Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #3039
HOMEBREW Digest #3039 Tue 25 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:
Re: Malt Flavor ("Stephen Alexander")
aluminum (Andrew Quinzani)
Re: Malt Flavor (Jeff Renner)
counterflow chiller sanitization ("Coordinator")
Siebel/autolysis (Jason.Gorman)
Re: Wyermann Munich ("J. Matthew Saunders")
Broken Hop Bines (Dan Listermann)
re EASYMASHER 3, almost ("Stephen Alexander")
Re: Hop-ectomy (Jeff Renner)
Honey Stout (Matthew Comstock)
Siebel - brewing careers question (Mike Kauffman)
ale yeast for fake lagers? (Bryan Gros)
Siebel: adding grist to liquor ("Thomas D. Hamann")
re: post-carbonation polyclar ("Greg Pickles")
answer to question by david rinker (Radzan1000)
"Them's phytin words..." (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
German Wheat yeasts/ Old cardomom-autolysis ("WILLIAM R. SIEBEL")
Re: ale yeast for fake lagers? (Jeff Renner)
Re: hop-ectomy (Tom Lombardo)
Yeast Culturing ("WILLIAM R. SIEBEL")
lag times (Ted McIrvine)
Dr. Pivo's Question about Kraeusening and Foam (Larsonjw)
answer by j power - siebel - to rob moline - subject: clinitest (Radzan1000)
answer by j. power - siebel - to aj de lange - subject: phytin (Radzan1000)
answer of j. power - siebel to guy burgess - subject: acidulated (Radzan1000)
answer of j.power - siebel to jm kenton - subject: acidification of (Radzan1000)
Re: Wort Chiller Efficiency............ ("Perle")
RO Water....what's left? (Nathan Kanous)
The Jethro Gump Report ("Rob Moline")
Jethros Done... ("Rob Moline")
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: Mon, 24 May 1999 06:27:12 -0400
From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Malt Flavor
JeffR writes ...
>>I suspect that the volatile nature of some of the compounds also means
that
>>they fade as the malt ages, [...]
>
>I agree. I think that really fresh malt makes a difference. I malted my
>own 6-row feed barley a few years ago and got a wonderful maltiness that
>carried over into the CAP I made with it [...]
I had a similar experience. I've promised myself that I would try making
crystal from some 2-row pale malt sometime, but haven't gotten around to it.
I think that Munich malt must age into oblivion too.
>>I once spoke to a raver who insisted that
>>he really loved whiskeys because it was the only was he could get the
>>concentrated malt flavor he craved. Bull___, [...]
>
>I don't think I agree, although my whisk(e)y education is just starting.
>There certainly is none of that aromatic maltiness in whisky,
Which is really what I was trying imperfectly to say. Whiskey does show
it's grain origin, but it leaves most of the
doppelbock/malted-chocolate/munich-malt type of maltiness at the distillery,
what is left of malt is soft and subtle.
>but there are grain components.
Right - but what a beer drinker, or maltster would call a "malty flavor"
doesn't appear at the other end of the still in anything like the same form.
The grains lend a certain subtle character and complexity of flavor.
>Just look to the rye whiskies that we have shared
>together recently, Steve, to see how different they are from bourbons that
>are made virtually the same after the mash. Even with new charred oak
>barrels, the grain bill comes through.
Of course rye is THE one very notable exception. One that l know both Jeff
and I appreciate. Rye adds a BIG 'high toned' vaguely
peppermint-like flavor that does make to through the still. A similar
flavor (and also a lot of beta-glucans and sometimes phenolics) are added by
rye to rye-beers. This flavor is a major contribution to the flavor of
bourbons, and moreso in Canadian whiskys and the nearly extinct but
absolutely wonderful American 'straight rye' whiskies. I would argue that
the flavor contribution from barley (malted or not) or corn thru a still are
much less significant than rye - not zero tho'.
>With Scotch whisky, using 100% malt
>and used barrels, which have far less influence, the malt surely does make
>a contribution.
Truth be told, I *suspect* that any grain liquor, if treated like Scotch and
allowance made for the peat smoke (some components of which make it thru the
still) and the 'peaty phenolic bog water' used in production would produce a
very acceptable "Scotch". Perhaps distinguishable from an all-malt Scotch,
but not different by leaps and bounds.
As for used barrels not being such a great influence - I disagree. The
Scots age their whisky in used sherry & bourbon barrels. Sherry is a
fortified tannic Spanish wine - Sherry, Jerez, Shiraz, historically shipped
to Britain in barrels. US law forbids re-use of barrels in whiskey aging -
another "stupid lawyer trick". Usually you can taste which type is used in
a particular Scotch. Barrel aging - even beyond 10yrs in the same used
barrel makes a big difference. For a truly A vs B comparison of barrel
flavor look to some of the Scotch distilleries like 'The Balvenie' and
Glenmorangie that have recently offered their whisky aged in different
"woods". You'll see that the impact of the barrel origin *is* striking.
>I don't have M. Jackson's whisky guide here, but I remember he suggests
Glen
>Deveron as tasting of unobscured malt. No peat, no sherry barrels. He
>says that a newcomer to Scotch whisky wanting to familiarize himself with
>the flavor of malt could do worse than spend a week with a bottle of Glen
>Deveron. I've been meaning to do this myself.
If you invite me over I'll bring something to counterpoint the G.Deveron. I
suspect however that Glen Deveron (also sold more commonly as Macduff) *IS*
sherry barrel aged. Jackson mentions sherry aromas in the description of
all three bottlings. Jackson also describes the Macallan 10 in part as
"Plenty of malt". Probably a better investment and more readily
available than the Glen Deveron too. I'd be hard pressed to describe
Macallan as "malty", altho the combination of background dextrinous
sweetness and phenolics does suggest malt.
I have also tasted raw distillate liquor (unaged) at the Glenora distillery
in Nova Scotia http://www.glenoradistillery.com/welc.html a few years back.
They are attempting to make true Scotch style whiskys in Canada. The raw
distillate is not what anyone should call "malty"; "very rough vodka" gives
the right impression of the major flavors. Since I was there Glenora has
finally released their aged Kenlock whisky - I haven't tasted it. A great
place to spend a few hours in N.S. BTW.
Piggott, the British brewing science author also has a book out on the
flavor components
of distilled beverages. Well worth a scan IMO. A lot of discussion of the
barrel components, lactones, aldehydes etc. Mort O'Sullivan (who also has
great experience & training in this area) told me that Piggott had another
whisky book coming out (circa 1998) but I haven't seen it yet.
I agree there is something of malt in whiskey, but it certainly isn't the
same flavor that we expect in a malty beer, nor is it a big
thump-on-the-head flavor.
back to brewing,
-S
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 07:06:24 -0400
From: Andrew Quinzani <quinzani@mediaone.net>
Subject: aluminum
ate: Fri, 21 May 1999 14:50:03 -0700
From: "Dana H. Edgell" <edgell@cari.net>
Subject: Re: aluminum
Alan McKay says,
>Anyone who says aluminum will give a mettalic taste has
>obviously never used it, and is operating on hear-say. Get
>used to it, because there is a great deal of hear-say which
>gets retransmitted in brewing circles (yes, including this
>one, though admittedly it's got a lot less than most).
This can happen, depending on many factors. Beer has
compounds in it that act like a mild acid and can remove
some Aluminum. Depending on what you are doing...a mash, or
a simple boil would affect just how much you would remove. A
simple example....if you made a hoiday sause in a alumiunm
pot it would have a green tinge to it (should be only
yellow) because it removed some of the alum.
Now maybe you want green beer (on St. Pats day?) but I
don't.
-=Q=-
- --
"Q" Brew Brewery...Home of Hairy Chest Ale
- ------------------------------------------------------------
quinzani@mediaone.net
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 08:25:53 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Malt Flavor
At 6:27 AM -0400 5/24/99, Stephen Alexander wrote:
>JeffR writes ...
>>With Scotch whisky, using 100% malt
>>and used barrels, which have far less influence, the malt surely does make
>>a contribution.
<snip>
>
>As for used barrels not being such a great influence - I disagree.
I wasn't clear with what I meant, which was that used barrels have far less
influence than new, charred white oak barrels. I agree that even used
barrels have a great influence on malt whisky. I believe that many
distilleries do reuse barrels for several multi-year fills do get minimal
influence.
I look forward to further field research with Steve on this subject.
Jeff
Oh, I'm looking forward to having a beer this evening. There, now this is
a beer post.
-=-=-=-=-
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, c/o nerenner@umich.edu
"One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 08:25:16 -0400
From: "Coordinator" <emcreg@one.net>
Subject: counterflow chiller sanitization
J Daoust <thedaousts@ixpres.com> wrote:
>...after cooling my brew, and rinsing, what can i
>use to make sure nothing green and fuzzy will grow between uses????...
I boil 2-3 gallons of water and run it through the wort chiller before and
after I use it. Effective and all the equipment is out and in place anyway
making it simple.
Todd (a recovering sanitization neurotic)
Cincinnati, Ohio
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 08:57:00 -0400
From: Jason.Gorman@steelcase.com
Subject: Siebel/autolysis
A recent post that got no response. What say Ye?
I did some searching in the archives, but could not find the information I was
looking for. From what I have read, autolysis is basically the spilling of the
yeast guts into the beer. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't this basically
yeast nutrient? If you transfer to a secondary and add some DME, will you get
renewed fermentation and rid yourself of the rubbery autolysis taste and smell?
Jason Gorman
River Dog Brewery
Grand Rapids MI
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 08:59:59 -0400
From: "J. Matthew Saunders" <saunderm@vt.edu>
Subject: Re: Wyermann Munich
Matt replies and writes:
>Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 15:36:14 GMT
>From: marnold@ez-net.com (Matthew Arnold)
>Subject: Re: Weyermann Munich
>
>On Sat, 22 May 1999 00:13:00 -0400, you wrote:
>
>>Now my question: Who sells Weyermann Munich in sacks and ships to Ohio ?
>>(preferably close by). Anyone have an opinion on this malt ?
>
>Any homebrew store that uses Crosby and Baker can get Weyermann products. I've
>used quite a bit of Weyermann Munich, Dark Munich, and Melanoidin in Alts,
>Dunkels, and a Bock. I like their products quite a bit.
Vintage Cellar at www.vintagecellar.com will ship Weyermann Munich in sacks
to Ohio. You can also email the shop at sales@vintagecellar.com.
Good Luck!
Matthew in VA soon to be in CO.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 09:40:41 -0400
From: Dan Listermann <72723.1707@compuserve.com>
Subject: Broken Hop Bines
Matt Arnold ( marnold@ez-net.com) worries about his decapitated bine. No
fear, the node below the cut will quickly sprout two runners that will
quickly replace the main bine.
Dan Listermann dan@listermann.com 72723.1707@compuserve.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 09:45:41 -0400
From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: re EASYMASHER 3, almost
Jack writes ...
>The EM3 screen is 1/2" i.d. and ten inches long
What's the intended audience ? It sounds too big for a 16" diameter 15.5gal
sanke.
Having used some homemade variants of the EZ-Masher in the past, I wonder
just how much need there is for the bigger diameter and length. The 10"
length can't improve the channeling situation, and anyone who needs 1/2"
fittings to drain a half barrel mash tun is sparging way too fast.
Maybe for a 55gal operation it would fit.
Steve
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 10:16:17 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Hop-ectomy
marnold@ez-net.com (Matthew Arnold) worries that he killed his hop bine
when he broke off the growing tip. Not to worry. While hops and other
plants grow from the tip, a side node branch will grow and take over as the
growing tip.
As I recall from my Botany 101, this growth tip is called the apical
meristem and prevents other potential growth tips from growing by producing
a hormone that supresses their growth. When it is lost, the others are
"released" and compete until one gets the upper hand. Sometimes you will
get several, though.
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: Mon, 24 May 1999 07:42:49 -0700 (PDT)
From: Matthew Comstock <mccomstock@yahoo.com>
Subject: Honey Stout
Greetings
I bottled the last batch about a week ago. It was a
'honey stout' and followed a recipe related to one
found in Papazian's book next to the 'Rocky Raccoon's
Honey Lager,' or something like that. Basically, the
recipe was:
4 # light DME
2.5 - 3# clover honey from the grocery store
1/3# roasted barley
1/2# black patent
1/2# 60L crystal
Cascade pellets (6%AA) 1.5 oz. 60 minutes in boil
Cascade pellets (6%AA) 0.5 oz. 15 minutes in boil
2 tsp. gypsum
1 tsp. Irish moss
Nottingham yeast cake from previous batch.
SG=1.059, FG=1.011
After steeping the specialty grains 30 min at 150F, I
dumped all the malt extract and honey in at the
beginning of the 1 hour boil. The fermentation
started very fast and was very strong as expected -
reusing the yeast cake.
I am curious if others have tried this recipe. The
(very green) beer after almost a week is developing
carbonation nicely, but the flavor intrigues me. The
first thing that hits me must be the honey
aroma(?)/smell. I've noticed something like it in
another commercial beer - from Devil Mountain Black
Honey... something, something. Then I taste a kind
of floral or grassy flavor. The cascades (I've not
used them before)? Then the 'stout flavor' hits.
This is a complex beer. Many different flavors. They
all kind of compete for attention. Anyone else make
this or something similar and have comments? Of
course, I should probably wait longer than a week to
taste test it....
Matt Comstock in Cincinnati.
_____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 08:03:06 -0700
From: Mike Kauffman <mkauffma@fred.fhcrc.org>
Subject: Siebel - brewing careers question
Siebel Staff,
I hope this question isn't too inappropriate for the HBD; if so, I
apologize.
I would like to seek your advice, or anyone else from the Digest, in
regards to getting into the brewing industry. I am a recent
microbiology graduate ('95) with a few years of biotech experience.
However, I am very interested in brewing microbiology, particularly
quality control. Unfortunately, I have had no success in even getting a
reply from anyone in the industry for suggestions on where to start. I
have some home brewing experience, and quite a bit of practical
microbiology and chemistry experience, but I don't know how to translate
that into brewing. I would appreciate any suggestions, advice,
comments, or help you may offer.
Thank you for your time.
- --
Mike Kauffman
Flow Cytometry Specialist
Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center
1100 Fairview Avenue, North
BE-024
Seattle, WA 98109-1024
mkauffma@fhcrc.org
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 07:58:33 -0700
From: Bryan Gros <bryang@xeaglex.com>
Subject: ale yeast for fake lagers?
Jeff Renner writes:
>>
>> Nottingham Ale yeast (dry -- I know, I NEVER use dry yeast...) or Wyeast
>>#2112 California Lager (optional)
>
>If you are going to use fermentation temperatures under 55F, then use a
>lager yeast for the real thing. I am suspicious that 2112 is any better at
>warm temps than any other lager yeast. It is used in steam beer at 60F or
>so where it produces an *ale* type beer, not a lager.
what do you mean by "*ale* type beer"? Do you mean estery?
Is there any good yeast choice for making an acceptable lager tasting
beer while fermenting at, say, 62 or so?
- Bryan
Bryan Gros
Oakland CA
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 01:28:38 +0930
From: "Thomas D. Hamann" <tdhamann@senet.com.au>
Subject: Siebel: adding grist to liquor
To the guys from Siebel and anyone else interested.
Why shouldn't I add the grist to the liquor,
have always read that you should add liquor to grist,
why? Are there pros and cons?
Adding grist to liquor would avoid dry lumps and I
think I'd reach strike temp. easier too.
Thomas D. Hamann
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 08:51:34 -0700
From: "Greg Pickles" <gregp@wolfenet.com>
Subject: re: post-carbonation polyclar
>Dan Ritter asks:
>Has anyone successfully used Polyclar to clear chill haze in the keg
>*after* the beer has been carbonated?
>...
My experience was with an ale, not a lager, but it was similar. I had 5
gallons of an English pale ale that had a noticeable chill haze. I had
carbonated and drank a little and it was a fine beer - a little haze didn't
bother me! It turned our that I needed to take most of it to a party and
since the majority of the party goers were not beer geeks, I decided I
needed to clean up the haze, at least a bit.
I chilled the beer down into the upper 30's to form as much haze as possible
and to minimize the release of CO2 when I added the polyclar. I released the
pressure on the keg, opened it and threw in a couple of tablespoons of
polyclar. I then closed the keg, purged any air as well as I could by
pressurizing and venting a few times and then shook the keg a bit to
distribute the polyclar. I let the keg sit in the upper 30's for several
days. Since I wanted to leave nothing to chance, I then ran the beer through
a 5 micron filter which removed the polyclar and whatever it managed to grab
hold of. It was a bit tricky because the entire filter operation had to be
done under pressure (sort of like counter pressure bottle filling).
Even though it was a lot of work, the results were great. I ended up with a
beer that showed no haze at typical ale serving temperature and only a
slight haze at colder temps. The beer didn't seem to suffer for all the
handling either (but it was an ale so subtle changes would have been harder
to detect than in a lager).
Greg Pickles
Seattle, WA
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 12:20:33 EDT
From: Radzan1000@aol.com
Subject: answer to question by david rinker
Dear David,
I have actually used the same recipe in a 400 barrel brewhouse, a 560 barrel
brewhouse and also an 880 barrel brewhouse. All I did was linearly change
the proportions of all of the ingredients. This produced a beer that
analyzed almost exactly the same. I could do this because all of the Brewing
Material Efficiencies of the three brewhouses were the same, 95%. If I would
have had to be dealing with different BME capabilities, I would have had to
adjust the proportions accordingly. Brewpubs and microbreweries that we have
seen, show BME's of 50% to 90%. Major brewers are at least at the 93% level.
I do not know what homebrewers experience since I have never home brewed.
To find your BME, divide the amount of extract you have actually extracted by
the amount that was available in the grains you used, and then multiply by
100.
If the new system has the same BME capability, the ramp is linear. If the
new system has a higher BME rating, you will need proportionately less
material than a linear ramp. If the new system has a lower BME rating, you
will need a proportionately higher amount of material than a linear ramp.
Any thoughts?
DAVE RADZANOWSKI
SIEBEL INSTITUTE
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 12:32:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker@welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: "Them's phytin words..."
AJ brings up some good points relating to my "phytin" post:
1) Yes, typos - all references to the /enzyme/ that breaks down phytate should
have refered to "phytase"
2) "Phytin seems to be a
generic name for the calcium/magnesium salts of any of several myo
inositol phosphates which are found in plant matter and which play
important roles in subcellular biochemistry (animal and plant)."
Not sure about this - every reference I saw regarding phytate/phytin
referred exclusively to the fully phosphorylated form of inositol - IP6 for
short. To be sure, phosphoinositides do play MAJOR roles, especially in cell
signalling pathways, but these are usually named seperately in shorthand form
(eg - IP3,IP2,PIP2, etc).
3)"I believe the only animals capable of synthesis of phytases are ruminants"
There are references out there on the production of phytase in rats, chickens,
pigs, as well as humans (saaaaaay, who're ya callin a ruminant pal!). A
variety of bacterial and fungal species produce the enzyme as well as many
plants. Widespread production of this enzyme would make sense given that
phytin is a major plant depot for phosphate - an essential nutrient. The fact
that researchers are attempting to add exogenous phytase to feed meals to help
increase nutrient availability, promote bioavailability of metals, and limit
phosphate excretion in pigs and chickens seems to mean that, either the diets
are so high in undegrated phytin that they are overwhelming the
animal's endogenous enzyme or, perhaps the low levels of enzymatic activity
they are measuring in the intestine are actually due to contamination from
enteric bacteria, but I've only read the abstracts so can't comment on this
last possibility. Have seen references to hepatic (liver) phytases and
isolation of the enzyme from cell vessicles in intestinal brush border cells
so maybe it's all kosher.
4) "I think the reaction, at each carbon,
catalyzed by phytase, is something like
\ \
C-PO3H2 + H2O ---> C OH + H3PO4
/ H / H
Thus the result is myo-inositol (good for yeast) itself and any proton
release would be from dissociation of the phosphoric acid to monobasic
phosphate which is the predominant species at mash pH."
I still think this reaction is not correct. Simply put, if you are hydrolyzing
the phosphate from the sugar you will either be breaking the C-O bond or the
O-P bond. Either way BOTH the H and OH parts of the water molecule will be
consumed in the reaction and there will be no net release of any protons.
Simplified, the linkage looks like this:
C-O-PO3
Breaking either the C-O bond with water:
C...........O-PO3
Or the O-P bond with water:
C-O...........PO3
Ends up with:
C-OH an HO-PO3
where the newly added H and OH came from the added water molecule. The
starting form - the monoester of the phosphate - is not supposed to change the
pKa's of the phosphate oxygens so breaking this bond and liberating the
phosphate should not cause any significant uptake or release of protons by the
phosphate oxygens. Also, the C-H bond will certainly not be broken in this
reaction, perhaps this is where you're diagram is going awry - it is balanced
as written but the C-H is missing in the right hand side of your equation.
5)" make a phosphate buffer at about pH 7 (equimolar amounts of
dibasic and monbasic salts) and add drops of some calcium salt solution.
The pH will drop and precipittion will occur (though you may not see the
precipitate with the naked eye if the buffer is too weak - 0.1M is more
than strong enough)."
As I mentioned in a previous post, I have done this using 5-10 mM
concentrations in which the phosphate was buffered at pH = 7.0 but strangely
enough I saw NO PH DROP following the precipitation - any explanation??
6) "When Alan says "alkaline" he means pH > 7. OK, so be it. In the brewing
industry, "alkalinity", as applied to the liquor, means the bicarbonate
buffering capacity of the liquor"
Would probably have been clearer had I used the term "basic" instead.
7) "........................................................So when
planning brews, worry about alkalinity, not pH. I know it sounds funny
but if I take my water and boil it, the pH goes from 6.5 up to 8.3 but
the water becomes less alkaline (because CaCO3 precipitates - same
mechanism as with the phosphate though the pK and pKs are different).
I'm better off sparging with this boiled water because it neutralizes
less mash acid thus allowing the mash pH to stay lower longer into the
sparge.
I guess this is true as long as you know you have adequate calcium present to
effect acidification of the mash by reaction with phosphate. Unless I'm wrong
about the lack of acidification in the phytase reaction itself, metal
complexation with phosphate will be the mechanism lowering the mash ph. Of
course, phytate itself is a great divalent cation sink so it may be bringing
along enough calcium itself!
-Alan Meeker
Baltimore
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 11:51:59 -0500
From: "WILLIAM R. SIEBEL" <SIEBELINSTITUTE@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: German Wheat yeasts/ Old cardomom-autolysis
Hi Eric Fouche,
1. With regard to your question on Wyeast 3942. The best people to
answer that question would be the suppliers of that particular yeast
strain. However, I can tell you about some of the yeast strains that are
held at the Siebel Institute that are popular yeasts for producing beers
with a clove character.
BRY 204: This yeast originated from Northern Europe. It is a top
fermenting Trappist type strain which ferments rapidly at relatively
warm temperatures. It can be used to produce ale and wheat beers with a
rather dry but estery flavor and a light clove-like spicy character.
BRY 235: A traditional Bavarian weizen yeast. Top fermenting and usually
used at room temperatures to give a very vigorous fermentation. Produces
a very estery beer with a mild clove-like spiciness.
Hope this information is useful.
2. In order to answer your question as to whether you used to much
cardomom in your wit beer, we need more information. What is your
brewsize? You say that you added 3 gm each of various spices. This may
or may not be O.K. depending on what concentration of the spices you are
achieving. However, your description of what your beer smells like
(rubbery and meaty) is a classic descriptor for the effects that yeast
autolysis has on beer aroma. Your beer is in primary for 15 days. Have
you removed the yeast once it has separated from the beer? Yeast left in
the beer (particularly at room temperature) for 15 days will die and
could very well give the kinds of aroma that you are describing. Hope
this helps.
Cheers,
Lyn Kruger
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 14:59:52 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: ale yeast for fake lagers?
At 7:58 AM -0700 5/24/99, Bryan Gros wrote (referring to my comment about
Anchor Steam:
>what do you mean by "*ale* type beer"? Do you mean estery?
Yes. I think it was Michael Jackson who wrote, some years ago, that Anchor
Steam was really indistinguishable from a pale ale, and a fine one at that.
>Is there any good yeast choice for making an acceptable lager tasting
>beer while fermenting at, say, 62 or so?
I don't have any suggestions from experience, but I have tasted 2112
fermented at that temp in homebrews and felt it wasn't particularly lager
like. Nottingham has been recommended on HBD and by the manufacturer for
this, but I recently had a very fruity homebrewed ale fermented fairly cool
with it. It had strawberry and pear aromas. Perhaps the brewer didn't
keep it as cool as he thought. Chico/American yeast has also been
recommended, but again, I have tasted some less than lager like brews from
it. OTOH, I have been fooled a couple of times, but don't know by which
yeasts. I think that cool temps is a big factor. Perhaps aeration, trub,
pitching size and other factors play a part as well.
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: Mon, 24 May 1999 15:58:08 -0500
From: toml@ednet.rvc.cc.il.us (Tom Lombardo)
Subject: Re: hop-ectomy
Matt writes:
>I made a big mistake the other day. I was checking on my hop bines and
>noticed
>that one of them was not wrapping itself around the twine. In an attempt
>to
>encourage it I started to wrap it around and it snapped off at the top. I
>think
>it was probably too cold. Am I right in assuming that this bine will not
>grow
>any higher (it's only about 4' tall). Should I just hack it off at the
>base and
>let another one grow up?
Matt,
Been there, done that. From the point of separation, two branches will
grow. You'll get a somewhat shorter, but bushier plant. Let it grow.
Tom (in Rockford IL)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 16:37:29 -0500
From: "WILLIAM R. SIEBEL" <SIEBELINSTITUTE@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Yeast Culturing
Hi Harlan Bauer,
To repeat your process:
Your "final"stage propagation is 3-4 gallons that is cultured in a 1/4
bbl Sanke keg. This is used to pitch 1 bbl wort in a 7 bbl
cylindroconical fermenter. After 24 hrs this volume is topped up to 7
bbl and fermented out as the "first brew".
To answer your questions:
1. Should you aerate the 3-4 bbl starter continously?
If your stirring in the Sanke keg is adequate, additional aeration
should not be necessary. However, you must insure that you are venting
the CO2 from the keg. You do not want any CO2 pressure build-up as this
will retard yeast growth.I assume that you have removed the check valve.
If you are going to aerate, this will not do any harm, and air will be
adequate.
2. What would be the optimum temp. of the starter for ale yeast?
A general rule of thumb for any yeast propagation is to propagate at
fermentation temperature.There is some controversy about this, but my
personal opinion is that, if it is possible, stick to the rule of thumb.
3. When would be the optimum time to pitch?
Depending on the yeast strain and the dilution steps that you are using
during your propagation, the 3-4 gallon stage should be ready to to
pitch into 1 bbl after 2-3 days.
4. On the second day, when you step up to 7 bbl, should you aerate the
wort?
Yes, you should aerate your wort to the usual level for the beer style(
normally ~8ppm). A comment that I would have: Make sure that 24 hrs is
the optimum time to transfer from 1 to 7 bbls. Again depending on the
strain, this time may be shorter or longer. As a guideline, the best
time to transfer to the next stage of propagation is at maximum yeast
count. If you have the facility to perform yeast counts on your
propagation stages, this is the best guideline that you can use.
Happy Brewing!
Lyn Kruger
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 16:44:37 -0700
From: Ted McIrvine <McIrvine@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: lag times
The easiest way to have a non-existent lag time is to reuse yeast from a
primary fermentation that has just finished! I often get a massive
fermentation in an hour or so. It is nice to hear that your long lag
times aren't causing infection, but they approach the time needed for
lactic bacteria, wild yeasts, and other nasties to get a foothold.
Introducing a pack of liquid yeast to a quart of starter can produce
long lag times for the starter, and that is bad too.
If using yeast from a new pack, I get best results by using a small
starter of 2-4 oz. of wort and double the amount every 12 hours until it
is time to brew. If you can pitch your yeast at high kreusen, it will
take off most rapidly.
Cheers
Ted
> From: JPullum127@aol.com
> Subject: lag times
>
> i'm curious about how people are getting these ultra-short lag times.
> i still am averaging 16-18 hours before i see any activity and then
> usually have an inch or so of foam within 2-4 hours after that. the
> beers all taste fine so this isn't really a problem but i would like
> to see one of these 2-3 hours starts sometime. thamks marc
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 18:00:38 EDT
From: Larsonjw@aol.com
Subject: Dr. Pivo's Question about Kraeusening and Foam
Dear Dr. Pivo,
Several of us at Siebel's have made kraeusened and non-kraeusened beers at
the same time, in the same brewery and our feeling is unanimous: kraeusened
beer has better foam, everything else being equal (which it seldom is!).
As far as a real reason for this, we haven't heard one either. Yeast could
be a factor but we know that yeast autolysis can be a negative foam factor.
Other explanations such as more and different residual extract after
kraeusening - or wort components in the kraeusen ending up in the beer as
opposed to stuck in a fermenter brandhefe ring - have been offered. None
have been proven, but they have been the subject of many lively discussions
in the Siebel Alumni Room after school.
Cheers, Jim Larson
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 18:39:25 EDT
From: Radzan1000@aol.com
Subject: answer by j power - siebel - to rob moline - subject: clinitest
ON THE USE OF CLINITEST SUGAR DETERMINATION KIT - WAS THIS A LEADING
QUESTION? I KNOW LALLEMAND USES THE TEST ON ALL OF THEIR YEAST AND I AM
THANKFUL TO THEM FOR SHARING THEIR APPLICATION.
WE PROMOTE THE CLINITEST WHEREVER AND WHENEVER WE CAN. THE CLINIITEST IS A
QUICK, SIMPLE AND INEXPENSIVE MEASURE OF "REDUCING SUGAR" AVAILABLE FOR
DIABETICS AT LARGER DRUG STORES. REDUCING SUGAR MEASURE IN BREWING
ORIGINATED IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY AND CONTINUES TO BE USED INTO THE
TWENTY-FIRST CENTURE. THE TEST, THOUGH, DOES REQUIRE SOME INTERPRETATION OF
THE RESULTS. FERMENTABLE SUGARS GIVE A HIGH REDUCING SUGAR VALUE, BUT
NON-FERMENTABLE SUGARS (DEXTRINS) GIVE SOME REACTION ALSO. THE AVERAGE BEER
HAS A REDUCING SUGAR LEVEL OF ABOUT 1% AS MALTOSE DUE TO THE PRESENCE OF
THOSE DEXTRINS AFTER COMPLETE FERMENTATION OF SUGAR. THE CLINITEST MEASURES
SUGAR "AS GLUCOSE" AND SINCE MALTOSE IS TWICE AS LARGE AS GLUCOSE, 1% MALTOSE
CORRESPONDS TO ABOUT 0.5% GLUCOSE IN COMPLETELY FERMENTED BEER USING TTHE
CLINITEST. BEERS WITH MORE THAN 0.5% CLINITEST READING ARE NOT COMPLETELY
FERMENTED, UNLESS THE WORT EXTRACT LEVEL WAS UNUSUALLY HIGH. IN THIS CASE
MORE DEXTRINS WILL BE PRESENT, MAYBE ENOUGH TO GIVE A READING OF ABOUT 0.75%
(WE ESTIMATE BETWEEN LEVELS GIVEN ON THE CHART). WE ALSO USE A GUIDELINE
THAT NO MORE THAN AN ESTIMATED 0.25% GLUCOSE ABOVE THE FINAL EXPECTED READING
SHOULD BE PRESENT BEFORE WE TRANSFER BEER FROM FERMENTATION TO STORAGE. THIS
ASSUMES THAT THE FINAL 0.25% GLUCOSE EQUIVELANTS OF SUGAR CAN BE FERMENTED
DURING STORAGE. USING THE "FIVE DROP TEST" WILL GIVE YOU A QUICK ANSWER TO
THE QUESTION "IS FERMENTATION COMPLETE?" WITH ONLY FIVE DROPS OF BEER.
JOE POWER
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 18:39:27 EDT
From: Radzan1000@aol.com
Subject: answer by j. power - siebel - to aj de lange - subject: phytin
PYTHIN IS AN INSOLUBLE STORAGE COMPOUND FOUND IN RAW BARLEY. AT THE CENTER
OF THE COMPOUND IS INOSITOL, A SUBSTANCE FOUND IN SOME LIPID COMPONENTS OF
CELL MEMBRANES LIKE THOSE IN THE YEAST. INOSITOL ACTS AS A VITAMIN TO
PROMOTE YEAST GROWTH. INOSITOL ITSELF HAS SIX HYDROXY (-OH) GROUPS. ALL SIX
HYDROXY GROUPS ARE COMBINED WITH PHOSPHATE (PHOSPHORIC ACID) IN PHYTIC ACID.
THE PHOSPHATES ARE NEGATIVELY CHARGED AND IN TURN FORM SALTS WITH MANY
IMPORTANT MINERAL IONS INCLUDING LARGE AMOUNTS OF POTASSIUM AND MAGNESIUM, A
FAIR AMOUNT OF CALCIUM, AND MINOR NUTRIENT MINERALS SUCH AS ZINC, MANGANESE
AND OTHERS. THE MINERAL IONS ARE RELEASED BY PHOSPHATE (SOMETIMES
SPECIFICALLY CALLED PHYTASE) ENZYME DURING GERMINATION OF MALT. WORT HAS
LARGE AMOUNTS OF PHOSPHATE, POTASSIUM, MAGNESIUM AND A FAIR AMOUNT OF CALCIUM
PLUS OTHER MINERALS AND INOSITOL DUE TO DIGESTED PHYTIN. ALL OF THESES ARE
IMPORTANT FOR YEAST GROWTH.
PHOSPHATASE OR PHYTASE ENZYME ACTIVITY CAN OCCUR AT LOW TEMPERATURE IN A
MASH. NOT ALL OF THE PHYTIN IS DIGESTED DURING MALTING, SO THERE CAN BE SOME
INCREASE DURING MASHING. MALT IS SUCH A GOOD SOURCE OF DIGESTED PHYTIN
PRODUCTS THAT THERE HAS NEVER BEEN ANY REAL CONCERN WITH ENCOURAGING
ADDITIONAL DIGESTION IN THE MASH - THERE IS NO NEED FOR IT, EVEN IN HIGH
ADJUNCT BEERS. PROBABLY FOR THIS REASON THERE HAS NOT BEEN MUCH RESEARCH
DONE ON PHYTASE. PROFESSOR NARZISS MADE SOME ATTEMPT TO EVALUATE PHOSPHATASE
ACTIVITY IN THE MASH ("THE INFLUENCE OF MASHING PROCEDURE ON THE ACTIVITY AND
EFFECT OF SOME ENZYMES - A SURVEY" PUBLISHED IN THE MBAA TECHNICAL QUARTERLY,
VOL. 13, No.1, PAGE 11-21). HE CONCLUDED THAT "TEMPERATURES IN THE RANGE OF
50-53C PROVED TO BE THE MOST EFFECTIVE" IN INCREASING ACIDITY OF A MASH,
PRESUMABLY BY RELEASING ACID PHOSPHATE.
JOE POWER
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 19:37:51 EDT
From: Radzan1000@aol.com
Subject: answer of j. power - siebel to guy burgess - subject: acidulated
The only information you have on the water is the pH of 7.2-7.5. This is an
interesting number, but an almost completely useless piece of information as
far as brewing goes. If you had the alkalinity value for the water, you
could use the pH to calculate the amount of carbon dioxide dissolved in the
water. As soon as the water is heated for sparging, the carbon dioxide will
be driven off.
The alkalinity or bicarbonate content will for the most part remain in the
heated sparge water and may affect the quality of wort as run-off continues.
Bicarbonate alkalinity acts as a buffer, affecting the pH of wort even during
run-off. The best way to evaluate the effects of sparge water on pH is to
measure the pH of wort coming out of the lauter. This should never be above
6.0 or undesirable components start to be extracted from the grain in the
lauter.
The most valuable piece of information on a water analysis is alkalinity. If
you have the alkalinity value of the water, a general rule is that if the
alkalinity as calcium carbonate is under 100 ppm, you probably will not need
to adidify the sparge water unless you run off for an unusually long time.
See our response to Jeffery Kenton for more discussion on sparge water and
acidification. As far as beer quality goes, pH also has an effect on
maturation and stability of beer after fermentation. The best place to
control pH of fermented beer is in the wort after the mash. This might
involve acidifying the sparge water or thr wort during boil or it might
involve addition of extra calcium at those points. We usually see beer pH in
the 4.2-4.5 range; you can experiment to find out what beer pH gives the best
quality from your standpoint.
Joe Power
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 19:37:53 EDT
From: Radzan1000@aol.com
Subject: answer of j.power - siebel to jm kenton - subject: acidification of
The only reason to acidify the sparge water is to keep down the pH in the
mash in the lauter during the last stages of run-off. The pH of the wort
coming off is the best place to measure this effect. A good rule is to make
certain that the pH of any wort being collected, especially of the last wort,
should never be above 6.0. This will prevent extraction of undesirable
material. If you find the pH goes above 6.0, you should acidify the sparge
water. Otherwise the only reason to acidify the sparge water would be to let
the acid carry through and acidify the wort being boiled. This could be
accomplished by acidifying the wort directly - the choice is up to you. A
reason for acidifying the wort might be to lower the pH of the fermented
beer. Addition of acid to wort is more effective than adding the same acid
to mash in lowering the pH of the final beer. In addition, you may not want
to add all acid to the mash because the effect on enzymes in the mash may not
be the one you desire.
Temperature in the grain bed should be no lower than 60C and no higher than
80C. If the temperature gets too low, nun-off will be very slow and may
become completely stuck. If the temperature is too high, all alpha amylase
enzyme will be destroyed and some starchy material will develop either
slowing the run-off or producing a starch haze in the beer. Within this
range the higher the temperature, the lower the wort viscosity and the easier
the run-off. About 75C is usually found most desirable.
Joe Power
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 18:16:47 -0700
From: "Perle" <perle@postalzone.com>
Subject: Re: Wort Chiller Efficiency............
The effiecncy of the wort chiller was not in question, yet was there a
negative
effect on the wort to reinfuse the chilled wort into the kettle to lower the
temperature to the point when it could be pumped directly to the yeast
slurry
awaiting the fermenter. It takes 3 minutes of recirculation to in the brew
kettle
to lower the temp from boiling to 170 deg. Then at this point the wort
outflow temp is 75 deg. , and can be directed to the fermenter.
Is it "bad" to abuse the wort this way?
Joe at the Victory Brewery of Oregon
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 21:22:09 -0400
From: Nathan Kanous <nlkanous@pharmacy.wisc.edu>
Subject: RO Water....what's left?
I've considered using RO water for brewing beer. My house has a water
softener and I like that. I can choose to purchase or otherwise make RO
water (aquarium and beer both need "good" water). I was under the
impression that RO water was similar to distilled water (no ions /
minerals) but had also removed organics and particulates. Fix, in AOBT,
says "RO is a series of membrane filters that effectively removes organics,
inorganics, and microbes. It also removes some water minerals, although
generally it leaves water chlorine levels unchanged." How can you remove
everything but the chlorine?
nathan in madison, wi
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 23:09:16 -0500
From: "Rob Moline" <brewer@isunet.net>
Subject: The Jethro Gump Report
The Jethro Gump Report
Tonight, I am reminded of many past events.....
I remember George Sears, from Beenleigh High....
I remember Roderick Thomson...In his own word's he was a "wee Scottish
git,"....he gave his life in Sri Lanka...died in Geneva....
I rememeber Sig, and Av, Chris, Cook, and Rick.......and mates worth
having.....
And brewers that gave of themselves....
But, with the knowledge of the weekend's events...I attended a party
tonight, arranged some time ago, for a bloke that was leaving his employer,
after a few years....
My son Robbie, 2 years old, was delighted to present Mike with a
present....a stuffed frog....
When I explained to Robbie that whenever Mike saw that frog, he would
remember him....he exclaimed..... "So, I go with him?"
Mike gave Robbie a balloon.....filled with helium, tied to his arm.....and
....it died in the car on the way home....burst....
At home, Robbie could not be assuaged from his heaving, desperate crying,
despondently calling..."Poppa....make my balloon better."
His anguish surges, rasping, flailing....finally catharsing into sleep...
But I know....my sleep will not catharse so easily........I cannot make this
better....
Steve Perry, Administrator for the Institute for Brewing Studies, passed
away last Saturday, within 48 hours of the birth of his daughter, the
Perry's first child, Caroline.....
"So, I go with you?"
I only hope so....
Rob
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 23:36:05 -0500
From: "Rob Moline" <brewer@isunet.net>
Subject: Jethros Done...
Jethros Done...
I'm done....Won't be back for a while.............
Commercial obligations will be proficiently handled....
What counts for a brewer???? Does he get support from his organization???
His Community? His customers? Any body?
Rob Moline
brewer@isunet.net
"The More I Know About Beer, The More I Realize I Need To Know More About
Beer!"
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #3039, 05/25/99
*************************************
-------
