Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2726
HOMEBREW Digest #2726 Fri 29 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:
Re: RIMS Ideas (Kenneth B Johnsen <NADB>)
homemade stir-plate (Scott Murman)
Just starting. (John D Lichtenberger)
mash/sparge one day, boil the next (Randy Ricchi)
polyclar and dead musicians (AlannnnT)
yeast reuse (Alex Gonzales)
Weissheimer malt (Stephen Cavan)
beer engine? ("George Techentine")
The Practical Brewer is NOT Handbook of Brewing (Andy Walsh)
Correction ("Houseman, David L")
spam; buying sensory beers; time; Big Brew; pressure (Samuel Mize)
Help with all grain requested ("Tom Struzik")
Re: pressure cooking a batch, wedding brews (Mark T A Nesdoly)
Style series books (Michael Rose)
Update on Safale dry yeast (Paul Ward)
A plastic vs. glass datapoint ("Dave Draper")
Rhubarb Beer, AHA, Alaska (Ken Schramm)
Secondary/Shipping/Yeast/Cybil Gump/Contests (John Varady)
cheap propane burners (JPullum127)
Altbier/Crystal vs. Caramel malts (Al Korzonas)
classic beer styles series (Dan Szemenyei)" <iamelvis@esu.edu>
Shucks! (Some Guy)
Bitter/Sweet Help Needed ("Frederick L. Pauly")
Re: Spent Grain Brain (irajay)
Some Stuff (Kyle Druey)
yeast (Andy Walsh)
Water Ponters and Fermentation Temps Vs Esters (Ken Schroeder)
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: Wed, 27 May 1998 17:50:52 -0400
From: kbjohns@peakaccess.net (Kenneth B Johnsen <NADB>)
Subject: Re: RIMS Ideas
In a previous issue, Louis Bonham sugests a seperate, small glycol filled,
heating chamber, filled with glycol to replace the RIMS heating chamber. He
then compares this system to a heating coil in an HLT and feels the
advantage of the heating chamber would be a quicker response than trying to
change HLT temps.
He's correct in that the HLT temp can not be changed quickly but what he
misses is that the temp of the HLT has a fairly wide temperature range
160-175 with a properly designed coil
Also from my point of view you would have to control both the flow of the
wort and the liquid temp in the chamber, making a more complicated system.
With a coil in the HLT you only have to monitor flow rate via a valve.
The other advantage of the coil in HLT is the speed with which temp
increases can be done. 8.5 min from 120F to 150F with 17 Lbs of grain and
1.3qt/lb of water.
Bob
Precision Brewing Systems URL http://www.pbsbeer.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 16:04:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: Scott Murman <smurman@best.com>
Subject: homemade stir-plate
I'm going to try putting together a homemade stir plate. I simply
can't get fast enough growth when stepping up my starters from a petri
dish. I know someone recently posted their success with this project,
but the damn search engine at the Brewery site sucks, and Spencer
Thomas' page doesn't seem to exist any longer, so I couldn't find the
post.
I was planning on getting a small DC motor, a power source, some type
of power control (a rheostat?), a drive magnet, and a teflon-coated
stir magnet or two. Then build it into some type of thin wooden
shell.
How big of a drive magnet is required? Is there a source for them
other than over-priced scientific supply houses? Maybe old stereo
speakers? Also, is there any preference on the radius arm that the
drive magnet is attached to or the RPM?
Any other advice is welcome.
SM
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 19:40:20 EDT
From: jlich@juno.com (John D Lichtenberger)
Subject: Just starting.
Hello everyone.
I am new to this hobby, I just finished enjoying my first batch of beer
made with Mr. Beer. Where do I go from here. Should I stick with Mr. Beer
until my skills progress, or jump into this without looking into the pool
first? I thank you all for any help I might receive.
John
_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 21:55:59 -0400
From: Randy Ricchi <rricchi@ccisd.k12.mi.us>
Subject: mash/sparge one day, boil the next
Danie de Villiers asked about mashing/sparging one night, and boiling the
next. For years, I have done just that, except I never bothered to boil
for 10 minutes after sparging. I simply sparged until I collected the
amount of wort I wanted, then I covered the wort and let it sit until the
next day (sometimes until 4:00 p.m., when I get home from work).
I never had problems with this technique, and it's a great way to brew if
you feel that a regular all-grain brew day is too long from start to finish.
I posted this technique to the Homebrew Digest once or twice in the past,
and saw a few responses, always critical, guessing at problems like
hot-side aeration (NOT), bacterial infection (NOT). Good guesses, but no
one ever posted they had actually tried the method and had bad results.
Evidently, no one ever tried it.
I see a lot of people post to the HBD with seemingly life or death
questions about whether they should try something or not. Now, I guess if
you brew once a year and it seems like a huge amount of work, you might be
afraid to try something that didn't come with a rock-solid guarantee; but I
brew on the average, 26 batches a year, and I take it in stride if now and
then one of my experiments turns out to be less stellar than I had hoped
for. The results are never horrible, and I gain another datapoint of
personal experience that is more valuable to me than anything I can read in
a book.
Not that I'm against reading to improve your brewing, mind you. I read a
lot, and I love reading all the theory that is available, both on this
forum and in the printed media. The problem is, if you're really
interested in brewing, you'll be really inquisitive. And if you're really
inquisitive, you'll have questions that you can't always readily find
answers to. At that point, I say give it a whirl, take good notes, and
think about what you tried to do when you are tasting the results of your
efforts, and learn by and for yourself something about brewing. If you
feel the probability of failure is fairly high, brew a fairly small batch
so you won't have too much of a not-so-good thing on hand when your
experiment is through.
Now that I'm done ranting, I noticed that Danie asks about the long contact
with copper. I always had mine in stainless. Anyone out there with a
comment on long copper contact?
I also never added the hops the night before, preferring to wait until I
was into the boil the next day, adding my first (bittering) hops with 60
minutes left in the boil. I can't comment on such an extended "first wort
hopping". My gut instinct scares me away from it.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 22:12:16 EDT
From: AlannnnT@aol.com
Subject: polyclar and dead musicians
Eric Fouch posted,
"Don't let a lack of qualificatins[sic] stop you from pursuing your career
goals.
I was never qualified for any of the positions I acheived."
-Sonny Bono, an excerpt from "I'm Living Proof You Can Have The American
Dream"
Perhaps had Sonny been a qualified skier...
On the polyclar front, personal and possibly irrelevant opinion only;
Adding plastic, even microfine plastic to my beer is more objectionable than
having a little haze. When fining in the keg some will be in your glass.
The FDA is on the fence about the addition of polyclar. The Williams catalogue
sort of mumbles a disclaimer about decanting your brew before drinking.
When bottling, assum some polyclar will make it's way into your bottles, and
if your beer is slightly stirred up before decanting you will wind up drinking
some plastic.
[Then again, plastic is better than weevils.]
In filtered brew polyclar doesn't matter, but not many of us filter.
Gelatine is possibly less objectionable, except for us radically non-meat
eaters.
I have always found that an extended stay at 32 deg F clears my beer pretty
well. At least enough for
non-competition brews.
Best Brewing,
Alan Talman
[Soon to take Eric Fouch's sensitivity class, as soon as scholarship funds
become available.]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 19:41:12 -0700 (PDT)
From: Alex Gonzales <brewingismylife@yahoo.com>
Subject: yeast reuse
I just wanted to reply to Mark Hillman's inquiry about reusing yeast.
Wyeast's web site has very detailed information about "washing" yeast
for reuse.
Alex Gonzales
Salt Lake City, Utah
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 20:59:12 -0600 (CST)
From: Stephen Cavan <cavanst@duke.usask.ca>
Subject: Weissheimer malt
Someone had asked for the specifications on Weissheimer malts. While there
will some variance with lots, this is what Weissheimer says is a "Typical
Malt Specification" for Pilsener malt:
Extract % db 80.7%
Moisture 3.8%
Extract Diff, db 1.8
Color SRM 1.73
Hartong index 35.8
Protein max 10.5%
Kolbach index 39.2
I hope that helps,
Steve
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 04:39:17 -0500
From: "George Techentine" <gtechen1@tuelectric.com>
Subject: beer engine?
Hello All,
I was at my local water store lately and saw a hand pump that mounts on top
of the water carboys' opening. The handpump then can be used to pump
water out of a 'faucet' on the pump. Can I use this as a poor - mans beer
engine? Have you seen these before? They cost about $22 (us).
Will my beer be ruined?
George Techentine
Baker Street Brew
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 15:42:30 -0700
From: Andy Walsh <awalsh@ventrassist.com>
Subject: The Practical Brewer is NOT Handbook of Brewing
Handbook of Brewing and Practical Brewer are definitely not the same
book. The former is very recent and the latter is much older. Neither is
of much use to homebrewers IMHO. The Handbook of Brewing should still be
available.
Andy.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 08:54:44 -0400
From: "Houseman, David L" <David.Houseman@unisys.com>
Subject: Correction
"There will also be a BJCP exam offered on Friday night which will make
you
eligible to judge if you are not already a BJCP judge. people interested
in
taking the exam should contact Dave Houseman at
dhousema+AEA-cccbi.chester.pa.us ."
Chuck's mailer must have done something funky with the "AT" sign, "@",
in case this one does the same in my email address above. The +AEA-
string is really the @ sign. dhousema@cccbi.chester.pa.us is the email
address to use in case you want to take/retake the BJCP exam in
Downingtown on June 26th, 7pm, and you haven't already contacted me.
Dave Houseman
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 08:25:34 -0500 (CDT)
From: Samuel Mize <smize@prime.imagin.net>
Subject: spam; buying sensory beers; time; Big Brew; pressure
Lo, in HBD #2725 "Jeffrey M. Kenton" saith unto us:
> Subject: AAHHHH Summer! (Low Bandwidth time)
>
> Howdy folks. I saw a couple of ads in recent HBDs,...
> the janitors are spending their time doing something
> worthwhile (not shackled to the server).
...
> Keep up the good work, I love the result every day.
I concur fully. I don't want us to hold up publication of the HBD until a
janitor can check it for ads.
Does the HBD allow non-subscribers to post to it? Has this been discussed
before? Some mailing lists prevent this to reduce spammage, others allow it.
I WOULD vote that such spam be removed in the HBD archives.
Behold, "Jeffrey M. Kenton" saith further:
> Is there a good resource out there for sensory evaluation that includes
> commercial beers that I don't need to spike?
Al Korzonas' book has a list in it, if you have that.
- - - - - - - - - -
Unto us from "Richard Cox" cometh this plaintive cry:
> I recently bottled a high-gravity amber ale that (due to scheduling
> conflicts) sat in the primary for nearly 2 weeks, and then in the secondary
> for another two weeks. This is the first time in my brewing career that
> I've let a beer sit around that long,
Well, you lazy bugger. Good grief, many people consider those MINIMUM times.
> Tonight I did my usual one-week taste test and cracked open a bottle. Not
> flat, but practically. There's a hint of carbonation, but not enough.
...
> Am I worrying needlessly?
Yes. Let it sit another couple of weeks. After a two-week secondary
fermentation, I wouldn't EXPECT it to carbonate in a week. Again, this is
absolutely on target for many brewers.
- - - - - - - - - -
Further is granted unto us this wisdom from the Brewing Book of Numbers:
> From: "Jethro Gump" <brewer@ames.net>
> Subject: Big Brew '98 Stats-Abridged
...
> More than 1000 brewers @ 105 sites......more than 1350 gallons of Big
> 10/20 (14,400 12 oz bottles equivalent,)
This is just a hundred times gross, man...
- - - - - - - - - -
Then spake unto us "jim booth", who saith:
> Subject: pressure cooking as thermal loading
...
> the big boy brewers are experimenting with pressure cooking wort to save
> energy but are finding detrimental flavors impacts.
>
> I didn't care for my last batch of pressure cooked wort bohemian pilsner
> but attributed the problem to my over enthusiastic use of soured mash.
My recollection of the thread on pressure cooking from a few months (year
or two?) ago was that it gives a nice malty flavor when you p-cook a part
of your wort, but p-cooking all of it gives an excessive, syrupy taste.
- - - - - - - - - -
Well, back to reading the bible.
Best,
Sam Mize
- --
Samuel Mize -- smize@imagin.net (home email) -- Team Ada
Fight Spam - see http://www.cauce.org/
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 11:04:18 -0400
From: "Tom Struzik" <tom@struzik.com>
Subject: Help with all grain requested
Hello all -
I have been lurking for quite a while now & have learned a great deal. I
was recently inspired to go all grain. I believe that the beer that I am
making now is in many ways the best that I have brewed. I have brewed about
4 all grain batches within the last 2 months. They are all from the 7
Barrel Brewery handbook. The taste & clarity have been impressive. I am
having a problem, however in hitting my target OG. In my latest batch, an
IPA with a target OG of 1056 I came up around 1046. I have had similar
problems with the other batches. This was my procedure:
10# English Pale 2 Row
1/2# Carapils
3/4# Crystal
1/4# Flaked Barley
Mashed into 165F strike water to end up at 151F for 75 minutes with 4 1/4G
liquor
Sparged to fill kettle with 6 1/2 G of wort.
My original pH of the strike water was 6.44~6.62
First runoff the was pH 5.51 and final was pH 5.59
Boiled for 90 minutes and ended up with about 5 G of wort.
I mash, sparge & boil in one kettle. It is a 10 G stainless steel with a SS
false bottom. The volume between the false bottom and the actual bottom is
about 1G. The above recipe includes an added 1G of water to compensate for
this. I also added an extra # of pale malt.
Any ideas to improve my procedures? I just began Noonan's NBLB...
Thanks alot!
- Tom
------------------------------
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by mail.usask.ca
From: Mark T A Nesdoly <mtn290@mail.usask.ca>
Subject: Re: pressure cooking a batch, wedding brews
Jim Booth asks in HBD #2725 if anyone who has pressure cooked part of a
batch has subsequently entered it in a competition, and if so, how did it do?
The first time I ever did a decoction, I did a triple decoction weizen. At
the time, there was a discussion on rcb about pressure cooking the last thin
decoction, so I decided to try it. It worked fairly well (there was so much
break material, I was afraid that the release valve on my pressure cooker
would clog and...boom!). However, due to the added effort, I haven't done
it since.
That beer was entered in CABA's 1997 All About Ales competition, and it took
2nd in the German Ales category.
Since that time, I've switched to doing a single, big decoction to save
valuable time on brew day. I haven't noticed any taste differences between
my triple, double, and now single decoctions. Basically what I now do is
mash in at 110F for an acid rest, then do a big decoction to bring the mash
up to sacch temperatures, then mash out with an infusion of boiling water.
Like I said before, it saves a lot of time over a true triple decoction, and
I still get the same flavours. Good enough for me.
***
BTW, while traffic is low, I want to thank the HBD for the very helpful
hints and informative discussions since I began reading it about a year ago.
Thanks to quite a bit of what I've learned here, I now brew better beer. As
a matter of fact, I brewed pretty much all of the beer that I served at my
wedding. I had 10 coke kegs' worth, and a few commercial beer for those
that aren't inclined to drink homebrew. Three kegs were completely drained,
and another three were half drained at the end of the night. Only about 3
dozen commercial beer went! There were about 200 people at the reception.
I've never had so many compliments on my beer before. I can heartily
recommend to any brewer who is about to get married to brew at least some of
your own for the wedding--it's a big hit.
- -- Mark
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 08:28:06 -0700
From: Michael Rose <mrose@ucr.campus.mci.net>
Subject: Style series books
If anybody living in Ames, IA could post or e-mail the phone # for the
bookstore (Waldenbooks ?) that has the discounted style series books,
I'd appreciate it. ATT gave me two bad phone numbers. I'm taking a long
shot and hoping that they ship to Riverside CA.
Tomorrow, lets all scramble the letters in the city in our tag line.
We'll ruin all the sourdough bread in Ann Arbor MI.
Michael Rose Ivrdrsiee, AC :^) mrose@ucr.campus.mci.net
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 11:31:51 -0400 (EDT)
From: Paul Ward <paulw@doc.state.vt.us>
Subject: Update on Safale dry yeast
This post is for the sake of others who require the convenience of
dry yeast.
I had posted previously about a new (to me anyway) dry yeast I was
trying from the United Kingdom called Safale.
I bottled a 1.044 bitter yesterday. This had been sitting in primary
for 16 days.
This Safale is rather impressive stuff! 1.044 O.G. down to 1.008.
Crystal clear beer. There was spooge stuck on the bottom of my
airlock and the inside of the 7 gallon primary lid, so I know the
fermentation was quite strong (although not as strong as Wyeast Irish
Ale - I still shudder over that one). The yeast had flocced
amazingly tight. I was able to tip the fermentor to get virtually
all the beer off the yeast cake without stirring up anything. This
beer dropped so bright I'm concerned about having enough yeast to
prime (I know, should be plenty).
As I bottled, I was getting whiffs of green apple aroma, but this didn't
come through in tasting. There was almost no 'ale' taste. Very
clean tasting - the hops really came through nicely (I just love East
Kent Goldings for flavoring). I wish I had used more that 1/2 pound
of crystal though, attenuation was more than I hoped for and the beer
is a little dry. Even though there's a dry profile, the sample left
a very smooth feeling on the tounge, so the body is there. A little
buttery or butterscothery flavor would do wonders here.
So far I would have to rate this product right up there with my
current favorite dry yeast (Nottingham).
So far I can report:
- strong fermentation
- high attenutation
- solid flocculation
- neutral flavor.
Of course it may all taste like crap after conditioning, but I kind
of doubt that. I'll post a followup in a couple of weeks.
Paul in Vermont
paulw@doc.state.vt.us
- --
According to government height/weight charts,
I'm seven and a half feet tall.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 11:32:45 -6
From: "Dave Draper" <ddraper@utdallas.edu>
Subject: A plastic vs. glass datapoint
Dear Friends,
Some weeks back, the perennial discussion regarding the relative
merits of plastic vs. glass fermentors came our way on the HBD
again. During this, Glyn Crossno mentioned he routinely split
batches between a plastic and glass fermentor, and when I emailed to
ask for some input on his experience, he very kindly responded by
sending me a pair of bottles of a bock he had made that was split in
this way. This past weekend I had the chance to sample these
bottles with my partner in mayhem Eric Schoville. The beer was
brewed back in late Feb or early March (I received the bottles at the
end of March), and various schedule conflicts conspired to prevent us
from sampling till now, so the beer was nicely aged. I don't know
the details of Glyn's recipe or procedures other than that everything
was identical except the fermentors.
Both Eric and I could detect no difference between these two beers.
One of them was poured rather more energetically than the other, and
there was a vanishingly subtle difference in mouthfeel between the
one that had a lot more foaming and the one that did not, but there
were no flavor differences whatsoever. The beer is a fine, clean
example of the bock style, one I would drink many glasses of quite
happily (and after a few I would no doubt be happy indeed... the
beer is fairly strong). I fully recognize that this is not a
systematic or rigorous experimental study, and merely a single
report, but since it is the only one that has come forward in direct
comparison I thought it would be worth reporting.
Cheers,
Dave in Dallas
- ---
*****************************************************************************
Dave Draper, Dept Geosciences, U. Texas at Dallas, Richardson TX 75083
ddraper@utdallas.edu (commercial email unwelcome) WWW: hbd.org/~ddraper
Beer page: http://hbd.org/~ddraper/beer.html
I can't be bought for a mere $3.50. ---Jeff Renner
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 13:16:32 -0400
From: Ken Schramm <SchramK@wcresa.k12.mi.us>
Subject: Rhubarb Beer, AHA, Alaska
Compliments from Jim Liddil over the HBD are guaranteed to brighten
one's day.
For the AHA in Nw-Ahlins, Dan and I made a 55 gallon batch of 1.052
cream ale in the Pico Brewing System 55 gallon pilot brewery. The
idea was one big batch of identical base beer with 5 lbs of various
fruits in separate secondary fermentations, so as to compare the
fruits. We also did some w/ 5 lbs of raspberries in primary, one with
10 lbs rasps in secondary and one cherry with a belgian yeast. We
served the base and the variations in a "start vertical and end
horizontal" tasting.
We did a single stage infusion with a high strike temp (158 F I
think). I can't really remember the grain bill (HELP ME DAN!) but it
was mostly Briess 2 row with a bit of crystal and some 10L specialty,
I think...maybe Munich? At any rate, we did 20 IBU's of Kent
Goldings (none at the finish) and fermented with YCKC A-51 yeast at
about 62 F in a jacketed cylindro-conical fermenter. The batch was
then dosed onto the fruit in stainless steel kegs for secondary
fermenters. We used 5 lbs of frozen rhubarb chunks and secondary
beer (wort?) to fill the cornelius keg. The beer was racked off the
fruit after 14 days and we used the manufacturers recommended dose of
pectinase per 5 gallons.
The rhubarb was probably the most distinctive and (I think) the most
refreshing of all of them. Tart, good mouthfeel. Balance of fruit to
malt/beer was pretty much on the money, unlike some of the other
fruits.
Someone pester McConnell for details. The whole thing finished up
around 4:00 am, and he was doing the documentation while I was
scrubbing tuns (That's clearly an exaggeration, but Dan does have the
notes).
As far as the thread on the AHA NHC, I'd like to know if anyone else
out there has any misgivings about the notion of competitions in
general. I often wonder if competitions are a truly rewarding
expenditure of our collective time and effort. Trout Unlimited goes
about its NPO way, promoting that hobby quite nicely without holding
competitions. I really like their concentration on activities that
improve the hobby and the overall body of knowledge available to
their members. I also like their structure, with local chapters that
work in concert with the Nat'l organization. Thoughts? Comments?
Anyone see anything there we could co-opt to help the AHA become more
valuable? Don't get me wrong: I have worked hard on competitions in
Michigan, but....
Comments re: "Babcock is doing a great job" are right on. 'Til you
done it, you gotta button it.... How much do you get paid to do all
that work, Pat? I, for one, really appreciate it. You too, Dick
Dunn, if you're listening.
If anybody else out there has suggestions on how to have good time in
Late June in Alaska, I'd love to hear 'em.
Ken Schramm
Troy, Michigan
"When the going gets tough, the tough have a Schramm's"
Mike Schramm, 1989
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 09:50:51 -0700
From: John Varady <rust1d@usa.net>
Subject: Secondary/Shipping/Yeast/Cybil Gump/Contests
Richard asks about an ale he had in the primary for 2 weeks and then in the
secondary for 2 weeks and wonders about it carbonating properly. I recently
bottled 20 gallons of ale that had been in the secondary for over 2 months
that took about 1 month to carbonate, so to answer your question, your beer
will carbonate fine in time.
Darren asks about free shipping from mail order hb shops and says he needs
to order 350# of malt. Most mail order hb shops exclude carboys and malt
from the free shipping due to the bulk and weight, so you will probably be
better off making a drive to the nearest local shop.
Dirk says that both ale and lager yeast are now classified as Saccharomyces
Cerevisiae. Actually I believe that lager yeast is once again going under
the alias Saccharomyces Carlsbergensis, not S. Uvarum, and have not heard
of any re-classification of bottom fermenters as S. Cerevisiae.
>From the sig line on yesterdays posts to the digest, it would seem that our
beloved friend Rob Moline is no longer and Jethro Gump has assumed complete
control! Jethro, I want to talk to Rob now...can I talk to Rob? Is he in
there with you?
Somebody mentioned entering two beers into the same category of the same
contest recently. Isn't this a no-no? or contest dependant?
Also, do most contests required you to use the entry forms & labels they
provide, or will any generic form do? I ask because I added a feature to my
software to print Entry/Recipe forms and Labels, but I called Jay Adams in
regards to the upcoming BURP contest and he said I had to use the
forms/labels supplied. I didn't ask why, I just used tier forms.
Thanks to those that supplied the volumetric formulas I was too lazy to
find myself. Based on the calcs (15" radius, 24" height), my copper tub
should hold over 70 gallons! I think I should actually measure the thing,
since I certainly don't look like it could hold that much.
Ok, that enough....
Peace!
John
John Varady http://www.netaxs.com/~vectorsys/varady
Boneyard Brewing The HomeBrew Recipe Calculating Program
Glenside, PA rust1d@usa.net
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 13:57:47 EDT
From: JPullum127@aol.com
Subject: cheap propane burners
I just made a batch last night using the brinkman $43.00 on sale at menards
burner. I really liked it. it took about 25 minutes to get 5 1/2 gallons of
wort to full boil, the stand was nice and sturdy,easily adjustable flame
regulator,and has a built in windscreen,even though its rated at 200,000 btu's
it didn't seem to use much propane from the tank. no affiliation,blah,blah, i
just liked the thing and thought it was a
good piece of equipment at a good price. I have also seen the same burner at
home depot,but priced a little higher. still cheaper than the king cookers
though.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 14:17:31 -0500 (CDT)
From: Al Korzonas <korz@xnet.com>
Subject: Altbier/Crystal vs. Caramel malts
Art writes:
>I've been reading the new Altbier book, which I
>find a very good read. When reading the section on
>ingredients, the author mentions crystal/caramel
>malt together, not making a distinction. In the
>recipe section however, one of them uses both
>crystal 60L and caramel. Does someone know the
>difference between crystal and caramel ? <snip>
First about the Altbier book. I don't have this
book yet but I was very concerned about its quality
when I read an article about Altbiers written
by the same author. In this article, the author
showed that he is completely confused about protein
rests, their use and what temperatures do what
things to the final beer. Then I read where Art
says that crystal and caramel malts are included
in a recipe for Altbier.
I spoke to the brewmaster at Zum Uerige in Dusseldorf
for a good two hours about their recipe and production
methods. He said that they use mostly Munich malt
with a tiny amount of very dark malt (I presumed
this to be something like Weyermann Carafa which is
like Chocolate malt). There is no crystal malt
(from what I could understand) in Zum Uerige.
I have also made several Altbiers which compare
favourably to Zum Uerige and they were made from
90% Munich malt and 10% DeWolf-Cosyns Aromatic
(a sort of Munich on steroids).
I plan to send letters asking about crystal malts and
about attenuation (another topic which is a bit
unclear regarding Altbiers) to the brewmasters at
the breweries in Duesseldorf I visited to clear
this up, but for now, I fear the worst for the
accuracy of "Altbier."
***
Crystal versus Caramel malts. I've read that in the
past they were made differently, but in recent years
(certainly everything we get now) the two terms are
interchangeable. That is not to say that Durst 60L
crystal is going to taste just like Weyermann's
Cara-Munch II or like DeWolf-Cosyns CaraMunich...
No... each malststers crystal/caramel malts will taste
slightly different, but they are all made using
pretty much the same process. Briess used to make
only 6-row crystal malts, but lately they have
been making some colours from 2-row also. I feel
the Briess 6-row crystal malts are very tasty and
distinctive... they all have a nice "milk chocolate"
flavour. The 2-row are equally nice, but quite
different in flavour. If you turn your nose up at
6-row malts, all you need to do is to taste the
beers made by Goose Island Brewing Co. (brewpub and
micro)... they use mostly 6-row malts and their
beers are world class.
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz@xnet.com
http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 15:49:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Aanakin Skywalker (Dan Szemenyei)" <iamelvis@esu.edu>
Subject: classic beer styles series
Hi, I originally posted this to (jkenton@iastate.edu) regarding his querie
in the HBD on 5/28/98. After writing, I figured I might post it to the
HBD in case anyone can get me what *I'm* looking for. Per usual, all
disclaimers apply, I'm just a wee-grad student trying to help, and to
build my Star Wars collection. Thanks all (sorry about the length)!
>
I got #1-8 all at my Waldenbooks for $3.99, and they still have all of
those numbers. I've yet to see any of the higher numbers, so I assume
we'll have to shell out the big bucks to order them, or not. I also got a
beer brewers dictionary (may be a sub-book in the C.B.S. series) also for
$3.99. I've also seen the brewing chemistry book by Dr. Fix for the same
price, but since I failed a 5 credit Chem course as an undergrad, I think
I'll skip that book. If you want any of these books, but can't get them
near you, I'll be glad to pick them up and ship them off to you, provided
you send me the bucks. Or, a trade could be involved. My Waldenbooks had
the published scripts for Star Wars trilogy. I picked up Empire Strikes
Back and Return of the Jedi, but they didn't have the one for "Star Wars"
(the first one from '77). If your Waldenbooks has it (i found mine in the
bargain section for $2.99 each), we could trade book for book, then figure
out the difference. Sound OK? Let me know via e-mail, and we can work
out a deal.
>
Dan
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 18:13:16 -0400 (EDT)
From: Some Guy <pbabcock@oeonline.com>
Subject: Shucks!
Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager...
Thanks to one and all for the praise lately heaped on the Janitors of the
Digest. I do want to ensure that the more important (if somewhat less
vocal) half of the HBD show gets the recognition: he deserves far more of
the recent praise than do I. If it wasn't for Karl's mastery of the code,
the moderation function flat out wouldn't be there for ANYBODY to do a
good job with!
Thanks, Karl! You're doing a fantastic job!
See ya!
Pat Babcock in SE Michigan pbabcock@oeonline.com
Home Brew Digest Janitor janitor@hbd.org
HBD Web Site http://hbd.org
The Home Brew Page http://oeonline.com/~pbabcock/brew.html
"Just a cyber-shadow of his former brewing self..."
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 18:17:49 -0400
From: "Frederick L. Pauly" <flp2m@avery.med.virginia.edu>
Subject: Bitter/Sweet Help Needed
There is a beer brewed locally that is just wonderfull called
Tuppers Hop Pockets by Domminion Brewing in Virginia. It is more
bitter than SNPA or Anchor Liberty and yet it has a very distinct
sweet component behind the bitterness and hop flavor.
My question to the great collective is, How do they do that?
Thanks
Rick Pauly
NucMed Tech
Charlottesville,VA
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 17:31:21 +0000
From: irajay@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Re: Spent Grain Brain
I am not sure how to access the HBD2549 area which has the spent grain
bread recipe but I do have an awful lot of spent grain. Could
someone be so kind as to tell me how to go about it?
Thanks
Ira
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 06:00:19 -0700
From: Kyle Druey <druey@ibm.net>
Subject: Some Stuff
Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 09:16:11 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Butt Lube
What, is this the homo brew digest??? Did I land at the right server...
Ooops! I hope that nobody was offended, perhaps I should enroll in one
of Fouch's sensitivy training classes. Now on to hom*e* brewing....
(another data point, I have been using the heterosexual keg lube (KY
jelly) with good success, no deteriorated o-rings).
Just a little more on the beer fridge thread, I have had good results
with my side-by-side fridge. I use a temp controller to keep the
freezer side at about 34 F and I lager 2 kegs there. The fridge side
stays at about 42-44 F which is fine for serving temps, and I can store
6 kegs there. Right now I have 7, 5 gal soda kegs in the beer fridge.
Thanks to all who helped me debug my 240V boiling setup. I am happy to
report no scorching or carmelization when boiling 6 gallons of wort with
a 240V 3500W electric heating element. The hardest part was getting the
courage to drill a 1.25" hole in the side of my 10 gallon aluminum pot.
How much of the thickest part of the mash should one pull for a single
decoction?
In Burley's absence... KEEP ON BREWIN' (BTW, where is that old fart?
Did he keel over on the 19 tee or something?)
Kyle Druey
Bakersfield, CA
Utah in 6 over the Bulls, you read it here first...
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 12:20:14 -0700
From: Andy Walsh <awalsh@ventrassist.com>
Subject: yeast
Hi.
I've had a few requests to clarify some of my recent monlologues...sorry
for the bandwidth...
> For example, Charlie says that yeast grow until they reach a certain
> concentration in the wort, and then begin fermenting.
If Charlie says that, he is wrong. If yeast is deficient in membrane
sterols when first pitched, it absorbs O2,unsaturated fatty acids and
sterols from the wort as a first process. Yeast grown anaerobically,
without fatty acid/sterol supplementation, typically has about 0.1%
sterol in its cell membrane at the end of growth. It cannot reproduce
with this level of sterol, if subsequently pitched into fresh wort. It
must first build this up before it can start reproducing. (to a maximum
of 1%: each division lowers sterol levels). If
you pitch yeast directly from the end of a primary fermentation, it will
have about 0.1% sterol. This is why we oxygenate wort. Most yeast will
have low cellular sterols when first pitched. The O2 enables the yeast
to build up its sterol reserves. George de Piro has covered this well
recently on the HBD.
(Yeast grown aerobically, or with fat/sterol supplementation, or which
has been aerated *vigourously* prior to pitching, behaves quite
differently, and has high sterol levels when pitched. It has no need for
oxygen or fatty acids or sterols for reproduction to commence. It has no
"oxygen demand", and hence wort does not require aeration when pitched
with such yeast. However, you must be certain you pitch a sufficient
amount of yeast if relying solely on this.)
(Aside: contrary to popular HBD wisdom, if anything, highly oxygenated
worts have a longer lag phase than unaerated worts: the lag phase is the
sterol synthesis phase)
Reproduction is yeast's primary goal. It doesn't care about alcohol.
Alcohol is a necessary byproduct for the reproductive process to
continue (this involves a very complex explanation I won't go into,
involving the balance of NAD/NADH inside the cell). As yeast begins to
reproduce (once its sterol levels are high enough), it ferments. This is
called the log phase. You can see this happen... this is occurring all
the way until gas evolution slows and the foam head subsides.
> Your post seems
> to indicate that yeast growth is occurring (or may even start up
> again?) and is important AFTER primary fermentation is complete!
No. I didn't mean this. Yeast growth and fermentation go hand in hand.
Fermentation occurs about 30 times more rapidly when yeast is growing
than when it is not. Yeast does not grow after fermentation is over. I
was trying to indicate that yeast at the end of fermentation is high in
gycogen and low in sterols. If you are to repitch such yeast (low
sterol) in fresh wort, it *must* be aerated (or be given fat/sterol
supplements) to allow it to subsequently grow and ferment.
> If you can, please put this in the context of pitching
> rates, aeration, attenuation.
I can't really do this. Basically I am saying that even an overpitched
wort will probably underattenuate if not sufficently aerated, and if
there are insufficient fats/sterols. Trub has very high levels of the
latter. I think homebrewers can often get away with underaeration
because their worts are usually very high in trub. Trub supplies the
basic fatty acids and sterols needed without the necessity of using
oxygen to build them up instead. Trub also serves to act as "nucleation
sites" for CO2 evolution. CO2 acts as a suppressant to yeast growth, so
by lowering CO2 levels (by providing nucleation sites) we can also
hasten growth, and hence fermentation.
> For example, why not aerate yeast in the
> fermentor repeatedly over several hours to get LOTS of yeast growth.
Because your beer will be nasty! I am not saying that more growth is
good, it is not (and somewhat paradoxically also results in *less*
ethanol, because the wort sugars end up in yeast biomass rather than
ethanol). There is a fine balance between growth, attenuation and
flavour that needs to be reached. This is why we have recommended
pitching rates, trub levels and wort oxygen content. If you want to play
around with these, go ahead, but you run a risk!
> I know this is asking a lot and will not be offended if you must
> ignore my questions. Perhaps you would like to post your reply along
> with my questions to the HBD.
I'm not offended. I realise my post must have been confusing to many, so
maybe I will post this to the HBD as well.
Andy.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 20:23:19 -0700
From: Ken Schroeder <knj@concentric.net>
Subject: Water Ponters and Fermentation Temps Vs Esters
Brent wrote:
>The tests performed were pretty poor, but these were the results:
>Hardness: 53.4 ppm
>>pH: 6.8
>Manganese: 0.2 ppm
>Fe: Trace amounts
What's so bad about this? I wish my water was this good. The hardness
has some weight but isn't really that bad. Boil and decant though this
has mediocer results.
Brent further wrote :
> Lead 0.015 ppm
> Copper 1.3 ppm
> Sulfate 14 ppm
> Chloride 68 ppm
> Sodium 5 ppm
Lookin' good again, but the chloride is a little high. Depending on
what, if anything, the chloride is bonded with, just letting the brew
water sit overnight should reduce this. Boiling for a few minutes
accomplishes the same thing but cost gas or electricity.
Brent, the clue to your "husky" taste is most likely found with the
"brown stains in the toilet and dishwasher". This could be many things
but I would take a look at iron. What are the pipes made of, from the
well all the way to the tap? Iron can give a brown or rust color to the
water as well as stain porcelin.
Since your water is from a well, you might want to check out what kind
of rocks are around your place. You brown stains and "husky" taste could
also be from the rock formations your water is "filtered" by.
Of course you may solve your problems by installing a water filter but
this is probably an investment not warranted for a place you rent
(unless your beer is sacred to you). I installed a resin filter and the
carbonate level went from about 130ppm to 20ppm. This will drop further
as the pipes shed the caked carbonate. Unfortunatelly these tend to be
expensive, like well over $1500. A simple carbon filter would help,
especially with the chloride but may not solve your husky problem.
And just to add my two cents to the esters and fermentation temps
discussion. I like to use the Fullers like yeast from the local
breweries around here. Both Burlingame Station and Boulder Creek Brewing
use it. The yeast is very similar to Wyeast 1968 but not quite as
fruity. At any rate, I and the brewers of both of these establishments
have noticed that if fermentation is below 65F, there is some off
flavors very much like an ester. It is a hard to describe flavor not
bannana, ect..Accepting that higher fermentation temps produce more
esters, here is an example of ester being produced a lower temperature.
I think the wild card in the equation is the perceived impact of an
ester. You can have esters in you beer and have little off flavors. But
if you have one ester which is "potent" you get a lot of off flavor. And
the concentration may not even be that high. So my statement is : it not
how many esters, but which esters you have. Counterpoint?
Ken Schroeder
Sequoia Brewing
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2726, 05/29/98
*************************************
-------
