Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2712
HOMEBREW Digest #2712 Wed 13 May 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:
FFFFOOOOOPPPPP!!! goes the weasel (Jeremy Bergsman)
delayed yeast count (Harlan Bauer)
homemade cara-pils (Jon Bovard)
Small Ale/Barleywine (Doug Geiss)
flying corks (Ninkasi)
HomeMade Crystal Malt (KennyEddy)
DMS / covered kettles / 1 data point (Steve)
Clinitest Calibration ("David R. Burley")
Re: yeast energizer/nutrient (brian_dixon)
Extract Brewing, All Grain Brewing & Chemistry ("Timothy Green")
Stout and The Grist (Al Korzonas)
Evaporation during the boil ... one more time! (brian_dixon)
Help with IBUs (michael rose)
GABF Roadshow (John Varady)
Re: kettle evaporation rates (Robert Arguello)
Fermentation question (Mason Harris)
New Yeast? (Paul Ward)
hops source (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
One potato, two potatoes (John Wilkinson)
FOP versus FOOP (Al Korzonas)
Corn Sugar Chemistry ("Michael R. Tucker")
Dr. Pivo and oxidation (Al Korzonas)
Fresh Hop supplier (Kevin TenBrink)
wet cardboard (Mark E. Lubben)
Re: Some newbie all grain questions (Rich and Susy)
calibration ("Ludwig's")
No particular subject ("Ludwig's")
1/2bbl fermenter ("Eric R. Tepe")
questions, questions, lots of questions (Jim English)
New Chest Freezer ("Michael Kowalczyk")
BURP's Spirit of Free Beer competition is June 6-7 and entry information
is available by contacting Jay Adams (adams@burp.org).
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: Tue, 12 May 1998 00:54:08 -0700
From: Jeremy Bergsman <jeremybb@leland.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: FFFFOOOOOPPPPP!!! goes the weasel
cburns@egusd.k12.ca.us (Charley Burns) writes:
> Duvel. I had barely loosened the wire basket when FFFFOOOOOPPPPP!!!
You see! I warned you! FOOP!
After Al misspells FOOP he writes:
> I feel that Jeremy's experience should be considered as one datapoint.
My experiment is absolutely one datapoint. My experience of making quite
a few batches with a largely covered pot is several datapoints (but only
one person's setup and methods etc.) I'm still waiting to hear the guy
who can actually say he gets the DMS in the beer only when he covers his
pot.
[contrary experimental results snipped (what else are you going to do
with contrary data?)]
> Might I suggest that perhaps the malt you used was very low in SMM
> (the precursor of DMS) or perhaps the room was filled with the smell
> of DMS and therefore the sample didn't smell much different than
> the room air...
I was brewing outside, but I agree that it was a malt low in SMM. Will
repeat with an upcomming DWC Pils mash.
> I really got different results than you did...
I believe you. This is an "experiment" that everyone can do with no
equipment except a lid and a glass in the course of 90 seconds and
so I think everyone reading this should disbelieve both you and me
and try it him or herself.
> I do agree however, that even a small opening in the lid should
> be good enough to prevent excessive DMS in the finished beer. Back
> when I used to brew on an electric stove, I had to cover the kettle
> about 90% and as long as I cooled the wort quickly, I didn't have
> any noticeable DMS in my ales. I think that as long as you cool
> the wort quickly and don't cover the kettle 100% you should be okay.
I think that's what I'm trying to say, but since it's 1 AM and I've
had a few beers, I'm not sure anymore.
- --
Jeremy Bergsman
jeremybb@leland.stanford.edu
http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~jeremybb
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 02:08:44 -0500
From: blacksab@midwest.net (Harlan Bauer)
Subject: delayed yeast count
I'd like to start taking a count of the pitching rate at the brewery I work
for...
Here's the problem--I pitch the yeast at approximately 4pm, but by the time
I get home after the cleaning run it's 8 or 9pm. The *snapshot* I'd like to
take is the number of cells pitched at 4pm, but if I take the sample at 4pm,
the cells will continue to multiply in the sample and by the time I get home
to do the count, I'm no longer examining the actual pitching rate, but the
number of cells 4 or 5 hours after pitching.
One solution I've thought of would be to take the sample and immediately
plunge it into salted ice to shock the yeast into dormancy, or at least to
slow them down.
Another possibility would be to heat the sample and kill the yeast, but then
I would not be able to run a viability test at the same time and with the
same sample.
BTW, we pitch from one fermenter to another so there is no way of knowing
the pitching rate except to count the cells in the recieving fermenter right
after pitching.
Anyone have any ideas?
Harlan.
Harlan Bauer ...malt does more than Milton can
Carbondale, IL To justify God's ways to man.
<blacksab@midwest.net> --A.E. Houseman
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 20:03:35 +1000 (EST)
From: Jon Bovard <j.bovard@student.qut.edu.au>
Subject: homemade cara-pils
Greetings to the collective!
Cara-Pils (dextrine) malt is possibly the last malt on the priority list
of the maltsters here in Australia (ie. we dont have it). Ive yet to come
across any malt so far
that fits the description or analisys of dextrine malts produced my
American companies such as Briess. Some stores sell a version of
"cara-pils" but it is more a mealier version of amber malt and
has too much "biscuit" flavour and a colour around 60EBC or so.
Ive noticed a lot of postings recently on how to make your own crystal
malts, and it sounds quite simple.
Noonan mentions the process briefly in the brewing bible "Lager
beer", but does anyone have a process for making cara-pils malt in a home
environment. I for one, want to try :).....
Many thankyous!!!
Cheers
Jon in Brisbane..
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 08:57:04 -0400
From: Doug Geiss <dgeiss@ford.com>
Subject: Small Ale/Barleywine
I brewed at one of the registered sites, in a demo with the Fermental
Order of Renaissance Draughtsmen on homebrew day. The
barleywine is still chugging along.... Any suggestions on a champagne
yeast? I did a cider 2 years ago, and used the standard dry packs of
yeast. In the last 5 years of beer brewing, though, I've never used dry
yeast, preferring to go with slap packs. Can you get champagne yeast
in liquid form?? How about one that isn't too dry?
We also did a small ale. I should have transferred to the secondary by now,
but the weather was too nice this past weekend. We ended up with a
1.045 ale. Did anyone else do a small ale?
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 09:05:43 EDT
From: Ninkasi <Ninkasi@aol.com>
Subject: flying corks
Charley Burns writes:
<<After hacking away at some copper pipe, we finally got to sit down with the
Duvel. I had barely loosened the wire basket when FFFFOOOOOPPPPP!!! The cork
nearly put my eye out as it whizzed past my face something just short of
lightspeed. Even left a dent in the ceiling.
So watch out! Open those things with great care or you may end up like that
alternative music group "One Eye Blind....".>>
That's good advice. 10 years of catering has convinced me to always use
extreme caution when uncorking carbonated drinks. I always drape a kitchen
towel over the cork before I uncage it. I reach under the towel to undo the
wire, but I also have most of the towel, along with the bottle neck, in my
other hand. That way if the cork decides to fly off before I'm ready (and
it's happened many times!!) it's caught in the towel and can't go far or hurt
anybody.
Ann
Saint Louis
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 09:28:03 EDT
From: KennyEddy <KennyEddy@aol.com>
Subject: HomeMade Crystal Malt
Steve Alexander cites George de Piro and asks for others' experiences:
>>In the old days, crystal malt was made by steeping finished pale malt
>>until a moisture content of ~45% was reached. You should change the
>>steep water quite often to avoid souring of the malt if you do it this
>>way (lest you make acid malt). Once the malt is appropriately wet, you
>>cover it and heat it to as close to 145-160F as you can to saccharify
>>it (just like mashing). After a couple of hours it will be noticeably
>>sweet and somewhat darker (keep an eye on it if you are trying to make
>>light crystal). You can then uncover it, let it dry, and raise the
>>temp anywhere from 170F to 350F to make the color crystal you want and
>>dry the malt. Easy!
>
>I guess I'll be trying this with some 2-row pale someday soon. Has
>anyone else ? Comments ?
Yeah, I've made crystal malt a couple of times, and it works nicely. George
covered it well in his post; the only thing I would add is that you should
soak the grain, covered, overnight *in the fridge* to prevent spoiling. No
need to change the water if you do this.
*****
Ken Schwartz
El Paso, TX
KennyEddy@aol.com
http://members.aol.com/kennyeddy
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 09:25:15 -0500 (CDT)
From: Steve <JOHNSONS@uansv5.Vanderbilt.Edu>
Subject: DMS / covered kettles / 1 data point
Al Korzonas brings up some good points on the covered kettle / DMS thread. I
would like to add a comment concerning the "one data point" issue that he
discussed. This would also be a good thread on the Judge Digest, but since
it seems to still be MIA, I'll talk about it here. This is in reference to
DMS sensitivity. A goup of us in Nashville were preparing for the BJCP exam
and were able to get access to one of the "off flavor" spiking kits that one
of our brewing community folks had brought back from his Seibel training
course. We spiked a whole case of Budweiser with varrying amounts of the
samples in order to experience different threshold levels of awareness of these
common beer flavors. DMS was one of these. Well, when it came time to
crack open the lowest of the 3 DMS samples we did, two of us at the table
smelled DMS as soon as the bottle was opened! Can you say "Ho Ho Ho! Green
Giant Niblets" !? These were blind samplings, too, by the way. What was
even more amazing was that several at the table even had a little trouble
picking up the aroma on the higher level spikings. I found this to be a very
educational experience, and for myself, I found that I have a little
difficulty picking up that buttery taste/aroma of diacetyl. So, one man's
"tastes OK to me / no DMS" may be another man's "Boy, Howdee, who's cookin'
corn in that kettle". Overexposure to DMS during a brew session also tends
to make one less aware of it than if you just walked in during the boil.
Steve Johnson
Music City Brewers
Nashville, TN
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 10:53:39 -0400
From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: Clinitest Calibration
Brewsters:
Jim Liddil says:
>I am surprised Dave Burley or anyone else never discusses
>the fact that regardless of the method one still should
calibrate or
>standardize the test or instrument.
I agree 100%. Use corn sugar as a standard source and
that should be fine for most uses. I have never tried it,
because I began using Clinitest long before corn sugar was
available in its spray dried form and I had no other form of
pure glucose readily available. I suspect that as long as
you are using it as an indicator for the end of the fermentation,
such a standardization is not really necessary. However, It
always is a good idea to run what I called a "confidence
experiment" ( one I knew would work) when I was doing my
thesis research. It would be interesting to see how this comes
out. I suspect that if you run sucrose you will also get a positive
test result, but it will be way off in a quantitative sense,
since I suspect a small percentage of glucose would be in there.
Like Jim, I am surprised BT didn't print a retraction to that article.
I mean, even the instruction on how to read a hydrometer
was incorrect. Read the *bottom* of the meniscus, not the
top as the article directed.
- --------------------------------------------
Keep on brewin'
Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
103164.3202@compuserve.com
Dave_Burley@compuserve.com
Voice e-mail OK
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 May 98 08:06:48 -0700
From: brian_dixon@om.cv.hp.com
Subject: Re: yeast energizer/nutrient
Chris asks about yeast energizer and nutrients, what's the difference
and how to use them.
I'm going to give an answer without the exact ingredients (fuzzy mind
... and no reference material with me here at work). Yeast nutrients
were developed first, and contain a couple of nutrients that help to
ensure that the yeast have what they need to perform a good clean
fermentation, e.g. metabolization of the sugars, growth and what not.
Yeast energizer is basically the same thing BUT has a better and more
complete balance of nutrients. If I remember right, dead yeast is
used in it (a good thing) and that gives a more complete and natural
mix of nutrients. Unless someone has some meaningful objections, I
believe that there is no reason to use yeast nutrients. Yeast
energizer is a better product and should be used instead, although
either is good enough.
When or how to use? Mix a teaspoon or two (per 5 gallons) in about a
quarter cup (sanitized cup) of your wort, warmed slightly in the
microwave, then pour this into the fermenter after transferring your
wort into it. Simple. No need to boil it.
Brian
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 11:18:53 -0400
From: "Timothy Green" <TimGreen@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Extract Brewing, All Grain Brewing & Chemistry
To the Collective:
I have been watching the digest over the last several weeks with building
concern.
I am an extract brewer who also uses additional grains that do not need to
be mashed. My main brewing intrest has been making mead, but I get a large
amount of enjoyment making and then drinking the beers that I make.
I was considering shifting to all-grain brewing to see just what it would do
for my beers, but now I am not so sure.
I have watched a recognized professional get blasted for giving out
information to help. This is something that is rude and in poor taste. The
fact that he still posted here to clarify the information totally amazed me.
If it had been me, the HBD would have never gotten another post from me!
I have also followed the thread on just what organic reactions are taking
place in beer. This is all fine and good, but I think that the point we all
became homebrewers is being missed. We all want to make and drink better
quality beer than we can buy. I had tons of chemistry in college including
biochemistry and organic chemistry. If I wanted to ply that trade, I would.
If that is what I have to look forward to if I switch to all-grain brewing,
I want no part of it.
I think we all need to get back to our roots, to brew good beer and have a
lot of fun doing it.
I'll get off my soapbox now.
Tim Green
timgreen@ix.spamnetcom.com
Remove spam from address to reach me. Spammers forced me to it.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 10:40:09 -0500 (CDT)
From: Al Korzonas <korz@xnet.com>
Subject: Stout and The Grist
Since I had met and tasted beers with Dr. John Harrison at the 1994 GBBF,
I sent email to Breworld in an attempt to get a clarification regarding
his article in The Grist, in which he said that "Stout" evolved from
"Stout Porter" which was decended from "Porter."
I received email from Geoff Cooper, fellow Durden Park Beer Circle member,
who relayed Dr. John Harrison's reply. It is as Spencer had speculated
and I concurred... reprinted here, ***with permission***:
Hi Al,
Maybe I should start refering to you as "the tall, long-haired, bearded
yank with the heavy camera bag"
Your email to The Grist, dated 5th May, concerning John Harrison's article
about stouts was passed to John who has asked me to respond to you
electronically. In your email you expressed surprise about John's early
paragraphs as you were aware of references to "stout" in 16th or 17th
century literature.
John advises that prior to around 1800, "stout" was an abbreviation for
"stout beer" meaning "strong beer". Just as now we might ask for a light or
a pale or a brown or a mild or even a bitter - all of which being
adjectives and the noun ale or beer being implied.
Originally, strong porters were known as "stout porter" and it is only
with time that "stout" has come to mean a black beer not necessarily strong.
John asked me to give a reference from H.S. Corran's 'A History of Ale and
Beer' where he mentions the brewing of 'stout butt beer'. Corran found the
earliest reference to 'stout' to be in a letter of MS Egerton in the
British museum stating "We will drink your health both in stout and best
wine". Also one of Swift's poems to Stella of 1720 includes the line
"Surprise him with a pint of stout ..."
Corran continues:
"A footnote to Faulkner's 1741 edition of Swift's works caustically
comments, 'Stout: a cant word for strong beer'. Stout today is a very dark
beer, usually stronger than the pale or brown beers commonly drunk; its
characteristics are its dark colour and possibly its creamy and
long-lasting foamy head. However, it would seem that in the early
eighteenth century stout was probably the strongest beer normally
available, the word merely indicating its strenghth or stoutness.
"'The London and Country Brewer' gives instructions for brewing 'Stout Butt
Beer'. 'Butt Beer' was in any case a superior variety and 'Stout Butt Beer'
was the very best"
I have not read the article in The Grist but I hope that answers your query.
Regards
Geoff
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz@xnet.com
http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 May 98 08:57:43 -0700
From: brian_dixon@om.cv.hp.com
Subject: Evaporation during the boil ... one more time!
I did some quick calculations on what I get with my boils (moderate
roll, not full heat and not 'simmer heat'), and here's what I found
and what I'm concluding from Dr. Fix's comments:
- Typical pre-boil volumes are from 7 to 8 gallons for my batches,
sized from 5 to 6 gallons according to recipe and fermenter that I
choose.
- Typical post-boil volumes run from 4 to 5.5 gallons, depending on
starting volume, length of boil, recipe and what not.
- I know from experience that I typically lose 2.5 gallons and a very
typical starting volume is 7.5 gallons, giving an evaporation rate of
33% (thirty three!). From what I've seen at the various brew sessions
at friend's and relative's places, this is pretty normal.
- I never sparge "to completion" according to the guidelines that I've
been taught (and have read many times), and I end up with enough wort
to _force_ having to lose the 33% volume in order to hit the fermenter
volume appropriately. I'm referring to rules such as, stop sparging
when a) the specific gravity of the runnings drops below 1.010, or b)
the pH of the runnings reaches 6.0, or c) when your boil pot is full.
These rules will guarantee that you have to give up far more than the
10-15% that Dr. Fix recommends.
The observation here is that the typical all-grain homebrewer is
probably losing twice the wort volume that Dr. Fix recommends.
Someone else posted curiosity about steam injection boiling and how
that probably prevents some of the loss. I'm not familiar with all
the different ways that the pro's (micros and up) conduct a boil, and
how well they manage the evaporation rate to the recommended 10-15%,
so I can't comment here.
The second observation is that if you want to end up with the
appropriate final volume (5 or 10 gallons etc), then you will have to
stop sparging sooner. In other words, the first rule of when to quit
sparging should be to stop when a) you have sparged from V/0.90 to
V/0.85 gallons (or liters etc), where 'V' is the intended volume in
the fermenter. Obviously, this will muck up your historical
extraction yield values (lower), but given that the first runnings are
higher quality than later runnings (maltier too), and a little extra
grain in the barrel is no big deal for home brewers, this is not an
issue.
The third observation is that Dr. Fix clearly stated that the thermal
loading issue is not a first order problem, but may be the kind of
thing that can add a point or two to your score at the competitions.
I think that's an excellent way to communicate the magnitude of the
issue!
Since I typically brew for 5.5 post-boil gallons (allow 1/2 gal. for
kettle loss from the pot to the fermenter), I will take the above
suggestions and try the following:
1) Stop sparging when I have 6.1 to 6.5 gallons in the fermenter (5.5
gallons divided by 0.90 to 5.5 gallons divided by 0.85),
2) Continue to top off with boiling water during the boil to maintain
approximately 5.5 gallons,
3) Continue to use the same rolling boil that I always use, but do #2
as appropriate.
As a further, fun, test, I'll do a test mash or two to determine my
extraction efficiency with this shortened sparge. Then when I brew a
batch of beer this way, I'll do it with a friend and we'll brew the
same recipe ... one with approximately 33% evaporation, and one with
about 10% evaporation. Should be fun! (And ANOTHER excuse to brew!)
Brian
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 09:25:15 -0700
From: michael rose <mrose@ucr.campus.mci.net>
Subject: Help with IBUs
I just recieved a free booklet with my subscription to BT. It's
"Selected Homebrew Recipes". Several of the recipes are in percentage
format. Example: Steelhead Amber
O.G. 16.0 Plato
76% Two Row
12% Caramel
Etc.
Hops 33 IBUs
Centennial 90 minutes
Perle 20 minutes
Cascade End
My question is, How do I figure the Hop amounts? If it was 33 IBUs for
one addition I could use Ray Danials (or anybodys) formulas. Is
something missing from the recipes or I missing something. If the recipe
is bad then go ahead and post. If I'm making a hugh blunder then better
to e-mail :^)
- --
Michael Rose Riverside, CA mrose@ucr.campus.mci.net
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 12:27:54 -0700
From: John Varady <rust1d@usa.net>
Subject: GABF Roadshow
Well, the GABF roadshow is this weekend. Are any of our readers planning on
attending? I will be going down to Baltimore early Saturday afternoon,
checking into the Tremont Plaza and then heading over to Sissons brew pub
for some Cajun/Creole food and beer. If anyone wants to meet there before
the evening session, drop me a line or just show up (I'll wear my blue
Philadelphia Folk Festival Tee) around 3 o'clock. Sissons is walking
distance from the Baltimore Convention Center and the Tremont Plaza.
Is there any after-festival festivities planned?
Sisson's - South Baltimore Brewing, 36 East Cross Street, Baltimore, MD
21230, (410) 539-2093
John
John Varady http://www.netaxs.com/~vectorsys/varady
Boneyard Brewing The HomeBrew Recipe Calculating Program
Glenside, PA rust1d@usa.net
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 09:35:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: Robert Arguello <robertac@calweb.com>
Subject: Re: kettle evaporation rates
Not to beat this horse to death but,
as yet another single data-point.....
I have changed my procedures slightly for the last 5 batches. Previously, I
would bring the wort to a vigorously rolling boil for 10 minutes, make my
first hop addition then maintain the most violent boil I could manage for
the full 70 minute period.
My kettle is a converted 15.5 gallon Sanke over a 180K BTU ring burner by
Metal Fusion.
Evaporation would be very high. Typically reducing 7.5 gallons to about 5
gallons in the course of a 70 minute boil. My math challenged brain puts
that at 33% loss.
For the last 5 batches I have employed a slightly different technique.... I
bring the wort to a vigorous rolling boil and continue until hot break is
evident. This is usually at about 15 minutes. At that point, I add my first
hop addition and begin my 60 minute boil. 5 minutes after the first hop
addition I reduce the temp so that a gentle boil is maintained for the
duration. With this procedure, my evaporation rate is reduced to about 18%.
I have only been able to sample two of the five beers boiled in this manner.
The recipe I used is one that I am very familiar with as I have brewed it at
least 200 times in the past. For what it's worth, there seems to be less
"harshness", a little more malt profile, more "complexity" in the beers
flavor profile and ,(surprisingly to me), slightly better head retention.
That, coupled with the savings in propane, seems to me a fairly good
argument for reducing the "thermal loading" of the wort.
"All In A Day's Wort"
Robert Arguello
robertac@calweb.com
CORNY KEGS FOR SALE! $12.00 each
See them at http://www.calweb.com/~robertac/keg.htm
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 10:07:03 +0000
From: Mason Harris <smharris@ed.co.sanmateo.ca.us>
Subject: Fermentation question
Hello brew buddies!
I have spoken to a few professional brewers and they tell me that they
let
the fermentation go for about six days (about four for fermentation and
then a couple for a diacetyl rest) and then they drop the temperature of
the fermentor to settle out the yeast.
I am wondering what most of you are doing out there. I usually let it
set
in the fermentor for two weeks before racking to a keg and lowering the
temperature and carbonating for another week before it is ready to
drink.
Wouldn't it make more sense to rack it into the keg after one week to
get
more clearing at the lower temperature? Then it would be 1 week in the
fermentor at cellar temperture and then two weeks in the keg at about
45F
to settle out the yeast just as the professional brewers do.
Do any of you do this?
Thanks.
- --
Mason Harris, MA (\
SMCOE Educational Audiologist -{ ||| 8-
smharris@ed.co.sanmateo.ca.us (/
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 13:31:53 -0400 (EDT)
From: Paul Ward <paulw@doc.state.vt.us>
Subject: New Yeast?
While picking up supplies last week for Sunday's brew session, I saw
a yeast package in the shops fridge that I had never seen before:
an 11.5 gram packet of sried ale yeast, name "Safale". In a real
pretty blue packet with budding yeast cells on the top of the packet.
It is designated s-04, and claims to be sufficient for 4 to 6
gallons (doesn't state if that is imperial or U.S.). The back of the
packet reads:
Ingredients: yeast, Emulsifier:E491
packaged in a protective atmosphere
Characteristics: fast fermentation, bottom flocculation,
medium attenuation
Application: wide range of ale beers.
(everything was also written in French).
This product is made by: DCL yeast, Ltd.
Salatin House
19 Cedar Road
Sutton
Surrey SM2 5JG
United Kingdom
I've never heard of this yeast before. Anyone used it yet, maybe in
the Kingdom? I pitched (rehydrated) on Sunday at noon time, and by 6
that evening I had fermentation glugging away, so it is fast. Time
will tell how good it works out.
I noticed that they also had a "Saflager" product. I thought real
lager yeasts couldn't be dried. Technology improved? Gimick?
oh well, it is a real pretty packet.
Paul in Vermont
paulw@doc.state.vt.us
- --
According to government height/weight charts,
I'm seven and a half feet tall.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 14:13:09 -0400 (EDT)
From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: hops source
F. Pauly is asked about a source for hops. I have been getting whole hops
from Hoptech and have been most impressed with their quality. Opening one
of their 8 oz. bags of Cascade flowers smells like heaven!
- ------------------------------------------------------------------
"Graduate school is the snooze button on the alarm clock of life."
-Jim Squire
-Alan Meeker
Johns Hopkins Hospital
Dept. of Urology
(410) 614-4974
__________________________________________________________________
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 May 98 13:22:11 CDT
From: jwilkins@wss.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson)
Subject: One potato, two potatoes
Dr. Pivo:
>"There are two guys standing outside in the cold, and one of them has a
>hot potatoe in his hands".
Now I know who Dr. Pivo is.
Dan Quayle.
Actually, I had to look it up myself.
John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins@wss.dsccc.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 13:46:47 -0500 (CDT)
From: Al Korzonas <korz@xnet.com>
Subject: FOP versus FOOP
Please note that in the previous discussions of this alleged
phenomenon, I believe that they were called "Foam Only Once Proteins"
with an acronym of "FOOP." This would be important for those
trying to do searches of the archives.
Al.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 14:54:48 -0400
From: "Michael R. Tucker" <mtucker@frii.com>
Subject: Corn Sugar Chemistry
Hi All,
Quick question. Corn sugar is dextrose right? Now, corn starch, like that
found in the grocery store is what exactly? I mean, starch by definition
is a "string" of sugars covalently bonded if I remember my organic
chemistry correctly.
dex-dex-dex-dex-dex-dex and so on.
Question- is corn starch like that sold in groceries merely "mislabelled"
molecular dextrose; or is it really starch like the example above? Let's
say corn starch sold in groceries really is strings of dextrose. Do you
think the amylase enzymes are still active in the brew to break those bonds
down so the yeastie beasties can get back to work on the resulting
molecular dextrose?
Another question- Is there a product at the grocery store that is a
suitable replacement priming sugar? Like maybe...... corn starch??? :-)
My organic chemistry is too far in the past for me to remember my sugar
chemistry......
- ---
Michael R. Tucker
http://www.frii.com/~mtucker
mtucker@frii.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 14:29:13 -0500 (CDT)
From: Al Korzonas <korz@xnet.com>
Subject: Dr. Pivo and oxidation
I'm afraid it's hard to compete with Dr. Pivo when it comes to simplifying
science or creative writing, but I'll shlump along with my comparatively
uneloquent prose and comment on his interesting post...
>Do all of you out there have repeated problems with wet cardboard
>flavours, that HSA must be raised as a banner again and again?
I have had the misfortune of judging a lot of wet cardboard beers (and
no, I wasn't drinking them out of an old Reebok box...).
>My personal experience, is that I spent many years unnesessarily
>pussy-footing around with my beer after reading about HSA effects
>(believe it was Miller's first book that had me treating the beer in my
>kettle like I was putting a quaqdraplegic to bed), and have since found
>the effect within my set-up to be "insignificant" between a bit of
>splashing, and escetic reverence.
I read all of Miller's books and don't recall him mentioning oxidation
of hot wort at all. I don't even recall *any* author mentioning oxidation
in the mash tun until it was brought up in the HBD. And I'm pretty sure
that it was George Fix who coined the phrase "hot-side aeration" unless
he read it in some professional brewing journal and brought it to the HBD,
Zymurgy and Brewing Techniques.
I have personally seen dramatic improvement in the flavour and aroma of
my beer (especially in "sherrylike" and "wet cardboard" aromas) ever
since I stopped aerating my wort while it was still hot. There are many
other areas in my brewing setup in which I made smaller, but noticeable
improvements in my beer by being more careful with the handling of my
mash and beer (read: reducing aeration).
>Now if you want to discuss "oxidation tastes", the most sure-fire way I
>know of sending a beer to an early "old-barrel" grave, is to have a
>secondary temperature, just a tad higher than your primary, and let the
>temperature creep up slightly (one degree is plenty) during the
>secondary. If that beer tastes fresh for ten minutes, I've never caught
>it (this is a recurrent problem each summer, when using a non
>electrified lagering cellar, and entails a LOT of carboy shifting). But
>of course, as radical tasting as this effect is, it doesn't resolve very
>well into an A-> B model of analysis, and never gets mentioned!
I'm probably the sloppiest brewer when it comes to temperature control
and bottling beers when they are done. I had a 1.034 Dark Mild make
it to the second round of the AHA Nationals *18 months* after bottling
and that beer at least four weeks in the carboy with the temperature
rising and falling at least 5 degrees. I've a box full of ribbons and
I'm coming up on a dozen 2nd-round beers. I'm sorry Dr. Pivo... I must
respectfully disagree with your assertion.
> Or how
>about "transport damage"-- I love the Ales in England, but have never
>tasted one outside of the Island that doesn't have that "edge". Nope,
>instead HSA get's thumped again and again, as "getting oxygen in causes
>oxidation" is a much easier concept to understand... even if the actual
>effects have never plagued the people discussing it (or have they?).
Transport damage is really time, agitation and heat... all three will
accelerate the damage caused by oxygen if it is introduced at the wrong
time in the brewing process. A perfect example of this was a sixpack
of Samuel Smith's Oatmeal Stout (no shortage of melanoidins here!) I
had about a year ago in which the aldehydes (yes, I am very well aware
of how they smell/taste) were nearly overpowering. They were far worse
than any other beer I have had in the past (commercial or homebrewed).
Anyone who has been to Tadcaster will tell you that the one thing
that sets the beer made at the Old Brewery apart from other beers (even
more than the fact that it is brewed in Yorkshire Squares) is that the
fishtails circulating the beer introduce an incredible amount of oxygen
during fermentation. This is not a problem for beer that is served
via handpump two weeks later, but it does pose a problem for beer that
is pasteurised and then shipped to the US.
>Avoiding oxidation in general? I think there are two approaches... The
>modern industrial; which is to remove all manner of things which might
>not taste good when oxidized (even if they were terribly interesting in
>their non oxidized state) or the traditional; this was to keep a supply
>of the best little reductants available shoved inside the keg, that is,
>living yeast.....
Some of the most damaged beers that come across the big pond are from those
modern low-oxygen beer factories, so I don't think that argument will wash.
Furthermore, George Fix either posted in HBD or sent me a private
communication several years ago in which he reported on an experiment in
which a measured amount of oxygen was intentionally introduced into the
headspace of a bottle of bottle-conditioned beer and then the beer was
analysed some time later. Some of the oxygen was still in the headspace,
some had reacted with the beer and some was missing, presumably consumed
by the yeast. The important points are, that not *all* the oxygen reacted
with the beer and not *all* the oxygen was consumed by the yeast! If
George could point us to where the full text of the experiment was published,
I'm sure all of us would be very grateful.
Oxygen is not Hitler, but there's plenty of data and experience that
proves aeration at the wrong time is not to be taken lightly.
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz@xnet.com
http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 16:02:00 -0600
From: Kevin TenBrink <tenbrink@jps.net>
Subject: Fresh Hop supplier
Rick asked about getting some fresh hops
>>I've been trying to find a supplier that sells really fresh whole
hops and have been dissappointed.<<
I have used and been very impressed with Hops Direct, they are hops
farmers that sell direct to the consumer because the commercial demand
has dropped. Diana at hops direct is very nice and helpful.
Their webpage is at http://www.hopsdirect.com
standard nonaffiliated disclaimer applies, just a happy customer.
>>I bought an 8 oz. bag of
cascade, well packaged from a well known supplier and yet when I
split a 10 gallon batch and dry hopped one half in the secondary
with 1/2 oz for 2 weeks there was zero hop aroma and only a touch
of hop character compared to the non-dry hopped half.<<
I usually dry hop with at least a whole ounce of whole flowers just
dumped into the secondary without a hop sock or other such device. 2
weeks is a good amount of time, just try upping the amount a little.
cheers
Kevin
Salt Lake City
Nine Inch Ales Homebrew club
http://www.jps.net/tenbrink/nineinchales.htm
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 19:12:27 -0400
From: mel@genrad.com (Mark E. Lubben)
Subject: wet cardboard
In #2711 Mort Sullivan posted that trans-2-nonenal is derived from
breakdown and oxidation of fatty acids including Linoleic Acid in the
wort. This sounds like the "break" would be a contributor which
might affect how succeptable the beer is to HSA causing T2nonenal vs
acetaldehyde. I know we are told not to ferment on the hot break,
and to get off the cold break before too long, but seldom specifics.
My question: Can anyone directly remember a specific batch with the
wet cardboard smell (trans-2-nonenal) and the presence or absence of
break material during primary. I am not talking about the sherry character.
Even a few personal (anecdotal) experiences pro or con might help us all
to make more stable beer. Of course if you have a learned reference to
cite, that is good to, but you know us homebrewers. ;^)
This lloks like a better thread than FOOP, but I will summarize any emails.
Mark Lubben
BTW:
Thanks to the HBD I think I have resolved that what I thought was
a slow infection of a weizen was actually yeast bite or degradation.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 19:34:27 -0400
From: Rich and Susy <cinnamon@erinet.com>
Subject: Re: Some newbie all grain questions
Tim Runnette writes:
> I've been reading a lot about single mash infusion and have decided to take
> the plunge from partial mash and extract to all grain.
>
> 1. I have a false bottom and a 5 gallon igloo picnic cooler.....can I use
> the same vessel for a mash tun and lauter tun???
> 2. If no, why not? It would seem like transferring vessels would be a loss
> in temperature.
> 3. Any recommendations or lessons learned would be greatly appreciated as I
> delve into the world of all grain
> 4. Been reading The Brewmaster's Bible by Snyder as my motivation and most
> recent reference.
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Tim.
Tim,
I'm an all-grain newbie, too, so I'm interested in seeing the
responses to your message. In the meantime I'll pass on what I've
heard/read. You can use the picnic cooler as a mash/lauter tun. The
one caution is to beware the dreaded 'stuck sparge.' Doing the mash in
your lauter tun may increase the chances of the grains getting below
your false bottom which can cause stuck sparges. This is especially
likely if you agitate or stir the mash, which I've seen experienced
all-grainers do during the mash. I've read that you should avoid
aerating the mash to prevent off-flavors, so I'm not sure why they've
stirred. I guess the concern about aerating the mash might be a con
with using a separate mash tun from a lauter tun. In spite of this and
your concern about loss of temperature, I'm planning on using a
rectangular cooler for mashing, then scoop the grains to an igloo-type
cooler with false bottom for sparging. I'm curious about the pros/cons
of this approach vs. the single cooler mash/lauter tun.
Thanks,
Rich
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 21:36:01 -0400
From: "Ludwig's" <dludwig@us.hsanet.net>
Subject: calibration
Jim Liddil says:
> The same applies to
> hydrometers and refractometers. They need to be calibrated. I know a
> number of people who have had problems in brewing only to find their
> hydrometer was out of wack.
This is real good advice. Check new hydrometers in water at the
specified temp before use. I have a new hydrometer that reads about
1 deg P low. Once you know the offset, it's usable.
Dave Ludwig
Flat Iron Brewery
Southern MD
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 22:07:57 -0400
From: "Ludwig's" <dludwig@us.hsanet.net>
Subject: No particular subject
Things sure have been quiet on the gadget front... Something must be
brewing ;)
Dave Ludwig
Flat Iron Brewery
So Md
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 23:00:02 -0400
From: "Eric R. Tepe" <erictepe@fuse.net>
Subject: 1/2bbl fermenter
I just realized while sitting here, reading my e-mail and enjoying a
Guiness that I left off some of my most recent post (silly me). I have
a half barrel that has had the thing in the center removed and I would
like to use it as a fermenter, but how do I know it is clean? I read Dr.
Fix's post several years ago and I am kind of scared of missing
something while cleaning or of "beer scale" forming. I would like to
airlock it. Does anyone have any suggestions?
Thanks in advance to all that respond.
Eric
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 23:23:04 -0400
From: Jim English <jimebob@mindspring.com>
Subject: questions, questions, lots of questions
My Munich Helles has been lagering for 3 weeks at 40F or less. I don't
think it has quite fermented all the way out. I know I goofed I should
have let it go a little longer at a higher temp before I started
lagering it, but, too late.
First question: should I just let it come back up to a temp the yeast(
Wyeast 2308) can handle and see if it ferments out any more? (I know I
risk esters and other aley characteristics but what the hell this is
only my second lager).
Second question: if no more fermentation occurs and I go ahead and
bottle it as is (TG 1.010 was expecting 1.006 or so) should I pitch a
yeast starter for carbonation, and if so, should I use the same yeast.
Third question: how much do I adjust the priming rate down to compensate
for the amount of wort in the starter.
Fourth question: is there anything more of a blast than brewing 1907
gallons of Barleywine at one time coast-to-coast......cool!
Latron
JRE
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 22:52:51 -0700
From: "Michael Kowalczyk" <mikekowal@megsinet.net>
Subject: New Chest Freezer
Got a new chest freezer and a controller. Ho boy! Ales in the summer,
lagers in the winter.... I have a problem though. I can't fit 2 carboys in
the big portion. I'm about total of an inch short in diameter.
Question: Anyone know a source for odd size carboys? I use 6 - 6.5 gallon
carboys, but they would need to be a little skinnier than the ones that I
have.
TIA
- Mike from Chicago.
p.s. Love the Big Brew talk. Got me itchin for next year!
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2712, 05/13/98
*************************************
-------
