Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #3046
HOMEBREW Digest #3046 Wed 02 June 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:
Response to Dave Burley (Harlan Bauer)
stuff (Jim Liddil)
re : Inexcusable ("Alan McKay")
Brutal Bitter ("Michael Tucker")
commercial vs homebrew, suggestions on how to use Siebels info., Cookin A sanke.. (Joe Rolfe)
The George Report ("George De Piro")
Siebel answer to dr pivo - subject: Rising temp in secondary (Radzan1000)
Efficiency problems with new all-grain setup (beanish)
converted keg kettle (beanish)
correction (Vachom)
celebrity deathmatch: fix vs aj ("Bayer, Mark A")
apology ("Bayer, Mark A")
George Fix (Dave Burley)
Second Pitch for High Gravity Brew ("John W. Thomasson")
Fat corks into empty bottles (ThomasM923)
HSA, Unfermentables in dextrin and crystal malts ("George De Piro")
* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!
* 2000 MCAB Qualifiers: Boneyard Brew-Off 6/12/99
* (http://www.uiuc.edu/ro/BUZZ/contest5.html); Buzz-Off!
* Competition 6/26/99 (http://www.voicenet.com/~rpmattie/buzzoff)
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, 01 Jun 1999 02:39:13 -0500
From: Harlan Bauer <blacksab@midwest.net>
Subject: Response to Dave Burley
Dave,
You bring up some good points. Part of my reason for posting was to get
some feedback on the procedure. I'm VERY aware of exactly how dangerous
this can be, but what are the actual pressures that would cause an
explosion? As long as I stay in the 15-psi range, I still feel that this
procedure is relatively safe. I was a contractor in a previous life, and
I look upon using this the same way I look at using a table-saw--NO
drinking and pay attention ALL the time (yes, I still have all my
fingers, and yes, I took ALL the safety guards off the saw, the damned
things are dangerous). I can see this thing exploding if you turned the
burner on full blast and went to sleep, but I'm not doing that. So, let
me address a few of your other concerns:
1. Why do I need 10-gal sterile wort?--It allows me to easily make
starters for 1-bbl of wort (I brew on a 7-bbl system). In a previous
posting, I described a yeast propagator made from a budwizer keg with a
3-in stir-bar on the bottom. With this procedure, the entire propagator
and the medium inside can be made sterile.
2. I was in slight error, a sanke keg is rated to 80-psi, not 60. Think
for a moment how budwizer cleans their kegs. They esentailly nuke
em--then sterilized with pressurized steam. I grant that they are NOT
designed to be given external flame, but for the moment, I can live with
that variable. In addition, I usually only use a keg once because I
don't feel like cleaning it, and then send it back to budwizer to let
them deal with it--I'm merely borrowing their equipment.
3. Pressure-relief valve. You've got me here--good point. This point has
always bothered me. Not sure how to do it just yet.
4. As long as no more than 10-gal of wort is used (adequate headspace),
and you keep the needle of the gage moving a bit (by varying the heat
source), a clogging of the guage is unlikely (and would be noticable
regardless), and thus, you can't get far off of 15-psi. Are you saying
that this device is unsafe at THIS pressure/temperature?
Does this ease your concern any?
Harlan.
BTW, does anyone know the bursting pressure of a sanke keg?
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 1999 08:08:18 -0400
From: Jim Liddil <jliddil@azcc.arizona.edu>
Subject: stuff
Steve Alexander wrote:
>> my initial run-off is stunningly clear.[...]
>> my clarity also improved dramatically when I got my
>> MaltMill (I previously used a Corona).
> Which may effect your definition of 'stunningly clear' vs murky as well.
> At the HB level we have no objective way to compare runoff clarity.
Oh but we do. It is called an Imhoff cone and has been discussed here
before. See the archives.
WRT to yeast storage and culture, I admit to being way anal about how
things are done. It is a product of doing cell culture for 15+ years.
Certainly we can all let things slide in homebrewing but with yeast
culturing I can not let it go.
It was great to have Siebel participate. And in my never ending jab fest
let me point out that this was done on the HBD. The AOB/AHA could have
organized something like this for it's members on thier web site, but they
did not.
Jim Liddil
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 1999 08:38:44 -0400
From: "Alan McKay" <amckay@nortelnetworks.com>
Subject: re : Inexcusable
AJ asks in 3045 for input on whether or not he deserved to bear
the brunt of George's apparant frustration. FWIW I read over the
post in question and could not find any "ranting". Then again,
I also read over George's post from 3044 and I don't really think
that he said much of anything that warrants an apology, either.
Looks to me like a simple case of misunderstanding on both parts.
And even then, not a serious case ...
cheers,
-Alan
- --
Alan McKay
OS Support amckay@nortelnetworks.com
Small Site Integration 613-765-6843 (ESN 395)
Nortel Networks
Internal : http://zftzb00d/alanmckay/
External : http://www.bodensatz.com/
All opinions expressed are my own.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 09:06:38 -0400
From: "Michael Tucker" <mtucker@hesketh.com>
Subject: Brutal Bitter
Hi guys,
I recently tried Rogue's Brutal Bitter at the Southeastern Microbrewer's
conference. Great stuff. Trouble is, I can't get it here in Raleigh, NC.
I also tried their Mocha Porter, also great stuff.
Does anyone have a source in NC or a recipe for either?
Thanks-
- --
Michael R. Tucker
Business Strategist
hesketh.com/inc.
mtucker@hesketh.com
http://www.hesketh.com
vox: 919.854.1570
fax: 919.854.1579
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 1999 10:55:55 -0400
From: Joe Rolfe <rolfe@sky.sky.com>
Subject: commercial vs homebrew, suggestions on how to use Siebels info., Cookin A sanke..
I think we can all agree that there are some major differences between
these two ball parks. One that most see that causes alot of confusion
and fustration: comparing the two. Commercial breweries have a time
window to hit for maximum (or allowable) product flavor. In most cases
the minute the beer leave the bulk tanks the brewery begins to destroy
the beer. Homebrewers (esp bottle conditioning and big beer brewers)
can wait for the beer to become "the best/or best in competition". For
me after about day three/four it old - nice dark green beer;) Some one
mentioned that homebrew can be subjected to worse handling than
commercial. I agree, but I would bet money it is a rare case that a
homebrewer would have total disregaurd for product like some
distributors I know..a**holes;p.. Most tend to them like a newborn
child. (ducking for cover)
This leads (maybe) into the next point. You must temper what you learn
from Siebels (or anyone for that matter). I saw this type of answer
quite often - "do whatever works in your environment". The crew
mostly at Siebels have come from rather large breweries. Most of the
general process from a brewer can pertain and it is not a secret what
is good to do and what is ""less good to do" during a brews life
time. There are a few key points that can minimize its effects on the
results. From my time a Siebel - rubbing elbows with lots of SR/Asst
Brewmasters I think the "do what works" is the bottom line - maybe
this is where I learned it and it stuck.
on cooking of the sankey - to pressure cook...
yep - I have done that - did not like it much, sure beats paying for a
big pressure cooker. One thing I would do to the sankey fitting tho,
on the part of the tap head that presses the ball and allow liquid
out, grind off the "ears". I was mucking around with a way to put a
2in TC fitting on there but never got around to it. Would have made it
eaier to attach "safties" to. I never had the valve/pressure controls
clog up. You just have to watch it carefully. I opt'd for dumping
hot wort in the keg instead, but YMMV.
Anyway - things are sizzling here - just luv this bonding crap....
Joe
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 99 09:53:59 PDT
From: "George De Piro" <gdepiro@fcc.net>
Subject: The George Report
Hi all,
I haven't had a heck of a lot of time to read the HBD lately.
I understand that I missed Siebel week. Damn!
After months (OK, years), of hard work, the C.H. Evans Brewing
Co. at the Albany Pump Station is now open for business! This
endevour has been gobbling up all of my time the past few weeks,
but I could not be happier (well, maybe I could be a bit happier,
but this is close to Nirvana for me).
We opened on May 25, with no advertising or other fanfare. This
"soft opening" is common in the restaurant industry; it allows a
period of somewhat quiet business during which the staff can
become aclimated. Depite our best efforts to keep things quiet,
we have been doing a fairly brisk trade.
The beers in my opening lineup are being well received. They are,
in order of popularity (week one sales): blonde ale, ESB, Hefeweizen
(using Hubert Hangoffer's yeast), stout, honey wheat, and cocoa
brown (yes, with real cocoa).
The top three beers are all really close in sales, which is quite amazing
to me. While it is no surprise that the blonde is the fastest mover, the
heavily hopped ESB at # 2 amazes me. This is a beer that I
almost sewered because it was tasting so rough early in its life.
It was intended to be an IPA.
Its tough childhood started on March 5 when I had to leave in the
middle of the brew session due to a personal emergency. Due
to some technical difficulties, the beer hit 76F during fermentation.
This yielded a beer with a stupifying citrus character. Due to more
technical difficulties (our refrigeration guy was a complete
incompetent),
the beer than lagered at 55-60F for a month before finally being cooled
to near freezing.
As the weeks passed, my opinion of this beer wavered, but always leaned
toward wanting to dump it. The owner, Neil Evans, didn't think it was
a
great brew, but wanted to see how it would be if we just waited a little
longer. So we waited.
Late Saturday night, May 22, hours before our dress rehearsal
(a private party), I walked up to the tank and said, "OK, beer. It's the
sewer or the serving tank. Tell me what you are." I tasted it, and
decided that while it was a crappy IPA, it wasn't too bad
as an ESB. Into the tank it went!
It's kind of annoying that this beer is so popular, because I will never
be able to duplicate the conditions it was brewed under again! It's
replacement is already maturing and will be ready to go on-line
as soon as I free up a serving tank. I think it is a much better
beer, but what do I know...
My favorite of the six beers is the Hefeweizen. It is based on the
recipe
that I have used for years at home, with the only modification being
that I use light Munich malt rather than Pils malt in order to
make up for the fact that I cannot decoct at the brewpub. Hubert's
yeast works really nicely in unitanks, yielding a beer very similar to
the
one that won at the MCAB this past February. My thanks to him, again.
Being a pub brewer is a bit different from brewing at home our at a
production brewery. I get to interect with the customers as they
drink my beers, which is a lot of fun (and very educational).
I also get to help in the kitchen when they are short-handed: Our
evening dishwashers quit without notice last Thursday, so Neil
and I got to do the dishes most of the evening (with the help
of a really hard-working busboy named Carl). I always knew
being a brewer involved a lot of custodial work, but I didn't quite
expect that! What fun!
If you are ever in the area of Albany, NY, stop by for a beer. I am
there
most of the time (literally), so chances are you will see me. You could
always call first at the number below to be sure. (Was that too much of
a commercial plug? Sorry if any take offense.)
Have fun!
George de Piro (Nyack, NY)
Head Brewer, Albany Pump Station
(518) 447-9000
Malted Barley Appreciation Society
"Brooklyn's Best Homebrew Club"
http://hbd.org/mbas
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 13:14:58 EDT
From: Radzan1000@aol.com
Subject: Siebel answer to dr pivo - subject: Rising temp in secondary
So, people are using old underground cellars for fermenting beer just as they
did in breweries before the invention of mechanical refrigeration. Have you
guys forgotten what these brewers did to lengthen their brewing season into
the times when outside temperatures were rising and getting quite warm? They
went out to the rivers and lakes and cut ice into blocks and hauled this ice
to these same underground cellars, packed the blocks in sawdust and burlap
and moved the blocks very close together. The sawdust and burlap helped to
insulate the ice and retard melting. These brewers extended their season
quite substantially and some times, if their space was big enough and they
had enough ice, they produced good beer year round.
The first refrigeration used by breweries was for ice-making and the blocks
of ice were hauled to these same cellars and used for the cooling.
Refrigeration provided an unlimited amount of ice at any time and the brewer
was no longer dependent on cold winters. Now the brewers realized that their
"cellars" no longer had to be underground and multistory fermenting and
storage facilities began to appear. The use of ice in breweries continued
far into this century. Ice contributed to the growing popularity of lagers.
My first brewery still had an operating ice house. Most of the ice produced
was sold as a byproduct. But we did have one traditional product, an old
nut-brown ale that we still produced in the traditional way. We had one
"cellar" set aside that contained eight 200 barrel open top cypress wood
fermenters. We packed this room with ice. This room was reserved for the
old nut-brown. We skimmed three times discarding the first and third skims.
When fermentation was complete the humid, cold, ice atmosphere allowed the
ale to cool and mature slowly and gracefully. This was our premium ale. Our
light ale was fermented in wooden tanks ranging in size from 100 to 450
barrels, but the cellars were cooled by ammonia refrigeration and the tanks
were equipped with attemperators that contained circulating chilled brine.
Unfortunately, the market for ale declined to a level at which it was no
longer economically feasible to continue production and true ale disappeared
from the commercial scene until the microbrewery renaissance. Anyone going
to cut ice this winter?
Higher temperatures, for the most part, cause reaction rates to accelerate.
Yeast autolysis is more rapid. Spoilage bacteria grow faster. Oxidation is
more rapid. One of the major brewers, Coors, has attempted to insure that
their beer leaves the brewery, is shipped and stored at the distributor,
shipped to the retailer and stored at the retailer ready for sale to the
consumer at no higher a temperature than 4C. They have done much research
and testing on this principle and are satisfied that such a position
definitely retards the deterioration of the beer for six or more additional
weeks. The other brewers agree but find that the problems of guaranteeing
such a program throughout the world is impossible. That is one of the
reasons that you have such short periods of time for the pull dates on
national and international beers. Cold temperatures are necessary for the
proper maturation and storage of beer. If you want to make the large
quantities and want it to be preserved as long as possible, you are going to
have to spend the money for more refrigeration or go out and cut ice. I
promise; this is the end of my preaching. I just couldn't resist this one.
Best wishes to all.
Dave Radzanowski
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 10:40:39 -0700 (PDT)
From: beanish@blarg.net
Subject: Efficiency problems with new all-grain setup
I've made three batches with my new all-grain setup (10 Gallon
Gott cooler, Phil's phalse bottom, Phil's sparge thingy) and have
been getting poor efficiency. The first brew was the AHA milk
stout; post-boil, I wound up with a little over 4 gallons of wort
that was at about 1058-1060 (target was 1063 I believe). From my
second and third batches, I'm guessing that I got somewhere in the
neighborhood of 52% efficiency. These have all been 5 gallon batches
using in the neighborhood of 10 lbs of grain.
For my first batch, I added a couple of quarts of strike water, then
alternated adding a quart of strike water and a quart of grain, mixing
all the while. For my second and third batches, I fashioned a bb-snake
(vinyl tubing filled with bb's, stoppered on both ends) and laid that
on top of the outer edge of the phalse bottom; then I added half the
strike water, all of the grain, stirred a bit, added the rest of
the strike water, stirred. I've been aiming for mash temperatures in
the 154-156 F range, and I think I've been hitting that ok (although I find
it difficult to get good temperature measurements - seems like there's
a lot of variability initially).
I've been mashing for 60 minutes, then recirculating around 2 gallons
of runoff before it starts to clear up very much. This is one part of
the procedure that has me puzzled. If I add some boiling water to get
it up to mash-out temperature, I'm sure I will lose that temp very
quickly as I recirculate. Mashing out by infusing hot water doesn't
make any sense after recirculation - mix it up and you ruin the filter
bed that has just been set up. What I've been doing instead of a mashout is
starting my sparge water fairly hot (180 F - although I imagine it loses a
lot of heat running through vinyl tubing, into the sparge arm, and trickling
down), and leaving the lid off of my sparge liquor kettle so that it cools
down during the sparge. I've been taking about 45 minutes to an hour to
sparge, aiming to keep the grain bed covered with 1/8" to 1/4" of sparge water
(with some variations high and low, as I'm still getting accustomed
to the system). The pH of my runoff has been in the 5.0 - 5.4 range,
so I haven't worried about acidifying my sparge water. My water is very
soft; I've been treating it with 1 tsp (~5 grams) gypsum and scant 1/4 tsp
(~1 gram) table salt per 5 gallons.
I'd appreciate comments and suggestions for what I can do to improve
my efficiency; I'd be happy to just get up to 65-70%. I crush my grain
using a mill at the homebrew shop I go to; I am going to discuss my
efficiency with the fellow at the shop, I'm wondering if a poor crush might
be part of the problem.
- --
Jeremy York
beanish@blarg.net
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 11:10:25 -0700 (PDT)
From: beanish@blarg.net
Subject: converted keg kettle
I recently picked up a used brew kettle, adapted from a keg.
It's got what looks like a hot water heater or oven heating element
installed in it. There's a pipe fitting welded into the side
of the kettle, with the heating element inserted through and
a box for the electronics and on/off switch mounted on the outside.
The power cord is a 3-line 10 gauge terminated with a dryer plug
(three prongs, with the neutral line going to an L-shaped prong).
I built an 8' extension cord for the thing, so that I could run
the cord from the garage into the laundry room and run off of my
existing dryer outlet; my home-made extension cord is terminated
in a ungrounded outlet box rated for 30 amps. I couldn't find
any grounded outlet boxes of this style, else I would have used one
of those.
After some more thinking about it, I'm leery to use the thing anymore.
If it really is running 30 amps ungrounded, if there were anything
wrong it could be deadly. The setup was built by a fellow who seems
pretty handy (and who works professionally in the brewing industry),
but it's also been sitting unused for a couple of years.
I'm fairly inclined to see if I can remove the heating element, put
a pipe plug in its place, and use it on a propane burner instead.
I used it for heating sparge water rather than as a brew kettle, because
I was concerned about uneven heating and carmelization. It did ok
for the sparge water, but I did find that the first 2-3 quarts of
water out of it are hardly heated at all (since they are coming from
beneath the heating element). After noticing that, I began stirring
and recirculating until the outflow temp was what I wanted.
Comments/warnings/whacks-about-the-head-for-being-so-foolish
are solicited...
- --
Jeremy York
beanish@blarg.net
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 14:29:15 -0500
From: Vachom <MVachow@newman.k12.la.us>
Subject: correction
I stand corrected. An alert reader made me aware of the fact that
Henry Weinhard's brewery, now defunct, had a long life as a regional brewery
before its acquisition by Stroh's and subsequent closing under Miller
Brewing. I did a little research and discovered the following: From 1863
until 1979, the Blitz-Weinhard brewery in Portland, OR was a family-owned,
regional brewery. The current brewery was built in 1906. In 1979,
Blitz-Weinhard was purchased by Pabst. It was sold to G. Heileman in 1983.
Stroh's acquired Heileman in 1996. This year, Stroh's went out of the beer
business by selling some of its brands to Miller and some to Pabst. Under
contract with Boston Beer Company, Stroh's used the Blitz-Weinhard brewery
to brew all of the Sam Adams beers until Stroh's lost that contract to Pabst
a few years later. Stroh's also brewed Mickey's and the Henry Weinhard
beers there, and, in an effort to bring the Weinhard label into competition
with the growing craft brew market, began brewing seasonal styles and a
wider number of styles in general. The closing of the Blitz-Weinhard
brewery in Portland has most to do with Miller, a Phillip Morris holding,
trimming down its newest acquisition--137 years of Portland brewing history
crushed by the juggernaut of American mega-business. In a recent Celebrator
Beer News article, the writers mention speculation that Gambrinus (Corona,
Moosehead, Bridgeport, Spoetzel, Pete's) might be interested in purchasing
the Blitz-Weinhard brewery to brew Pete's Wicked Ales. These same writers
also speculate that developers are practically coming out of their skins to
transform the brewery into high-end, yuppie loft apartments and boutiques.
I couldn't find much info on Weinhard's in its family-owned years,
the vast majority of its existence. Is anyone writing the histories of
these disappearing regional breweries? Perhaps an Oregonian could enlighten
us on recent developments. Or rather, because this may not necessarily be
an HBD topic, email me privately.
Mike
New Orleans, LA
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 14:53:11 -0700
From: "Bayer, Mark A" <Mark.Bayer@JSF.Boeing.com>
Subject: celebrity deathmatch: fix vs aj
collective homebrew conscience_
i just finished re-reading aj delange's mad, paranoid, anal retentive attack
on george fix's bt article (hbd 2999).
as punishment, aj, you are hereby sentenced to continue to post mad,
paranoid, anal retentive information in this forum.
as for mr. fix, i believe his punishment should probably require a remedial
reading class. at clemson, there should be plenty of sections available to
fit his busy schedule. (btw, georgia tech rules.)
sorry for the wasted bandwidth.
brew hard,
mark bayer
stlmo
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 15:04:03 -0700
From: "Bayer, Mark A" <Mark.Bayer@JSF.Boeing.com>
Subject: apology
collective homebrew conscience_
i am truly sorry for my mad, paranoid, anal retentive previous rant/vent to
this forum. i don't know what came over me. my apologies to george fix and
his future employer, clemson university.
brew hard,
mark bayer
stlmo
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 22:14:51 -0400
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: George Fix
Brewsters;
I was shocked to read George Fix's whining declaration
of a clandestine moral "victory" over some judge in
some miniscule contest. Frankly, I had expected more
of someone who apparently has a good reputation
and supposedly some sort of leadership role in this
hobby. I can only say it struck me as extremely childish
or even warped.
I was really shocked to find that it was AJ deLange
( according to AJ) who was being attacked by
George Fix apparently without proof of any misdoing.
Some months ago, I too was subjected to personal
invective delivered offline by George. After several
exchanges between us, he ultimately sort of apologized
at Laurie's request. I have never met him and really do
not have the desire to do so, if he is in this
sort of mood. Perhaps, some day when he has regained
his perspective, I'm sure I would enjoy having a few
beers with him and discussing homebrewing.
>From my impersonal viewpoint, I can guess maybe
he's working too hard getting promoted ( as often
happens in business and the university ) and promoting
himself such that he has lost his perspective ( which
also happens in business and university). Perhaps
for the moment he, and unlike others' opinions, has
too high an appreciation for himself and his
"contributions" to Home Brewing. In my experience,
this is a temporary condition for a number of reasons
Most often it is a loss of audience which reconstitutes
perspective. My advice, George?
Back off for a while, catch your breath. Stay Cool.
I have often wondered how he got such a fine
reputation. I can only hope it was not through
intimidation, as one might suspect from my
experience. In my opinion, compared to AlK's book,
his are poorly documented and do not hold my
attention. I wonder that the AHA, or whoever,
continues to support the printing of these books.
Those of you who have Principles of BS
should carefully read the dustcover, especially
the comment by the VP from Millers.
And frankly, in my opinion, at least his recent
contributions here on the HBD have been
insignificant compared to A. J. de Lange's
contributions. A.J.'s are always supported by
documentation and experimentation.
I know that lots of people will differ with me on this,
and I presume our differences will be based on
past contributions George might have made or
his activities in the AHA, of which I know nothing.
I 'm sure he must have done something, of which
I am totally unaware, to gain his reputation and
band of loyalists. It may simply be a magnetic
personality which does not come through in his
writings or here in the HBD.
I am not interested in slamming anyone personally
without reason and the HBD should not be the place.
Unfortunately, George showed his fangs in public
apparently to an HBD member who I happen to respect
greatly for his contributions and style in the HBD.
George's surprising attack on me, in my opinion,
lends credibility to AJ's comments. For AJ's sake,
I felt this issue needed to be addressed in public
and their contributions compared. AJ wins hands
down as far as I can see.
Sadly, a forum or job is not always right all the
time for every person. Perhaps the best thing is to
sincerely wish George well in his new endeavors
which, as he indicated, will take him away from the HBD.
Good Luck, George!
- ------------------------------------------------
Keep on Brewin'
Dave Burley
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 1999 21:59:24 -0500
From: "John W. Thomasson" <jwtjr999@flash.net>
Subject: Second Pitch for High Gravity Brew
Hi all,
I have a slight problem with my second all grain Barleywine brewed on 4/17.
With 12# Maris Otter, 10# Munich, 1# 40L Crystal and 1# flaked barley, the
OG was 1.120 which dropped to 1.032 after a little over two weeks in
primary. I pitched about 2 quarts of yogurt consistency Wyeast #1056
recovered from a previous ferment, aerated for 10 minutes with O2, then for
an additional two hours with air. Needless to say, fermentation started
very quickly and was the most vigorous I've seen yet. Unfortunately, I lost
about two quarts of this wonderful wort in the process. :(
There has been little activity in the secondary. By my calculations, this
brew was approaching 12% ABV at racking, which leads me to think that
alcohol toxicity is inhibiting further fermentation rather than pooped out
yeast. To attain my goal of SG 1.020-1.025, I employed a 30 minute rest at
140F, and a 90 saccharification rest at 151F. This should be a highly
fermentable wort.
So it looks as though I will need to pitch more yeast. This wasn't
necessary on my first BW because it finished at 1.018 (OG was 1.096; used
Wyeast #2265... good stuff for BW!). Since I've never done a second pitch,
I basically need to know everything. Obviously a yeast with a high alcohol
tolerance. Recommendations? Eau de Vie (Wyeast #3347), dry Champagne
yeast? Should I just build up a starter, decant the spent wort and pitch
the solids? (I do know better than to aerate the beer again.) When should
I pitch? What else should I have asked? BTW, the beer is in a 5 gallon
cornie keg with an airlock fitted onto the gas in side.
At 104 IBUs (according to ProMash), this beer should not be cloyingly sweet
at FG 1.032. But, hop bitterness tends to decline/mellow after a year in
the bottle. I prefer well attenuated beers and I'm a little bit afraid this
will taste like bitter wort with a shot of everclear. I also have concerns
about bottle carbonation. I really think that pitching additional yeast to
finish up the remaining fermentables is the right thing to do, so I would
really like to hear from other high gravity fiends before proceeding.
TIA for any/all advice. Private email is fine, but why not share with the
collective since traffic seems light following the Siebel answer session?
Those folks are indeed a world class organization.
Yours in high gravity brewing,
John W. Thomasson, High Gravity Newbie
The Seven Bucket Brewery
Aledo, Texas
The only thing that's more fun than all grain brewing, is *high gravity* all
grain brewing...
-me-
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 23:58:13 EDT
From: ThomasM923@aol.com
Subject: Fat corks into empty bottles
In hbd #3044-7 Rob Hanson wrote:
"Is there a way to reuse expanded champagne corks and wire cages from
empty bottles in a new bottling? How could one with limited equipment
compress the fat corks to fit back in an empty bottle?..."
Although I may be mistaken, it seems that Mr. Eric Fouch and friend may have
the proper equipment for this sort of task. Fred seems to possess quite the
inventive streak during his time off...
Apologies to all concerned, (still can't find that darn smiley face key)
Thomas Murray
Maplewood, NJ
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 99 23:54:51 PDT
From: "George De Piro" <gdepiro@fcc.net>
Subject: HSA, Unfermentables in dextrin and crystal malts
Hi all,
Jeff Irvine (sorry Jeff, but you haven't earned the prestigious title you
have
given yourself) writes:
"Apparently people who defend the "dreadful HSA" didn't, and my reporting
of this waked not a small ammount of derision. George DePiro seemed
most adament that "I must have done something wrong", and scrambled for
imagined things that that could be."
Why Jeff spends so much time deriding me in his posts is beyond me. Must
be some sort of self esteem problem...
Anyway, not to be misquoted, what I said then, and I will say now, is:
1. Jeff conducted triangle tests to determine that the HSA beer was the
same
as the non-HSA beer. Aside from only testing at one, relatively young
time point,
Jeff doesn't mention who made up his panel of tasters. Where they
trained
tasters? It makes a big difference.
Since Jeff conveniently scorns homebrew contests, the world has no way
of
knowing if is beer is actually any good. The quality of a brew is
usually
correlated to the quality of the brewer's palate. I would trust the
advice
of a palate I know and respect much more than that of someone I have
never met
and whose beer I have never tasted (nor ever heard of anybody else
tasting).
2. I was at Siebel over 1.5 years ago and posted way back then about
their
belief that the danger of HSA is overrated. Rob Moline coauthored the
post.
3. While the danger of HSA may be overrated, it is also one of the
easiest
things to avoid, even in a home brewery. When presented with the option
to either spray hot wort through the air or move it quietly, the answer
should
be obvious, and not take any extra effort!
- ------------------------------------------------------
There was a question about the lack of fermentability of dextrin malts.
Dave
Burley talks about using them late in the mash to ensure that the
dextrins are
not broken down during the mash. This is unnecessary.
Mort O'Sullivan, in my opinion one of the brightest stars to ever post
to the
HBD, wrote about this topic at some point last year. To summarize:
Dextrin and crystal malts are made by kilning wet malt (about 45%
moisture)
at saccharification temperature. Because the malt is not milled and the
water
to malt ratio is much lower than in the mash tun, the amylases can only
act on
a relatively small percentage of the starches in the grain. The reducing
sugars
that are formed undergo Maillard reactions to become furans, melanoidins,
etc.
and are unfermentable, but a significant amount of starch remains. What
is its
fate, and why does it not yield fermentable sugar in the mash tun?
Starch molecules in barley are about 25% amylose and 75% amylopectin.
Due to the limited enzyme mobility in the unground, low-water malt, the
amylopectin is preferentially degraded because its complex shape
entraps amylases on the surface of the molecules. The much longer,
straight-chained amyose molecules are solubilized, but remain relatively
unscathed.
Later, during the higher temperature kilning and subsequent cooling,
these
amylose molcules recrystalize in a process known as "retrogradation."
For reasons not yet known to science, these recrystalized starch
molecules
are very resistant to enzymatic hydrolysis, and thus do not yield
fermentable
sugars in the mash tun.
It is well known, by both researchers and common brewing experience,
that high-kilned malts produce less fermentable worts than pale malts
using the same mash schedule. A wort made from 100% dark Munich
malt will not be as fermentable as one made from 100% pils malt, even
if mashed in the same manner.
Have fun!
George de Piro (Nyack, NY)
Head Brewer, Albany Pump Station
(OK, so I'm also the only brewer...)
Malted Barley Appreciation Society
"Brooklyn's Best Homebrew Club"
http://hbd.org/mbas
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #3046, 06/02/99
*************************************
-------
