Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2834
HOMEBREW Digest #2834 Sat 26 September 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:
Response to 1998 AHA National Awards Post (Paul Gatza)
Clinitest (Al Korzonas)
Columbus, Ohio beer scene/ Alt (Mark Garthwaite)
clinitest (Jim Liddil)
Re: Glucose monitor (Old Man Scanlon)
AHA medal snafu (Dean Fikar)
Stability of yeast on slant ("Ed D'Anna")
Brewing with different grains ("Steinkamps")
dryness nee: astringency ("Michel J. Brown")
GFCI receptacle for fridge (fridge)
Mash out (question) (LEAVITDG)
kegs on planes ("Spinelli, Mike")
A-B Mash Times (Clint Thessen)
Re: Stepping up Starters (Martin A. Gulaian)
Clinitest Cage Match (PAUL W HAAF JR)
McEwans and Bottles ("Penn, John")
Re: CAPital experiment (Jeff Renner)
RE:RE: Stepping up starters (Tim Burkhart)
re: lauter tun size ("McConnell, Guy")
re: HERMS (The Holders)
Pregnancy test ("silent bob")
RE: EZ keg/bottle filler (John Wilkinson)
question re: potatoes as the source of fermentables ? (LEAVITDG)
Osmotic Shock - was Re: Stepping up Starters (Gary H Nazelrod)
re: HERMS (Ronald Babcock)
Carmel in Beer ("Adam G. Fisher")
Pacific Brewers Cup Deadline Extended! (The Holders)
Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!
Send your entries in for the Hoppiest Show On Earth yet?
Details: http://members.tripod.com/~BrewMiester_2/Home.html
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: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 13:05:53 -0600
From: Paul Gatza <paulg@aob.org>
Subject: Response to 1998 AHA National Awards Post
Yes the AHA came up a new and creative way to botch another aspect of
the 1998 National Homebrew Competition. The medals were sorted with the
mailing labels, but once the boxing and sealing happened, the labels
were placed one box over causing several misdirected packages. We
identified the cause as a voodoo witch doctor cursing the competition
because he could not find a recipe for Shrunken Head Stout in Zymurgy.
Truthfully we don't brainstorm new ways to frustrate homebrewers.
I apologize that a mistake was made in the shipping. Regarding your
charge of "placing several calls with the AHA director and other members
of the AHA staff," Your name does not appear on my answering machine log
or in my received e-mails folder. I talked to several award winners over
the phone and everyone got the same story: The competition literature
states that award distribution will occur in October. We were planning
on sending them early as a courtesy before our outreach at the GABF
began.
To correct some misinformation in your post--Brian is AHA Membership
Development Director and I am AHA Director. We are working together on
the last pieces of the 1998 NHC. I am handling the distribution of
prizes. I am trying to ascertain where each specific medal landed. I am
first communicating with the people that we know did not receive the
right medal, then I will coordinate the shipping of medals from brewer
to brewer, then I will handle the reimbursement of shipping costs.
Regarding the "exuberant salaries of consulting authors," I personally
feel that the range of $100 to $200 per article that the AHA pays
authors in Zymurgy to be reasonable. Infrequently, we may reimburse
travel expenses for individuals, such as for Byron Burch to speak at the
AHA Conference in Portland. Our Board of Advisors, which includes
several authors, serve on a volunteer basis.
You ask "is this the future of the AHA." The answer is no. The future of
the AHA is to promote the hobby of homebrewing, to continue to work
toward legalizing homebrewing in all 50 states, to continue to produce
homebrewing educational projects such as Zymurgy, to work with our
network of 760 (and growing) homebrew clubs, and to encourage public
participation in AHA-sponsored events, such as the NHC, Big Brew,
Sanctioned Competition Program and Club-Only Competitions.
Regarding your decision to not renew your AHA membership, John, I
understand that you must do what you must do. I apologize for the
negative experience you had with the NHC this year. Mistakes do happen.
If you decide that the other work that the AHA does is important to you
as a homebrewer, or decide to give the NHC another try in the future,
you are certainly welcome to participate as a member/entrant.
- --
Paul Gatza
Director
American Homebrewers Association (303) 447-0816 x 122
736 Pearl Street (303) 447-2825 -- FAX
PO Box 1679 paulg@aob.org -- E-MAIL
Boulder, CO 80306-1679 info@aob.org -- AOB INFO
U.S.A. http://www.beertown.org -- WEB
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 15:10:17 -0500 (CDT)
From: Al Korzonas <korz@xnet.com>
Subject: Clinitest
Dave writes:
>Clinitest is nearly perfect in that it
>measures all reducible sugars in beer. These are all fermentable.
Wrong. They are *NOT* all fermentable. Many (unfermentable) dextrins
have reducing ends and thus would cause a positive response on
Clinitest. This was my initial suspicion (why I initially felt the
test may be suspect) and why I still contend that some beers will
read greater than 1/4% "glucose" when they are indeed fully fermented.
See http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/articles/clinitest.html for the
full explanation.
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz@xnet.com
http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 16:06:04 -0500 (CDT)
From: Mark Garthwaite <mgarth@primate.wisc.edu>
Subject: Columbus, Ohio beer scene/ Alt
I'm going to be in Columbus, Ohio the first weekend of October and
am wondering if anyone has reccommendations for beers/brewpubs/micros to
be found in the area. Private email to mgarth@primate.wisc.edu please.
Thanks in advance.
Brewed an alt *just* prior to all of the recent discussion of the
style so I've been pleased to see all of the attention it has received.
I'm very pleased with the result. I did a single decoction and used only
German malt as the base. Fermented with Wyeast 1338. I first-wort-hopped
(which was probably a no-no for an alt but what the heck...it's MY beer
darn it!) It tastes more like a Fest beer and surprisingly lager-esque.
My question is whether there is even a chance of finding a genuine alt
here in the States to get an idea what it should taste like?
-Mark Garthwaite
Madison, WI
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 14:14:55 +0000
From: Jim Liddil <jliddil@azcc.arizona.edu>
Subject: clinitest
I'm not going to say much about it except that some of you may want to do a
search at http://www.nlm.nih.gov/databases/freemedl.html and look at what
comes up. As a researcher I am more than aware of precision and accuracy
issues. And also the number of papers about ingestion of the tablets is
also something to think about if you have children.
Jim Liddil mentally no where near anybody
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 19:34:53 -0400
From: scanlonr@ici.net (Old Man Scanlon)
Subject: Re: Glucose monitor
Dave_Burley wrote
>As far as I know, a glucose monitor would not work because at
>the end of the fermentation there is no glucose left and in fact,
>it probably disappears early in the fermentation. These monitors
>have very specific membranes which limit the detection to glucose
>alone.
As a regular user of a One Touch II blood glucose meter, I *had* to try
testing my ready-to-bottle beer (do diabetic homebrewers have their own
newsgroup?). I can confirm that it doesn't work. Doesn't matter whether or
not there's any glucose in the beer; it fails the meter's sanity checks for
sample validity. And you're out one more precious drop of homebrew.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 20:59:43 -0500
From: Dean Fikar <dfikar@flash.net>
Subject: AHA medal snafu
John writes about the screwup regarding the AHA medals and says he won't
renew his AHA membership. I really do sympathize with his annoyance
with the screwup but my take on this is a little different. I'm one of
the ones that got the wrong medal. My wife got a very polite call from
someone from the AHA today who apologized and explained the whole mess
and requested that I mail the medal I received to the proper recipient
and someone else is going to me mail me mine. To me, this is not a real
big deal. I was thrilled just to win anything. This was my first
AHA/NHC entry and I'll definitely enter again next year, if for no other
reason than I feel like the experience level and quality of the judging
was so good - especially in regards to my beers that didn't win anything
where I felt like I got better feedback than I have gotten in some
regional competitions with the same beers. Medals and ribbons are
great but my main goal in entering a huge contest like the AHA/NHC is to
get good, constructive feedback which I felt like I got. In all
fairness to the regionals, they do the very best that they can but
because of sheer numbers they have to use alot of novice judges (like
me!).
Dean Fikar
dfikar@flash.net
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 22:05:21 -0400
From: "Ed D'Anna" <edanna@webt.com>
Subject: Stability of yeast on slant
I have been using yeast from slants for about two years now, and have
greatly enjoyed the convenience, quality and economy it affords. While my
friends who don't do it themselves think I must be very knowledgeable about
yeast, the fact is that I have a bunch of questions for anyone who is,
indeed, truly knowledgeable. I have noticed that fresh slants produce a
quicker fermentation and greater yeast quantity than older slants (say, 6
months to a year), but I have compensated by making an additional step-up
and have not noticed any appreciable deterioration in my beer's flavor as a
result. So, what happens to yeast from a slant when it gets old? What limits
its effective utility? Is it low viability? If so, wouldn't extra
"stepping-up" compensate? Is it yeast mutation? If so, how much cell growth
is occurring in a refrigerated slant and at what point should I abandon
them? If I can get readily apparent yeast growth from a slant more than a
year old (or even two years old, for that matter), what would I risk by
using it other than slow (or non-) starting?
I'm looking forward to learning more about this.
Thanks in advance!
Ed D'Anna
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 23:22:26 -0500
From: "Steinkamps" <EnW_Steinkamp@email.msn.com>
Subject: Brewing with different grains
Brewing with Quinoa
I've heard stories that the old men in the Inca communities would make beer
by chewing Quinoa and spitting into a pot. The expectorant was collected
from several men and left to ferment.
I chewed a few grains, but they got stuck in my teeth, so I stopped spitting
and decided to malt the quinoa. I basically followed the process in
Noonan's original "Brewing Lager Beer". I baked the moist grains in a
covered roasting pan at 160 F similar to the process for crystal malt.
After about eight hours at 160 f the quinoa was a golden brown in color with
a sweet, nutty flavor.
My first batch was designed to evaluate the flavor contribution of the
malted quinoa. I decided to brew a one gallon experimental batch. Big
mistake. All of my equipment is geared towards 5 to 10 gallon batches. It
just doesn't work with one gallon. I struggled through and made a mess of my
entire nano-brewery (the garage) using the following recipe:
Target O.G. = 1.048
SRM = 13
IBU = 20
1.5 lbs Gambrinus 2-row pale Assumed extract potential of 72%
1.5 lbs Malted Quinoa Assumed extract potential of 70%
.08 oz Galena (The only thing in the freezer) 60 min Alpha acid unknown
.08 oz Galena 15 min "
.08 oz Galena 1 min "
Wyeast American Ale liquid yeast
Dough-in with water at 170, but something went wrong and I ended up with a
mash temp of 142 F.
Boiled a thick quart, added back to mash. Mash temp at 148 F.
Boiled another thick quart, added it back to mash . Mash temp at 153 F.
One hour rest.
Actual Gravity = 1.042 with volume of 4 liters.
The head retention of this beer was remarkable. The flavor was malty with a
toasted nutty flavor from the quinoa. Maybe too nutty.
For the second brew I went for 5 gallons with the following recipe (target
O.G. 1.040):
5.50 Pale Assumed extract potential of 72.0%
2.08 Quinoa Assumed extract potential of 36.0%; Color 10.0 lov (WAG)
0.75 Caramel Assumed extract potential of 70.0%
Hops:
0.24 Galena 60 min
0.47 Hallertauer 10 min
0.47 Hallertauer 0 min 0.0% 0.00
Yeast: Wyeast 1968 - London ESB
This was a great beer. It was light and nutty, with great head retention
and color. The quinoa gave a distinctive that was nice, but not
overpowering. I would recommend using malted quinoa up to about 25% for a
unique, tasty brew. This brew was a while ago, but I might go looking for
another source of quinoa so that I can brew another batch right after I get
done with another altbeer.
BTW I made my first altbeer recipe based on Fred Eckhardt's description on
pages 42 and 43 of the 1991 special zymergy and on Michael Jackson's
description on pages 52-56 of the winter 1994 zymergy. I don't recall BT
"Brewing in Style" ever covering Alt Beer. Have they?
Ed Steinkamp
I am a relatively new resident of Dallas Texas, USA where you can mash at
122 F by simply putting your cooler in the sun.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 02:47:58 -0700
From: "Michel J. Brown" <homemade@spiritone.com>
Subject: dryness nee: astringency
>Michel writes (quoting me):
>>Why would astringency have anything to do with the amount of adjunct
>>used?
>>
>>Well, Al, *some* non-malt grains have a certain amount of dryness to
>>them that is perceived as astringency. Like Rye, or Oats. Good things
>>when used in the right proportions, but when overdone, can cause REAL
>>excessive dryness akin to astringency.
>>
>>I do believe you are mistaken to blame astringency on adjuncts.
>>
>>Perhaps, perhaps not -- I made a perfectly good Oatmeal stout last
>>spring, and it had a 2.5#/gal grain bill, with 2# of the grist coming
>>from Quaker Oats. After aging a few weeks, it started to develop some
>>dryness I've not noticed in lesser amounts. Too, a friend made some
>>"Roggenbier" last year that was basically a Bavarian Pils with a
*POUND*
>>of Rye added. It was so dry that it made my eyes water! My tongue felt
>>like it had been grabbed by someone with a towel. Both beers were good
>>when first conditioned, but within two weeks, developed an unpleasant
>>dryness. Batches made later with lesser quantities of Oats/Rye were
>>excellent, and remained so for the end of the last glass 8*)
>
>As I said before, a pound of rye or rye malt should not cause
unpleasant
>changes in flavor. I think that perhaps other factors could be causing
>the problem. My RyePA had 5# of rye malt and 7# of Pale Ale malt for
>5 gallons (that's right: 29+ points/lb./gal). I don't recommend this
much
>rye unless you are very patient... it took me 3 hours to take 7 gallons
>of runnings!
>
Well, *should*, and *did* are two different subjects, but I still keep
an open mind. What other factors could cause this dryness IYHO Al? I
know it wasn't my process or procedures, as I've made this brew many
times, and when I added more than my usual amount of Oat meal, I got a
cloying dryness in the aftertaste. 3 hrs to do a 7 gallon sparge -- no
wonder you got 80% extraction efficiency! Next time maybe try a b-glucan
rest?
>
>One other thing to consider is that rye *appears* (I'm not 100% sure)
to be
>high in ferulic acid (the precursor or 4-vinyl guaiacol, the compound
that
>gives Weizens their "clovey" character). I used a very neutral yeast
(I
>believe it was Wyeast #1056 American Ale) and I got some 4-vinyl
guaiacol!
>Note that 4VG is a phenolic compound and if it were oxidized, it could
>lend some very irritating astringent character.
>
I don't know about the ferulic acid factor with regards to Rye malt, but
where would this oxidation be coming from all of a sudden? My beers
(with that one exception of Oatmeal Stout) are long keepers that taste
as good a year after they're made (if I can keep them around that long
what with all the thirsty relatives, friends, etc...).
>
>I discussed this whole issue off-line with the original poster and we
>came to terms that it was a matter of semantics and that it probably
>wasn't the adjuncts that added the astringency. The question of
ferulic
>acid and oxidized 4VG could explain the astringency, but then wouldn't
you
>specifically say "rye" and not the general term for non-enzymatic
starch
>sources: "adjuncts?"
>
In that particular case I'll take your word ;^) And yes, I would more
than likely say Rye, or Oatmeal, or whatever. But IMHO, any ingredients
other than malted barley constitutes an adjunct, not so? Maybe we can
arrange to do some experiments with Rye, and see how much ferulic acid,
if any, is present, and if any of it is capable of being oxidized into
polyphenols. What do you think, Al?
>
>I believe that we are in agreement once we get through all the
semantics,
>for which I perhaps am too much of a stickler...
>
Perhaps so, but I prefer that we all use the same vernacular, and use it
consistently, just for being able to communicate and understand one
another.
>
>Al.
>
Dr. Michel J. Brown, D.C. {Portland, OR}
2222 miles due west of Jeff Renner
homemade@spiritone.com
http://www.spiritone.com/~homemade/index.html
"In the field of observation, chance favors only the prepared mind"
L. Pasteur
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 07:50:45 -0400
From: fridge@kalamazoo.net
Subject: GFCI receptacle for fridge
Greetings folks,
In HBD #2833, Bob Haines would like to use a GFCI-
protected circuit for his basement fridge and asked if
there is any reason not to do so.
I like to use a GFCI-protected circuit wherever moisture
may be present. A GFCI shouldn't trip unless there is
current going someplace that it should not go. I have
successfully used GFCI receptacles for my brewing
freezers and other equipment in my basement for years
without incident. I also use a GFCI in my RIMS. I have yet
to see any of them trip.
The garage receptacle I use for my RIMS is on the same
circuit as the receptacles in one of the bathrooms in our
house. Both are GFCI-protected. I experienced a tripped
circuit breaker once in mid-mash as my wife plugged her
hair dryer in and we overloaded the circuit. The GFCI did
not trip because we simply used more current than the
breaker was rated for. The GFCI would quickly trip if
current went some place that it shouldn't.
I got my worst electrical shock from an old fridge with a
bad ground, as I grabbed its metal handle while standing
barefooted on a concrete floor. I couldn't let go and had to
force myself to fall in order to get free of the fridge. It
seemed like time stood still. I had time to figure out what I
had to do in order to get free, and could feel the current
changing directions as it passed through me. All of this
happened in a second or less, and I hurt like hell for
several days afterward. I was very lucky.
After that experience I am sold on GFCI protection and
use it liberally. In Bob's case, I would definitely use the
GFCI. If it trips, find out why and repair the problem. I'd
rather risk losing some homebrew than my life.
Hope this helps!
Forrest Duddles - FridgeGuy in Kalamazoo
fridge@kalamazoo.net
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 07:54:59 -0500 (EST)
From: LEAVITDG@SPLAVA.CC.PLATTSBURGH.EDU
Subject: Mash out (question)
I have read that mash out is important (~168 degrees) so as to kill the
enzymes. But I am unable to find anywhere (I just ordered the George Fix book)
WHY? What is the reason for this, or what is harmed by NOT doing a mash out?
My problem (one of them ) is that I like to understand why....
Darrell
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 08:08:03 -0400
From: "Spinelli, Mike" <paa3983@exmail.dscp.dla.mil>
Subject: kegs on planes
HBDers,
Do the airlines permit you to transport kegged homebrew across the
country? I'd like to take a 3 gallon cornie to California and maybe
even the CO2 tank as well?
Thanks,
Mike Spinelli, Cherry Hill NJ
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 07:32:04 -0500
From: Clint Thessen <cthessen@mdc.com>
Subject: A-B Mash Times
Hi Folks,
I'm sorry it took me so long to share this
information... but I sort of forgot about it. Over Labor
Day weekend here in St. Louis we had a fair and air show.
The best part of the show you ask... the Blue Angels,
magnificent all the time. Anyway, after the airshow my
wife and I were looking for something to do and walked
by the A-B travelling Beer School. I said, "Hey it's air
conditioned let's go in." So we entered and received
about a 40 min lecture on how A-B produces beer.
Actually pretty informative. The most interesting fact is
how they produce Bud-Lite vs. regular Bud. Now, I've
been reading all the back issues of the HBD starting with
1992. I'm up to Oct 94 right now. I've read alot about
speculation of how the big boys create their lite beers.
The opinion that stands out is Jack S.'s. He speculates
that they just brew a Bud and then dilute for Bud-Lite. I
have yet to read in the HBD if this was resolved, so I'll tell
you what the A-B brewmaster stated. He said that they
do about a 30 min mash for Bud and then do about a 2 hr
mash for Bud-Lite. This long mash breaks a higher
percentage of complex sugars to simple sugars that the
yeast can eat. This explanation seemed to make sense to
me. Comments?
Also, would someone be so kind as to inform me
(E-Mail is fine) of good micros/brewpubs to visit in
Chicago. My wife and I will visiting there the second
weekend of October.
Take it easy.
Clint Thessen
35 miles west of McGuireLand USA
550 miles (via highways) southwest of Jeff Renner
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 08:56:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: mag6@po.CWRU.Edu (Martin A. Gulaian)
Subject: Re: Stepping up Starters
Brian Dixon writes...
>Bill asks about stepping up starters, and whether or not to keep the
>original wort in the stepped up starter each time, or just using the slurry.
>
>The short of it is yes, keep the original starter wort. This is very
>typical. For example, make a 2-cup starter (pint), then when high krausen
>is just starting to wane, add another 2 cups, etc. up to whatever size you
>want (1/2 gal, 1 gal).
>
>The long of it though, as expressed by Darryl Richman in the AOB Classic
>Series text "Bock", is that there's nothing wrong with just using the
>slurry.
Seems like one reason to keep the wort is to prevent infections -
once the starter is "beer like" and therefore resistant to infection
because of the alcohol and pH and what not, you want to keep it that way.
>...
>Anyway, the way to ease your yeast up to the specific
>gravity of the wort is to start it at the recommended gravity (1.020 to
>1.030), then use the _brew's intended original gravity_ for each doubling.
>If you are keeping the original starter wort in the starter (what I do),
>then this will move the starter halfway towards the brew's OG with each
>doubling. For example, if you're brewing a wort with SG 1.080, your starter
>starts out at 1.020, and you double 3 times to produce a gallon of starter,
>then the starter gravities would be like this: 1-pint = 1.020, 1-quart =
>1.050, 1/2-gal = 1.065, 1-gal = 1.072.
This won't work because the starter is always fermenting down. If it
gets down to, say, 1.010 by the time you add more wort, the gravity will
end up halfway to 1.080 (1.045 or so) after the wort addition.
- --
Marty Gulaian - Cleveland, Ohio
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 09:27:37 -0400
From: haafbrau1@juno.com (PAUL W HAAF JR)
Subject: Clinitest Cage Match
I think we should look to the WWF for guidance on the Clinitest debate.
Put the champions of each side of this heated debate in a cage, and
whoever's side comes out alive is the opinion the rest of us will
revere!! 8^} It might not actually solve anything, but it'll certainly
be fun to watch while sipping a homebrew or two.
Hey Jeff, can you guess where I am from my sig line?
Paul Haaf
7 mi. south of the Jersey Devil, 10 mi. west of the
Tun Tavern Brewpub, and 40 mi. north of Kokomo's Brewpub
haafbrau1@juno.com
___________________________________________________________________
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: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 09:33:33 -0400
From: "Penn, John" <PennJE1@SPACEMSG.JHUAPL.edu>
Subject: McEwans and Bottles
I meant to post this yesterday, sorry.
... as for bottles, try a liquor store. I found a case of 16oz
returnables for $4 and 12 oz at $2.50 a case. Don't pay $12 for a case
of empties, you can get good bottles filled with beer for a bit more
than that empty price.
McEwans, one of my favorites. Yes it is supposed to be 9.5% abv. OG
~1.088, FG a relatively low 1.015. There was a post years ago in the
HBD with a McEwans recipe but I found it too sweet. My best scotch ale
recipe to date was posted in the HBD a few months ago. It does not
taste like McEwans but it was very, very, very good. The secret per
Charley Burns suggestion was to boil part of the recipe, namely 4# of
malt extract in 1 gallon of water until it carmelized and was nearly as
thick as the original extract. It was probably 1/3 gallon left after
over 2 hours of boiling. A very nice aroma and caramel flavor, not
butterscotch though like McEwans. The aroma is almost gone after a few
months but the beer is still excellent, I drink maybe one of these a
week so it should last a little while. Some yeasts produce more
diacetyl than others but I think it would be very hard to duplicate the
strong butterscotch flavor of McEwans. I would avoid lactose and
malto-dextrin to achieve sweetness. A large part of the sweetness is
due to the relatively low bittering rate, ~35 IBUs, for such a high
gravity beer. An increase in FG will also result in the perception of
sweetness too. In order to achieve an abv above 8% where most yeast
poop out you need to pitch a large starter, maybe 1/2 galllon of Wyeast
1728. The scottish ale yeast 1728 will handle the high gravity but its
taste is identical to McEwans export, not McEwans Scotch ale. Good luck
and let us know how your beer turns out. If you can't search the HBD
and find the scotch ale recipe I posted a few months ago, email me and
I'll try to look it up.
John Penn
Eldersburg, MD
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 10:14:12 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: CAPital experiment
Tom Herlache <th22@cornell.edu> reports on a well designed and executed
experiment on a subject dear to my heart. The only problem is that I don't
like the results! Iconoclasts are never popular. ;-)
A few thoughts. I'm not sure just what you meant by creamed corn
flavor/aroma. This is how DMS is often described, but it comes from the
malt and not corn. I myself don't get a corniness from DMS, but rather
more a beeriness. I do get a corn character in my CAPs, which I have
always attributed to the corn, but I don't know for sure. I do know that
using sugar goes against my purist grain, but that's no reason to close my
eyes. I used to use it in similar proportions in my early brewing days
(20+ years ago). Cooper's uses it. Many (perhaps a majority?) mainline
North American breweries use it rather than corn or rice (Stroh's comes to
mind) and have for years - Wahl and Henius (1902) include recipes using it.
It allows a simpler brewing process and greater capacity. Corn starch has
also been used in the past - simpler than grits. Surely it has less flavor
than corn. Maybe not in the final process.
I wonder if the 3 micron filtering had any affect. I find that my beers
clear beautifully without it. Perhaps it removed some of the corn
charqacter. I certainly don't know.
I'd love to have others repeat this experiment. As for me, I'll continue
to do it the hard way. That's why I use cereal mashes rather than flaked
corn. I like fussing, and I'll probably continue to think that it makes a
difference.
Jeff
-=-=-=-=-
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan c/o nerenner@umich.edu
"One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 09:29:52 -0500
From: Tim Burkhart <tburkhart@dridesign.com>
Subject: RE:RE: Stepping up starters
I've got my very first starter batch growing right now (#1338 for a
D-Altbier) and Brian Dixons response brings up a question. Would the wort in
the smack pack be acceptable for the first step up (ie. the 1020-30sg step)?
For my first whack at liquid yeast I popped the pack and let it expand a
bit. I then dumped it in my starter vessel and fed it with 6.5 oz. sterile
1045 wort. Next with a pint of 1045 and so on...
The target og for my altbier is 1046, far from high gravity, but I'd like to
correct my process fromthe get go! So once again...when I get to making that
Old Ale and Barleywine, would the popping the smack pack be a gentle enough
first feeding before ramping up the SG?
Tim Burkhart
Kansas City
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 10:55:52 -0600
From: "McConnell, Guy" <GuyM@Exabyte.COM>
Subject: re: lauter tun size
Mark Bayer writes:
> corky asked about what size of gott cooler to go with - 5 or 10
gallon.
<snip>
> trying to brew a 5 gallon batch of a low gravity beer (bitter, etc) or
a
> wheat beer (not much husk in the mash) in a 10 gallon cooler could
result in
> a grain bed depth that would prevent the wort from clearing during
> recirculation.
<snip>
> if you don't care about wort clarity, it's not an issue.
In my recommendation to Corky to go ahead and buy the 10 gallon cooler
now instead
of later, I suggested using an Easymasher in the lauter tun. Doing this
will take care of clarity
issues, even with a shallow grain bed (in my experience). Whether you
purchase it or make
it yourself, the Easymasher is just what it says.
Of course, it's just my advice and worth at least what you paid for it.
:-)
Guy McConnell /// Loveland, Colorado /// guym@exabyte.com
"Gimme oysters and beer for dinner every day of the year, and I'll feel
fine..."
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 10:24:21 -0700
From: The Holders <zymie@sprynet.com>
Subject: re: HERMS
<page down alert>
WARNING: RIMS, HEARMS(tm), TECHNO-WEENIE CONTENT!
</page down alert>
In digest #2833, Pete asks about HERMS.
Pete,
When I first built IGOR, my HEARMS(tm), there were very few examples of
this process on the web. Now it seems to be evolving into an accepted
standard.
Without knowing the wattage of a Bruheat setup, I'd advise that more is
better for heat exchange using a standard immersion coil. IGOR98
currently uses a 1650W 120V element in the HLT, and step mashing is
marginal in 12 gallon batches. IGOR99 will benefit from a 240V upgrade,
thanks in no small part to his escape from apartment life, and
performance should increase.
Wort return should be done in a fashion that will keep the wort from
splashing, and a sparge arm would not fit this description. Make some
sort of a manifold that returns the wort back into the liquid. Many
simple manifold variations can be found on the web, just do a search for
"RIMS".
IGOR keeps his HLT temperature around 170, and keeps the heat on while
performing a mash step to lessen any temperature lag. IGOR99 should have
enough wattage in the HLT to make this a non-issue.
I'd definitely recommend adding automation to HERMS, since HEARMS(tm) is
much more user friendly. When it comes to controllers, there are many
types that can be used. I'd recommend getting the Omega handbooks,
available from http://www.omega.com. Many of your questions about
controllers can be answered from these books, although there are
certainly many other brands available. The technology keeps getting
better in temperature controls and the price keeps going down, so you
can benefit from this.
Good Luck, and long live the gadget d00ds!
Wayne Holder AKA Zymie
Long Beach CA
http://andinator.com/zymico
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 10:33:03 PDT
From: "silent bob" <holdenmcneil@hotmail.com>
Subject: Pregnancy test
Hell Folks,
I read with great pleasure, maltydogs post about using pregnancy tests
to determine the presence of living yeast, and therefore lack of
completion of fermentation. I have also found this method to work
exceptionally well, and have also employe it in testing the viability of
my starters and slurries for re-pitching. I have found "Clear Blue
Easy" to be the most accurate. A plus sign means there is still yeast,
and therefore there must still be fermentables. A minus sign, and it's
clear! go ahead and keg. Also, after a few too many homebrews one
night, I decided to determine some other uses for this test, and good
news!! I am ready to bottle.
In all seriousness, in the short time that I have been a participant in
the HBD, I have seen a great deal of stress caused by the clinitest
thread. May I humbly suggest that if anyone wants to debate the minutia
of Clinitest that they do it privately, and that general
non-inflammatory questions like "how do I get one" and "tell me about
your experience with it" continue to be posted. I just hate to see a
group of people as charming and intelligent as homebrewers cause each
other such grief, but I also don't want to see new innovatians and
peoples experience with them not get posted for fear of abuse. Thanks
to all for the tons of great info, and keep it coming, but lets keep it
civil, and lets keep ongoing heated debate in the realm of private
E-mail. It saves HBD bandwidth (which I apologize for monopolizing so
much of with this post), and makes the digest that much more enjoyable.
Thanks, and happy brewing, I'm going for a beer!
Adam
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 98 12:45:05 CDT
From: jwilkins@wss.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson)
Subject: RE: EZ keg/bottle filler
Mike Bardallis wrote:
>John W sez:
>
>"The crude CP filler I made consists of a #2 drilled stopper (#3 if using
>the
>plastic water bottles) with a length of racking cane through the hole.
> ... There will be more O2 in the
>bottle while filling than with a proper CP filler but for short term
>storage
>it doesn't seem to matter."
>
>A few years back there was a ZYMURGY 'road test' feature on CP bottle
>fillers, and the _lowest_ package air level was attained using the method
>John mentions. The trade-off was that it had the lowest CO2 retention
>(approx. 80%, as I recall) of all due to more foaming. That foaming
>purges the headspace pretty effectively; in fact, most older commercial
>bottling lines use percussion or water-jetting to stimulate fobbing just
>prior to capping the bottle.
I had forgotten about the Zymurgy test but what I was thinking of was the
O2 in the bottle as I fill it. That may not be significant either. I think
the longest I have stored a bottled filled this way was 3-4 weeks but I have
not noticed any staling.
John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins@wss.dsccc.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 14:05:42 -0500 (EST)
From: LEAVITDG@SPLAVA.CC.PLATTSBURGH.EDU
Subject: question re: potatoes as the source of fermentables ?
I am thinking of experimenting with fresh potatoes as a source of
fermentables in a Potatoe-Something Ale. I assume that they should be
boiled real well...then can I just mash them with an equal amount of
malt? Anyone have experience or care to advise me on this truly experimental
brew?
..Darrell
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 14:59:59 -0400
From: Gary_H_Nazelrod@tst.tracor.com (Gary H Nazelrod)
Subject: Osmotic Shock - was Re: Stepping up Starters
In hbd2833 "Brian Dixon" <mutex@proaxis.com> says in response to a question
from Bill.
<snip the basic answer to Bill's question>
This next part has always confused me for the many years that I have lurked
here and have heard this many times.
>Another advantage to doubling starters a few times is that your yeast gets
>to have a gentle introduction to the (always) higher specific gravity of
>your primary wort. I'll explain in a moment, but this results in reduced
>risk of osmotic shock ... especially with the high gravity brews. And that
>in turn reduces the risk of mutations occuring (which may give you 'wild
>yeast' characteristics in your beer). I brewed a Dusseldorf style Altbier
>one time that appeared to have this problem ... never could decide if it was
>a wild yeast infection or a problem with mutated yeast, but I've been
>careful ever since. Anyway, the way to ease your yeast up to the specific
>gravity of the wort is to start it at the recommended gravity (1.020 to
>1.030), then use the _brew's intended original gravity_ for each doubling.
>If you are keeping the original starter wort in the starter (what I do),
>then this will move the starter halfway towards the brew's OG with each
>doubling. For example, if you're brewing a wort with SG 1.080, your starter
>starts out at 1.020, and you double 3 times to produce a gallon of starter,
>then the starter gravities would be like this: 1-pint = 1.020, 1-quart =
>1.050, 1/2-gal = 1.065, 1-gal = 1.072. The first doubling causes the
>largest move (30 points), and that is completely acceptable. As the
>gravity, and stress on the yeast, increases, the jumps are smaller. With
>the final gallon, let it go to sedimentation and pitch the
>gravity-acclimated yeast into your wort. Works like a champ! And the
>process is very simple!
The flaw that I see in Brian's math is this. When you add the 1-pint of
1.080 starter to the 1-pint of 1.020 starter, the original 1-pint is no
longer 1.020. It has dropped to ~1.008. This results in a 1-quart starter
of 1.044, not 1-qt of 1.050. This is a move of 36 points not 30 points.
Now with each addition the jumps are not getting smaller, they are staying
about the same. I am not saying that this is not an excellent method for
making a starter. It is better than what I normally do. The argument for
reducing osmotic shock does not make sense. Perhaps someone who
understands this concept better than I, can reduce my confusion.
Gary (suffering osmotic confusion) Nazelrod
Silver Spring MD
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 13:09:03 -0600
From: Ronald Babcock <rbabcock@rmii.com>
Subject: re: HERMS
Pete Perez asked about a HERMS system in HBD# 2833:
************************
I developed a HERMS system about a year ago and couldn't be happier.
As far as returning the heated wort to the MLT you want to be careful not
to introduce oxygen into the wort. I built a H return with 45 degrees.
elbows at the ends to gently return the wort to the MLT. This works quite
well as long as you are careful to purge all the air out of the return.
If you have sufficient surface area for the heat exchanger and a good flow
rate you can raise the temperature 1.5 - 2 degrees. per min. I generally
maintain the HLT containing the heatexchanger at 180 degrees. This has
worked quite well and achieves conversion in about 30 minutes but continue
to hold for a period of 1 hour.
I built in an electric bypass valve to continue to recirculate the wort
bypassing the heatexchanger to give me the temperature control I desired.
When the valve is energized the wort flows through the heatexchanger and
bypassed when the valve is de-energized. This facilitates the addition of
electronic controls to raise and maintain the temperature as needed to do a
step mash or to hold the temperature of a infusion mash. I decided to
divert the wort from the heat exchanger instead of cycling the pump to
raise and maintain the temperature allowing the pump to run consistently,
maintaining an even temperature throughout the grain bed. This will also
add a lot of life to the pump.
The controller can be as simple as a thermostat or a more sophisticated
controller such as a PID. I am using a thermostat at the present time and
have found that the response time of the system doesn't require a PID to
prevent over shooting the desired temperature or cycling.
I have been working on programming a basic stamp to control the process
using the computer to download the program to the stamp enabling the system
to follow a step mash schedule. I just setup a older computer in the brew
area to have my brewing programs and recipes close at hand. This may allow
me to write a program using an I/O card to control the system.
I know a lot of the things I am doing will not give produce better beer
than I was brewing before but gives me a lot more consistency to the
quality brew I am producing now. This is a hobby and I am by nature a
tinkerer...
Pictures of the system and more information can be seen at
http://shell.rmi.net/~rbabcock/
Ten miles SW of the GABF.
Ronald Babcock - rbabcock@rmii.com - Denver, CO
Home of the Backyard Brewery at http://shell.rmi.net/~rbabcock/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 16:26:04 -0400
From: "Adam G. Fisher" <agfisher@tiac.net>
Subject: Carmel in Beer
Hello Everyone,
Has anyone out there every try to add caramel (Like the kind used for
caramel apples) into a beer. Any experience in this matter would be
much appreciated.
Adam Fisher
Boston, MA.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 13:31:43 -0700
From: The Holders <zymie@sprynet.com>
Subject: Pacific Brewers Cup Deadline Extended!
The Long Beach Homebrewers are please to announce:
The entry deadline for the 1998 Pacific Brewers Cup, an AHA sanctioned
competition, has been extended to Oct. 10th.
The competition will follow AHA rules governing homebrew competitions.
Information on the competition can be obtained off of our web page at
http://mozart.andinator.com/PacCup98/ or by calling the competition
chairman, Rob Wise at (562) 435 - 6188, ext 208.
Judges and Stewards are still needed, and online registration for either
is available via the website listed above.
This competition will be held October 24th at the Rock Bottom Brewery
and Restaurant, Long Beach CA.
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2834, 09/26/98
*************************************
-------
