kegging and lagering.
Thanks for everyone's help on recipe and process. I think this one is a keeper!
Charley (happily salivating) in N. Cal.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 97 13:13:07 CST
From: jwilkins@wss.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson)
Subject: RE: Rousing the wee beasties
Steven Smith says he is having a hard time getting an ESB yeast to ferment
because of floculation. If the yeast is Wyeast 1968 I have had no problem
with it if well aerated or oxygenated. I usually get about 75 percent apparent
attenuation without ever rousing the yeast. It does seem to require good
aeration at pitch time but I don't know that it is any more demanding in
this respect than any other yeast.
In mt experience, it pays to aerate well.
John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins@wss.dsccc.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 14:46:09 -0500
From: David A Bradley <BRADLEY_DAVID_A@LILLY.COM>
Subject: Wives and Brew
Brent asks the age old question of how to keep the wife out of his homebrew
stash.
My brewing friend Rich and I have met with success in only attack.
Pregnancy. It works quite well, but there are drawbacks, to be sure!
Dave in Indy....with the next assistant brewer on the way.
Home of the 3-B Brewery, (v.) Ltd.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 14:38:29 -0600 (CST)
From: Al Korzonas <korz@xnet.com>
Subject: 3 weeks of starters/female brewers
A week or so ago, I posted that when I need to make a big starter, I
begin three weeks in advance. I'd like to point out that it's rare
that I do this anymore... if I'm making a Barleywine or Doppelbock,
what I usually do these days is brew a 1.040 or 1.050 OG beer with
the yeast I want to use for the BIG beer two weeks in advance. I
rack off the "starter beer" (usually into a keg) and then run the
BIG beer wort onto the entire yeast cake of the "starter beer."
The only reason I said that I would start three weeks in advance to make
a *BIG* starter is because I wanted the *all* the yeast to settle well
before I poured off the spent wort. I take a 2L Erlenmeyer flask,
boil up about a liter of 1.030 or 1.040 wort from dried malt extract,
a pinch of Fermax yeast energizer and rehydrated Irish Moss, cool,
oxygenate with oxygen and pitch the swolen Wyeast package (or a smaller
starter from a YCKC slant). A week later, it's crystal clear and well
settled. I pour off the spent wort and add between 1.5 and 2 liters of
1.040 or so wort (same as above). The day before brewing, I pour off
the spent wort (now clear) and usually add around 500ml of 1.040 wort.
This is at or just after high kraeusen right when I'm ready to pitch.
The yeast is active, I've got far more yeast than if I had only done
a single starter and I'm only pitching 500 ml of partially-spent wort.
If you are pouring-off cloudy wort from your starters, you are selecting
for the early floculators which could give you a higher FG than you
want. That's the reason I wait for the spent wort to be clear before
pouring it off.
***
I don't know if I can say this without sounding sexist, but I must
say that I think it's great that the number of female homebrewers
are increasing. I have been thinking this for a while, but Vicky's
post reminded me. I view the whole hobby very differently when it
is more equally represented by both male and female brewers. My wife
keeps saying that she wants to brew with me, but whenever I'm brewing,
she always seems to have something more important to do. I suppose
I should simply count my blessings that she tolerates the time and
money I've put into it.
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz@xnet.com
My new website (still under construction, but up-and-running):
http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 14:45:34 -0600
From: Rob Kienle <rkienle@interaccess.com>
Subject: Stout Efficiency, Extract Potential of Dark Grains
- --------------C0F9AE46C480C1F9456C9CA2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Ken said in HBD 2565 in response to my query regarding efficiencies in
a recent batch of
stout:
> From pale ale malt (since you use a similar system to me) you should get 31
> to 34, depending on brand and lot. I'd expect about 10 - 15 pts per lb for
> the dark grains
>
> pale ale 20 X 32 = 640
> dark 7 X 12 = 84
> flaked 3 X 25? = 75
> Total = 814/12 gal = OG of 66.5
>
> You didn't say how low your OG was. but the above is about what I would
> expect approximating your recipe
>
Offline discussions with others have indicated that my efficiency may
also have been reduced
by the size of the mash, given the slowness of my runoff and a lack of
low-temperature rest in
my mash sequence to loosen up all those beta glucans.
However...Ken's figures are remarkably close to what really happened,
and bring up what
might be an important point for me as well as others (I think). I had
projected an OG of 1.070
for this batch but the pre-boiled wort readings showed that, had I
boiled to my original target
of 13.5 gallons, my OG would have been more like 1.062. Boiling to 12.25
gallons increased
my OG to the original target.
The difference is that my calculations used significantly higher values
for the dark grains.
Ken's figures quote 12-15 pts of extract for dark grains (in this case
roasted barley and black
patent). I checked and rechecked available data sources for these values
when computing my
original recipe and in each case they quoted something in the high 20s
even for dark roasted
grain (26-29 or something as I recall, don't have documents with me).
Given the fact that 20%
of my stout used dark grains, overestimating the extract from those
grains would indeed have
skewed my figures.
Which is right? Since the diastatic power of roasted grains is tapped
out by processing, is
extract potential reduced as well? What's an appropriate range for these
malts, and are some
of our references, including the most recent grain issue of Zymurgy, for
example, incorrectly
citing the extract figures for dark grains as much higher than they are
in reality?
- --
Cheers4beers,
Rob Kienle
Chicago, IL
rkienle@interaccess.com
- --------------C0F9AE46C480C1F9456C9CA2
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<HTML>
Ken said in HBD 2565 in response to my query regarding efficiencies
in a recent batch of
<BR>stout:
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>
<PRE>From pale ale malt (since you use a similar system to me) you should get 31
to 34, depending on brand and lot. I'd expect about 10 - 15 pts per lb for
the dark grains
pale ale 20 X 32 = 640
dark 7 X 12 = 84
flaked 3 X 25? = 75
Total = 814/12 gal = OG of 66.5
You didn't say how low your OG was. but the above is about what I would
expect approximating your recipe</PRE>
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>Offline discussions with others have indicated that my efficiency may
also have been reduced
<BR>by the size of the mash, given the slowness of my runoff and a lack
of low-temperature rest in
<BR>my mash sequence to loosen up all those beta glucans.
<P>However...Ken's figures are remarkably close to what really happened,
and bring up what
<BR>might be an important point for me as well as others (I think). I had
projected an OG of 1.070
<BR>for this batch but the pre-boiled wort readings showed that, had I
boiled to my original target
<BR>of 13.5 gallons, my OG would have been more like 1.062. Boiling to
12.25 gallons increased
<BR>my OG to the original target.
<P>The difference is that my calculations used significantly higher values
for the dark grains.
<BR>Ken's figures quote 12-15 pts of extract for dark grains (in this case
roasted barley and black
<BR>patent). I checked and rechecked available data sources for these values
when computing my
<BR>original recipe and in each case they quoted something in the high
20s even for dark roasted
<BR>grain (26-29 or something as I recall, don't have documents with me).
Given the fact that 20%
<BR>of my stout used dark grains, overestimating the extract from those
grains would indeed have
<BR>skewed my figures.
<P>Which is right? Since the diastatic power of roasted grains is tapped
out by processing, is
<BR>extract potential reduced as well? What's an appropriate range for
these malts, and are some
<BR>of our references, including the most recent grain issue of Zymurgy,
for example, incorrectly
<BR>citing the extract figures for dark grains as much higher than they
are in reality?
<P>--
<BR>Cheers4beers,
<BR>Rob Kienle
<BR>Chicago, IL
<BR>rkienle@interaccess.com
<BR> </HTML>
- --------------C0F9AE46C480C1F9456C9CA2--
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 13:05:43 -0800
From: "Michel J. Brown" <homemade@spiritone.com>
Subject: Rock Bottom Brewery (was GABF sort of...)
I would like to give thanks to Mr. Mark Youngquist, Owner and Head Brewer of
Rock Bottom Breweries (RBB). I was responsible for stating that at the time I
felt that the RBB in Portland left a lot to be desired, and practiced what I
felt was dispicable business acumen. After several gentlemanly discourses with
Mark, we reached an accord that was mutually agreeable. It would appear that
there were several bizarre turn of events that had to happen in order for the
mixup to occur. I'm sure Mr. Murphy is rotflol over this one! At any rate,
Mark took what I thought were very professional, and prudent steps to right
any wrongs, and make sure that this wouldn't happen again. Mark seems a fine
person, and was very attentive to the situation. I feel that without his
interaction in a positive, and fruitful manner, that we would not have been
able to reach such a mutually satisfying conclusion. I apologize if I took too
much bandwidth, but I feel that *both* parties of a situation should make
amends, especially when made in a public forum like the HBD. The HBD works,
and my testimonial is proof that at least some of the folks out there in the
brewing world pay attention to our corner of cybeeria ;^)
- --
Dr. Michel J. Brown, D.C.
homemade@spiritone.com
http://www.spiritone.com/~homemade/index.shtml
"In the field of observation, chance favors only the prepared mind"
L. Pasteur
------------------------------
Date: 25 Nov 97 02:20:21 GMT
From: BSweeney@unanov.una.edu (Bob Sweeney)
Subject: How do I clean the inside of an Aluminum pot?
I bought a fantastic restaurant grade 15 gal Al pot and lid as
a present to myself (thanks, me!) and love it. Unfortunately,
last week I made a batch of liquid extract-based Christmas ale
for a party my wife is giving I managed to scorch the bottom
of the pot. This was the first time I've tried an extract batch
in that pot and the first time in 5 years I've brewed with extract
so I forgot to add the extract into *already* boiling water. I use
a Cajun Cooker so the pot eventually got quite hot.
My question is, is there an easy way to clean the inside of this pot?
I used a cold water rinse and non-abrasive scrubber just after brewing
and I have let the pot sit for a week with a mixture of dishwashing
soap and water and every day or so I scrub a bit to see if any more
of the spot is removed. So far not much. Are my choices
to just live with it or should I break out the brillo pads (which
I was hoping to avoid)?
All hail the wisdom of the collective!
Bob (from Florence, Alabama--across the river from Muscle Shoals, the
home of some sweet soul music--where homebrewing is both a hobby and
a felony!) Sweeney
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 21:10:41 -0300 (GMT-0300)
From: Jorge Blasig - IQ <gisalb@elmer.fing.edu.uy>
Subject: Fermentation Temperatures
Dear friends:
In my country, Uruguay, at this time of the year, it is almost impossible
to have temperatures lower than 20-25c during the day and it will be even
warmer in the next months. At night it may be lower than 20C.
I need to know the influence of temperatures in wort fermentation. I need
to know whether it would be possible to brew an ale with these
temperatures or should I wait until next fall to start brewing again. I
wonder what are the compounds that high temperatures fermentations
produce.
Thanks in advance for your help.
Jorge Blasig
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 19:47:05 -0500 (EST)
From: Jpilhoefer@aol.com
Subject: re: Nitrogen Dispensing
Check out this page for the info you are looking for
http://beertown.org/IBS/newbrewer/tnbmain.htm
This has been the most up to date info I have found.
Hope this helps.
John Pilhoefer
Jaxon's Restaurant and Brewing Co.
El Paso, Tx
>I've been brewing for about 5 years. Been kegging for about 4.5 years.
>Now, I would like to get into mixed gas dispensing (i.e., nitrogen+co2)
>using a "shear" or "stout faucet"--but can't seem to find much
>literature on the subject. I'd like to get as much info on the subject
>as I can before I purchase a nitrogen tank, regulator, and a tap. Heck,
>I don't even know what type of tap to get. Banner sells a few different
>kinds as presented in their ads in BT. I really love the way APA and
>ESBs come out when dispensed in this manner. I would like to make beers
>similar to Pyramid DPA or Moylen's ESB. Help.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Racso
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 22:13:28 -0500
From: "Michael E. Dingas" <dingasm@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: RE: Leaving Beer on Sediment
I made a recent Digest reply to a newbie who was concerned about a =
3-week fermentation. My comment that the beer should not be allowed to =
sit on the sedimentation for long periods brought a direct email =
response from a more seasoned homebrewer. (BTW, John, yours was the only =
response to my submittal.) The basic message was that after I had =
considerable more brew-sessions under my belt (only have 5, so far) I =
would be more inclined to leave batches sitting on sedimented yeast for =
=20
3-4 weeks or longer because cleanup was such a pain. Such a philosophy =
seems to reflect that perhaps the joy of homebrewing has lost its =
luster. What was once a pleasure is now a chore.
Such a practice surely should not become the routine, but is an =
acceptable alternative on occasion when time constraints do not permit a =
timely bottling or secondary racking. Why do I hold this opinion? Pros =
and cons (I can think of) follow.
Advantages: None that I can think of except postponing the inevitable =
cleanup job.
Disadvantages (not in order of importance): 1. Fermenter becomes =
harder to clean as the residue hardens. 2. Might introduce off-flavors =
due to autolysis. 3. Introduces a degree of uncertainty when batches go =
bad. 4. Encourages sloppy practices elsewhere such as the scheduling of =
brewing =20
phases. 5. Cannot propagate the yeast since this is usually done shortly =
after fermentation completes. 6. Your beer deserves more respect. 7 =
Delaying the transfer more than 2 weeks increases the risk of bacterial =
infection since the protective head of foam and carbon dioxide are no =20
longer present.
As you might guess, I have a real problem with propogating (what I =
consider to be) bad practices to beginners. At the least, I would temper =
such advice by stressing to follow good practices until the individual =
is comfortable with an accepted/established method. Much like an old =
math =20
class I once had where the hard way was learned first and then shortcuts =
introduced to simplify the hard way.=20
Cleanup is the least enjoyable aspect of brewing to be sure. However, =
it has to be done and the sooner the better. What say the collective? =
Is this prudent advise (leaving beer on sediment for 3-4 weeks or =
longer) to offer?
Mike D.
Middle GA
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 22:43:49 -0500
From: "Pat Babcock" <pbabcock@oeonline.com>
Subject: Re: Leaving Beer on Sediment
Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager...
"Michael E. Dingas" <dingasm@worldnet.att.net> writes of allowing
the beer to remain on the lees of the primary for a few weeks...
> Disadvantages (not in order of importance):
>1. Fermenter becomes harder to clean as the residue hardens.
Generally true, but the environment above the beer is somewhat like a
tropical rain forest. Moisture is always present and sometimes
condenses on the residue, leaving it moist and fairly easy to remove.
The times I've been negligent in my racking schedule, this has never
been a problem. (Of course, that residue washing back in may be: if
you use the blow-off method, that residues - mostly trub particles
and hop oils - are just what you were trying to get out of your
beer...)
> 2. Might introduce off-flavors due to autolysis.
Not very likely. Autolysis is easier to say than to cause in brewing.
It is unlikely that autolysis would set in within the timeframe in
question and under normal circumstances.
> 3. Introduces a degree of uncertainty when batches go bad.
Again, not likely. The amount of time on the lees should not change
the likelihood of infection. If the beer has an infective organism
present, it'll do its dirty work whether or not the beer is resting
on the dregs of the primary.
> 4. Encourages sloppy practices elsewhere such as the scheduling of
> brewing phases.
Ah, but that's part of the flexibility we as homebrewers enjoy: we
can do what we need to do when we want to do it. Granted, to produce
grand beers like clockwork, you must be a bit more anal about the
timing of events, but it is not a requirement to produce great beers.
> 5. Cannot propagate the yeast since this is usually done shortly =
> after fermentation completes.
OK, I'll grant you that. I can't say whether the yeast in the 'boy is
worthy of another batch or not, but I'd be reticent to reuse the
dregs of a long primary ferment.
> 6. Your beer deserves more respect.
:-)
> 7. Delaying the transfer more than 2 weeks increases the risk of
> bacterial infection since the protective head of foam and carbon
> dioxide are no 20 longer present.
That dog just don't hunt. Use an airlock? Mission accomplished. There
is far too much credence given to the kraeusen and "blanket of CO2"
in a world where the vast majority of us ferment under airlock.
Frankly, unless you ferment in an open fermenter, the kraeusen is
simply a mass of foam that is somewhat fun to watch. And if you _do_
happen to use an open fermenter, that good ol' blanket of CO2 is
simply a myth. Otherwise, as many have pointed out before me, we'd
all have suffocated long ago with all the CO2 we go around exhaling.
(Aside: Imagine the breath you're about to take. Does it contain the
exhalation of the guy next ot you? How about the breath of a dog?
Perhaps one that has just completed its usual ritual of doggy
hygiene. Makes you shudder, doesn't it. But I digress...)
Mike, I'm not hacking on you, and I commend your willingness to post
this information (stop holding your breath. No matter who had it
last, you NEED that air!) with only five batches done. Shows great
promise that you can and will become "one of the great ones". But it
is important to realize that sometimes the "dogma" (breathe, damnit!
I was just kidding about the dog breath!) is just that. The
conditions under which each of us brews drives the practices we
follow. One man's sloppy practice is another man's working a batch in
between career and family. And the equipment we have available to us
pretty much assures our success... (man, you don't look good in
blue. Aw, c'mon. Get off the floor...)
See ya!
Pat Babcock in SE Michigan pbabcock@oeonline.com
Home Brew Digest Web Site http://hbd.org
The Home Brew Page http://oeonline.com/~pbabcock/brew.html
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 23:29:25 -0500 (EST)
From: BernardCh@aol.com
Subject: Announcement: 1998 Hail to Ale, AHA Club Only Competition
The Music City Brewers, Nashville Tennessee's AHA registered homebrew club,
are proud to announce that they will be the host club for the Hail to Ale,
AHA Club Only Competition to be held Saturday, January 31, 1998 at Boscos
Nashville Brewing Company in Nashville Tennessee.
The AHA Club Only Competition allows each AHA registered homebrew club to
submit one entry per club. The determination of which entry to send is made
by the individual clubs. Some clubs have a formal mini-competition, others
just an informal tasting.
Styles accepted for the Hail to Ale Competition include only the following
AHA style categories:
5-a) Classic English Pale Ale
5-b) India Pale Ale
6-a) American Pale Ale
6-b) American Amber Ale
6-c) American Wheat
AHA Style descriptions can be found at the AHA website: http://beertown.org
Look for the other specific information (entry deadlines, shipping address,
etc.) on the AHA web site in the next few weeks. Also look at the Music City
Brewers Web Site http://theporch.com/~homebrew1 for a link to the AHA site.
BREWERS - Brew Now for Hail to Ale!
CLUBS - Use you january 1998 meeting to select your club entry for Hail to
Ale!
Entries are due by January 26, 1997. Each entry must have a standard
entry/recipe sheet completely filled out and bottel ID labels attached to
each bottle with a rubber band. Black out all caps. Include a check for
$5.00 made payable to the AHA. Ship entries to:
Boscos Nashville Brewing Company
Attention: Chuck Skypeck
1805 21st Avenue South
Nashville, TN 37212
See the AHA web site for complete rules.
JUDGES AND STEWARDS: You are invited to judge these entries. Lunch will be
provided for judges and stewards. If you are interested, please email me at
bernardch@aol.com for additional information. (January 31 is the weekend
AFTER the Super Bowl).
Chuck
BernardCh@aol.com
Music City Brewers
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2567, 11/26/97
*************************************
-------
