Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2882
HOMEBREW Digest #2882 Mon 23 November 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:Rye malt vs flaked rye (ThomasM923)
Re: Another Thermometer Calibration Idea ("John A. MacLaughlin")
Re: Subject: Natty Boh (Rick Jarvis)
GLATT PARTS (Evan Kraus)
Re: . . . pronounce . . . ("John A. MacLaughlin")
three questions for you all (Jebbly)
Thanks for help with Wyeast 2308-Munich (Dan Cole)
d'arcy debate (Boeing)" <BayerMA@navair.navy.mil>
Yet another newbie Protein Rest question ("Hans E. Hansen")
Darn cider preservatives (Redholling)
Sweet Beer (Paul Levasseur)
Weizen Changing Character (Ron West)
single infusion vs step mash ("Frederick L. Pauly")
Say WHAT?!? (pbabcock)
HOMEBREW Digest #2881, Sat 21 November 1998, Response: (Fred Scheer)
Aluminum open fermentors/I hate carboys (Breadnale)
Kraeusen pronunciation? ("Fred L. Johnson")
Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!
Send your entries in for Hoppiest Event 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: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 01:46:02 EST
From: ThomasM923@aol.com
Subject: Re:Rye malt vs flaked rye
Eric Reimer wrote: "I am considering brewing a roggenbier or perhaps a
roggenweiss. I can't find malted rye locally, but have no difficulty getting
flaked rye. What are the pros and cons to each type of rye? What flavour
differences can I expect? What about mashing and lautering differences?"
I've read that malted rye can impart a harsh taste. I think it was in an
article about the Redhook Brewery. The brewer was discussing Redhook's Ryehook
ale and recommended flaked rye for a smoother flavor.
Don't kill yourself trying to find malted rye. I actually went to the trouble
of malting my own once (I still have it in a jar somewhere) and I can tell you
that you will have some trouble with milling the grain. It is quite hard and
it will have to be milled separately because the grains are much smaller than
barley. So why go to the trouble of changing the setting of your mill (or
talking your homebrew supplier into changing his/her mill setting) when you
can get good results with flaked rye?
One more thing---A little goes a long way. I recommend between 10% to 25%. 10%
flaked in a lighter beer provides a good amount of rye flavor with little or
no run-off problems. I recommend doing a bete-glucan rest at ~108-112 degrees
F for 20-30 minutes because the rye can create an extra-thick mouth-feel that
is inappropriate in a lighter beer. Check out my Roggen Pils recipe at The
Brewery---http://brewery.org/gambmug/recs/322.html
Thomas Murray
Maplewood NJ
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 07:20:12 -0500
From: "John A. MacLaughlin" <jam@clark.net>
Subject: Re: Another Thermometer Calibration Idea
In HOMEBREW Digest #2881 Fred Wills <MaltHound@aol.com> writes:
> . . . Why don't you just stick it in your mouth?
>
>Assuming you are not feeling ill or haven't just finished running a
>marathon your body temp should be 98.6 degrees F.
> . . .
If Fred believes this works for him then I believe it works for him,
but I don't believe it will work for me or for many other people. That
98.6 F figure (which is exactly equal to 37.0 C, a fact which alone
should make us suspicious) is a momily about as reliable as pulse 72 or
BP 120/80. People are just not sufficiently uniform to be a satisfactory
standard for anything as touchy as mash temperature.
I am more than a bit hyper about this because my "normal" body temper-
ature is around 96.8 F. Most people to whom I tell this believe I'm
just transposing those last two digits and that I'm malingering when I
claim to be sick at 98.6 F. This caused me so much grief throughout my
childhood that one of the great rewards of early adulthood was being
able to give the finger to the bigots who disbelieved me on this point.
I think that anyone who believes 37 C is a useful calibration point for
a brewing thermometer should follow the advice of Frederick L. Pauly
<flp2m@avery.med.virginia.edu> in HBD #2877 or that of Herbert Bresler
<bresler.7@osu.edu> in HBD #2880.
The electronic fever ("clinical") thermometers available nowadays seem
not to have the "lock on max" feature Herb mentions. The one I have is
consistently within 0.2 F of my traditional mercury fever thermometer
but I have no idea whether that is typical performance.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 07:53:20 -0500
From: Rick Jarvis <rjarvis@nauticom.net>
Subject: Re: Subject: Natty Boh
>>>Actually, didn't I hear that Pittsburgh Brewing
does a lot of the Natty Bo brewing now?<<<
Since they lost the Sam Adams contract they have a lot of capacity.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 08:36:21 -0500
From: Evan Kraus <ekraus@avana.net>
Subject: GLATT PARTS
Anyone know where I can get some Glatt parts ?
I need the bearings.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 09:09:26 -0500
From: "John A. MacLaughlin" <jam@clark.net>
Subject: Re: . . . pronounce . . .
A recent visitor to the Pacific northwest tells me that the local
pronunciation of "Willamette" in that area is more like will-LAM-met
than the will-lam-ETTE I had expected. Can anyone verify this?
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 11:00:42 EST
From: Jebbly@aol.com
Subject: three questions for you all
First: I am looking for a yeast bank or supplier to find a european--welsh,
to be specific--ale yeast.
Second: I am also looking for neat beer/brewing/old english clipart for my
labels.
Third: I am considering setting up a rims in my basement. I currently mash
in a ss pot which I keep in an insulated box to maintain the temp. With a
rims, how does one keep the temps constant? Is this something else I'll need
to master?
Any help on any of these will be appreciated.
Thanks,
Jebbly in Vermont
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 11:35:37 -0500
From: Dan Cole <dcole@roanoke.infi.net>
Subject: Thanks for help with Wyeast 2308-Munich
I just wanted to thank everyone for their advice on Wyeast 2308-Munich. To
summarize the suggestions: ferment cool (50F), a diacetyl rest is
mandatory, huge sulfur production should be expected, and be prepared to
lager for months. Many said that if you follow all the above advice, you
will get an award winning Lager and many called this yeast their favorite.
Dan Cole
Roanoke, VA
Star City Brewers' Guild: http://hbd.org/starcity/
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 12:12:34 -0500
From: "Bayer, Mark A (Boeing)" <BayerMA@navair.navy.mil>
Subject: d'arcy debate
collective homebrew conscience:
scott wrote:
>Folks keep bringing up Darcy's law and how it relates to lauter design.
IMO, it's irrelevant to the >problem.
and paul said:
>Your opinion is wrong. Darcy's law is completely relevant. And that is
not my opinion, it is a fact.
paul, take it down a notch. what scott is saying is that flow rate at the
bottom of the lauter tun is not the quantity being sought. what john palmer
was trying to show in his experiment was how the mash liquor drains through
every part of the lauter tun. and in that case, d'arcy's law is completely
irrelevant. what you need, theoretically, is a solution describing the flow
at every point in the lauter tun so you can determine where the flow is not
reaching, and therefore where your extraction might be compromised. a
"picture" of the flow is what john was shooting for, and that's why (i
suspect) he abandoned the theoretical approach in favor of the experimental
approach.
if you want to know the flow rate coming out of your lauter tun, just take a
measuring cup and use your wristwatch. and use a valve so you can adjust
it.
brew hard,
mark bayer
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 10:19:14 -0800
From: "Hans E. Hansen" <hansh@teleport.com>
Subject: Yet another newbie Protein Rest question
Hello one and all.
I just spent about 5 hours cruising thru the archives to
find out about protein rests. In particular, there was
some good stuff this last January.
Most discussions centered around the protein rest's effect
on haze, and only occasionally mentioning body (the usual
comment in this regard was the potential body loss from
low temp protein rests).
My question (which I couldn't find elsewhere):
What effect on body does a 135 deg protein rest have?
In particular, what happens (to body) if a well modified
malt gets a 135 deg protein rest?
My guess to my own question is that large proteins (the
kind that would normally hot-break out) will get broken
up into more soluble proteins and contribute to body.
But obviously I don't know what I am talking about,
else I wouldn't be here!!
Hans E. Hansen
hansh@teleport.com
I don't have a clue how many miles from Jeff Renner
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 14:13:46 EST
From: Redholling@aol.com
Subject: Darn cider preservatives
Hello again boys and girls! For the benefit of all digest readers:
I received a load of private replies (thanks again, guys) telling me to check
out the preservatives and suggestions. I finally tracked down a jug to find
that Bob Sweeney nailed the preservatives in his reply (#2881). The cider
contains apples, potassium sorbate, sodium benzoate and malic acid. I get
airlock bubbles about once a minute now and there is a layer of kraeusen on
the surface. SOMETHING is going on. Not sure what I'll do yet. Thanks for all
the help!
Red
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 14:29:11 -0500
From: Paul Levasseur <plevasseur@snet.net>
Subject: Sweet Beer
About a month ago I made Phil Fleming's Christmas Ale. I probably made
a mistake by not propagating the yeast. Instead I pitched right from
the smart pack using Wyeast 1007. About a week into the primary
fermentation I realized that I should have used more yeast for such a
high gravity beer,(1.070+) and I repitched another smart pack and let it
sit in the primary for another week.
Last night after two weeks in the secondary I took a gravity reading
which turned out to be 1.020 which I assumed would mean that it was
probably done. I then took a sip of the beer and it tasted like it
never fermented at all. It tasted very sweet just like on the day that
I started to ferment it.
My question, is what should I do? Should I give it more time? Should
I repitch some yeast this time using the proper amount of yeast? At
1.020 I think that it should be about done, but maybe with such a high
gravity beer it just needs at least a few more weeks in the secondary.
This is my first attempt at a high gravity beer.
Please help I will be very greatful especially since this was a very
expensive beer to make given all of the ingredients.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 12:51:35 -0800
From: Ron West <ronwes@halcyon.com>
Subject: Weizen Changing Character
I am a new owner of a Cornelius kegging system. A little less than two
weeks ago I kegged my first batch (a weizen) in the Corny and stored it
at a stable 46 F. under 18 lb. of pressure to condition. After 4 days I
tried it and was immediately impressed by the wonderful banana and
clove-like characters of this beer. This is my first weizen, I've made
several other beers over the past year, always brown ales. Now, just
one week later I am wondering what happened to the banana and clove
notes? It is still a very nice drinkable beer, but the overall
character has changed seemingly overnight.
Although the beer is still not sparkling clear (I used liquid hefeweizen
yeast), it has cleared steadily over the past week, no doubt due to the
settling of the yeast in the corny. Did the characteristics I am
missing go the way of the yeast, consumed during the first week? Or is
this just a natural process of the beer conditioning over time? This is
the first beer of this style I've brewed. Maybe I've just not noticed
the similarly changing character of the previous (hoppier) ales I've
made. Can someone shed some light on this?
Ron West
ronwes@bigfoot.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 17:30:52 -0500
From: "Frederick L. Pauly" <flp2m@avery.med.virginia.edu>
Subject: single infusion vs step mash
Well I thought I was going to scoope the HBD with this big news
item but Dave Draper beat me to it.
I have been wondering for a long time about the step mash vs
single temp mash with well modified malts. What does it add to
the beer besides possibly more effeciency?
So I experimented.
Usually I do 10 gallon all grain batches. For the experiment I
split the grain bill in half and using the same yeast culture,
made 2 5 gallon batches that fermented side by side. Now, one
month old I tasted them and found no difference between them.
It was a pale ale and one was mashed at 154F while the other was
stepped through 135F 10min 148 15min 158 20min then 165 for
10nmin. All the temperature rests, to my amazement, were hit
right on.
Of course this is just one experiment but it helps me feel more
comfortable doing my single infusions for my ales with well
modified malts.
All those opposed, please, fire away.
Rick Pauly
Charlottesville,Va
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 20:31:35 -0500 (EST)
From: pbabcock <pbabcock@mail.oeonline.com>
Subject: Say WHAT?!?
Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager...
Hans E. Hansen says...
> But obviously I don't know what I am talking about,
> else I wouldn't be here!!
Huh?!? If only people who don't know what they're talking about are here,
then why are you asking us?!? (Just kidding - I know - at least I HOPE I
know - that this is not what you meant...)
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: Sun, 22 Nov 1998 12:08:23 -0700
From: Fred Scheer <maltster@marsweb.com>
Subject: HOMEBREW Digest #2881, Sat 21 November 1998, Response:
Eric Reimer <eric@etymonic.com> wrote:
Subject: Rye malt vs flaked rye
Eric, because RYE (secale cereale ) is a strongly flavored grain, I
recommend not to use more than 15% in your recipe; later on,
you can increase the rye level; per your tasting.
As with Wheat Malt, Rye has no husk, therefore can create problems
during mashing and lautering. Also, Rye has a lot of beta - glucans,
which increase the wort viscosity and will create problems during
run off; filtration ; and can cost flavor problems.
During my apprenticeship in Germany we brewed a Roggen Bier,
using 80% 2 - Row Pilsener Malt, and 20% Roggen (Rye).
Because the Pilsener Malt was undermodified, we applied a
single decoction mashing. I remembered some long Brewing
days when brewing Roggen Bier - but, when the Bier was
finished and we had the chance to taste the nectar, it made up
for al the long hours on the kettles.
I do recommend to start brewing with Rye Malt.
The first source that comes to my mind would be MidAmerica
Brewing Supply in MN (they don't pay me to name them),
ask for Jim or Jerry, and if they don't have it, they can give you
a source. Good Luck
"Riedel, Dave" <RiedelD@PAC.DFO-MPO.GC.CA> wrote:
Subject: Hugh Baird Munich/Decoction
1. I pulled the decoction and raised it to 158F to convert.
> It took well over 40 mins to do so. I was expecting
> 15-20. The grist was 75% Hugh Baird Munich. Is it
> possible that it was so well modified to be a very slow
> converting malt?
Dave, in order to convert, you need a pool of enzymes. Maybe
the Malt used did not have enough to do the job.
Ask your supplier for the lot analysis of that particular malt
and see what the enzyme levels are.
...............the idea behind the decoction
The idea behind decoction mashing comes from Europe
(mostly Germany), where most Malts are undermodified,
and this type of mashing regime is necessary.
.............................with a grist comprised of 75% HB Munich
and 12% DWC Pils, I found that conversion (even at 158F) was sluggish.
Dave, again as in your first question, I think the malt used has
not enough enzymes to do the job correctly.
Fred M. Scheer
MALT MONTANA
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1998 17:41:04 EST
From: Breadnale@aol.com
Subject: Aluminum open fermentors/I hate carboys
Hey,
All this talk about Aluminum kettles makes me wonder what everybody out there
thinks of using Aluminum for an open fermentor. I claim Ignorance (happily) on
the science of Aluminum and it's contribution to Boiling wort/Fermenting beer.
Just looking for a simple answer. Whatddayathink? I'm looking for a good open
fermentor.
I switched from the carboy 6 beers ago and am never going back. I never feel
like I get them clean enough. I'm always afraid of breaking it. My beers are
better since I switched.
Thanks. I have no idea how far Jeff Renner is from me!
Jim
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 07:37:36 -0500
From: "Fred L. Johnson" <FLJohnson@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Kraeusen pronunciation?
How about someone pronouncing "kraeusen" for me? (I misspelled this word twice
before I finished this post!)
- --
Fred L. Johnson
Apex, North Carolina
USA
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2882, 11/23/98
*************************************
-------
