Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2675
HOMEBREW Digest #2675 Tue 31 March 1998
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:
Acid malt / DMS and diacetyl ("George De Piro")
offensive behavior ("Michael E. Dingas")
Yeast with Enzyme ("Richard Lehrl")
Kolsch article in BT (Mike Allred)
Re: anybody know this company (michael rose)
Wine and Brew By You, INC. (Al Korzonas)
"Fruit Extract Haze" or Awakening Yeast? ("Charles L. Ehlers")
refracto (JohanNico)" <JohanNico.Aikema@akzonobel.com>
Heating-RIMS (Fredrik Hjalmarson)
Still more .08 (Steve Jackson)
Water Analysis in my new home - Calling all Water Experts ("Reed,Randy")
Open Ferment (John Varady)
.08 vs .10 (Wayne_Kozun)
Rodenbach Grand Cru (Malty Dog)
info on caustic cleaners ("MICHAEL L. TEED")
Re: Baker's Yeast (Jeff Renner)
Re: Legislating morality... (brian_dixon)
Bottling is Hell (or at least Purgatory) (Bill Goodman)
Re: Reverse RIMS. (Dion Hollenbeck)
That 'scummy' Idophor... (brian_dixon)
Re: Grand Cru (Jim Larsen)
Sulfur problem from Munton's malts? (Paul Shick)
Me and My lame stout. ("SchoenBacher, Anton")
club yeast libraries (Daniel S McConnell)
Chill haze and protein rests (yet again) (George_De_Piro)
"acid malt" (David Kerr)
0.08 BAC (James Tomlinson)
NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS: hbd.org
Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@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 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@hbd.org
Homebrew Digest Information on the Web: http://hbd.org
Requests for back issues will be ignored. Back issues are available via:
Anonymous ftp from...
ftp://hbd.org/pub/hbd/digests
ftp://ftp.stanford.edu/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer
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: Sun, 29 Mar 98 09:41:58 PST
From: "George De Piro" <gdepiro@NOSPAMfcc.net>
Subject: Acid malt / DMS and diacetyl
Hi all,
Nathan asks about using (what I think) is Weissheimer acid malt (sauer
malz) to add comlexity to his beer.
Sour malt is used in Germany to lower the pH of the mash in highly
carbonate water. It is simply malt that has been biologically acidified.
It can most certainly change the character of your beer in a noticable
way; BE CAREFUL! I have evaluated (in competition setting) an
Oktoberfest beer that had a distinctly sour note. I found it to be a bit
much (even thought the beer might have been infected). Afterwards,
I spoke with the brewer and found out that he was experimenting with sour
malt.
When tasting his beer in a less formal setting, I thought it was very
nice. When concentrating on it, though, it was too sour.
Experiment with small amounts at first (I have never used it and can't
remember how much my friend used), and go from there.
Heck, it would make the most sense to use it to help achieve the proper
mash pH when brewing pale beers in carbonate water.
- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Jim asks about the high DMS (dimethyl sulfide) level in his recent
Koelsch. He talks about doing a warm rest at the end of fermentation to reduce
it.
Jim is confusing DMS with diacetyl. DMS is produced during the boil, not
during fermentation. While some of it might get scrubbed out during
fermentation by the CO2, it won't get consumed by the yeast.
DMS is formed by SMM, which is found in high quantities in Pilsner malt.
The high kilning temperature of other malts tends to form DMS and drive
it
off, so that there is less chance of ending up with it in the final
product. Excessive DMS in your beer is usually a result of too gentle and/or
too short a boil.
Keeping the lid on the kettle will also increase DMS. When using pale
ale malt, you may be able to get away with a bit more than when using
Pilsner malt.
An inadequate boil with Pilsner malt (or inadequate ventilation during
the boil) will lead to high DMS levels. I don't think you can fix it at
this stage, sorry.
Try to Have Fun!
George De Piro (Nyack, NY)
Remove NOSPAM from address to reply
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 09:52:08 -0500
From: "Michael E. Dingas" <dingasm@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: offensive behavior
How the rest of us find such behavior is not the issue. However,
there is nothing to be gained in expanding the sphere of
embarassment simply to express our distaste for a particular
offense. The original post which felt an apology was in order was
my first insight into any 'wrong-doing.' In all honesty, I never
should have become aware of it in the first place, especially from
one who was not the 'wronged' party.
Point: Limit your outrage to the scope in which the offense took
place.
Mike (Middle GA, USA)
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 19:12:10 +0200
From: "Richard Lehrl" <r.lehrl@xpoint.at>
Subject: Yeast with Enzyme
Hello,
I bought some SB14 dried Lager Yeast which comes in a twin pack. There are
two bags one the yeast, the second "Pilsner Enzyme" with the instructions:
"Add with yeast". I wonder which kind of enzymes this might be and what they
are good for?
Richard
r.lehrl@xpoint.at
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 11:16:44 -0700
From: Mike Allred <mballred@xmission.com>
Subject: Kolsch article in BT
I wouldn't have opened by big mouth, but then I read this in ref to the
Kolsch article in jan/feb BT:
>>The excellent BT issue came too late for me to use a blend of RO water as
per my >>lagers.
Now, I am not one of the experts like so many others here, but this article
was lacking in my opinion. I wanted to learn about real Kolsch beer and how
it is produced. What we got was an article on how to make an ale with
pilsner malt, german or american hops, single step infusion mashing, and the
recomended yeast was 1056 or 1098. Color does not define a beer style.
Next month Forrest will be doing an article on how an Imperial stout can be
duplicated in a Mr. Beer with bakers yeast and beet sugar.
OTOH, the article on decoction by Spencer Thomas was EXCELLENT as was the
RIMMS/Decoction brew off by Louis and Andy Thomas. This is why I read BT.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 12:00:57 -0800
From: michael rose <mrose@ucr.campus.mci.net>
Subject: Re: anybody know this company
Lars Bjornstad wrote,
> know low density elements are the ones to use, but on
> PlumbingSupply/warehouse/world.com (does anyone know this company??) I
Three weeks ago I bought six 1/2" SS couplings for my 3-tier system. I
recieved them about six days latter. The package had been torn open in
shipment and some of the fittings had been lost. I e-mailed back (they
don't have any phone contact with customers, only e-mail)with my
complaint and in about 4 days I recieved the lost parts. I am happy with
their service and will use them in the future.
Michael Rose Riverside, CA mrose@ucr.campus.mci.net
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 18:34:16 -0600 (CST)
From: Al Korzonas <korz@xnet.com>
Subject: Wine and Brew By You, INC.
In private email, I have learned that Wine and Brew By You, INC.
is under new (thankfully!) manangement.
The "Serving South Florida Since 1969" is what led me to believe
that the same people were at the helm.
Sorry about that.
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 20:26:16 -0600
From: "Charles L. Ehlers" <clehlers@flinthills.com>
Subject: "Fruit Extract Haze" or Awakening Yeast?
Just bottled a lagered wheat and encountered something I haven't seen
before. However, did two things I've never done before. Would appreciate
any wisdom from the collective.
Lagered an extract wheat. Cleared beautifully. To prime, used a
technique I learned from Rob Moline in his Little Apple Brew Crew (not to be
confused w/ LAB Company) days and have seen recently discussed here. Added
priming sugar solution straight to the secondary and bottled from the
secondary. Hadn't done this before (even though heard about it from Rob
over a year ago!). Anyway, secondary was cold, about 40F when I added the
warm priming solution. Let it sit about 30 minutes. Filled 24 bottles.
After filling but before capping, added 2.5 oz. raspberry extract to the
remaining 2.5 ~ 3 gallons in the (primed) secondary. Capped the first 24
bottles, then bottled the remainder from the carboy.
The first 24 bottles were very clear. The remaining bottles (after adding
the raspberry extract to the carboy) were slightly hazy. First noticed the
haze not in the bottles, but in the carboy. The beer had been very clear.
But after I capped the first batch of bottles, I noticed a cloudiness/haze
developing from the bottom of the carboy. I first noticed it about 10
minutes after adding the raspberry extract. It could have been developing
all along as I hadn't been paying much attention to the beer in the carboy
and it was more chance than anything else that caused me to notice it when I
did.
Is this haze something that developed as a result of adding the raspberry
extract? Or, was it yeast rousing from the bottom of the carboy in response
to the introduction of the priming sugar?
Appreciate any/all suggestions/comments.
Cheers!
Charles
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 08:04:19 +0200
From: "Aikema, J.N. (JohanNico)" <JohanNico.Aikema@akzonobel.com>
Subject: refracto
Hello brewers,
I have a refractometer and use it for measuring during sparging and the
final wort. Would it also be possible to use it during and after
fermentation?
I'm a subscriber of HBD for a few month now. I'm getting acquainted with
abbreviations as KISS, TIA, IMO, IMHO. I don't know yet what <SNIP>
means.
IMHO Briess Malting is the correct name. Why are so many people writing
Breiss (HBD # 2653, 2665, 2666, 2670, 2671 (thanking the Company for
sponsoring!).
I don't have access to Internet (only E-mail).
Greetings from Holland,
TIA, Hans Aikema
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 16:09:42 +0800
From: Fredrik Hjalmarson <fredrik@atri.curtin.edu.au>
Subject: Heating-RIMS
Hi all,
I'm planning to build a RIMS and have some questions about the heating
method. Most RIMS I've seen on the web use the boil vessel to heat the
dough-in water and/or a separate heater (gas or electric) to heat the
sparge water in the HLT. Now, If I use a RIMS with a heater chamber with
a 2500W low watt density element. Shouldn't it be possible to heat all
dough-in water and sparge water with that element? My idea is to fill up
the amount of spage water needed in the HLT and the amount of dough-in
water in the mash-tun. Then
1) Recirculate the sparge water up to sparge temperature
2) Recirculate the dough-in water up to dough-in temperature
3) Add grain and start mashing.
Is there any problems to use full power (2500W) when heating the water?
Suppose I don't need to worry about scorching of the water...
Then during sparging, if the sparge water goes through the heater
chamber on the way to the mash tun, it should be possible to heat the
water on the fly. If the waterflow from the HLT to the mashtun during
sparging is around 0.1gal/min (0.38l/min), how much is it possible to
raise the temperature with the 2500W element? This means that you don't
need to heat the water in the HLT up to sparge temperature as said in 2)
above.
I know many of you out there uses a 4500W/240W element in a 120V system
wich gives 1125W. How much can you raise the temp of the water (or wort)
flowing through the chamber?
You may ask, Why don't you heat the sparge water in the boil vessel
while you heat the dough-in water in the mash tun? That's because if I
have a 10A limit that gives me 2400W in a 240V system. So, I can't use
both heaters at the same time...By the way, is 2400W (wort boiler)
enough to boil a 6.5 gal (24.6l) batch?
Thanks in advance,
Fredrik Hjalmarson
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 05:38:04 -0800 (PST)
From: Steve Jackson <stevejackson@rocketmail.com>
Subject: Still more .08
Sorry to keep dredging this up, but there a couple points that haven't
been mentioned that I think are relevant.
As much as I dislike the idea of imposing a .08 BAC standard on every
state, I have my doubts as to how much it will affect most social
drinkers. In most states, you cannot be stopped unless you are showing
some signs of impairment. This means you have to be weaving, speeding,
crossing the center line, etc. In other words, you have to be doing
something wrong in order to get pulled over. If you can drive at .08
without any impairment, then you almost certainly don't have anything
to worry about. (It varies from state to state, but random checks have
frequently been ruled unconstitutional.)
Secondly, in most states, you *can* be arrested for drunk driving with
blood alcohol levels *below* .10 already. Here in Indiana, you can be
arrested if you're at .05 and showing signs of impairment. The charge
is somewhat different than if you blow .10 or above, but the net
result is roughly the same (big fines, ridiculously high insurance
premiums, etc.).
Of course, the second point proves how silly this .08 move is. You can
already be arrested, charged and convicted if you're driving while
impaired, regardless of whether you're at .08, .10 or .50 (back when I
was a reporter and did the cop beat, I actually someone arrested for
DWI at .50 -- a level that would leave most of us comatose if not dead).
My point is not that we shouldn't be concerned about this effort to
lower the legal BAC -- whether it's at the federal level or if one's
individual state is trying to do so. I agree that this is part of a
neo-prohibitionist effort to make it illegal to ever set foot out of
the house/pub/whatever if one's had a drop to drink. However, I don't
think this is cause for panic at this point. If this move is
successful (which it almost certainly will be), I really don't see it
affecting many of us one way or another.
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 08:46:26 -0500
From: "Reed,Randy" <rreed@foxboro.com>
Subject: Water Analysis in my new home - Calling all Water Experts
A few weeks ago I posted my water analysis from my new home. It is a 20
year old house and well in Rehoboth, MA, where I am moving. The first
analysis was the result of water that had gone through a softener. I had
the test run again, this time bypassing the softener.
Can you recommend how I can brew with this water? If I did not want to
purchase bottled water for each of my batches, what should I do to treat my
water? Or, is it too high in Iron to use?
The first number represents the softened water and the second un-softened
water, direct from the well. All are Mg/L
PARAMETER WITH softener WITHOUT softener (direct from well)
Sodium 105.0 10.9
Potassium .35 1.0
Copper ND .02
Iron .08 3.29 **
Manganese ND 1.22 **
Magnesium .03 5.7
Calcium .25 33.9
PH 6.50 6.5
Conductivity 596 343.0
TDS 357.6 205.8
Sediment Negative Positive *
Alkalinity 55 42.5
Chloride 130 ND
Hardness .77 108.1
Nitrate .30 ND
Sulfate 13.2 14.7
So, we can see that the softener really raises the levels of sodium and
chloride and reduces the levels of iron. If I used the softened water, it
might make a salty tasting beer.
Can any of you water chemists and/or filtration experts recommend how you
would treat this water for brewing if you did not want to buy bottled
water? Thanks in advance.
Randy Reed
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 09:26:46 -0800
From: John Varady <rust1d@usa.net>
Subject: Open Ferment
YYZCLAYTON@aol.com (Rush Reference?) Asks:
>1. What type of container do you use (SS, plastic, glass, other) and how
big? Do you have any type of drain valve?
I use a sanke keg with the top chopped and a drain on the bottom. It also
serves as my hot liquor tank.
>2. Is there any special care needed for the fermenter? Cleaning,
sanitizing etc.?
I don't do any special cleaning. After use, I scrub it with a green scotch
brite pad to remove krausen residue. It then gets rinsed and filled with
sparge water for the current brew being mashed. After the sparge water has
been heated and drained I consider it pretty clean and sanitized. For good
measure, I put it on the burner and turn on the heat for a couple of
minutes to get it really hot. I then dump in a cup of water and put the lid
on it and let it steam away and then drain the remaining water out of the
valve at the bottom. I consider this clean and ready to ferment in.
>3. The Kraeusen head is supposed to provide a protective layer but does
anyone cover the fermenter? If so, with what, when, and for how long?
I use a lid to cover the opening in the top and then place a close fitting
trash bag over the entire keg to keep interested critters out. If the bag
doesn't fit close enough, I will secure it with a rubber band. The trash
bag will inflate like a hot air balloon as the ferment gets kicking.
>4. Where do you ferment? I guess I mean how clean of an area does one
need to be successful?
With my method of covering with a trash bag, the area doesn't have to be
too clean. I open ferment in my basement, which is by no means sanitary.
>5. Do you skim the dirty head? If so, when and how often?
I will skim the dirty head on either the 3rd or 4th day into the ferment
and discard. I use a kitchen fryer spatula to skim the head. I put this
over the burner on my kitchen stove to sanitize and use it while it is
still hot. It will sizzle when first dunked into the brew but it makes me
feel good to know nothing is growing on it.
>6. Do you crop the yeast? If so when and how often? How do you store
the yeast?
After skimming and discarding the dirty krausen, I will replace the trash
bag on the keg. When it has once again inflated, I put a coin on top of the
bag. When the ferment begins to die off, it will no longer be outgassing
enough to hold the weight of the coin, and the trash bag will begin to
collapse. This indicates to me that it is time to skim the yeast again and
rack to closed fermenters to clear and condition. The skimmed yeast gets
put into a quart jar using a sanitized funnel and saved until needed again.
>7. Are there any yeast strains that seem to be better suited to open
fermentation? Which ones?
I have used 1084, 1056, 1007 and my current house yeast an unnumbered ESB
strain (from Wyeast not avail to homebrewers yet, I get it from the Red
Bell Brewery in Phila). These all seem to be great top croppers.
>8. Do you rack the beer to a secondary? If so, when?
See Q-6.
I have taken some pictures of an open ferment and when time permits, I will
scan them and put up a page detailing my methods. The picture of the sanke
keg with an inflated trash bag on top looks cool.
Hope this helps someone...
John
John Varady http://www.netaxs.com/~vectorsys/varady
Boneyard Brewing The HomeBrew Recipe Calculating Program
Glenside, PA rust1d@usa.net
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 09:48:04 -0500
From: Wayne_Kozun@otpp.com
Subject: .08 vs .10
Will everybody just shut up about the new drunk driving law and get back to
talking about brewing. This is not the "Pissed Off About Proposed American
Legislation Digest" it is the "Homebrewing Digest". Many of the
participants here are from the UK, Australia, Canada and elsewhere and we
just don't give a damn.
And to John Wilkinson who dissed Canadians saying:
I could have gone on about how the people Canada are sheep willing to
accept
an oppressive government, but this is a brewing forum, not a political one.
So I won't.
We Canadians are willing to accept reasonable laws that increase public
safety. That is why it is rare to hear about Canadian children shooting
each other. That is also why the United Nations consistently picks Canada
as the best place to live in the world.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 10:15:18 EST
From: Malty Dog <MaltyDog@aol.com>
Subject: Rodenbach Grand Cru
<In HBD 2672 Ted Manahan writes:
<Rodenbach Grand Cru. For those of you who haven't tried this classic,>
<it's surprisingly sour and aromatic. It can be startling if the drinker>
<isn't ready for it.>
In HBD 2674, Michael Witt (Golgothus) replies:
<Hey Ted,
< As far as I can see, Grand Cru is a specialty Belgian White ... though your
<comment on entering it in the Belgian Strong Dark makes me wonder if my
<information is correct. I have it listed as color: 2-4 SRM's. I don't
really
<know much about this style of beer, but that's the info I have on hand at
this
<time. If I am wrong, I hope someone will take the time to correct me.
Here's the correction. The Belgian term "Grand Cru" is a little misleading.
It's kind of the Belgian equivalent of "Super Premium." It isn't really a
style name at all; it basically means the best or strongest product of the
brewery. I'm sure Michael was thinking of Celis Grand Cru or Hoegarden
Grand Cru, which are, indeed strong White ales.
However, as some others may post to this list quick enough,
Rodenbach Grand Cru is an entirely different style, the Flanders Red,
which is usually combined with Oud Bruin in competition style
guidelines. The BJCP style number/letter is 18-A; the AHA style
number/letter is 2-A.
I hope this helps.
Bill Coleman
MaltyDog@aol.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 08:46:54 -0600
From: "MICHAEL L. TEED" <MS08653@msbg.med.ge.com>
Subject: info on caustic cleaners
.int homebrew@hbd.org
Greetings to all,
A month or so back I had asked for help in using lye for occasional
cleaning of my rims system, but unfortunately recieved no replies. I
searched the archives and found no answers to my questions, and havent
found any reference type materials on using caustics. Is there something
out there I can read up on? I know the obvious, use gloves and goggles,
keep something handy to neutralize any mistakes, but any help on
what ph to adjust for or concentrations to use, usage times and such would
be appreciated. Private mail is fine. TIA.
Mike Teed, ms08653@msbg.med.ge.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 10:57:44 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Baker's Yeast
Charles Hudak cwhudak@adnc.com writes:
>Hmmm, I don't think that bakers yeast can use the carbs in flour. In every
>loaf of bread that I've ever made the recipe calls for sugar (usually 1
>Tbsp) which is the food for the yeast.
It's just because someone thought you ought to put the sugar in, and the
error is repeated by most recipe writers. It isn't necessary if there is
some diastase in the flour. I make many tons of bread per year without a
bit of sugar, and the dough cool ferments quite happily for 18 hours, and
then rises in loaves (proofs). If it ferments too long, however, it won't
proof well, due to a diminution of gas production (available carbohydrates
have ben depleted) and degradation of the gas-trapping gluten (protein) by
proteolytic yeast enzymes.
As I posted the other day, historically, flour had some diastase from wheat
that had sprouted in the field and/or from poor storage. This level would
be greatly variable. Modern baking flours have the diastase adjusted to a
standard amount by the addition of malted barley flour, nominally 0.1%.
This diastase acts on starch granules that have been damaged by the milling
process. That is why "*available* carbohydrates can be consumed. Since
approximately 80%+ of wheat flour is carbohydrates, there is lots more
there, it's just unavailable as it is bound up in starch granules.
Jeff
Owner, baker, R & D, pan scrubber, saleman, delivery boy and this week, tax
preparer (ugh!)
"Best French Bread in Town"
Ann Arbor, MI
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 98 08:04:00 -0800
From: brian_dixon@om.cv.hp.com
Subject: Re: Legislating morality...
>Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your legislator...
>
>In perusing Friday, 20 Mar 1998 Detroit News, buried in a small
>column
>article in Sec 5A, I believe, I got my dander up:
>
>Well, they're at it again. Rep. Juanita Millender-McDonald
>(California)
>has sponsored a bill to heavily penalize UPS (or any other carrier)
>should
>alcohol delivered by them end up in the hands of a juvenile. In
>affect,
>she says there is already a law precluding the consumption of alcohol
>by
>minors. This law is just to "...make sure..." (Full text of the
>article at
>http://detnews.com/1998/nation/9803/20/03200146.htm).
For those who are concerned, I looked up Jauniat Millender-McDonald's
email address so YOU can send her email concerning your opposition.
These things work best if you state your opposition in the first
sentence, and keep your justification short and sweet, e.g. a 2 or 3
item bulleted list that's easy to read. Anyway, here's the email
address:
millender.mcdonald@mail.house.gov
Have fun,
Brian Dixon
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 16:12:49 +0000
From: Bill Goodman <goodman@APWK01G1.nws.noaa.gov>
Subject: Bottling is Hell (or at least Purgatory)
I'm convinced that bottling homebrew is one way to atone for sins
committed in this life! While transferring my steam beer from the
secondary to a bottling bucket Saturday night, the siphon became stuck
due to dissolved CO2 coming out of solution and creating a big air
bubble (I assume)...lost a good quart of beer in the process. If that
weren't bad enough, while trying to fix the situation, the hand pump
from my BrewPump siphon starter gadget fell into the beer in the
bottling bucket! Hope that didn't contaminate the batch, and yes, I'll
get a cover for the bucket, but only time will tell. Also, since I
cold-conditioned the beer for 10 days at 40F, I wonder if the beer still
has enough suspended yeast to make for good carbonation? (After 1 day,
I noticed practically none of the usual sediment at the bottom of the
bottles, making me wonder about that even more.) As far as the
flavor...excellent! Like hoppy liquid bread, with excellent Cascade hop
aroma too. Will be the best batch I've brewed so far in 3 attempts, if
it survives all the above troubles. BTW, is fresh Anchor Steam really
this hoppy?
- --
Bill Goodman
Olney, MD
------------------------------
Date: 30 Mar 1998 08:15:41 -0800
From: Dion Hollenbeck <hollen@vigra.com>
Subject: Re: Reverse RIMS.
>> S Wesley writes:
SW> From time to time I read the postings about RIMS systems and
SW> wonder if anyone has ever tried running a RIMS system backwards.
SW> I believe one of the potential hazards of this type of system is
SW> excessive compaction of the grain bed. Flow rate, and the rate of
SW> temperature change as well as overall system size may be limited
SW> because of this. Some sort of intake mainifold could be placed at
SW> the surface of the mash, and fluid could be returned to the mash
SW> tun drain. A more powerful pump might be needed to make the whole
SW> thing work. I'd be curious to know if anyone has tried this and
SW> if so, how it worked.
I have not tried this, but see several problems associated with it.
First, one advantage of a RIMS is that the grain bed acts as a filter
bed as well. If you pump liquid up from the bottom, the filter will
never be established, and you will get cloudy wort. Secondly, there
will be no return manifold that you can make at the top of the grain
bed that will work well. The small parts of the grist will always be
in suspension. If you have a manifold that lets these through, then
you may get clogs in the pump and/or hoses. If you have some sort of
fine enough screen on the manifold to filter out the grain, then you
will have flow problems. The reason that the grain bed works so well
as a filter is that it has a huge area, for my system, this is 113
square inches, the area of the false bottom.
dion
- --
Dion Hollenbeck (619)597-7080x164 Email: hollen@vigra.com
http://www.vigra.com/~hollen
Sr. Software Engineer - Vigra Div. of Visicom Labs San Diego, California
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 98 08:28:50 -0800
From: brian_dixon@om.cv.hp.com
Subject: That 'scummy' Idophor...
I notice, a harmless as far as I can tell, scum that floats out of
Idophor sanitized glassware. For example, if I sanitize carboys by
filling partially with water, adding the Idophor, then filling the
rest of the way. Mix, top off with some Idophor sanitizing solution
from a measuring cup to 'sanitize it to the rim', and let soak. After
a few minutes, a bit of whitish/grayish scum floats to the top. I
typically wipe it off and top off the carboy again. This 'scum'
floats up a couple of times, then seems to be gone after that.
When I sanitize my bottles, I fill multiple 7-gallon buckets with
Idophor solution, then submerse the bottles in them (2 sixpacks per
bucket). After soaking for an hour or so, I remove the bottles and
let them drip-dry on a bottle tree. When I fill the bottles, I do so
with a siphon out of a carboy, a brass Phil's Philler, and a large pot
on the floor to catch the drips and runs from the filler while I grab
another bottle. I notice that in the beer running around the bottom
of the pot, that the same 'scum' is floating in it. Not a heck of a
lot, but it's there all right. Time before last, I switched to
chlorine for everything, and no scum was seen anywhere. Last time was
back to Idophor, and the scum returned. It doesn't seem to hurt
anything, as evidenced by taste tests and good carbonation results.
Anyone else witness this phenomenon? I'm about to quit using Idophor
(even though it works and the scum doesn't hurt), just because I don't
like seeing the scum and not knowing what it is ... or at least for
the bottles, rinsing them with a bottle washer prior to the drip-dry
step so that the Idophor solution is rinsed out. The carboys get
rinsed anyway since I don't have a good way of letting them drip dry
before using them...
Brian
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 10:31:18 -0600 (CST)
From: Jim Larsen <jal@oasis.novia.net>
Subject: Re: Grand Cru
Michael Whitt <Golgothus@aol.com> writes in reply to Ted Manahan =
Rodenbach Grand Cru style query::
>As far as I can see, Grand Cru is a specialty Belgian White ... though =
your
>comment on entering it in the Belgian Strong Dark makes me wonder if my
>information is correct. I have it listed as color: 2-4 SRM's. I don't =
really
>know much about this style of beer, but that's the info I have on hand =
at this
>time. If I am wrong, I hope someone will take the time to correct me.=20
>I would be interested in the recipe, (or even some general advice if =
you
>wish to keep it a secret for now) as I plan to brew a Grand Cru in the =
near
>future (within the month I hope) and I only have one recipe, which is =
the one
>that is in Papazian's book. Any information on this style would be =
helpful,
>and appreciated (from any source). I am still a neophyte to the brew =
world
>and to many of the styles out there, and need all the help I can get. =
TIA.
And I reply:
Grand Cru in not a specific style of beer. Grand Cru is usually the =
brewery's most special beer, whatever style that is. Rodenbach Grand Cru =
is a special, aged, unblended version of Rodenbach Red, and Flanders Red =
Ale. The Red is a blend of old and young beer, tart and smooth and =
delicious. Rodenbach Grand Cru is intensely tart and an acquired taste =
that I have not been able to afford to acquire.=20
I'm sure someone brewery's Grand Cru is a Belgian White, but not =
Rodenbach's.
Jim Larsen
Cerveseria al Fresco
Omaha, NE
jal@novia.net
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 11:36:45 -0500 (EST)
From: Paul Shick <SHICK@JCVAXA.jcu.edu>
Subject: Sulfur problem from Munton's malts?
Hello all,
I guess I've also fallen victim to the poor quality Marris Otter
malt from Munton's that George DiPiro reported a while back. Since George
apparently monitors his gravity before the boil, he was able to boil long
enough to hit his target OG. Unfortunately, I don't check my gravity until
pitching time, although this hasn't been a problem until now. I used the
Munton's malt as the base for an English pale ale, expecting to get an OG
of 1.055+. I was quite suprised when I found 1.046 on the hydrometer at
pitching. I wasn't too worried, figuring that I'd just get a light (but
a bit overly-bittered) ale that might take a while to age. I assumed that
the low OG was due to letting the wort run off too quickly. I use a pump
to move from the mash tun to the boil kettle, and occasionally I let the
rate get too high. This has never given me this big a difference before,
though. After seeing George's post, I wondered if I'd see other differences
from the norm in this batch.
After kegging and waiting two weeks, I find that the ale has a very
noticeable sulfur odor. It's not quite the same as you get from some lager
yeasts early in the fermentation, but it's close. It seems to fade a bit
as you get further into the pint, but it's definitely annoying. I fermented
the ale with Wyeast 1028 London, at about 65F, with a good starter.
Fermentation seemed normal enough, so I doubt the yeast is the culprit. The
ale also has pretty poor head retention. I'm willing to pin the blame for
that on the severly overmodified malt, but I don't know of any mechanisms
for overproduction of sulfurous compounds with overmodified malt. Any ideas?
As always, thanks in advance for any insights.
One other quick note: this overmodified malt is really easy to mill!
It practically crushes itself. I haven't gotten around to motorizing my
MaltMill yet, and I've found doing 10-11 gallon batches of certain European
lager malts involves a pretty good workout. Too bad there isn't a way to
get easy "millability" without bad beer!
Paul Shick
Basement brewing in Cleveland Hts OH
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 08:36:00 -0800
From: "SchoenBacher, Anton" <Anton.Schoenbacher@wwireless.com>
Subject: Me and My lame stout.
I recently decided to brew a rye stout, I got a recipie
from the hbd archives, it was something like this...
8# 2-row
1# flaked rye
.5# carapils
.5# roasted barley
.5# crystal
.75# chocolate
I did a one step infusion mash at around 150, I say
around because the temperature in my mash was very
uneven, some parts were 148 and some were 152. I mashed
with about 3 gal. of water for 100 minutes. I sparged
and everything looked and smelled good, when I went to
check my gravity after the boil I started to boil ! It
was 1.030 !!!! I got really pissed, especially
considering the mess I just made in the kitchen for
myself. This has never ever happened to me before, does
anybody have some ideas as to why I got such crappy
conversion ?
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 11:42:29 -0500
From: danmcc@umich.edu (Daniel S McConnell)
Subject: club yeast libraries
Dennis Cabell <cabell@home.msen.com> writes:
>My question goes out to members of other clubs that have yeast
>libraries. How to you administer the library? I don't have the time to
>make a starter everytime someone calls and wants a yeast, so I wanted to
>know how others did things.
Since I more or less administer the club's yeast library, I have some
insights here. Actually, it's not that much trouble. I always have
sterile wort available and make (1L) starters for brewers when they need
them, unless of course, they need them TODAY. I can't boost to 1L that
fast. You can make a slant that fast, and it would be much easier, but
most of our local brewers are not up to speed on slant culturing techniques.
I have learned a few tricks in the process. I don't deliver. I no longer
give the cultures out in the glass bottles in which the wort was
sterilized-too few of them return in a timely manner-some don't make it
back at all. This is not to accuse my friends, it's just that we're all
forgetful now and then.....I now do the final boost to 1L in a 2L pop
bottle that has been sanitized with iodophor. Works great and it costs my
wife only $0.10.
You have the oppourtunity to try ALL of the yeasts in your collection which
can be difficult to do singlehanded. I find that it is well worth the
effort. Especially when the cultures go to our local microbaker, Jeff
Renner, who usually brings a loaf or two of French or Rye bread in
exchange. Others feel compelled to leave beer which is ok too!
DanMcC
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 12:18:15 -0800
From: George_De_Piro@berlex.com
Subject: Chill haze and protein rests (yet again)
Hi all,
Kyle posted the beer-haze musings of a "Mystery Brewing Wizard." In his
post, some questionable statements are made with no references to back
them up. The most obvious one is:
"MBW> Remember its (sic) the same enzyme so at higher temps its (sic)
going to be less active and produce less of all types of proteins."
There are actually many different enzymes that break down proteins in
the mash. At higher temperatures larger proteins are broken down into
haze precursors. At lower temperatures smaller peptides are degraded
into their constituent amino acids. This is from knowledge gained at
Siebel and other sources.
The "MBW" goes on to say:
"So remember its (sic) the polyphenols that are the major producers
of haze."
With no references to back this up, it is really hard to believe.
Kunze, as well as others, states that chill haze is the product of
proteins AND polyphenols that have reacted to form insoluble
complexes. Polyphenols don't form haze on their own; they need to
combine with proteins.
Kunze talks about the importance of minimizing chill haze precursors
to help avoid haze in the final beer. Removing either the protein or
the polyphenol will reduce chill haze.
In fact, tannin (a polyphenol) can be added to beer to haze proof it!
Tannin is added to the beer to react with the haze-forming proteins.
This induced haze can than be lagered or filtered out.
Anheuser-Busch used to do this, but now use silica gel. Don't try
this trick at home; you don't want excess tannin in your beer!
"MBW" says:
"So to contradict your friend Kunze degrading the HMW proteins to MMW
proteins will aid in better head retention, more mouth feel, and also
better hot and cold break, by the interaction of polyphenols with
proteins."
It is tough to contradict a major brewing figure without references.
Yes, MMW proteins aid head retention and lend mouthfeel to beer. They
are not more easily removed from the wort, though.
Kunze's assertion that the degradation products of HMW (high
molecular weight) proteins are more prone to form chill haze makes
sense because they are not as easily removed from the wort as the HMW
proteins. In the boil, both proteins and polyphenols are removed as
hot break. Larger proteins will be more likely to be removed in this
fashion than smaller ones. So while larger proteins would be good
candidates for haze producers, they are more easily and effectively
removed in the boil.
The mid-weight proteins that are formed when a protein rest at ~130F is
used are less completely removed during the boil, and may make it into
the packaged beer where they can react with polyphenols to form haze.
Kunze states (chart on p. 569) that low molecular weight polypeptides
are actually detrimental to foam stability, while large proteins
aid in foam retention to a certain degree. That is another reason not
to do a protein rest.
Interestingly, I was just talking to Roger Briess (the maltster) and
was bright enough to ask him his opinion of haze-causing proteins and
the need for p-rests. In short, he agrees with Kunze.
Oxidation of the beer will speed up the haze-producing process, and
help make a chill haze permanent. It is also important to note that
chill haze will become permanent if given enough time. Temperature
cycling and/or warm storage will speed this up, as will O2 and
shaking.
Back in January or February I quoted extensively from Kunze, listing
some of the things he considers to be most important for inducing
colloidal stability. Review that post for all the details (if you
care).
The Mystery Brewer also talks about some other possible causes of haze
in packaged beer, including starch, dextrins, and calcium oxalate
(beer stone). Starch can of course cause haze in beer. It will be a
permanent haze, though, not one that forms only in cold or old beer.
Dextrins causing haze is new to me; without data I am skeptical.
Calcium oxalate is something that commercial brewers pay attention to,
but not because of haze problems. Calcium oxalate (beer stone) is
insoluble. It can form in the package just like it forms in your
kettle. These crystals will provide nucleation sites for CO2 so that
when the beer is opened, GUSH!!!
The mega brewers are so wary of this that they actually work to
maintain excess calcium in the wort throughout the brew process (80 ppm
Ca++ in the packaged beer is adequate). This excess of calcium ensures
that all the calcium oxalate is formed in the brewery rather than in
the bottle or can. Gushers at homebrew contests are merely annoying;
imagine having a commercial beer gush at your dining table!
I guess that calcium oxalate could cause light scattering if it was
suspended, but my guess is that it would settle out pretty quickly.
I could write a LOT more about this stuff, but I have other stuff to
do!
Have fun!
George De Piro (Nyack, NY)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 11:05:14 -0500
From: David Kerr <dkerr@semc.org>
Subject: "acid malt"
Just stay away from the brown acid malt, man.
Dave Kerr - Needham, MA
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 13:02:42 -0500
From: James Tomlinson <red_beards@compuserve.com>
Subject: 0.08 BAC
In HBD2673, Samuel Mize wrote about some of my usenet posts and
reprinted some of it.
I need to make a couple of minor corrections, I posted it to Alt.beer,
not alt.politics (For any who care).
Also, I reposted the information from compuserve's Bacchus forum.
Pete Petrakis posted the original message to compuserve which I posted
in its entirety to alt.beer, with full credit to him.
- --
James Tomlinson
remove the "no.spam" to reply
Give a man a beer, and he wastes an hour.
But teach a man how to brew, and he wastes a lifetime!
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2675, 03/31/98
*************************************
-------
