Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #2999
HOMEBREW Digest #2999 Thu 08 April 1999
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:
brewstands/fruit/aeration/fusels/more fusels/momilys (BrewInfo)
Slow sparge/protein rest (Adrian Griffin)
Re: Broken Thermometer ("Jeffrey S. Fabrizio")
Decline of home brewing? (Jack Schmidling)
Diacetyls: Again? ("Dr. Pivo")
Murphys/Heineken connection ("Bridges, Scott")
Planting time... ("Spies, Jay")
Re: A Newbie Brewer Question (Joel Plutchak)
Diacetyl Again! (RCAYOT)
Re: taste references (Spencer W Thomas)
Easymasher (Drewmeister)
Klages Malt (Dan Listermann)
like buttah ("David Kerr")
That "D" word, grain crush... (Joe Rolfe)
Chlorine in SS Sink ("Eric R. Theiner")
Re: Questions of my own (Michael A. Owings)
floating thermometer - and - broken thermometer in brewpot ("leroy strohl, iii ")
Re: Ringwood Yeast (Jeff Renner)
Re: Help -> Belgian beers... (Ted McIrvine)
Diacetyl (AJ)
Maltodextrin-watery brew (TPuskar)
Belgians (Gordon Strong)
Re: A Newbie Brewer Question/ and a question of my own ("Mark W. Wilson")
Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!
Enter the Spirit of Free Beer! Competition 5/22/99. Details at
http://burp.org/SoFB99. 2000 MCAB Qualifier!
Enter the Buzz-Off! Competition 6/26/99. Details on the HBD Competition
Calendar for June 1999 (http://hbd.org). 2000 MCAB qualifier!
Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org
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!
Contact brewery@hbd.org for information regarding the "Cat's Meow"
Back issues are available via:
HTML from...
http://hbd.org
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
COPYRIGHT for the Digest as a collection is currently held by hbd.org
(Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen). Digests in their entirity CANNOT be
reprinted/reproduced without this entire header section unless
EXPRESS written permission has been obtained from hbd.org. Digests
CANNOT be reprinted or reproduced in any format for redistribution
unless said redistribution is at absolutely NO COST to the consumer.
COPYRIGHT for individual posts within each Digest is held by the
author. Articles cannot be extracted from the Digest and
reprinted/reproduced without the EXPRESS written permission of the
author. The author and HBD must be attributed as author and source in
any such reprint/reproduction. (Note: QUOTING of items originally
appearing in the Digest in a subsequent Digest is exempt from the
above. Home brew clubs NOT associated with organizations having a
commercial interest in beer or brewing may republish articles in their
newsletters and/or websites provided that the author and HBD are
attributed. ASKING first is still a great courtesy...)
JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 18:03:12 -0500 (CDT)
From: BrewInfo <brewinfo@xnet.com>
Subject: brewstands/fruit/aeration/fusels/more fusels/momilys
More very old questions...
Badger writes:
>I am on the verge of making this step myself.. and i was wondering if people
>had recomendations for Brewstands that i can buy, not being a welder or
>knowing of one...
See my homebrew system on my website. I built my stand from galvanised
steel angle iron and flats, all connected with nuts and bolts, like a
giant erector set. I did a back-of-the-envelope sketch to calculate how
much I needed and then still had to go back for a few pieces. My biggest
recommendations are: 1. get a power nut driver, 2. wear gloves, and
3. file down the sharp edges either after you cut them or after you are
done assembling.
***
Chris writes:
>With 5 minutes remaining of the 60 minute boil, add 1/2 oz German Hallertau
>hops. Cool quickly until the wort reaches 65-68 degrees. Pour the contents
>of the brew pot into a plastic fermenter. Add Raspberries from the can,
>syrup and all (can contents are pasteurized). (do NOT use a glass carboy
>for primary fermentation), top with cold water to 5 gallons, and seal the
>fermenter with an airlock. Pitch Wyeast and aerate. Fermentation should be
>completed within 7 to 10 days, or rack to secondary when primary
>fermentation has ended. When bottling, add raspberry flavoring to taste.
Two comments. 1. To maximise fruit flavour, add the fruit after the primary
(malt sugar) fermentation is over. Fruit flavours are really just aromas
and evolving CO2 scrubs out those aromas. The later in the ferment that
you can add the fruit (this is also true for dryhops, maple syrup, honey,
etc.) the more aroma (and thus flavour) you will get out of the fruit.
2. I've yet to find a fruit extract (even those 100% fruit ones) that
makes for a natural-tasting fruit beer. When I add enough to get a decent
fruit flavour, I get either too much bitterness or a medicinal flavour
(or both).
***
John writes:
>The problem is, when I transfer from my brew
>pot, after cooling of course, I strain the wort to aif in trub
>elimination and filter out hop residue. This produces a lot of foam.
>Now I start to aerate and I quickly get a huge amount of foaming. It is
>impossible to even come close to aerateing for 1 hour. What do I do? I
>tried not straining ( I do whirlpool to syphon awaay from the trub ),
>but it still gets quite foamy. Should I foam away and just have a big
>mess, but a well aerated wort?
That's why I switched to oxygen. 2 minutes with oxygen dissolves more
oxygen in the wort than many, many minutes with air (see the archives
for AJ's experiment proving this). Air will work as well as oxygen in
the long run (for most yeasts), but I simply don't have the time (usually
around midnight) to wait for the head to fall between aeration sessions
(a minute of air, 15 minute wait, a minute of air...).
***
Kelly writes:
>Could someone tell me what Fusel alcohols are...why they are bad, what the
>taste is like (so I can know how to detect), and how to prevent them?
Fusel alcohols are also known as "higher alcohols." They differ from
ethanol in that they are bigger (more carbons and hydrogens). They are
"bad" if they are in a beer that shouldn't have them. Lagers generally
should be low in higher alcohols whereas Belgian ales are typically
high in them. Higher alcohols are more "alcoholic" than ethanol. I
don't know if they are more intoxicating, but they certainly certainly
have more alcohol aroma. If a beer contains only ethanol, most people
can't smell or taste it until the concentration gets above about 8%ABV.
A very small amount of some higher alcohols can taste/smell like alcohol,
so that a beer could taste warming and smell like alcohol even if the
ethanol level is only 5%.
To learn what higher alcohols taste/smell like, compare some of
the stronger Belgian ales (like Delirium Tremens) with something
bland and neutral like Coors. Alternatively, you could compare
the Belgian ales with strong German beers which are typically much
lower in higher alcohols. Perhaps some others can offer suggestions?
I could write several pages on what increases production of higher
alcohols, but the main factors are temperature (higher temp == more
higher alcohols), yeast strain selection (some strains produce more
than others), pitch volume (underpitching == more higher alcohols),
OG (higher gravity == more higher alcohols), fermenting on hot and
cold break (more break == more higher alcohols) and initial dissolved
oxygen level. This final factor is rather confusing... there are
studies that have found more oxygen == more higher alcohols and other
studies that have found just the opposite. My *guess* is that there
is some strain dependence and that perhaps both extremes can result
in increased production (i.e. know your yeast's oxygen requirements
and don't give them too much or too little). If you don't believe
me I can give you a reference privately, but I'd rather not post it.
***
Lou writes:
That is why a strong ale or barleywine worth it's mettle will
taste 'sharp
and angular' until at least 6 months of conditioning has occurred.
That
'sharp' taste is from fusels.......they go away with time......
I've heard this before and certainly longer conditioning does have a
mellowing affect on high gravity beers. I am curious as to how this
actually occcurs. Anybody know or care to speculate?
I believe that it is esterification of the alcohols (acids + alchols =
esters)... see below.
***
Jethro writes:
> But the essentials are these....as questioned most notably in a private
> communication from Pete Santerre....who understates his acuity....
[snip]
> 7) Remembering that esters are the product of a reaction of an organic
> acid with ethanol....and that "Fusels are pretty much there for the
> duration".....a slow, up to 2 years or longer reaction of fusels with
> other organic acids, (from autolysis, protein degradation, etc) will
> lead to formation of more esters.....This is a slow process...BUT..
[snip]
> In short, in a VERY complex chemical reaction(s)....the "Fusels are pretty
> much there for the duration." Maturation and 'softening' of a high grav
> brew is a long term, and complex process.....
> (Source, Dave Radzanowski, Lynne Kruger, Siebel Institute)
With all due respect, I believe that this has been addressed in the
literature before. Could it be that Dave and Lynne are referring to
filtered beer? I believe that someone posted in HBD, quoting from
a research paper, that esterification by itself is incredibly slow,
whereas if yeast is present it can go much more quickly (enzymatic
process if I recall correctly?). It could also be that while we
are talking about ppt for ethanol, some higher alcohols are present in
only ppm and there simply isn't that much reaction needed to "use much
of it up." I know from personal experience both with homebrewed and
commercial Barleywines that over the course of a year the higher
alcohols decrease and the esters increase.
***
Eric writes:
>In this forum, our momilies are [snip] "Yeast never respire
>in beer wort", and "You'll go blind if you don't leave yourself alone!"
Regarding the first, the fact is that due to the Crabtree Effect, only
a very small amount (essentially none) of the oxygen is used by the
yeast for respiration (remember that the Crabtree Effect only *suppresses*
respiration) and the vast majority is used for things like sterol
synthesis. The source of this whole problem is where well-meaning,
non-biochemist brewing authors have inadvertently used the word "respiration"
to mean "oxygen uptake."
Regarding the second, couldn't you just do it until you need glasses?
Al.
Al Korzonas, Lockport, IL
korz@brewinfo.com
http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 17:56:54 -0700
From: Adrian Griffin <agriffin@softcom.net>
Subject: Slow sparge/protein rest
I did my first mash with a protein rest last Saturday and had a very
slow runoff. Sparging my batch took 4 hours, much to the disgust of my
spouse who does not like me monopolizing the kitchen for that long.
I'd appreciate any thoughts from the collective on how to avoid this
problem.
I have used Jack Schmidling's Easymasher without any problems at all for
about 20 batches. My usual procedure is to mash 11 pounds of grains
(Mostly Hugh Baird English pale) with 1 1/3 quarts per pound of mash
water. I mash at 152F for 70 minutes and then sparge with 23 quarts of
sparge water. The Easymasher gives me right flow rate when the little
spigot is about 7/8 open.
I have also mashed DeWolf/Cosysns pale ale malt using this procedure,
without any sparging problems, although I had a lot of break material in
my fermenter.
I wanted to try the DWC pale ale malt with a protein rest. I mashed for
15 min. at 138F and stepped up the temperature with stove heat and 2
quarts of boiling water to 152F Total mash water was 14 2/3 qt. I
rested at 152F for 80 min.
When I tried to drain the grain bed, flow through the spigot was only a
trickle. Slashing the grain bed made no difference. The mash showed
no tendency to set up, but continued at this slow rate for 4 hours. The
flow was slightly faster in the last hour of the sparge.
A few possible explanations:
1. My retailer's mill was out of adjustment and the grains were ground
too finely.
2. My mash schedule turned the malt into glue.
3. When I cleaned up after my previous brew, a piece of husk got into
the tube of my Easymasher. This lodged in the spigot when I began to
drain.
I'd appreciate any thoughts on the cause of this problem. Also, any
suggestions for a (preferably two-step) mash schedule for Belgian Pale
Ale Malt would be welcome.
I will of course, compile and post the results.
- --Adrian
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 20:03:01 -0500
From: "Jeffrey S. Fabrizio" <jethro@i1.net>
Subject: Re: Broken Thermometer
Dan Listermann replied to my broken thermometer story:
> I have found that the balls are magnetic which means that they
> are steel and harmless for the most part. Check them with a magnet.
Indeed, they were magnetic, and therefore, steel. I don't know why I
assumed they were lead. 8^)
> As for the wax, I drank the beer and I seem to be OK or rather not
> so bad that anyone would be willing to bring it up to my face at
> least not in public very often when my wife is around.
LOL! You seem all right to me. On a similar note, I would like to
thank all of the people who wrote to help me with his problem. In the
short space of four hours, I had received eight e-mails offering helpful
advice. If this isn't the greatest forum for novices like myself, I
don't know what is! Special thanks to Dan Listermann, John Adsit,
Robert Haines, Jeff Renner, Lee Menegoni, Greg Remec, Ian Smith, Scott
Newell, and Tim Burkhart. It is people like you that make me realize
what a great group this is, with a huge knowledge-base that they are
very willing and eager to share.
BTW, the Russian Imperial is fermenting along nicely, and quite
aggressively. I can't wait to tip one back to the HBD folks! I am glad
I kept it!
Jeff
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 13:42:56 -0700
From: Jack Schmidling <arf@mc.net>
Subject: Decline of home brewing?
"I a recent BT editorial (http://www.brewingtechniques.com/............
"Stephen Mallery refers to a decline in home brewing and what can be done
about it. I'd like to toss in an idea.
First of all, I can not read the page because of the background. It's
black text on very dark background and is totally unreadable to me.
Not sure what motivates folks to post such stuff but.....
Perhaps, decline is in the eye of the beholder. It is not surprising
that magazine sales or rate of growth of same would be down in this
sort of craft/hobby. After one has been brewing successfully for a
few years, especially if one has access to the internet, there seems
little need for a magazine. I have not read one in years. They keep
coming in and go on to a pile.
I will never forget the first time I saw a Zymurgy, I devoured it for
weeks but how many times can a subject be covered and still hold one's
interest. It basically explains a craft and once learned, who needs
it? There is virtually not "news" element too keep one interested.
Many hombrew shops have vanished but most of these were folks who
fell into the get rich quick trap. Seemed like if one knew how
to brew one could sell the stuff. I know of very few serious
players who have been around for 5 years that are out of business
or even hurting. There were vastly too many retailers for the
market and the fitest are surviving and doing well.
Most serious brewers, sooner or later switch to all grain so it is
not surprising that the mainstay of retailers (extract) is a precarious
market at best.
Not sure what it means but in spite of mills popping up like mushrooms
and the rise of a few serious competitors, our business has been
virtually flat for years.
I think what it says is that the hobby is maturing and surprisingly
healthy. Perhaps there are not as many beginners jumping in now as
at the peak but that only means the market is not growing as rapidly
but I seriously doubt that "decline" is the appropriate word.
Magazines and distrubutors need growth to survive but that is their
problem. If they went bonkers setting up too many retailers, that
again is their problem. We just need good beer to survive and there
are plenty of good retailers out there to satisfy our needs.
js
- --
Visit our WEB pages: http://user.mc.net/arf
ASTROPHOTO OF THE WEEK..... New Every Monday
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 07 Apr 1999 09:26:29 +0200
From: "Dr. Pivo" <irv@wireworks.se>
Subject: Diacetyls: Again?
This probably falls under the category of inconsequential nit-picking
that usually makes me shy away from this forum, but AJ DeLange's so
usually correct postings contained one thing that I don't think should
be propagated.
> Further to taste, the taste impressions of diacetyl
> vary according to what it is presented with and the level. At low levels
> (i.e. 2 -3 time threshold as in Bohemian Pils) it synergizes with the
> malt to give that wonderful round, nutty, caramel quality.
I don't know where you got those numbers from (some "homebrewing"
literature perchance), but Bohemian pilsners as per my original posting
are higher than that.
Not only does it match my taste perception, but I've taken my "exact"
numbers regarding Urquell from the University of Fermentation Technology
in Prague (Where all Czech Brewmasters are educated in a 5 year Brewing
Technology Engineering degree).
While Budvar and Prazdroi would be considered "pretty similar" on world
scale standards, the traditions at Ceske Budjovice and Plzen are
succinctly different, and form the two main "schools" of thought by
which brewers are educated there.
I think they "know" exactly where those levels are, and I have watched
students crunching differential equations of diacetyl over time and
temperature.
The only reason I bring up this useless information, is that this is yet
a further example of how diacetyl has gotten a "bad rep" among modern
brewers, so there is a tendency to "downplay" their levels.
Brewer's Hint no. 187: When tasting a beer made by a professional
brewer, you don't "need" to tell them that you percieve diacetyls. You
can "ask" them if they have measured them.... they usually reply: "Not
yet. We don't have that equipment in our laboratory". And then they
usually say that they "think" it is "about".... and report a number that
is about half of what your perceptions tell you it really is.
I'll requote this:
> it synergizes with the
> > malt to give that wonderful round, nutty, caramel quality
Now THAT was a wonderful description.
Dr. Pivo
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 08:44:31 -0400
From: "Bridges, Scott" <ScottBridges@sc.slr.com>
Subject: Murphys/Heineken connection
>Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 10:13:40 -0600
>From: John Adsit <jadsit@jeffco.k12.co.us>
>Subject: Murphy's Irish Stout
>
>I'd just like to add a lttle more info about Murphy's. I toured the
>Heineken brewery/museum in Amsterdam last summer, and part of the tour
>showed the kind of malt they use when they make Murphy's Irish Stout.
>Yes, it may be made in Cork, but it is owned by Heineken.
John,
Do you know this, or are you speculating? Just because Heineken brews
Murphys in Amsterdam, doesn't necessarily mean they own it. Guinness brews
Bud in Ireland. Doesn't mean they own the brand. They are licensed to brew
it. I don't have a clue, but it's interesting if true.
Scott
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 09:32:03 -0400
From: "Spies, Jay" <Spies@dhcd.state.md.us>
Subject: Planting time...
All -
Just completed the trellis on my rooftop deck, and yesterday received my
shipment of 6 hop rhizomes in the mail. <<<grin>>>
Question for the collective: I'm planning on getting six 35 gallon
rubbermaid-type trash cans, and paying someone to fill them with, er, fill
dirt (I live in the city). I'll probably add some topsoil in the upper
layer of each. Each can will get its own rhizome (they're all Cascades).
Tinseth's page lists what the optimal pH of the soil should be for hop
growth, but what's SOP for adding (Miracle-Gro) type fertilizer in what
amounts to get the proper nutritional balance to ensure the optimal amount
of hoppy goodness???
These are my first (and hopefully only) 'bines, so I don't want to screw
them up...
Hopefully some hop ranchers out there can offer some insight.
TIA,
Jay Spies
Wishful Thinking Basement Brewery
Baltimore, MD
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 08:35:27 -0500 (CDT)
From: Joel Plutchak <plutchak@ncsa.uiuc.edu>
Subject: Re: A Newbie Brewer Question
In HBD #2998, Eric McIndoo writes:
>If I were you I would buy a starter kit (sold at every site on the net
>and at every homebrew shop) that includes at least a plastic bucket, a
>glass carboy (5gal) and a bottle capper. However, you will be better
>off with two glass carboys...
I'm with you so far. Getting a standard "beginners" kit
(assuming quality components, e.g., a good capper) is
sufficient to get restarted, and an extra carboy is good.
>...one for the primary fermentation and one for the secondary.
But I diverge in opinion here. I started brewing just before
the US Homebrew Renaissance began, with a plastic pail (covered
loosely with plastic wrap) as the sole fermenter. Although I quickly
started using a glass carboy as a secondary fermenter, I still use
a plastic pail (now closed) as a primary fermenter. It works for
me.
However, still get the second carboy. You'll want to start
brewing that second batch before you have a chance to bottle the
first one! Make it a 6- to 6.5-gallon carboy, and you'll have a
little room to play with somewhat larger batches of lower gravity
beers, etc. And if you want to go the carboy/blow-off route for
primary fermentation, the larger carboy will work well for you.
You can convert that plastic pale into a fine bottling bucket,
spare Zappap lauter tun, etc.
- --
Joel
DMS... the next HBD strawman.
------------------------------
Date: 07 Apr 1999 08:57:02 -0400
From: RCAYOT@solutia.com
Subject: Diacetyl Again!
In order to add to the discussion about Diacetyl, I would like to say
that for the longest time, I have read about "slight buttery" flavor
in various beers, "some diacetyl okay" in guidelines, and have had
several beers with subtle diacetyl notes that I loved at the time,
when I wasn't really sure what I was tasting. Now that I KNOW what
diacetyl tastes like, and I am very sensitive to it, I have I usually
dislike the taste. Now here is where things get fuzzy: I agree with
"Dr. Pivo" that Diacetyl, and DMS and other flavors ADD to the overall
impression of beer, and it is the melange of flavors, the marriage of
them into a seemles, complex experience that makes a great beer! If
the diacetyl sticks out like a sore thumb, or is unbalanced then it is
a detraction form the beer.
Having said that, controlling it is another story! Remember, that
diacetyl is the oxidation product, ultimatley, of an amino acid, and
that to rid the beer of it, it is further oxidized to butanediol! who
wants butane diol in thier beer? Not me! This is where the problems
come in, and where commercial bereries, including micros and brewpubs,
have an advantage. They have a fixed brewing system, and are capable
of much more reproducible brewing conditions than MOST if not all
homebrewers. they can play with O2, open, closed, temperature all
they want within the confines of thier brewery, and come up with a
beer with a level of diacetyl, and other characteristics they like.
we don't have the luxury of brewing over and over and over almost
daily to find a set of conditions in our brewery that will produce a
desired level of diacetyl. What are we to do? keep on brewing! I
have given up on my long quest to brew an ale with diacetyl in it! I
have never before had a diacelty note in any beer I have ever made
(that I know of) until recently in a lager! In this case, the lager
step was done in a 15 gallon keg with 10 gallons of beer in it, and
the bung hole not closed, but covered only with aluminum foil. I
believe that it was oxygen from this step that led to the formation of
diacetyl, however there may have been some in the beer before I racked
to the keg.
P.S. the diacetyl was removed by pitching a healthy starter into the
beer and allowing it to warm up for a copuple of days.
Roger Ayotte
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 07 Apr 1999 10:06:02 -0400
From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer@engin.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: taste references
Laurel> phenolic - eugenol, 4-vinylguiacol - whole cloves, if
Laurel> possible from bulk (as opposed to bottled)
This is just one type of phenol (the "good" kind).
For the "bad" kind, certain sore throat lozenges have "phenol" as an
ingredient (sorry, can't give a brand off-hand, but I had some in my
cupboard).
And then there are the "smoky" phenols. I don't have a good flavor
source for these.
=Spencer Thomas in Ann Arbor, MI (spencer@umich.edu)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 07 Apr 1999 10:11:04 -0400
From: Drewmeister <drewmstr@erols.com>
Subject: Easymasher
Finally bought an EasyMasher (TM) (Schmidling Productions) and wanted to
post a quick solution I used for connecting it to my Gott cooler. The
EasyMasher for the Gott cooler was not real attractive to me, as it has
only a rubber stopper with the copper tube going throuhg it and rubber
tubing is attached and a pinch clamp is used to control flow. I used one
of the new "datograf" bungs (Fass-Frisch type). One end of the brass
spigot that comes with the Easymasher (the end that connects to the
compression fitting on the copper tube) is inserted into the large open end
of the bung, then the spigot is reassembled. Basically, the brass spigot
and compression fitting piece are nicely assembled in the bung, which is
then inserted into the hole in the Gott cooler. Nice tight fits.
Andrew Nix
Drewmeister
drewmstr@erols.com
http://www.erols.com/drewmstr/
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 10:14:52 -0400
From: Dan Listermann <72723.1707@compuserve.com>
Subject: Klages Malt
Stan Prevost ( sprevost@ro.com) asks about Klages malt. A number of
years
ago Briess' maltster, Mary Ann Gruber, told me that Klages is no longer
grown commercially. I knew that a lot of the malt sold as "Klages" was a
blend of Klages and Herrington, but at that time I was unaware that
Klages
had been phased out. I don't recall the reasons anymore. There is
nothing
magical about Klages. I am sure that it just happened to be the malt
grown
at that time. Herrington seems to be just fine. It would surprise me
little to learn that it is closely related to Klages. The only problem I
can see with this change is that a lot of homebrewing literature calls
for
Klages. I am very sure that nobody will notice the change to Herrington
or
at least be able to demonstrate an ability to tell a diifference.
Dan Listermann dan@listermann.com 72723.1707@compuserve.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 10:19:04 -0400
From: "David Kerr" <dkerr@semc.org>
Subject: like buttah
Thanks to Dr. Pivo, A.J., et al for a fun thread.
While I'm somewhat diacetyl perception impaired (from a flavor
standpoint, at least), I've noticed in my pFramboise an oily
mouthfeel - is this another sign of very high diacetyl levels? I'm
certainly not going to notice any butterscotch flavor/aroma notes
through all of that Brett., Pedio. sourness and raspberry, but I'd
presume that all of that Pedio stewing for 2+ years has thrown a lot
of diacetyl.
Dave "Maybe if I dip a croissant in my PU I'll smell butter" Kerr -
Needham, MA
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 07 Apr 1999 10:30:38 -0400
From: Joe Rolfe <rolfe@sky.sky.com>
Subject: That "D" word, grain crush...
Been pretty quite of late figured I'd give a try to stir things up
again..Putting on the 'silver suit'.
D - Diacetyl - to 'most' professional brewers...a sign of a defective
fermentation. I got to agree with that slant.I never liked D - but
this is one of the spot in my flavor thresholds that is at very, very
low levels (per Siebels). I'd drink one beer with it but rarely have
another (such brand loyalty I have). True - you can design a product
with D as a flavor compound if you desire - and a lot of people do -
look at all the Ringwood breweries around (atleast here in the N.E.
area). There are some excellent beers produced from the older
generation Ringwood yeasts (Geary's, MaCausalan, Tremont). The ones I
typically like are the bigger beers (barleywines/stouts). These hide
the D for me and make it pleasant and drinkable (take the keys level
of drinkable)++. The less going on in the beer the more likely the
chance to move on to other non D quaffs. Now wonder most of the
brewers I have talked to refer to this as a defect - most where
current or ex employees of A/B..
Response to Dan L. on the bad extract from crappy crush..
I too look at the grain thruout the crushing (if I am doing it), and
always on the way in to the mash - and even on the digging out. Once
you know what it looks like a few hand fulls of samples thru-out the
grind you should be all set. Providing the mill does not have the
auto-change the settings feature.
On those particular bad batches of grain we got, we did chew a few and
compare to the older bags we had - not a great difference in kernel
size or steelyness - if my memory recall works which is what one would
normally detect - i agree. And we where brewing 4-10 times a week.
The average brewer at home might tend to loose the 'art' of this test
with the lack of brewing. One thing that did seem odd on the short
samples we did - bag to bag floater/sinker test was variable. I dont
recall ever doing the flour mash test with them - probably would have
saved us a lot of trouble in blending it out tho...I still think the
source of the bad extraction is going to mostly be found elsewhere
than the crush (once you get the process right).
Good Luck and Great Brewing
Joe Rolfe
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 07 Apr 1999 10:49:36 -0400
From: "Eric R. Theiner" <logic@skantech.com>
Subject: Chlorine in SS Sink
Jeff Luck asks about using hypochlorite solutions in a stainless sink--
go ahead. At the level necessary for sanitizing, 50-100 ppm, you'll be
fine.
Rick Theiner
LOGIC, Inc.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 07 Apr 1999 14:52:31 GMT
From: mikey@swampgas.com (Michael A. Owings)
Subject: Re: Questions of my own
> 1. The homebrew shop owner I talked to suggested using a grain bag for
> sparges. Has anyone had success with this setup or is it inferior to
> other setups?
I've never heard particularly great things about grain bags (though
I'm sure there are people who are perfectly happy with them). I use an
easy masher with both my Gott and my kettle (both with the boil kettle
and when I use a kettle for mashing). You only have to recirc at MOST
a couple of quarts and stuck mashes are almost non-existent (I have
had ONE, and that was with an oatmeal stout mashed pretty dry). You
can get an easy masher for the Gott directly from Jack Schmidling
Productions, or just make one yourself. Installation should take all
of 30 seconds in your Gott. No affiliation, yada yada. Schmidling's
web site is at:
http://user.mc.net/~arf/aysindex.htm
Note that the Gott EasyMasher is impossible to find in stores -- you
need to either make one or get it directly from JSP.
> 2. The owner (and many people on HBD) also suggested using an
> overnight mash to shorten brewing sessions. So, on my second batch
> (an IPA with 11.5# grain in 5gal Gott) I mashed overnight (12hrs).
At ambient temps around here (70-80F in the spring), my 10 Gal Gott
only loses about .5 F/Hr, so I guess that would be OK for overnight
mashing (I've never done it, personally). But if your tun loses
substantial amounts of heat overnight you may want to avoid this, as
long, low temp rests can have possible deleterious effects on the
finished beer -- or so the conventional wisdom goes. But like I said,
I've never tried it. What was the mash temp the next morning, anyway?
I may give this a shot one day...
***********************
Lord grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change.
The courage to change the things I can. *** And the wisdom to
hide the bodies of the people I had to kill because they pissed
me off ***
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 07 Apr 1999 10:55:28 -0400
From: "leroy strohl, iii " <lstrohl@mwc.edu>
Subject: floating thermometer - and - broken thermometer in brewpot
In a recent post from Rich Moore he asks:
"... I was wondering if anyone has come up with something to protect the
fragile bottoms of these
thermometers. There must be some gadgeteer out there with a solution."
Crosby & Baker sells a Stainless Steel Cage Thermometer, blue spirit, dual
scale (-6C to 115C, 8F to 238F)
Item number 9355. They are not cheap.
Crosby & Baker also carries the Green Line series of test equipment.From
their catalog: "Our 'Green Line' test instruments are both environmentally
friendly and technically improved. Hydrometers carry steel shot instead of
lead. Thermometers also carry steel shot rather than lead, and the fluid
used is food grade and edible, non toxic and biodegradable."
You may be able to ask your local homebrew supply shop to order these
items for you.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 10:44:25 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Ringwood Yeast
Dave Humes <humesdg1@earthlink.net> asks about Ringwood Yeast
Dan McConnel, who produces the yeast for GW Kent's YeasLab liquid yeasts
(not the dry ones), posted the yeast IDs here in Dec., 1994. YeastLab A09,
English Ale, is Ringwood. Dan's Yeast Culture Kit Co. also sells it on a
slant.
There seems to be some confusion around NCYC 1172. It has been called
Ringwood, but it definitely is not. Ringwood forms a heavy yeast cap.
1172 never forms a yeast head but rather drops like a stone when it is
done, making it ideal for cylindro-conical unitanks.
I have used YL A09 without any particular car for O2 other than my usual
aeration at the beginning. I have also "dropped" it on the second day,
making sure to splash. This resulted in some diacetyl. Our local
Pugsley/Ringwood brewpub, Grizzley Peak, uses Ringwood yeast (although not
from YL, so it may differ slightly due to genetic drift or whatever). On
the second day of fermentation, they throw a submursible pump into the
fermenter and pump a fountain of wort/beer over the yeast cap to aerate it.
This results in a difinite diacetyl house flavor for all of their beers.
Jeff
-=-=-=-=-
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan c/o nerenner@umich.edu
"One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 07 Apr 1999 07:22:30 -0700
From: Ted McIrvine <McIrvine@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Help -> Belgian beers...
Need any help drinking them?
My recollection is that Lindemann's and Belle-Vue are filtered.
According to Pierre Rajotte (whose book on Belgian Ales answers many of
your questions) Orval uses a mixed strain so culturing it might not
work well. Affligem and Corsendonck yeast should be good for strong
ales and Hoegaarden good for Wit if the yeast is viable. See comments
about style below. (I feel as if I'm taking a test.)
> From: John S Thompson <jthomp6@unix1.sncc.lsu.edu>
> Subject: Help -> Belgian beers...
>
> I've recently had the fortune to acquire some fresh brews from Belgium.
> They were brought over yesterday by a Belgian guy, so they may still have
> viable yeast in them. I wanted to know if you HBDers could identify which
> of the following beers have yeast worth culturing. Also, could you
> identify the style of some of them? (The ones with the ???s.)
>
> The beers:
>
> Affligem Blond - ???
Trippel (and a personal favorite)
> Grimbergen Blond - ???
Strong Ale, could be called a Trippel
> Hoegaarden De Verboden Vrucht - ???
Vrucht means Fruit
> Orval - Strong ale?
No, a Trappist pale ale 5.2 Alcohol by volume, (weak by Belgian
standards) very hoppy, very unusual (and a personal favorite too.)
> Pauwel Kwak - Pale Ale?
The bottle I had was an Abbey single,
vaguely like Orval without hops
> Leute Bokbier - ???
I can't find my dictionary, but looks like "People's Bock" to me
> Corsendonk Brown - Pale Ale?
Brown strong ale, like a Dubbel except more malty.
> Ingelmunster Kasteelbier - ???
Strong Ale, very good!
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 07 Apr 1999 10:32:03 -0500
From: AJ <ajdel@mindspring.com>
Subject: Diacetyl
Dr. Pivo ponders why butane dione is more prevalent than pentane dione
(and other dinoes). I assume (but do not know) that the reason is
similar to the reason that ethyl acetate is the most common of the
esters and that is that its precursors are the most prevalent. We know
that butane dione results from the oxidative decarboxylation of
acetolactic acid and we know where the acetolactic acid comes from:
leakage from the valine synthesis pathway. Presumably pentane dione
comes from oxidative decarboxylation of a similar acid with a C6 carbon
skeleton (as opposed to acetolactate's C5). Where would this come from?
Presumably some minor pathway. Nonetheless some beers are definitely
honeylike and some are definitely butterscotchy just as some ales are so
full of ethyl acetate (Tetly's) that you can barely drink them while
others are free of this "nail polish remover". Why? The answers lie, I
believe, both in the yeast strain chosen and in how it is operated.
There is a fair body of information on how to suppress diacetyl (avoid
oxidative states, expose to actively fermenting yeast, diacetyl rests)
and on how to enhance it (oxidized state, valine poor wort, "dropping",
stone squares). Implicit in these should be the advice "don't use a
strain which is a big diacetyl producer" or "use a strain which is a
diacetyl producer". This brings me around to the good Dr's most
interesting question on how the level of diacetyl can be controlled.
How does Pilsner Urquell come out consistently at twice threshold? Part
of the answer is that the same yeast strains are used in the same way
brew after brew. With PU there may be more to it. They are reported to
use multiple strains and there are conflicting rumors as to whether they
pitch a blend of strains or brew 5 separate beers and later blend them.
If the latter is the case it is clear how the consistent diacetyl level
in the finished could be established and probably with no more
sophisticated instrument than the palates of the taste panel members.
This brings me to Joel Plutchak's comments. I think you will find people
who will broadly condemn diacetyl just as you will find those who will
universally condemn DMS and oxidation in any form, anywhere. A recent BT
article implied that those of us who claim to like oxidized beers (PU
was again the target) have been sold a bill of goods by those clever
Czechs and just don't know what good beer is. I have a friend who
insists that there is a correct level of salting in gourmet cooking - a
scoche more or less and the dish is spoiled, in his opionion (and he
gets lots of teasing for this viewpoint though many good cooks feel this
way). Broader minded souls recognize that people have differing tastes -
one man's meat is another's poison. I hate parsnips, I love salsify,
George Bush hates broccoli etc. As an aside, there is an interesting
anecdote about Rolling Rock which so many of us use to teach DMS to
nascent judges. Supposedly, the big name brewery that bought them sent
the brewing scientists around to fix their DMS "problem". Sales
plummeted - it wasn't Rock any more as far as its consumers were
concerned. As anyone who has tasted it recently knows, the DMS is back
in - in force. Whether or not Rolling Rock is a good, bad or indifferent
beer, I leave to the judgement of the individual reader.
And now on to Dave Burley's comment. I guess I did misinterpret his
remarks - thought the notion of a volatile sulfite complex seemed funny
but he knows much more chem than I do. And no, I don't remember my
organic because, alas, I never took it. I was very interested in beer as
a student but for entirely different reasons than the current ones.
Anyway, the pK's of sulfurous acid are 1.8 and 6.9 which bracket both
wine and beer pH's so it looks like bisulfite is going to be the
predominant species in either case.
I can now report that sulfite does indeed reduce the ORP of beer
dramatically. In a single test on my last ale the rH of the beer was
about 18.2 (measured under nitrogen - wow, does that make a
difference!). Adding a pinch (i.e. the results are rather qualitiative
at this point) of sodium sulfite caused it to plummet to 15.5.
Conclusion to date: sulfite (not metabulfite - haven't tested that in an
O2 free envrionment) fairly rapidly brings beer to a more reduced state.
Will this result in reduction of diacetyl? Have to wait for the answer
to that one.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 11:46:06 EDT
From: TPuskar@aol.com
Subject: Maltodextrin-watery brew
I have a pale ale-ish sort of brew in the secondary now. I used my new mill
and didn't not get the extraction I hoped for. As a result the beer tastes
OK but kinda watery. I have some maltodextrin and was thinking of adding
some to increase the body. All the books I have refer to maltodextrin for
this application but none of them say how much to use or how to prepare it.
I'm planning to bottle this batch later this week and figured I'd add it when
I prime with corn sugar.
Any suggestions on how much would be appreciated.
Tom Puskar
Howell, NJ
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 07 Apr 1999 12:37:52 -0400
From: Gordon Strong <strongg@earthlink.net>
Subject: Belgians
Responding to John Thompson's request about Belgian Beers in HBD # 2998:
You might want to pick up a copy of Michael Jackson's Great Beers of
Belgium. I ordered mine from amazon.com. Another good book is Pierre
Rajotte's style guide on Belgian Ales from the AHA. Jackson's books
have historical background, style information, his tasting notes, and
great pictures. I used it to look for the examples I hadn't tried.
As you might have figured out, there are many unique styles in Belgium
and many commercial beers are rather individualistic. Our attempts to
hammer the beers of Belgium into style categories hasn't always been
successful.
Anyhow, you have some of them right but Corsendonk Brown is a dubbel and
Kwak is a strong dark ale.
Affligen blond is a blond ale (not a BJCP category but similar to a
strong golden ale IMHO). Jackson says "lemony, hoppy, almost talc-like;
6.5-7% ABV". Grimbergen blond and Tongerlo Double Blond are the same
style.
Grimbergen Cuvee Speciale I never heard of. But it's name means
"Special Blend". It might be a seasonal or special/spiced beer. The
designation Cuvee also sometime is used for a cask-aged beer.
Hoegaarden Verboden Vrucht "Forbidden Fruit" is a dark strong ale, 9%
ABV, spicy, fruity, rich.
Hoegaarden Julius is a strong golden ale, like a Duvel.
Orval is unique. A genuine Trappist ale, 5.2% ABV, golden, dry-hopped.
Multiple fermentations with different yeasts. Examples vary with age
and handling. Can have a huge brettanomyces character.
St Bernadus 6 and 12 use the Belgian Gravity scale which doesn't neatly
correspond to other scales. As a rough approximation, I think you can
say it's either the ABV or the starting gravity (e.g. 1060, 1120). I'm
sure I'll be corrected on this point... Pater 6 is similar to a Chimay
Red or superficially similar to a dubbel. Abt 12 is simiar to
Westvlettern 12 or superfically similar to a dark strong ale. These are
abbey beers which generally correspond to a Trappist example (which
don't always fit into BJCP or AHA styles).
I'm not familar with Leute Bokbier but it sounds like a bock. Possibly
similar to Chouffe Bok?
Inglemunster Kasteelbier is a dark strong ale, 11% ABV, malty,
port-like.
I'm sorry I can't help with identifying the yeast, but you have a nice
selection of beers. Take your time and enjoy them. And remember to
toast your friend.
Gordon Strong
Beavercreek, OH
strongg@earthlink.net
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 07 Apr 1999 09:50:13 -0700
From: "Mark W. Wilson" <mwilson@ichips.intel.com>
Subject: Re: A Newbie Brewer Question/ and a question of my own
> 1. The homebrew shop owner I talked to suggested using a grain bag for
> sparges. Has anyone had success with this setup or is it inferior to other
> setups?
I started all-grain using a grain bag in 5 gallon bucket. Worked pretty
well for "average" gravity 5 gal. batches (OG < 1.070), after I had problems
with the bed compacting. It was also sometimes tricky getting clearance
between the bag and the bottom of the bucket, I had to really pull the grain
bag up hard sometimes. Cleanup is a breeze with the grain bag. Now I'm
using a square picnic cooler and 1/2" copper pipe manifold, so i can do high
gravity or 10 gallon batches.
> 2. The owner (and many people on HBD) also suggested using an overnight
> mash to shorten brewing sessions. So, on my second batch (an IPA with 11.5#
> grain in 5gal Gott) I mashed overnight (12hrs). I started my sparge and the
I just can't see where the time savings are with overnight mashing, unless
you have some kind of robot doing a 6 hour decoction mash for you while you
sleep. Modern malt only takes 5-15 minutes to convert, all the books
recommending longer sacchrification mashes are wrong.
After a pro brewer enlightened me on this point, I shortened my sac. rest
times from 1 hour to 15 minutes, with no change in extract level, just more
body and mouthfeel in the resulting beers. The negatives of overnight
mashing are a) overconversion b) possible sourness from lactobacillus in the
grain (unlikely to be perceptable) c) stuck mashes, as you have discovered.
-Mark Wilson
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #2999, 04/08/99
*************************************
-------
