Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #3044
HOMEBREW Digest #3044 Mon 31 May 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:
Fred's Invention ("Phil and Jill Yates")
Siebel: Thanks ("Dr. Pivo")
Re: Dextrin Malt (Dave Humes)
Thames Valley (wyeast 1275) (Charley Burns)
Re: Czech pils w/ American Malt (Charley Burns)
Re: Tart Cherries (Jeff Renner)
Reusing champagne corks (Rob Hanson and Kate Keplinger)
Anything but ... (Tim Anderson)
Unitanks / Conical Fermenters - Worth it for the Homebrewer (David and Susan Tedeschi)
adios amigos (George Fix) (BrwyFoam)
multiple personalities, endpoint, cooler agitator (Dave Burley)
oud Bruin Duck (Dave Burley)
HSA, Yeast Ranching (Dave Burley)
yeast experiment (Jeremy Bergsman)
Possible Partnership ("Phil and Jill Yates")
Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!
"All gave some. Some gave all"
Remember one who has fallen to protect what you
have today. US Memorial Day 1999.
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: Sat, 29 May 1999 19:03:09 +1000
From: "Phil and Jill Yates" <yates@flexgate.infoflex.com.au>
Subject: Fred's Invention
Eric,
Fred has obviously been doing some hard thinking in the back of your
car. This is a pretty spiffy sounding device, albeit somewhat clumsy to
operate when functioning with blood alcohol levels upwards of 3%. This is a
fairly outrageous figure by today's standards but I'm sure we used to give
it a nudge. We used to use a divisional factor usually set at 3. This simple
factoring method simply assumed that you would be "blind" and so no precise
blood alcohol level was of any consideration.
Using this method, the very very best looking girl at 2-00 am could
never get above a score of 3-3 repeater! The trouble was at this hour one
simply didn't care!
Does your machine have some form of "grabometer" that can cool the
amorous thoughts of a drunk at 2-00 am?
Not that I am in the market any longer as you would understand, but a
few of the boys at work would like to know more.
Phil Yates.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 29 May 1999 14:21:44 +0200
From: "Dr. Pivo" <irv@wireworks.se>
Subject: Siebel: Thanks
I must admit I was sceptical. When Rob Moline announced this
interaction with an American Technical Institute for Brewing, I was VERY
sceptical.
For the first, I thought: "Why would I want advice from a leading force
in American brewing production? I like none of the commercial varieties
available there, and very few of the micro brewed stuff." (he quickly
ducks under his desk, to avoid the flying bricks aimed at his head).
Secondly, haven't some home brewers attended there, and published some
incredibly dogmatic, yet irrelevant (dare I say "snooty") opinions on
this forum?
Just WHO ARE these guys?
Yep, I was waiting for someone else to make the first move, and see what
turned up.
Boy, was I wrong. Their replies have been refreshingly erudite,
relevant, and given with perspective.
It reminds me very much of the attitude and knowledge that it has been
my pleasure to glean from "real" brewers within the industry (not
"weekend-warriors" such as myself).
It turns out there is a big difference between what one knows how to do,
and what one knows one HAS to do.
The first is determined by experience, education, enthusiasm, and
ingenuity.... the second is controlled by "the market".
To all participants from "Siebel": You have certainly gained at least my
respect, and if I'm ever in your part of the world, would very much like
to pay you a visit (I won't get in the way long, promise).
Hell, if I had the time, and wasn't so bloody cheap (I think it's a
trait that comes irremovably attached to the "homebrewing" badge), I'd
probably even go one of your "courses".
Thanks again for your kind and succinct replies to not only mine, but
the other questions presented here as well,
Dr. Pivo
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 29 May 99 10:06:08 -0400
From: Dave Humes <humesdg1@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Dextrin Malt
Siebel Staff,
Thanks for your reply. I have really enjoyed reading your responses and
hope you do this again soon. I have a quick followup to which I hope you
can reply.
>To Summarize, Dextrin malt does not contain starch dextrins but
>chemically modified sugars that are not susceptible to enzymatic
>breakdown. Again, there is not much analytical data to support this
>subject.
I agree with this statement when discussing the higher kilned varieties of
dextrin malts since the temperatures involved are clearly sufficient to
bring about Maillard reactions between sugars and nitrogen compounds. And
I can see how this leads to nonfermentable extract that is not degraded by
mash enzymes. However, in the case of carapils malts, as I understand it
the kiln temperature is kept quite low to avoid development of flavorful
and colored compounds. According to Dennis Briggs in Malts and Malting,
"For carapils drying is at a low temperature (55-60C (131-140F))." Can
you suggest a mechanism at this temperature region that accounts for the
modification of malt sugars into nonfermentable compounds that are not
subject to mash enzymes?
Thanks.
- --
- -----------------------------------------------------------
Dave Humes <humesdg1@earthlink.net> Dave Humes
- -----------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 29 May 1999 08:28:17 -0700 (PDT)
From: cburns@jps.net (Charley Burns)
Subject: Thames Valley (wyeast 1275)
Brewed up a light porter a couple weeks ago (1.050 og) and used an active 2
quart starter with Thames Valley yeast from wyeast. I got the yeast as a
surprise gift a few months ago and its been in the fridge ever since.
Started just fine in about 3 days and was actively fermenting its second
quart of starter wort when I pitched into 5 gallons of 75f porter wort.
Had positive airlock activity within 3 hours, built nice krausen and then
pooped out 3 days later at gravity 1.020.
Is this typical of Thames Valley. The archives have a lot of people using
this yeast in high gravity worts but I didn't see any notes on a medium
strength beer. The porter is a bit sweet but I think I'll leave it that way,
rather than pitch more yeast and possibly muck it up. Certainly drinkable
the way it is.
Charley (brewing again) in N.Cal
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 29 May 1999 08:39:01 -0700 (PDT)
From: cburns@jps.net (Charley Burns)
Subject: Re: Czech pils w/ American Malt
I recently brewed a Czech pils with Briess 2-row:
0.50 lb. Cara-Pils Dextrine
2.00 lb. Munich Light
9.00 lb. Pale 2-Row (Briess)
2.00 oz. Saaz 3.1% 60 min
1.00 oz. Saaz 3.1% 30 min
1.00 oz. Saaz 3.1% 0 min (10 minute steep)
All hops were whole
Grain Starting Temperature: 65F
Grain/Water Ratio: 1.22 quarts/pound
Strike Water: 3.51 gallons of water at 166F
Single Infusion Mash Temperature: 152-150F (60 min)
Wyeast 2112, 2 weeks at 60-62F
Forced Carb, lagered under 10psi for 1 month, nearly clear. Tons of body,
even with low fg. Massive, long lasting rocky head. Nice spicey hop flavor.
Another month lagering (if it lasts) will hopefully crispen it further.
OG 1.050
FG 1.009
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 29 May 1999 12:15:55 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Tart Cherries
"Ken Schramm" <schramk@resa.net> writes:
>All tart cherries are prunus cerasus, and the variety is specified in the
>third part of the binomial nomenclature (someone explain that one to me).
>...
>The variety designation becomes the crux of the bisquit. The "L." at the
>end of prunus cerasus var. Schaarbeek is therefore critically important,
>and I'd love to know what it stands for.
Here are some nomenclature basics as I remember them. I have not worried
about the tiny details, in part because I don't remember them.
Linnaeus is the father of the modern binomial nomenclature for plants and
animals. There was quite a vogue at the time (250 years ago) for naming
other natural things that way too - like rocks. A proper binomial
capitalizes the first word, which is the genus. There may be many species
within a genus. The second word, the specific epithet, is not capitalized.
The two together specify a species (the word can be singular or plural).
The binomial is italicized or underlined, since it is Latin. (Endings are
supposed to conform to Latin rules). Then often follows the name of the
person who first described and named the species. Since Linnaeus named so
many organisms, his name is simply abbreviated as "L." If someone
subsequently renamed the species, the original person's name is placed in
parentheses.
A species is considered to be distinct from others, for the most part, if
it can't or doesn't interbreed with others. There are certainly
exceptions, called hybrids. Hybrids between two species are indicated by
an "x" in the name. Subspecies are considered to be completely
interbreedable. The third name is for a subspecies, such as "_Homo sapiens
sapiens_ L."
A variety is different from a subspecies. It is something completely
manmade, and I think is applied to plants. Animals are called breeds. A
variety is named following the abbreviation "Var." So the Jonathon apple
would be _Prunus malus_ L. var. Jonathon. "Cultivar" (for "cultivated
variety") is another sord for the same thing. An amazing thing is that
cabbage, Brussel sprouts, broccoli, cauliflower, kale, and others are all
cultivars of of the same species, _Brassica sativa_ L.
Hope this is now as clear as Mudgee mud.
Jeff
-=-=-=-=-
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, c/o nerenner@umich.edu
"One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 29 May 1999 21:51:40 -0400
From: Rob Hanson and Kate Keplinger <katerob@erols.com>
Subject: Reusing champagne corks
I'm new to the digest, so please forgive me if you have answered this
question a thousand times already.
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? It seems anti
intuitive that soaking would be the answer, but I have no idea.
I've often wondered how the Belgians cork their bottles and now that I
want to cork some of my own for the satisfying "pop," I would like to
know even more. Any answers would be appreciated!
- --Rob Hanson
Washington, DC
- ----
"...They have worked their will on John Barleycorn
But he lived to tell the tale,
For they pour him out of an old brown jug
And they call him home brewed ale."
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 29 May 1999 20:14:41 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tim Anderson <timator@yahoo.com>
Subject: Anything but ...
In response to a question about Mickey's Wayne mentioned the imminent
demise of a WI brewery:
>>>
Do to recent mergers/buyouts, Mickey's is soon to be, if not already, a
Miller Brewing Co. product. It is my understanding that the Heileman
Brewery in La Crosse WI, will be closed by next year.
Wayne
Big Fun Brewing
Milwaukee
<<<
Same for Henry Weinhard's. Also bought by Miller, who are closing the
Henry's brewery. Damn shame. Henry's will be brewed somewhere else.
But not for me, I've had my last Henry's anything. I was at a social
event a few weeks after the Miller announcement and the guy ahead of me
at the bar ordered, "Beer. Anything but Henry's." I asked for the
same.
tim
In Portland, Oregon, where we still have several good micros and used
to have a decent regional.
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 22:15:48 +0900
From: David and Susan Tedeschi <tedeschi@shinbiro.com>
Subject: Unitanks / Conical Fermenters - Worth it for the Homebrewer
I have read some articles on the subject of Unitanks / Conical
Fermeneters around the net. I am considering obtaining one and using
it. But first I would like to know from the people who brew at home and
have tried either the plastic or stainless steel conical fermenter is,
has life gotten better? And most important of all is the beer better?
Thanks
Dave Tedeschi
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 09:22:09 EDT
From: BrwyFoam@aol.com
Subject: adios amigos (George Fix)
I have been unable to participate in HBD this year due to a very heavy
work load. I was hoping to join this forum this summer on a regular basis,
but these hopes were dashed when I was offered, and I accepted, the
position of Professor and Department Head, Dept. of Mathematical Sciences
at Clemson University. This position does not start until fall, but in the
interim
Laurie and I have aspirations of selling our house and building a new one
(in which hopefully will reside the brewery/lab of our dreams!) Spare time
disappears again and with it moi.
We have accumulated a lot of surplus equipment during the time we have
been in Texas. We have decided to ship only those things we use on a
regular basis, and auction off the rest. Our only requirements are for
on site inspection of the equipment with the same applying to possession
of winning bids. We are not set up for mailing these sorts of things.
Interested people should e-mail me directly. Included in the list are
fermenters
(unis, open, and standard). mashing systems, brew kettles, grain mills, et
al.
We also have an (embarrasing) number of air/O2 testers. (Ok, I know I tend
to over emphasize do that part of brewing).
Speaking of oxidation, a particularly humorous situation recently came up.
A gentleman took me to task in this forum, referring me not by name but
as "the author of the recent BT article on oxidation". He seemed stressed out
about many things, but one was a perceived slur on my part against Pilsner
Urquell. I conjecture this gentleman did not read my article for I have always
revered PU as the Flagship lager. In any case, after the standard ranting /
venting he concluded that I was narrow minded and did not understand
pilsners in general and PU in particular.
Well folks guess who was a judge on the Classic Pilsner panel at the recent
Burp competition in Washington D.C. Guess who judged my entry, a Bohemian
Pilsner. Guess who gave it a 42 assuring !st place and a MCAB qualification
to boot. I have no idea how this gentleman reacted when he heard the news,
but my only reaction was a deep sense of gratitude that these competitions
are judged blind!
On a more serious note, I sincerely do wish everyone associated with HBD
well. In spite of the occassional invective HBD is a good discussion group,
and I am sure it will flurish in the years to come.
Cheers,
George Fix
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 14:10:56 -0400
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: multiple personalities, endpoint, cooler agitator
Brewsters:
After a couple of weeks of fishing, golfing and working at my
new house in SC, I finally have some time to comment here.
Other than the little fun which follows, I will try not to comment
on things no longer of interest.
Although the Phil/Jill dual personality has correctly
identified Dr. Pivo and I to be the same personality, it is
only true at the level of being well travelled and having a
healthy, sceptical approach to purveyors of beer
knowledge. The main difference is that I expect to
have any disagreement with traditional knowledge
be supported by data and not just opinion.
Congratulations, Phil/Jill! even Dr. Pivo hasn't figured
this out yet. But he did also surmise the potential
relationship between the word "pivo" and "peijo",
I thought about this too and wondered if it was like
"mama" in all languages, since it is about as close to
mother's milk as we can get as adults. I have also
wondered about "arigato" and the Portuguese
"obligato" influencing the Japanese language
during their occupation. Comments, oh Japanese
Scholars?
And yes, Dave Kerr, kraeusening, especially for bottlers,
is my pet method of getting reliable results. I also often
use this method with lagers in kegs. In the absence of
true kraeusen, I make a fake kraeusen from secondary
yeast, priming sugar and some malt extract. See the
HBD archives.
- ----------------------------------------
Phil Wilkinson asks about the pH where an acid titration
changes color or something like that. It all depends on
the indicator, as these dyes are what change color in
a certain pH range. In the case of phenolphthalein
( a common 'clear to pink' indicator as the pH goes up),
the pH change is in the high 7s to low 8s as I recall. Other
indicators change color as the pH is changed at different
values ( say 2.5-3.2, etc.) and certain ones change twice
over the pH range of 1 to 14. So there is no one pH where
the color changes.
A far better way, if you have a pH meter, is to titrate with
0.1 N NaOH ( for those laboratorily impaired, 4 grams
of lye in a 1 liter coke bottle with boiled, distilled water will
do fine). Add this solution in incremements of 1 ml and
record the pH. Near pH=7 add it in units of 0.5 or 0.1 to
maximize accuracy of the e.p. position. Plot these
Y= pH, X = vol of NaOH and you will get an 'S' curve.
The steepest slope is the e.p. A plot of the derivitave
of this curve will produce an accurate location as the
zig-zag curve passes through 0. All this is not
necessary, as the volume of NaOH at 7 is probably
good enough for your needs. In situations where other
weak acids abound ( like wine) the e.p. is not always
at 7, but is where the slope is steepest under all typical
systems.
- ----------------------------------------
Mark Bayer asks about a sort of rock and roller to
agitate the kettle or lift the kettle lid partially and lift
his cooling coils with the lid in place during cooling
of his wort. Or something like that. Why not just install
a simple stirrer in your kettle lid. This should do the
job of increasing the cooling rate, maintain sanitation
and be simple to sanitze. You might consider just
using a crank stirrer and that way avoid all the agitation
( so to speak) of a <safe> electric installation.
- -----------------------------------------
Keep on Brewin'
Dave Burley
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 19:31:49 -0400
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: oud Bruin Duck
Brewsters:
A duck waddles into a bar. He jumps up on a barstool. The
bartender looks at him and says, "What can I get for you?"
"I want an 'oud Bruin'," said the duck.
"I'm sorry we don't have fancy beers,how about a Bud"
replied the bartender. The duck gets mad and quacks
up a storm as he leaves.
A couple of weeks later, the bar door gets kicked open
and the duck waddles in again. Bartender says what
can I do for you. Duck says "I want an 'oud Bruin'."
Bartender says that he doesn't have any, how about a Bud.
So, the duck gets mad and stomps out again.
A few weeks later,the same thing happens and the
Bartender says,"Look I have now told you three times
that we don't have any 'oud Bruin'. If you come in here
one more time asking for a fancy beer, I am going to NAIL
your bill shut to this bar table!" Duck starts quacking and
stomps out.
A week later, the same duck comes in again and jumps up
on the bar stool. The bartender says, "What do you want?"
The duck says, "Do you have any nails?"
Bartender says ,"No"
The duck replies, "Good, then I want an 'oud Bruin'!!!"
Keep on Bruin'
Dave Burley
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 19:33:40 -0400
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: HSA, Yeast Ranching
Brewsters:
I am in the uncomfortable position of disagreeing with Siebel
and Dr. Pivo while agreeing with SteveA, Nathan Kanous
and George Fix on the subject of Hot Side Absorption or
aeration. Or whatever you want to call it.
Without a doubt, this was the single biggest improvement
I made in my early days of homebrewing when I stopped
pouring the hot wort through the air while straining out the hops.
I cannot be convinced otherwise, since I moved back and
forth in my technique on a batch by batch basis to test it.
I did not get a cardboardy taste to my beer, but what I would
call phenolic or the like. It is possibly true that HSA does not
bring about the same chemistry as cold oxidation after
fermentation which does lead to a flat cardbopardy taste,
but there is definitely a difference and <not> oxidising
hot gives a MUCH better beer, for sure with extracts.
Admittedly, these were lager, malt extract batches and
possibly some of the antioxidant character of the wort
could have been impaired during the evaporation and
canning of the extract. I have never tried this experiment
with all grain wort nor have I heard of any such loss of
anti-oxidative power of extracts..
I am impressed by Dr. Pivo's triangular blind results, and
can only explain them ( other than the above whole cloth
anti-oxidant idea) by suggesting that perhaps in his
handling, all beers provided equally for hot oxidation of
the beer or that he didn't do 5 gallon batches so
oxidation was not significant in any of the beers.
I have often rationalized this as did SteveA by the
difference in surface to volume ratio between
commercial and homebrewed volumes to explain
why breweries could do it and I couldn't. I also
suspected that this taste of hot oxidation was what
was attributed to "malt extract tang" mentioned in
the British pioneering homebrew hobby books of the
late 60s and early 70s.
- -----------------------------------------
Rich Olivo's complaint and Jim Liddil's suggestion
about investigating technique to reduce the amount
of mold growth is the main reason I suggest that
yeast ranching be done using distilled water only
as the medium.
Remember all the comments when we begin
discussing "Sanitation vs Sterilization", well, the
yeasts are in a mixture of all kinds of beasties
and some will ultimately crop out. Molds love
agar plates as Dr. Fleming will tell you.
Keep on Brewin'
Dave Burley
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 18:31:58 -0700
From: Jeremy Bergsman <jeremybb@leland.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: yeast experiment
As I mentioned recently, my club, the Worts of Wisdom, recently completed a
yeast experiment. I have now put the data on the club web site:
http://www.stanford.edu/~jeremybb/beerstuff/wow.html
- --
Jeremy Bergsman
jeremybb@leland.stanford.edu
http://www.stanford.edu/~jeremybb
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 13:06:11 +1000
From: "Phil and Jill Yates" <yates@flexgate.infoflex.com.au>
Subject: Possible Partnership
Eric,
I should have explained more to you about the grabometer. This is a
"nice" name for a device more accurately known as the "graboscrotumeter". It
is an Australian invention which works on electronic impulses from the
brain, measuring amorous thoughts as an x curve and alcohol interference as
a y curve. Depending on where on the graph and at what hour of night the
curves cross, the graboscrotumeter can apply pressure accordingly. Should
the amorous thoughts persist, so too will the pressure, and increasingly!
The device is usually fitted prior to going out for a big night and is 100%
effective.
Strangely enough, the graboscrotumeter is completely ineffective when
consuming homebrew and we don't know why. The weak point of the
graboscrotumeter is that it has no way of assessing the "visual beauty"
causing the amorous thoughts. You could be knocking back bourbons at the bar
with Elle McPherson or better still her sister Mimi and things are really
looking good when the damn machine decides to kick in. Designed on the
chastity belt principle it is not an easy thing to get off in the middle of
a nightclub, unless you happen to have a hack saw in your back pocket. But
this sort of work is risky business at this hour of the night! Coupled to
your BBSRA, the graboscrotumeter could be a most effective option.
Picture this:
It's Saturday night and you and Kyle are planning a big night
out. Kyle is a little slow getting on his make-up and climbing into his new
fishnet stockings. So, you help yourself to the homebrew and flick through a
few girlie videos. No problems here, the graboscrotumeter light blinks
inoffensively by your left ear. Many hours later, now at the bar and looking
leeringly about the place you realize there aint much action going on here!
Hey, those fishnet stockings look pretty good on Kyle.
And then it happens, one bourbon too many and you lean close to
Kyle, breathing alcoholic fumes into his ear, you suggest it's time to go
home. This to the graboscrotumeter, coupled to the BBSRA which gives Kyle a
score of -10, is like setting off a fire alarm! The graboscrotumeter
instantly "pressures" you in the right direction - straight home and
definitely by yourself!!
One concern of mine though, is that Fred insists on wiring everything
to 415V. In this form the machine will not work well at all in this country
and in your country will surely fry your "essentials" off!
With a few wrinkles like this sorted out we could indeed be looking
at a happy partnership.
Phil Yates
Chief Inventor
CAT TALE BREWERIES
AUSTRALIA.
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #3044, 05/31/99
*************************************
-------
