Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2815
HOMEBREW Digest #2815 Thu 03 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:
Re: The most disgusting brew story ever. (Scott Murman)
Starter ("David Hill")
chimay (Brad Railsback)
Re:Oatmeal stout (Rod Schaffter)
Automatic Roller Mill, Filtering, Sensory Evaluation Workshop (Steve Potter)
Moisture in grains (Christophe Frey)
Storage of yeast slants? ("Marc Battreall")
Re: Hops and light ("John A. MacLaughlin")
Chest Freezer Questions (John E Carsten)
Re: Film on your porter ("Greg Lorton")
flow rate of wort vs. water (Hans_Geittmann)
10 Gallon Fermenter or Demijohn (Bradd Wheeler)
Old Brewing Procedures (George_De_Piro)
oxygenation rates (JPullum127)
Force Carbonating / CO2 Scrubbing (sbgr)
Carbonation with yeast, microlight source, fermenter film ("David R. Burley")
Film on your beer & Microscope light sources (Dave Johnson)
Harvesting Hops (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
Iodophor (Paul Niebergall)
J. Kish's post on film being a contaminant (Jonathan Edwards)
Liquid Malt Exract in Starters ("30hollywood")
Alt hopping schedule (Al Korzonas)
Re: old bench cappers (Richard Gardner)
re: lightstrike/lauter rates/crunchy protein (Lou.Heavner)
Near Disaster (Jack Schmidling)
Let a good beer be the exclamation point at the end of your day as
every sentence deserves proper punctuation...
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, 1 Sep 1998 22:54:17 -0700 (PDT)
From: Scott Murman <smurman@best.com>
Subject: Re: The most disgusting brew story ever.
> a MILL crushed coackroach floating in my Mash!!
>
> Jon
Cockroaches supply protein and filter material. They're far more
desirable than the usual bees and moths. You're one lucky dog.
SM
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 17:01:15 +1000
From: "David Hill" <davidh@melbpc.org.au>
Subject: Starter
Question the first
If word for a starter that has been aerated by vigorous shaking is
then sealed in bottle and sterilised in autoclave, pressure cooker or
canner is the effective aeration affected by the process?
I suspect not, because the oxygen has no where to go unless some of
the components of the wort are oxidised in the heating process.?
.
Question the second
Where in a starter at high krausen are the majority of the yeast that
we desire for pitching?
In the foam?
In the liquor ?
In the sediment?
in other words should one carefully decant off the supernatant and
then just pitch the sediment/cake or should one give the lot a good
swirl and pitch everything?
.
many thanks for the groups' wisdom
.
David
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 03:10:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: Brad Railsback <rails2bier@yahoo.com>
Subject: chimay
Greetings from Holland! Here you can buy Chimay , La Trappe and
Westmalle beers in the grocery stores. Chimay blue is usually around
$1.40 or so, which explains why I haven't been homebrewing here yet.
Also they don't heat the stores while they are closed(they don't have
24 hour shopping and the stores by law must close at 8:00 PM, which
is a great improvement in the last year as it used to be 6:00 PM) so
most of the time the Trappist beers are almost the perfect temp to
drink right from the store. I've found that usually the Trappist and
some other(Hoegaarden Gran Cru comes to mind) beers will foam
excessively until they settle down after a rest of a day or so. Of
course I might shake it up more as I ride my bike to the store. I
think MJ in one of his pocket guides said to let the Gran Cru rest a
few days. I'll look when I get home and find out what exactly he
says. I've found that you just had to let the foam settle before
drinking the beer if you want to drink it right away. Of course I
don't mind the foam as much when it cost me less for a bottle of
Chimay than a bud in a bar in America costs(not that I'd buy one, next
time I go to the store I'll check the price of US Bud and compare it
to Chimay). If I had paid $4 for a bottle I'm sure I'd have a
different opinion. I must go now, I have a couple of bottles of
Andecks Dunkel I hear yelling, come drink me!
I hope this has been of help to everyone and not a repeat as I haven't
had time to read HBD in the last 10 days.
Brad Railsback
Brad's Bier Tours and Research
Leiden, The Netherlands
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 1998 08:13:31 -0400
From: Rod Schaffter <schaffte@delanet.com>
Subject: Re:Oatmeal stout
Doug wrote:
> Charles Beaver wrote:
>
> >>I am contemplating making an oatmeal stout in the next few weeks.
> >>As aveteran single step infusion masher I and wondering if it is
> >> a*mandatory* that I include a protein rest.
>
> In a word, no.
>
> The main purpose of a protein rest is to break down large molecular
weight
> proteins that may lead to haze. As oatmeal stout is a very dark
beer, even
> if haze is present, it shouldn't be visible.
A recent BT (Oct 97, I think) article on adjuncts said that a rest was
needed to avoid stuck sparges. My only experience with oatmeal stout
was a partial mash, which was a bear to sparge (but great to drink!),
but that may have been due to incomplete conversion.
Any comments from the veteran "oatheads" amoung us?
Cheers,
Rod Schaffter
PS. Message to very serious thin-skinned people: oathead is not
intended as an insult-it is a joke. We return you to your regularly
scheduled program already in progress.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 1998 08:10:19 -0500
From: Steve Potter <spotter@meriter.com>
Subject: Automatic Roller Mill, Filtering, Sensory Evaluation Workshop
Dear Collective,
I just received my new Williams Brewing Catalogue. (No financial interest
- -- just a veeeery occasional customer) In it were two items that I thought
were of interest -- a new (to me anyway) brand of roller mill and a new
plate fillter for beer.
Question one - Does anyone have any experience with the homebrew
size mill from the Automatic Equipment Company? It appears to be
stainless steel with two 1 1/2 by 6 inch rollers. The second roller is
friction driven (no gears) and it has sintered brass bearings. Having
been burned with a Glatt mill, I really want someone who has given the
mill hard use to tell me what they think.
Question Two - Does anyone have experience with the plate filter
Williams is offering? (Yes I know that filtering can remove IBUs and
body, but I can compensate in formulation...and I would only filter for
competitions anyway) They say that it holds up to 5 psi pressure, filters
a five gallon batch in about an hour, and only wastes about 12 oz of
beer. They offer two filter pads - one medium and one fine. Any idea of
the pore size ratings on these? What are the advantages of a plate filter
over a cartridge filter?
Lastly, are any HBDers going to attend the Milwaukee Area Technical
College Sensory Evaluation Workshop on September 12? It will be
presented by Dennis Davidson (President of the BJCP) and Laurel Maney
(past commercial brew, consultant, brewing educator and occasional
HBD contributer). I will be helping pass out samples, so I have been
given a peek at the class outline. One part that I am looking forward to is
the tasting segment where students will have the opportunity to discover
what their personal tasting thresholds are for various flavor components
including diacetyl, lactic acid and DMS. After the class students usually
grab a late lunch and a few brews at a Milwaukee brewpub. If anyone
is interested in attending, e-mail me for further details. (No affiliation --
just a satisfied customer of a previous class)
------------------------------
Date: 02 Sep 1998 10:06:09 -0400
From: Christophe Frey <cfrey@ford.com>
Subject: Moisture in grains
to: post@hbd.org
Recently I have noticed that a few of the grain bags that I opened over the
last six months are absorbing moisture. I usually bag them in large trash
bags, but I have gotten lazy lately and now I am wondering, can I/should I use
these grains? I assume I can, but if I do, what are the downside consequences?
Also, what are people doing who store a lot of different grains? The basement
is my only true choice, and even with the dehumidifier running 24/7, there is
excess moisture present.I purchase 50-55 lbs bags, so tupper wear doesn't real
ly cut it and lining up 8-10 garbage cans probably wouldn't be too feasible
either.
Sincerely,
Chris P. Frey
Strategic Planning & New Product Development 337-1642
chris.frey-ford@e-mail.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 10:14:57 -0400
From: "Marc Battreall" <batman@terranova.net>
Subject: Storage of yeast slants?
Hello all,
Just wanted to ask for some guidance and see if anyone has tried this before
with good results.
I have an extensive yeast bank (some 40+ strains) stored on malt agar
borosilicate glass test tubes with screw tops. Up until now I have been
storing them in baggies in the refrigerator at approximately 40-42F. I have
3 refrigerators and a deep freezer dedicated to brewing and fermenting and
whatnot and this particular refrig stays at that temperature pretty much
constantly because this is the one I use for serving out of with my Corny
kegs and tap system. The other two have thermostats and are constantly
changing temps for lagering and fermenting and the like and are not
conducive to yeast storage because of the constant changing temperatures.
The deep freezer is used for flash cooling of wort and Cornies prior to
force carbonating them. I would love to set it up for lagering and storage
but my wife thinks it is supposed to be used to store food! (Goofy girl!!)
I want to lower the temperature at which I store my yeast bank at to about
34F as per what I have read regarding this issue and was contemplating the
following set up: Place the slants upright in a slant rack and house the
rack inside of a Tupperware container in the freezer. I set a thermometer
inside the freezer section of the refrigerator I want to use and in the deep
freeze for a half hour and the temperature was around 12-14F. I don't know
if the slants will gain any insulating properties by being stored inside the
container and maintain a slightly higher temp or if they will eventually
settle down to the same temp as the freezer. Maybe some foam insulation?
I know that yeast will be damaged and more than likely killed if it is below
freezing temps unless it has been treated with glycol or something. I had a
Wyeast pack that accidentally froze solid once and it was wasted. It is my
understanding that the yeast's cell walls actually rupture there by killing
them. But would this be the case of yeast cells merely "resting atop" gelled
malt agar as opposed to sitting in frozen liquid wort? And if so, what could
I do to insulate the slants to maintain around 34F without actually
adjusting the temp of the entire refrigerator unit? Anyone ever heard of
adding a glycol solution to gelled malt agar? I have read a few articles on
storing yeast slurries in solutions of distilled water and glycol or
glycerin (don't remember which one it was) at freezing temps for up to a
year and was wondering if this is a similar procedure and could be adapted
to slants?
Any help or testimony will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks and Have A Hoppy Day!
Marc
=======================
Captain Marc Battreall
Backcountry Brewhouse
Islamorada, Florida
batman@terranova.net
captainbrew@hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 10:17:47 -0400
From: "John A. MacLaughlin" <jam@clark.net>
Subject: Re: Hops and light
In HBD #2813 William Graham <weg@rmi.net> asks about packaging
wild hops. I'd like to make a small addition to the responses of others
in HBD #2314.
Whenever packaging any hops it is worthwhile to take care to keep the
outside of the packages clean so you can perform a very simple test of
the adequacy of the seal: the next day after freezing the packages,
take them out and sniff them. If you can smell the hops you need a
better seal. An additional bag may be sufficient but I recommend a
glass jar with a seal in its lid; a canning jar for example, or some
honey jars are sufficient.
- --------------------
In HBD #2813 "Mike Butterfield" <XPBRMB@sugar.org.za> asks about the
effect of strong light on yeast. My understanding is that the problem
is not with the yeast but with the hops. Charlie Papazian ('. . .
Companion,' p. 400) claims that strong light around 520 nm can change
some hop compounds to the odoriferous substances we associate with
skunks and Corona. This suggests that exposing hopped wort to strong
light before, during, or after fermentation is hazardous unless you
like Corona.
I infer that unhopped wort is not subject to this particular hazard.
------------------------------
Date: 02 Sep 1998 09:43:38 -0500
From: John E Carsten <John.E.Carsten@oklaosf.state.ok.us>
Subject: Chest Freezer Questions
I purchased a used chest freezer last night (big sucker, like
21 cubic feet). I have finally begun brewing in enough
volume that my spare refrigerator will not hold it all. I have
a temperature control on it, (the dial kind, where you plug the
freezer to it, then plug the controller into the wall). I have two
concerns:
1. Last night, I set the controller at 60F, laid my meat
thermometer at the bottom of the freezer and let everthing go.
When I checked it this morning, although the controller was
set at 60F, the thermometer read 40F. The controller worked
fine a couple of weeks ago when I used it on my fridge, so
there shouldn't be a problem there. Since there is no place
to blow cold air into the freezer (like with the fridge), I'm
assuming that the source of cold is from something just under
the freezer surface. I'm also assuming that just like an electric
oven's filament actually gets several degrees hotter than the
temperature dialed into it, the freezer probably cools
several degrees beyond set temperature, in order to
maintain the set temp.
So I guess this isn't a question, I'm just looking for a little
corroboration here. I've put the thermometer off the surface
of the freezer to see if the air temperature (since that's what
the controller is reading) is somewhere in the desired
temperature range. Is this correct? And how do I solve my
problem with the freezer surface getting much colder than
desired? Should I rest the carboys on something? (2x4s?)
2. This concern really is a question. When I felt the area near
the compressor this morning, and the outside wall of the freezer
on the side opposite of the freezer, they were both quite warm
to the touch. Is this normal?
Since I spent $175 and have a 30 day guarantee, I would
appreciate any hints, suggestions, answers, etc. asap.
Private e-mail works for me.
Thanks
John
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 08:47:21 -0700
From: "Greg Lorton" <glorton@cts.com>
Subject: Re: Film on your porter
Joe Kish responded to Peter Perez's question about a film on his (Peter's)
porter by saying it was produced by acetobacter, and that ultimately Peter
should nuke his beer and his equipment.
Then Pat said "Whoa!" It could be something else, especially if it doesn't
smell like vinegar. Don't pour the beer out yet!
I just got done reading "Lambic" book of the Beer Styles books, and
Jean-Xavier Guinard talks about a couple of yeasts (Brettanomyces, Candida,
and Pichia) that produce a "pellicle" (film) on the surface of the beer.
Brettanomyces contributes a "horsey" character, and the others reportedly
add some esters, adding to the fruity character of the beer. Lambic
brewers NEVER break the film. It supposedly protects the beer from
oxidation.
If Peter's film is one of these yeasts, it probably won't have a bad
influence on the beer, on the other hand, it may make it more complex and
interesting. I think I read somewhere that historically the yeasts for
these ales contained a bit of Brettanomyces anyway.
Greg Lorton
Carlsbad, CA
not a microbiologist, just naively believing everything I read!
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 10:17:05 -0600
From: Hans_Geittmann@notes.seagate.com
Subject: flow rate of wort vs. water
John Schnupp asks:
My question: I know that wort is *thicker* than water
and will have a different flow rate. Is there an easy
correlation between water and wort? I know the tubing
material will also play into this but I'm looking for
general guidelines. If it took water 4 min/gallon, what
will be the flow for wort? Most of my brews are in the
1.050-1.060 (FAG) range.
John, IMHO, learn to use the ball valve to control your flow rate.
Reynolds number (and thus viscosity) is likely to have a very small effect
on the flow rate in a system like yours (especially if the wort is at 150F,
viscosity decreases with temperature, for liquids). If you want to scale
your data, start with a linear relationship between specific gravity and
time to pour out a gallon- if your water flow rate is 1gpm, then for 1.050
wort you might expect 1.05gpm (a whopping 1.2 second difference to pour 1
gallon of water if your wort is at room temperature, even less at mash
temps). The parameters that will make the biggest difference in flow rate
are
1) ball valve position
2) liquid level in mash tun- your flow rate decreases as liquid level
decreases.
3) diameter of tubes used for your plumbing (smaller tubes, lower flow
rate)
4) length of tubes used for your plumbing (longer tubes, lower flow rate)
I would concentrate on #1 since you've already got the other equipment.
Hans
- --
Hans Geittmann
Seagate Technology
Hans_Geittmann@notes.seagate.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 12:29:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: Bradd Wheeler <braddw@rounder.com>
Subject: 10 Gallon Fermenter or Demijohn
In my search for the perfect fermentation vessel for 10 gallon batches
I've come across a 46L plastic carboy from the folks at www.wineart.com
Does anyone have experience with this particular item, or have access
to a more suitable vessel for fermenting 10 gallon batches?
TIA .........
- Bradd Wheeler
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 12:48:51 -0700
From: George_De_Piro@berlex.com
Subject: Old Brewing Procedures
Hi all,
Badger writes in with questions about an old brewing procedure that he
posted:
- grind your grain, and set to boil your mash water
- put half of your grain in your mash vessel
- pour bit by bit "with scoops or pails" the boiling liquor over the
malt,
and stir
- add rest of malt
- let stand for an hour or more
- "let the first liquor run gently from the malt"
- put into boiling vessel, and add hops
- boil for an hour or more
- drain through a sieve to catch hops
- cool overnight
- pitch Ale Barm (yeast essentially)
Badger is wondering what will happen to the enzymes when using this
procedure. Modern brewers avoid overheating the mash. Why is this?
Enzymes are irreversibly destroyed (denatured) when overheated. The
procedure Badger describes will destroy a fair amount of the enzymes
in the malt because of localized heating where the boiling water meets
the malt. Alpha amylase is the most sturdy of the enzymes that are
useful to brewers, and is likely to be the dominant amylase at the end
of mash-in. This means that the wort will be fairly dextrinous and
the final gravity of the beer would be high (if using a pure brewing
strain).
If too little malt was used the mash temperature would be so high that
even a-amylase will be rapidly denatured, yielding a starchy wort.
Such a wort would be *very* unfermentable with a pure brewing culture.
So if the procedure Badger posted is so potentially damaging to the
beer, why did they do it this way?
Thermometers weren't invented until the 18th century, and were not in
every household until many years after. The easiest and most reliable
way to get some saccharification to occur was to heat a specific
volume of water to a point that could be consistently measured without
a thermometer (boiling) and mash in a specific amount of grain so that
the temperature ends up somewhere near the saccharification range.
Beers of old were likely to be phenolic, sour, etc. If a modern
brewer is going to try recreating historical beers pure yeast cultures
should not be used (especially if one is trying to recreate ancient
homebrew). The highly dextrinous (and possibly starchy) worts of
yesteryear could be attenuated by wild yeasts and bacteria. Some wild
organisms produce quite agreeable flavors (as modern Lambic
demonstrates). You could get lucky. I'm sure the best brewers of old
were the ones that just happened to be microbiologically fortunate.
As an interesting side note, there is a reproduction of an old
illustration in Cindy Renfrow's _A Sip Through Time_ which shows the
"yeastman" going from door to door with buckets of yeast hoisted over
his shoulders. They are not covered. What do you think the beer
brewed from that stuff tasted like? Why do you think lagers took the
world by storm when the first pure yeast strains were isolated and
used in breweries?
Have fun!
George de Piro (Nyack, NY)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 13:05:48 EDT
From: JPullum127@aol.com
Subject: oxygenation rates
i have been following the wort oxygenation thread closely but haven't seen any
flow rates mentioned. my setup can deliver 2-10 liters a minute through the
filter. anyone have suggestions on what the best flow and timing would be for
5 gallons of wort? thanks
------------------------------
Date: 2 Sep 98 13:09:00 -0400
From: sbgr@cbmsmail.cb.lucent.com
Subject: Force Carbonating / CO2 Scrubbing
All,
I am interested in connecting my CO2 line (with a liquid out fitting) to
the liquid out fitting on my keg when force carbonating. (this was
suggested along with other methods in thread a short while ago)
I have a question concerning bubbling CO2 through the beer like this when
the beer has some ingredients with fairly mild aromatic properties.
(specifically raspberries or vanilla beans). I add these ingredients to
the secondary to protect the aromas from being scrubbed out by the CO2 of
primary fermentation. Will this brief, but substantial, blast of gas
through the beer perform CO2 scrubbing similar to that of primary
fermentation?
Thanks,
Stacy Groene
Columbus, OH
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 13:17:48 -0400
From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: Carbonation with yeast, microlight source, fermenter film
HBDers,
Matthew Arnold says:
"I've had some problems with #1338 overcarbonating when
I was bottle
conditioning. Now with kegging, I find that I rarely even have
to force
carbonate with #1338! Yes, the fermentation was complete
and if anyone suggests
using a certain product that begins with "C," I'm going to throw
them under a
camel.
Well, I would suggest Clinitest, if this is a persistent problem,
to find out if you ARE waiting long enough to finish out the
fermentation. You never know what you might learn when ignore
narrow minded peoples' denigrations.
Nevertheless, it sounds to me like #1338 may be continuing to
ferment (as you want it to) even after you bottle it. Often low
carbonation (opposite to you) is a result of not having enough
active yeast in the bottle and that's why I suggest using the
"kraeusening" starter method (made from beer and yeast from
the secondary, malt extract and priming sugar )to which I have often
referred. ( archives) This method guarantees an active yeast colony
and rapid, smooth and dependable carbonation. The present
method used by most bottlers is dependent on the strain of yeast
( viability) and the length of time in the secondary ( flocculation
and settling) carboy. If you upped your priming sugar based on past
experience with other yeast, then you may have gone too high.
As far as the beers made with higher apparent carbonation in the
fermented unbottled beer, I have also noticed that this is common
with ales and suspect it has to do with the composition of the
wort/beer. I have also had this problem when the beer wasn't
quite finished and no amount of degassing would allow me to get
a decent hydrometer reading. It may be that your beers aren't
finished because you have a very flocculent yeast.
"Any thoughts on this, or is it all a product of my non-technical mind?"
If you have a flocculant yeast your beers may not be finishing
( despite a constant hydrometer reading) until you stir them up
during priming. This would also explain why you observe such a
large amount of carbon dioxide in the beer and excess carbonation
in bottling- it is not quite finished and is still slowly fermenting.
Try rousing (stir up the yeast or rack all of the beer - including
the yeast) the beer about three days into the ferment and see if
these conditions go away.
- -----------------------------------------------------
George DePiro asks for suggestions for a light source for his
microscope. A 75 watt light bulb is too disperse and too large
to suit his purposes.
When I was about 6 -8 years old I had a microscope which used a
light bulb with a magnifying lens on it. It was a small bulb like seen
in those penlights. Maybe you can try a penlight and see if that is
sufficient light and rig something up from there. Also, maybe you
could go to an auto supply shop and use a modified tail light and
a lantern battery. Or try using a magnifying lens or ( shaving) mirror
and the 75 watt bulb
- -------------------------------------------
J. Kish says:
'"To: Peter Perez
The thin film on your porter is a contaminant, the
dreaded Acetic Acid Bacteria,"Acetobacter". It's the same
stuff that turns wine into wine vinegar. Your beer will
slowly get sour. If you ever wanted to make Kosher Dill
Pickles, you need that bacteria to get it to sour."
Actually Kish is wrong on both accounts:
1) It is unlikely that that coating is actobacter, since it needs
oxygen.Peter has just completed his fermentation and
his fermenter should be full of CO2. Probably this is just a
little yeast which rose to the surface. Don't worry about it.
Most of all don't do anything about it.
2) Dill pickling and Sauerkraut are lactic fermentations - not
acetobacter. The vinegar used to preserve the pickles is
produced by acetobacter or by a big chemical plant..
- ------------------------------------------------------
Keep on Brewin'
Dave Burley
Kinnelon, NJ 07405
Dave_Burley@Compuserve.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 1998 14:10:59 -0400
From: Dave Johnson <djohnso@OPIE.BGSU.EDU>
Subject: Film on your beer & Microscope light sources
Greeting brewers,
Pete Perez relates the presence of white film on his beer
and Some Guy (nuttin wrong with plaid) advises to wait it
out....sage advice.
A few weeks ago, I too noticed a white film with large (up
to golf ball size) bubbles in a clearing carboy, expletives
followed. Since I play a biologist in real life, I grabbed
my trusty turkey baster and took a sample that included
a good portion of the film. I slapped that puppy under the
scope and sure-as-shooting, bacilliform bacteria....DAMN!!
Well, it smelled and tasted fine (I've had acetic acid and
phenolic bacter infections before), so I just let it go. The
film eventually disappeared and I proceeded to fine as
usual. I tasted it again just a few min. ago and its a clear
fine tasting pale ale thingie, which I will bottle tomorrow
night.
Pete, I wish you the same luck as I had.
- -------------------
George De Piro laments the expense of quality micro-
scope light sources and wonders about an alternative
to his current set up. Unfortunately, quality coherent
light is expensive and unavoidable, no matter the source.
As an alternative to his current set up, I suggest replacing
the soft white bulb with a full spectrum incandescent
bulb...also known as a Grow Light. This should make
some improvement in what you see at mags lower than
1000X (I assume its a 10X ocular lens and 100X objective
lens). In order to get enough light through the condensor
to make 1000x mags useable, a light source designed for
microscopes is pretty much required. However in the
current situation, if the light mirror is 2-sided, one side is
likely flat and the other side slightly parabolic, using the
parabolic side, lots of tweeking of the mirror, raising
the condensor to its highest position, tweeking the
aperature, and using a full sprectrum light may offer some
improvement. As a rule of thumb, maximum light with a
smaller aperature provides the best contrast.
It is REALLY cool to peep into the world where our beloved
yeastie beasties hang out!! I hope something above can
pull the curtain back a bit further. Report back on improve-
ments, please?
Regards,
- --
Dave Johnson aka Tall Dave
djohnso@opie.bgsu.edu
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 14:55:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: Harvesting Hops
Greetings all, I have a question for those of you growing your own hops.
This is my first season attempting to grow hops. While my
Mount Hood and Perle bines did not flower this year I do have one
very nice Liberty plant that is laden with cones. My question has to do
with how to go about harvesting. The flowers began appearing/maturing from
the lower part of the plant and proceeded upwards. It seems to me that
many of the lower cones are ready for picking (as per published
descriptions - they are light, papery, spring back when compressed, the
internal strig snaps when the cones are bent..) However, as you go up the
vine there is a definite gradient in maturity, in fact new flowers are
budding at the very tips. So, how does one handle this? Should I harvest a
section at a time? I certainly don't want to assay each cone seperately!!
Is it better to harvest too early or too late?
Thanks in advance
-Alan
_____________________________________________________________________
"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: Wed, 02 Sep 1998 14:12:06 -0500
From: Paul Niebergall <pnieb@burnsmcd.com>
Subject: Iodophor
Brewsters,
The information comes from the oldest (and one of the most respected)
home brew shops in the our area. In a newsletter that was recently
issued, it was stated that Iodopher doesn't work in an alkali soution
(specifically above a pH of 8.5). Tartaric acid was recommended to
lower th pH of the Iodophor solution. Has anyone else ever heard of
this. It kind of makes me worry since my tap water is usually above pH
of 9.
On an unrelated issue, has anyone else received an unsolicited email
from Jessica Olson at brewing techniques <Jessica@brewtech.com>
advertising their special subscrition rate. I sure hope that BT isn't in the
practice of culling email addresses from the HBD.
Paul Niebergall
Kansas City
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 16:18:07 -0400
From: Jonathan Edwards <jdedward@us.ibm.com>
Subject: J. Kish's post on film being a contaminant
>Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1998 22:01:45 -0700
>From: "J. Kish" <jjkish@worldnet.att.net>
>Subject: Film On Your Porter
>To: Peter Perez
> The thin film on your porter is a contaminant, the
>dreaded Acetic Acid Bacteria,"Acetobacter". It's the same
>stuff that turns wine into wine vinegar. Your beer will
>slowly get sour. If you ever wanted to make Kosher Dill
>Pickles, you need that bacteria to get it to sour.
> I don't know if pasteurizing would kill the bacteria.
>You could try racking the porter through your wort chiller
>but with very hot water instead of cold water.
> You will have to go through a super-sanitizing process on
>all of your equipment.
whoa! joe! how can you pronounce peter's beer infected unless you are actually
there sniffing and tasting it? or better yet running labortory tests on it?
from my experience, i've seen film on my brews that had me worried but they've
always turned out great. even with 3+ months of aging. how you can not only
pronounce it infected but identify the culprit is beyond me. my advice to
peter, ignore joe's ravings and let your beer age. smell it, taste it. if it
tastes okay and smells okay, bottle/keg it. chances are it's okay.
jonathan
Joe Kish
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 16:22:53 -0400
From: "30hollywood" <30hollywood@email.msn.com>
Subject: Liquid Malt Exract in Starters
How much liquid malt extract do you use in a starter from a Wyeast pack?
How much water? I have always used DME but have extra liquid.
Mr. Sammy
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 15:37:44 -0500 (CDT)
From: Al Korzonas <korz@xnet.com>
Subject: Alt hopping schedule
Chuckm writes:
>In the latest issue of Zymurgy there is an article on Alt. I was interested
>in the hopping schedule. Bittering hops as usual, flavoring hops added when
>heat turned off, and then aroma hops added after wort has cooled to 180
>degrees F.
>
>This is a new twist to me. Has anyone else used this schedule? Is this
>typical/unique for Alt?
I'm not caught up on reading HBDs and someone may already have posted on
this, but I cannot contain myself on this topic. I also know that I should
not be posting while emotionally charged, so I'll try to be brief so I
don't say too much of the wrong things.
I feel that both the book Altbier and the Altbier article by Horst Dornbush
are extremely misleading, self-contradictory and are counterproductive to
the betterment of Altbier homebrewing and presumably commercial microbrewing.
Chuckm has noted but one inconsistency in the article, namely that few
Altbiers have much hop flavour or aroma (only the Sticke variant of
Duesseldorfer Altbiers has any hop aroma) yet the author's recommened
recipes call for both flavour and aroma hops! There are numerous similar
inconsistencies in both the book and the article, the latter being nothing
more than a distillation of the former's misinformation.
In the text he claims that dark and crystal malts are used sparingly if
at all, yet in the recipes he uses crystal malt in every one and as much
as a POUND of crystal malt in what he calls his "Altstadt Altbier" (Old
Town Altbier)! My most credible clone of Zum Uerige is about 89% (8 pounds
for 5 gallons) Weyermann Dark Munich, 11% DeWolf-Cosyns Aromatic (1 pound
for 5 gallons), 50 IBUs as Spalt hops (I think it was 3 ounces, but check
with a reputable formula) added at the beginning of the boil and Wyeast #1338
European Ale (NOT the over-attenuative and poorly-flocculating Wyeast #1007
German Ale the author suggests). Every authentic Altbier I've tasted
and all my experience with Altbiers is in direct disagreement with the
recipe section of the book.
I critically tasted a half-dozen Altbiers made in and around the Altstadt of
Duesseldorf and I feel that the most traditionals ones (the ones that score
the highest in Jackson's book, also) taste as if they are virtually all
Munich malt with possibly just a touch of very dark malt. NO crystal and
the base malt is MUNICH... NOT 2-ROW!
I urge everyone to be wary of the recipes and guidelines presented in this
article and the book "Altbier" from whence this article was extracted.
Can you tell I'm passionate about Altbier (and thank goodness I got through
this without any name calling... whew!)?
Al.
Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL
korz@xnet.com
http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 21:23:45 -0500 (CDT)
From: Richard Gardner <rgardner@monarch.papillion.ne.us>
Subject: Re: old bench cappers
If all else fails, bench cappers are good collectables. Here in the plains
states, they go for $10-15 usually and I have a row of them on my chimney
mantle (5 - get lots of questions, what are those? ANS: prohibition....not
as complete as you think...). They also work relatively well. My modern
capper won't work on champagne bottle (mead), but the antiques will. I've
looked at numerous antiques pricing guides and have yet to find on with
significant discussion on cappers (a market?). Some need a rubber
grommet/washer on the inside that is guaranteed to have turned to dust by
now. In small town antique stores I ask for "root beer cappers," the nom de
guerre.
Does anyone know of a decent guide to these great collectables?
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 20:52:46 -0500
From: Lou.Heavner@frco.com
Subject: re: lightstrike/lauter rates/crunchy protein
Steve Mansfield <steve@nw.verio.net> writes:
>>>>>
> From: "Mike Butterfield" <XPBRMB@sugar.org.za>
>
> I am a beginner brewer, and have been following the yeast thread
with
> interest. One more question - there has been a lot posted about
> oxygenation, yeast growth etc, but what about light ? Does light
affect yeast
> growth, and should brewing be done in the dark, or is it OK to have
a
> glass fermentation vessel standing in sunlight? I havent seen
anything on
> this in the texts I have read.
My understanding is not that it will affect the yeast so much, but
that
there are other chlorophyll-based bits in the wort, which can react to
sunlight and produce off-flavors. I have always kept my carboys
covered
with either a blanket or a cardboard box to keep light away. <<<<<
I believe those chlorophyll-based bits are hops. After hops have been
boiled in wort some of the hop compounds are converted to a form that
reacts undesirably to light. Hence the term lightstruck. In a
starter, whether hops are used or not, it probably isn't an issue. In
a full fermenter with hopped wort, light is bad! just like it is in
bottled beer. Hence the expression "greatest thing since canned beer"
(cans are usually opaque to light). ;)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
John_E_Schnupp@amat.com writes:
{snip}
>>>>>
My question: I know that wort is *thicker* than water
and will have a different flow rate. Is there an easy
correlation between water and wort? I know the tubing
material will also play into this but I'm looking for
general guidelines. If it took water 4 min/gallon, what
will be the flow for wort? Most of my brews are in the
1.050-1.060 (FAG) range. <<<<<
While wort may be thicker, I think the bigger difference in testing
your system is the effect of the grain-based filter bed. That will do
more to restrict your flow than the piping diameters you mention. I
think I'd look for a smaller valve than 1/2" at any rate. If you have
an espresso maker, try this: 1)brew water with no coffee, 2) brew
with conventional grind coffee, 3) brew with espresso grind, 4)
compare the flow rate. It will be very clear.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jon bovard <jonbovard@geocities.com> writes:
{snip}
>>>>>
As i stirred the mash something darted over the grain bed again, I
stopped and fished it out. NOW ive stumbled upon
some preety sick things on the NET but none as foul as a MILL crushed
coackroach floating in my Mash!!
{snip}
Oh by the way, I kept brewing with that same mash. <<<<<
I hope you did a protein rest! ;)
Cheers!
Lou - Austin err uhhh I mean Blacksburg, VA today
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 1998 21:11:23 -0700
From: Jack Schmidling <arf@mc.net>
Subject: Near Disaster
It seems to come in waves when one gets old.
First I turned off the fridge to get rid of some ice and forgot
to turn it on and had rather warm beer the next day.
Then, when I turned it on, instead of switching to the control mode
I set the switch to "ON" which turns the chest freezer back into a
freezer.
So this morning when I went out to transfer the cool wort from the
kettle to the fermenter, the monitor said "LO" and I knew I was in
trouble. I doubt the 10 gal kegs were frozen solid yet but they
have sight glasses which could burst as any moment and the yeast
was frozen solid and I have no way to get new yeast in less than
3 days.
I added a gallon of room temp wort to the yeast cake and it started
fermenting within 15 minutes and I really relaxed.
Moral of the story,..... THINK
...........
Solved my pump problem with a nifty controller from Granger that
someone pointed me to and it works like a charm. I can't find the
part number at the moment but it's under "speed controls". It will
control any motor with brushes up to 10 amps.
I was able to transfer from fermenter to keg with only about a
quarter inch of foam on top by slowing it way down. Strangely
enough, it seemed like it actually took less time than when running
at full speed. Something to do with all the foam, I guess.
Neat gadget. Made my day.
js
- --
Visit our WEB pages: http://user.mc.net/arf
ASTROPHOTO OF THE WEEK..... New Every Monday
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2815, 09/03/98
*************************************
-------
