Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #3225
HOMEBREW Digest #3225 Tue 18 January 2000
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: bottling a few ("Vinbrew Supply")
come on, folks (Dick Dunn)
Zapap / Listermann mashing ("John Herman")
Re: Water Treatment Tricks (KMacneal)
Burst Sparging - Clarification ("Paul Smith")
Leap Years ("Paul Ward")
brewing texts ("Paul Smith")
Zapap - Phil's Phalse Bottom (Dan Listermann)
Palmetto State Brewers ("H. Dowda")
re: VERY old can of Bud (Brian and Shirley Cornelius)
SS fittings (Susan/Bill Freeman)
Economies of Scale ("Jack Schmidling")
PMMA as an adhesive for Pump Fittings ("Dan Schultz")
Hot Sauce and fermenting ("Peter J. Calinski")
1st All Grain----Zapap ("Peter J. Calinski")
Lemon ("FLEMING, JOE")
Converting Propane Cooker to Gas ("Timmons, Frank")
racking/kegging techniques (Jonathan Peakall)
Re: Mills n Drills ("Brian D.")
Best non-auto sparging technique? ("Brian D.")
Mouthfeel, (Dave Burley)
Caustic Sanitizer ("Eric R. Theiner")
pH questions with RO water ("Chris Beadle")
Stout/Sour Mash ("Richard")
brewchem books ("Alan Meeker")
Saison ("Leak, Brad")
pumpkin light ale (Warandle1)
Re: adding DME to distilled water (Project One)
Jack's mill (ALABREW)
Handling fees (Marty Brown)
SS Fittings & Quick-Connects ("Dana H. Edgell")
Spruce Beer/Brewing Techniques Vol. 4, No. 2 (WayneM38)
Rauchenfels (RBoland)
* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!
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 FROM THE E-MAIL
ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!**
IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, you cannot subscribe to
the digest as we canoot reach you. We will not correct your address
for the automation - that's your job.
The HBD is a copyrighted document. The compilation is copyright
HBD.ORG. Individual postings are copyright by their authors. ASK
before reproducing and you'll rarely have trouble. Digest content
cannot be reproduced by any means for sale or profit.
More information is available by sending the word "info" to
req@hbd.org.
JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 00:55:11 -0500
From: "Vinbrew Supply" <devans@greenapple.com>
Subject: RE: bottling a few
Dan Michael asks about bottling some beer before kegging most of it......
I find the Prime Tabs to be an excellent resource for this.
Doug
------------------------------
Date: 16 Jan 00 23:20:57 MST (Sun)
From: rcd@raven.talisman.com (Dick Dunn)
Subject: come on, folks
Could we stop mincing about?
"Teet" is not a word.
The word is "teat". Pronounced like "tit". Used in phrases like "useless
as teats on a boar", meaning about the same as "useless as a screen door on
a submarine",...,or like "teats up" (wrong-side-up, dead). Cows have 4,
goats have 2, humans have 2 (duh!), pigs have 8, cats have...ummm...6 I
guess (thanks, Fred, and sorry to bother you).
Try as I may, I can't make this not OT, even using milk stout as a tie-in.
- ---
Dick Dunn rcd@talisman.com Hygiene, Colorado USA
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 06:19:09 -0500
From: "John Herman" <johnvic@earthlink.net>
Subject: Zapap / Listermann mashing
I've been using the Listermann 2 plastic bucket setup for about 2 years no.
My advice to those using it is to mash in a heatable pot, I use a 5 gal.
stainless steel cooking pot. I then using the buckets for spargeing only.
When calculating my extraction rates I generally figure on 70%, although
yesterday I did my first decoction mash and was in the 80s! The biggest
problem I've had with the stainless steel mash has been temperature
adjustment. I've been using the stove as a temperature adjustment, perhaps
infusions of boiling water would make sense.
John Herman
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 06:50:11 EST
From: KMacneal@aol.com
Subject: Re: Water Treatment Tricks
In a message dated 1/16/2000 6:40:16 PM Eastern Standard Time, Jesse Stricker
writes:
<< I'll second Patrick's request for quick and easy water treatment
tricks, though. All-grain brewing is a bunch of fun, but there's so many
refinements and variables, and it gets dark so early in winter, that I
don't mind simplifying the process at all. >>
Jesse,
There are a few water treatment calculators out on the net. I've been using
one that is pretty simple. I also stumbled across information on my city
water supply on the net. They've posted their yearly analysis results on the
DPW webpage. There was a lot more information on the web page than I was
able to get from the phone call I made a few years ago. I don't know if
other cities are doing the same, but it's worth a look.
Keith MacNeal
Worcester, MA
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 07:03:42 -0600
From: "Paul Smith" <pksmith_morin@msn.com>
Subject: Burst Sparging - Clarification
I would like to clarify what I mean by "burst sparging," in case there is any
confusion. Some have written of a technique which entails essentially
recirculating as normal, then adding a great volume of the batch water, and
running off completely. This is what I have heard of as "batch sparging" and
differs from the technique I employ, burst sparging.
Whereas batch sparging entails a complete runoff (to a dry grain bed) between
"dumping" sparge water onto the bed (often, the sparge is thoroughly mixed
into the grain bed again, a recirculation is completed, and the runoff is
again run to a dry bed), burst sparging entails a recirculation and runoff as
per normal. The only difference is that you allow the runoff to proceed until
the sparge water column on top of the grain bed gets close to the top of the
grain bed (don't shoot until you see the whites of their eyes!), then dump
another 2-3 inches on top. Continuous sparge obviously differs here in that a
constant 1.5-2" water column is maintained above the grain bed.
I have never "batch-sparged." From the discussions in BT and elsewhere, a
"batch sparge" has the rep of resulting in a more malty wort, although the
brewhouse effiency is considerably reduced. On the other hand, burst sparging
is known to increase brewhouse efficiency (in my case, from 85% to 95%).
Hope this clarifies.
Paul
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 08:11:21 -0500
From: "Paul Ward" <paulw@doc.state.vt.us>
Subject: Leap Years
O.K. - I guess I was skipped school that day. I honestly didn't know that
leap years are not applied on the century years unless they are divisible by
400.
Who made up these goofy rules. Next thing you know 'i' won't come before
'e' all the time iether.
Chagrined.
Paul in Vermont
paulw@doc.state.vt.us
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 07:22:20 -0600
From: "Paul Smith" <pksmith_morin@msn.com>
Subject: brewing texts
Will Randle wants to recommendations on a good brewing chemistry text. These
are mine:
George Fix's "Principles of Brewing Science" is good, laying out in very
elegant terms the biochemical components and processes of wort and beer
production. It is also reasonably priced.
However, for brewing chemistry, I would recommend the Hough, Briggs, et al,
Eds.,' Malting and Brewing Science series. It is definitely geared towards
the professional brewer, but then, it's the same chemistry. The costs may be
prohibitive but I think they are well worth the money, if you want an
exhaustive look at the subject.
Wolfgang Kunze's "Technology Malting and Brewing" is also excellent, but I
would hold off if all you wanted was chemistry. While chemistry and
biochemistry and thoroughly discussed, the real value in my view is his
additional in-depth discussion (as the title suggests), of the technology
involved in malting, wort and beer production (e.g., schematics and drawings
of lauter tuns v. mash filters, pneumatic v. mechanical malt conveyors, etc.).
Both the Stevens and Kunze texts are pricey, but again, great texts if you
want to pursue it. The Practical Brewer is available via pdf download at the
Master Brewer Association of the Americas website. It takes forever, but it's
free. A good text.
Paul
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 09:28:22 -0500
From: Dan Listermann <72723.1707@compuserve.com>
Subject: Zapap - Phil's Phalse Bottom
Brian Dixon (briandixon@home.com) writes:
< The difference between the Phalse
Bottom and the Zapap was actually quite significant ... a 5-gallon batch
with 8 lbs of grain would end up differing by almost 4 points! (Difference
in ppg is 2.41 ppg, so 8 lbs would result in a difference of 19.3 total
points. Divide this by 5 to get the difference in SG points for the batch
... 3.9 pts! Or for this example batch, 1.054 versus 1.050!) Charlie
Papazian strikes again!>
A bit of history here. Phil's Phalse Bottom is a direct descendant of
Charlie Papazian's Zapap. The very first Phalse Bottom was made from the
bottom of a Zapap. I still have it, stained from stout and all.
Dan Listermann dan@listermann.com 72723.1707@compuserve.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 06:35:27 -0800 (PST)
From: "H. Dowda" <hdowda@yahoo.com>
Subject: Palmetto State Brewers
The competition info is at:
http://www.sagecat.com/psbcomp2.htm
If that doesn't work PLEASE let me know.
The club site is at http://www.psbrewer.org
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 06:39:44 -0800
From: Brian and Shirley Cornelius <corneliu@colfax.com>
Subject: re: VERY old can of Bud
Jeff McNally writes
< A good friend of mine gave me a very old, full, can of Budweiser....
On the front of the can it says:
"brewed and canned at Newark, NJ, USA by
Anheuser-Busch, Inc.
St. Louis - Newark - Los Angeles"
Any ideas/guesses as to how old this can is?>
The AB Newark plant opened in 1951 and is still operating. The LA plant
opened in 1954 and is still operating. In 1958 they opened a plant in Florida.
So, you'd be looking at a can produced sometime between 1954 and 1958.
< Any ideas/guesses as to what this may be worth (and no, it's not for sale)?>
Largely depends on the condition of the can. Rust? Humidity spots? Scratches?
Dents? A full can often eliminates much of the market that would be worried it
will leak. e-Bay is the natural place to start on a price.
Brian
Steptoe, WA
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 08:54:13 -0600
From: Susan/Bill Freeman <potsus@bellsouth.net>
Subject: SS fittings
IMHO, stainless fittings for brew kegs are best welded on or through the
keg wall with a TIG. It is possible to thread a MPT through the wall
and lock it on the inside, but I think this begs a blowout at some time
or other at worst and leaks at best after several brew sessions. By
putting a 1/2 SS union through the wall, you gain threads on the outside
and inside for anything using a 1/2 FPT. You really don't want to know
what a true SS bulkhead fitting sells for. A source of SS fittings is
here: http://www.plumbingsupply.com/stainles.html
Pipe threads are much easier to use than ferrule or compression
fittings. A little teflon tape and the seal is made. On tubing a
simple screw clamp works just fine.
The quick disconnects I use are brass and are most often found in the
graden hose supplies part of your local mega home inprovement store.
Brass must be treated for lead by soaking in a solution of 1 part
hydrogen peroxide and 2 parts vinegar before you use them. "the
perfesser" is all plumbed with 1/2 inch hard copper except for silicone
tubing on short runs.
Hope this helps.
Bill Freeman aka Elder Rat
Birmingham, AL
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 21:59:12 -0600
From: "Jack Schmidling" <arf@mc.net>
Subject: Economies of Scale
From: "Matthew A. Cosenza" <MCosenza@KAPLAW.com>
>All this Shipping and Handling stuff has gotten me irritated. I realize
that there is extra cost in "handling" an item to be shipped-- But there's
an added benefit in that you are increasing your target customer base my
millions!.....
You don't seem to understnad the market out there if you think there are
millions of folks who would buy a MM if they just knew where to get it.
> It's the Wal Mart theory-- sell more stuff at cheaper prices.
If I cut my price in half, the most I could get is a 10 or 20% increase in sales
that would result from wiping out the competition. If I had all the business, I
still would not have the volume to buy parts off shore and my costs would not
change by one percent. There simply are no economies of scale in a product like
this and comparing to to Walmart is nonsense.
>Every cent does not need to be passed on. The smart e-sellers will offer NO
shipping or handling costs....
The "smart" e-sellers are making zero profit or losing money. They also
manufactur nothing, have no investement in engineering or design and are simply
service business. Different program entirely.
>It's insulting to me that stores add a
handling cost. I know the boxes cost more-- but this is the way that
e-business is going to be.....
Just because one has a web site or email address does not make them an
"e-business". We have been building mills since years before that word even
existed and just for the record, our price has not change since the first year
we were in business.
> Make up your costs with volume.
That sounds like an old joke. You can not make up in volume what you lose in
profit.
js
PHOTO OF THE WEEK http://user.mc.net/arf/weekly.htm
HOME: Beer, Cheese, Astronomy, Videos http://user.mc.net/arf
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 07:33:03 -0800
From: "Dan Schultz" <dschultz@primenet.com>
Subject: PMMA as an adhesive for Pump Fittings
Chester notes:
>I've found an answer to a problem that I've seen mentioned in
>several RIMS/HERMS web sites but can't remember being mentioned in
>HBD: How to get a PERMANENT water-tight seal between the mag impeller
>pump body and the threaded connectors. <snip>
> I note that its basic material is (poly)methylmethacrylate -
>essentially the same stuff as bone cement in surgery, and plexyglas,
>so it should be chemically inert once cured.
Be carefull of PMMA (super glue) type adhesives. They tend to give up their
adhesion properties at 100C depending on the specific type. If you were
gluing the two pieces together, let me recommend a two part epoxy instead as
epoxy systems will have higher thermal capabilities.
Because of the differences between the thermal expansion coefficients of the
plastic fitting (typically Ryton R4, a 40% glass fiber PPS) and the metal
fitting, the high number of thermal cycles makes this a difficult at best
area to seal. Typically, an elastomer type sealant would work best so that
it can absorb the different expansion rates without losing a seal. So maybe
a silicone sealent might be better. Hmm, you noted that didn't work either?
Maybe a fluoro silicone sealent which has higher temp capabilities?
One note on plastic pump fittings: Always get the plastics fittings in the
male style as the female style are stressed to much by the expansion of an
NPT male pipe. The plastic will fail very easily.
Burp,
-Dan
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 09:34:04 -0500
From: "Peter J. Calinski" <PCalinski@iname.com>
Subject: Hot Sauce and fermenting
I started to post this information last week but decided it was off topic.
Now, Paul Niebergall's question brings it back. This was Paul's question:
"Now I have made my own hot sauces before but never tried to ferment
them. Has anyone ever tried this? Any hints on how to go about it?"
I heard a piece on a Toronto news radio station (no news stations in the
Buffalo area) last week about a Hawaiian company that was recalling its hot
sauce. It seems that when the bottle is opened, the contents erupt and can
spray the persons hands and eyes with hot sauce. The recalling company
claimed that the garlic in the sauce was fermenting and causing the
pressure buildup.
Pete Calinski
East Amherst NY
Near Buffalo NY
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 10:27:51 -0500
From: "Peter J. Calinski" <PCalinski@iname.com>
Subject: 1st All Grain----Zapap
Bruce Carpenter said:
"my aching hand, I put the two buckets together. I noticed that the space
between the bottom of the top bucket and the bottom of the 2nd bucket is
about 3.75 inches (beneath the "false bottom")."
Go one step further. After you finish the holes, take a carpenter's knife
(I assume Bruce Carpenter has a carpenter's knife ;-)) and cut the bottom
off the bucket about 1" above the bottom. Now you have a false bottom. It
will go all the way down in the outer bucket, bumping on the outlet hose.
This will also eliminate another problem. Before I did this, I had air
leaking between the inner and outer buckets. Sometimes I would hear a loud
sucking sound as the air leaked between the buckets and aerated the wort.
Using just the bottom solved this problem.
One caution. This bottom will float so keep something handy to hold it
down as you add the grain.
Also, if you make another one, instead of a drill, I used a soldering iron
to melt the holes. The soldering iron I have makes ~ 1/8" diameter holes.
I scribed a 1/4" by 1/4" grid on the bottom of the bucket and melted holes
at the grid crossings. It took less than 2 hours to do the melt.
Pete Calinski
East Amherst NY
Near Buffalo NY
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 10:42:00 -0500
From: "FLEMING, JOE" <JOE.FLEMING@spcorp.com>
Subject: Lemon
Don mentions he uses finely chopped lemon peel in the secondary
for his lemon-fresh beers. I know that in the culinary world only
the zest (yellow outside) is used as the pith (white inside) tends
to be bitter. I guess that time spent in the lower pH, evolving
wort may offset this. I'll have to try it.
An HBDer tipped me on this: zest in the bottling bucket gives a
great lemon scent but with little taste to compete with your beer.
However the zest does not dissolve and may, in an unappealing
fashion, float about your glass!
Someone mentioned RealLemon (reconstituted lemon); my favorite
description of RealLemon is: "a gastronomic effrontery."
Joe
PS I've been away from the HBD for a few years and it's good to
see that its lost none of its flavor; real malt body (great info)
with balanced hop bitterness (tempers & unrelated postings for
perspective). And I'm pleasantly surprised to see some of the same
brewers diligently adding to the collective wisdom. You know who
you are -- thanks!
Is my beer ruined?
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 09:12:44 -0700
From: "Timmons, Frank" <frank.timmons@honeywell.com>
Subject: Converting Propane Cooker to Gas
Greetings!
I have a Cache Cooker (high pressure jet-type propane cooker made in
Utah) that I want to convert to Natural Gas. I have just gotten permission
to run gas to the house (too bad it cost me the price of kitchen remodel to
do it) from the s.o. I have looked at it and don't see any kind of
restriction orifice, like the ring type burners have, just a dial-type
pressure regulator. I know I can't just hook up the regulator to the gas
line and expect it to work, the supply pressure of the gas is much less that
the pressure in a propane tank.
Has anyone ever successfully converted one of these things? Or does
anybody have a contact at the company that made it? I have done a web search
with no success, and can't find a phone listing either.
Frank Timmons
James River Homebrewers
Richmond, VA
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 08:29:38 -0800
From: Jonathan Peakall <jpeakall@mcn.org>
Subject: racking/kegging techniques
>>Okay, am i the only one who has thought of this? I first fill the
>>destination keg with sanitizer and after the appropriate amount of
time push
it out with c02, I now have a sanitized keg with no air. When i transfer
from one keg to another I use connect C02 to the In side of the full keg
and
go from the Out of the full to the OUT of the empty keg - elimiates
foaming.
On the In side of the target keg i put a blowoff tube into a jar with
sanitizer - allows ac02 out and no air in. I thus get no exposer to air
during the transfer.
That's exactly what I do. Works great, no siphon, no air. If you keg,
it's the only way to go.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 08:42:10 -0800
From: "Brian D." <briandixon@home.com>
Subject: Re: Mills n Drills
> "Contrary to all popular
> belief and Jack, I use a 3/8 drive drill motor to power mil JSP. It has
> worked for the last 3 years without a hitch.
>
> Actually, the reason we do not recommend using a drill on the MM is
because it
> defeats the self-destruct mechanism. When a drill is chucked up to the
mill,
> the magnetic flux lines are parallel to the roller with the detonator in
it and
> not enough energy is transmitted to set it off.
>
> One of the dumbest things I ever did was to design the mill with a 3/8"
shaft
> that would fit any electric drill on earth. We lose a great deal of
business
> not only on the $472 motorized option but we can't even sell a drill
adapter.
>
> js
Uh oh! I finally understand why I had to buy a Valley Mill ... my MaltMills
kept blowing up while I was cranking them! If I had only known!
brian
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 08:51:02 -0800
From: "Brian D." <briandixon@home.com>
Subject: Best non-auto sparging technique?
Ok, for those who have a 3-tier (or other) system with a sparging arm and
all the 'works' for doing this task automatically, you can skip this post
...
For those of us that have an open lautering system and pour water into it in
various ways, read up! Here's a question or two for you (idea generators)
... and please, for myself anyway, I'm not looking for batch sparging or
"put the sparge water in all at once" ideas. Noble in their cause, I'm used
to the trickling method(s) and get good results, so I don't want to change
(yet).
Q) I pour hot sparge water through a SS colander with a 2-cup Pyrex
measuring cup so that the sparge water forms little streams and drops and
doesn't cause channeling ... what's the best non-hand-holding answer to the
colander? I don't mind pouring water in to keep the sparge water from 0" to
1 1/2" deep on the grain bed, but I hate holding the colander ... duh ...
been doin' it this way for years. I've heard of using drilled cake pans
that are suspended above the grain (wires and gizmos), floating (large)
Rubbermaid container lids that have been drilled (just set it right on the
grain bed), etc. Any votes on the best and easiest method? If I suspend
something from higher up (so it'll accommodate deep OR shallow beds of
grain), is there a problem with the sparge water passing through lots of air
before it strikes the grain/water? Aeration? Cooling? Channeling?
I most of all want to hear from those who have come up with something that
you can pour in to and are now currently using that method ... and love it.
Ideas?
Brian
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 12:14:03 -0500
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: Mouthfeel,
Brewsters:
Steve Worth's suggestion to go back and
re-read Papazian's book after brewing a
few is a good one. But if Charlie is the origin
of Steve's concept that dextrins contribute
to mouthfeel, he's wrong.
Soluble proteins contribute to mouthfeel and
dextrins do not, acccording to many scientific
investigations.
Keep on Brewin'
Dave Burley
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 11:12:18 -0800
From: "Eric R. Theiner" <logic@skantech.com>
Subject: Caustic Sanitizer
This may already have been addressed ad nauseum, but I'm behind on my
HBD's and had to respond to what I just read-- Graham Sanders' thoughts
on caustic as a sanitizer.
First-- why no problems with infection? Cleanliness is 99% of
sanitation. Generally speaking, microbes don't live on glass, plastic
or metal-- they need food and a hospitable environment. Remove the
gunk, dust and so forth, and you're going to remove the bulk of the
microbes. The odd single-celled organism or spore remaining may not
have an ample opportunity to infect your brew due to your large, healthy
yeast slurry (one of the reasons for using that slurry).
Second-- caustic destroys microorganisms? Some, not all. Not by a long
shot. You have your spore formers which are very good at resisting many
sanitizers, let along cleansers, and you have organisms surrounded by a
proteinaceous cell wall which is a good shield from alkali. Then you
have large colonies which will allow the outer edges to be attacked by
the caustic, keeping the inner organisms safe and free from harm
(caustic has a bit of surface tension that prevents effective
penetration).
Caustic's a great cleanser, but I'd use a sanitizer to be safe.
Rick
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 12:28:56 -0500
From: "Chris Beadle" <cbeadle@fischerUS.com>
Subject: pH questions with RO water
Hi all -
I hope someone can shed some light on my pH problems. I recently started
using RO (reverse osmosis) water to brew with, and was surprised to find the
pH of the water itself was quite low (4.7). I have to add calcium carbonate
(1 tsp) to the mash (pale ale malt, 55L crystal and 1/4 lb wheat)to bring
the pH up from 4.7 to 5.0. I then must add two more teaspoons to the boil
to bring it up from 5.0 to 5.3 (Miller's recommended minimum). (On the
positive side, I don't have to acidify my sparge water!). My next batch with
this water yielded the same results.
My problem, aside from the fact I don't want to add this much chalk,
especially when brewing lager, is that I didn't get a very good hot break,
and my beer had a bad permanent haze.
I have been told that the pH of RO water should be neutral (7.0), so I
tested a bottle of commercial RO water and it measured 5.0.
I use the ColorpHast strips to measure the pH.
Thanks in advance for any answers, insights, or random musings.
Chris Beadle
Macomb Twp, MI
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 10:14:18 -0800
From: "Richard" <seaotter@orland.net>
Subject: Stout/Sour Mash
I'm going to try my hand at a stout, the recipe states that it is similar to
Guinness (Toad Spit Stout from Joy of Home Brewing) but is lacking the
"twang" of the real stuff due to it's lack of soured beer which Guinness
uses. For those not familiar with it, the recipe is a DME and extract syrup
recipe. Being adventurous, I turned to the appendix in which Papazian gives
a sour mash procedure. Basically, you dissolve your malt extracts in hot
water, stabilize at 130, add 1/2 pound crushed pale malted barley, and try
to hold at elevated temperature for 15 to 24 hours to sour. Then boil, add
hops, etc. I was wondering if anyone has tried this procedure. Is the result
*very* sour? Too sour for a Guinness type stout? Should I make up a very
small batch of soured wort and add it into the regular recipe? I've heard
Guinness uses about 3% in the final mix. I want to play with this but want
to see what y'all might have tried along these lines also. Thanks!
Rich
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 14:01:43 -0500
From: "Alan Meeker" <ameeker@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: brewchem books
Will Randle asked about chem books:
>I want a good chemistry text on the brewing process. I am thinking of
buying
>either "Analysis of Brewing Techniques" (Fix) or "Principles of Brewing
>Science: A Study of Serious Brewing Issues, 2nd Ed." (also Fix). I can't
>page through them to decide, and will have to order via mail or internet
>without really knowing what to expect from either one. I have a degree in
>chemistry and have been homebrewing for 2 years (12 batches made). Does
>anyone have an opinion to share regarding one or both of these books? For
>instance are these written for the homebrewer in mind or the professional
>brewer? Does it matter?
Will, are there any particular aspects of brewing chem you are interested in
or do you want info on all of the process steps? The first edition of POBS
contained several errors and had a significant amount of irrelevant material
(IMHO) so I wouldn't recommend this. I haven't seen the second edition which
has just come out, presumably it has been updated and the errors corrected.
However, this means that you can pick up the first edition of POBS for a
song (I got mine for $4 at the local bookstore) so it might be worth getting
after all if it can be had cheap, with your background in chem you will
easily navigate around the basic science errors. The info in AOBT is of
better quality than the first ed of POBS and is complimentary in many
respects, for instance it has a nice section on the characteristics of many
of the commercially available yeast strains which I haven't seen gathered
together and published before this. There are a few things in AOBT that are
annoying (like wasting space by including a picture of a microscope and
such) and I wonder about some of the info like Fix's "modeling" of amylase
activity - the graph of the pH dependence looks backwards compared to actual
activity profiles as measured in laboratory studies but he gives little
detail as to how this graph was actually generated so I'm not sure what is
going on here. All in all, I prefer AOBT to POBS but as I said perhaps the
second ed of POBS is worth buying. The target audience seems to be a mix of
the serious homebrewer / micro brewer.
Other sources:
There is a little paperback called "Brewchem 101" By Janson that might be
worth a look, it was reviewed a while back in Brewing Techniques. Speaking
of Brewing Techniques, If you can get a hold of back issues there are many
good articles sprinkled about on topics like water chemistry, amylases,
phenols, etc. Especially nice was the series of articles by Scott Bickham
entitled "Focus on Flavor" in which he went into great detail covering many
of the chemical species responsible for beer flavor (both good and bad
flavors) as well as their sources, how to do doctored beer tests to help
recognize the relevant species and commercial examples which highlight some
of the key flavor contributors.
MBAA has an entire book on their website downloadable in Adobe Acrobat
format that's definitely worth a look. There's a lot of chemistry in here
including wort production/boil, yeast fermentation biochem, hop chem, etc.
The appendix also has a section on many of the off-flavor compounds found to
cause trouble and their characteristics and taste thresholds. This is a nice
reference to have and the price (FREE!) is certainly right!
I would highly recommend Brigg's "Malts and Malting" though it is a bit
pricey. It has TONS of chemical info on malting and mashing. Lots of info
on grains other than barley, on the various specialty malts and how they are
produced too.
There's also Lewis and Young's book "Brewing" which is along the lines of
Fix's original POBS but does a much better job (again MHO) especially in
outlining basic chemical and biochemical principles (though since you
already have a chem degree this would probably be of little benefit). This
was published in '95 so is also more up to date than the original POBS but
again there is that new edition out there... (thanks to Dave Humes for
loaning me these two books!!)
Supposedly the two volume set "Malting and Brewing Science" (Hough) is
excellent but I haven't read it and it is quite expensive (~ >$120 per
volume).
Hough's "Biochem of Malting and Brewing" is reputedly very good though I
haven't seen it.
Bamforth's "Tap into the Art and Science of Brewing" is easy to read and
entertaining but not rigorous, still worth the read.
Hope this was helpful to you
-Alan Meeker
Baltimore, MD
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 13:25:46 -0600
From: "Leak, Brad" <BradL@stratadvise.com>
Subject: Saison
Greetings,
I've been searching for a recipe for a Saison and have not encountered much.
I did find one recipe on Gambrinus' Mug, but it's an extract recipe and I
would like to try an all-grain.
If anyone has successfully brewed a Saison please email me (private email
okay).
On a related note, I have a bottle of Fantome Saison in my fridge and was
wondering if anyone knew if the yeast was fermenting yeast and if it could
be cultured.
Thanks in advance for your input.
Brad Leak
Chicago, IL
Shocka@mcs.net
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 15:38:23 EST
From: Warandle1@aol.com
Subject: pumpkin light ale
Michael K. asks about a light ale recipe with pumpkin. Here is mine.
Basically a recipe from Ray Daniels Homebrew Fun book, for 5 gallons (mini
mash):
2 lbs crushed two row malt
0.5 lbs crushed crystal malt (light or 20L)
5 lbs extra light malt extract
0.75 oz Cascade hops for boil
0.5 oz US Saaz hops for 30 minutes
0.5 oz US Saaz hops for 5 minutes
two pumpkins-each 9 inches in diameter
1 tsp pumpkin pie spice last 2 min of boil
Wyeast 1098 British Ale Yeast
5 oz (3/4 cups) corn sugar for bottling
Clean out guts of pumpkins and cut into chunks. Bake at 250F for 1.5-2 hrs
or until soft. Puree or squash/crush soft pumpkin. I cut off the skin as it
scorched in the oven. I did not read any where to do this it just seemed
wise (actually this is recommended by Dawnell Smith in Brew Your Own, July
99). Add pumpkin puree and crushed grains to 3 qts water and steep at 155F
for 1 hour. Strain and sparge into brew pot and bring to boil; add extracts,
hops etc as usual.
This should fit your request for a light ale. The color was golden orange.
I followed the above directions except I did not add my pumpkin to the
mini-mash grains. I read from someone elses post this was a mistake as no
enzymes worked on the pumpkin starches. I did not have room for all the
"mash" ingredients to go into the mash pot (I had three gallons of pumpkin
puree), so I just steeped my pumpkin in 145F water for one hour in a
different pot and strained it into my brew pot. I essentially added pumpkin
flavored water to my brew pot. Regardless, the beer to me and two other
homebrewers was thought to be quite good. It was a tad hazy but typical of
my homebrew. I use Irish moss and chill the wort. In no way could I detect
the flavor of the pumpkin pie spice. I could not tell you how much nutmeg to
add. The beer has a slight but noticeble pumpkin flavor. Pumpkin by itself
is relatively mild. I did not get an original gravity, but it finished quite
high at 1.030. I've read that canned pumpkin does not taste as good as
fresh pumpkin (Daniels); Papazian (Complete Joy) says canned pumpkin has
preservatives that a brewer should stay clear of, but Sal Emma (in Brew Your
Own, Jan 00) wrote that canned pumpkin was better cause the heat process used
to treat pumpkin for canning converts much of the pumpkin to sugar. For this
recipe, Daniels recommends two 15 oz cans of pumpkin should you decide to go
with the canned stuff to lighten the work load. It took me three hours just
to prepare the fresh pumpkin--cutting, baking, pureeing.
Will Randle
My thoughts are my own and may not accurately reflect what I might think in
the future.
P.S. This post was rejected the first time. Due none ascii characters. Was
this due to apostrophes in word like didnt? All the lines in error had that
in common.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 13:59:28 -0800
From: Project One <project1@pond.net>
Subject: Re: adding DME to distilled water
Jeff Renner said:
>I think your problem may lie in your water - I've never heard of adding DME
>to distilled water as a treatment. Was this a typo? Did you mean gypsum?
>If not, then you had none of the calcium needed for efficient conversion.
>I'd suggest 1-2 tsp. gypsum for the whole batch.
I'm getting caught up here, so forgive me if this has already been covered...
This is the same thing I do. The advice came from Ken Schwartz' website.
I don't have the text in front of me here, but paraphrasing, he said in a
paper on converting extract to partial mash batches, that if your water was
an unknown, the easiest thing to do is to use distilled water and add 1
Tbsp./gal. DME to it. He claims that is creates a chemical "signature" in
the water that will in effect adjust it properly. He says that this is
easier and more certain than hit and miss treatments. I use well water and
don't have a full analysis, so I switched to this method. It seems to have
increased my efficiency by at least several points.
----------->Denny Conn
a long way from Jeff Renner, but close to the center of the beer
universe in Eugene OR
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 18:42:47 -0600
From: ALABREW <alabrew@mindspring.com>
Subject: Jack's mill
Jack wrote,
"Actually, the reason we do not recommend using a drill on the MM is
because it defeats the self-destruct mechanism. When a drill is
chucked up to the mill, the magnetic flux lines are parallel to the
roller with the detonator in it and not enough energy is transmitted to
set it off."
I must have used the wrong drill. My malt mill did self-destruct
(personal use only). The (small) hopper came apart and the base broke.
It does make a nice, though expensive door stop. That's why we have used
a PhilMill here at the shop for the past three years.
- --
ALABREW Homebrewing Supplies
http://www.mindspring.com/~alabrew
Birmingham, AL
Home Beer and Wine Making Specialists
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 17:47:05 -0800
From: Marty Brown <ms_brown@pacbell.net>
Subject: Handling fees
Donald Lake posts that he doesn't like handling fees. But in so doing, he
impugns the integrity of a long time home brew vendor that has sold
hundreds (thousands? Tens of thousands?) of reliable and well built mills.
To call a fairly common trade practice a deception is really uncalled for.
The logical reason for the charge is that which you call a "nice try", but
refuse to accept. If I order two or three mills, as a small homebrew shop,
I'll pay a lesser overall price than if Jack builds an average cost to ship
each individual mill into his basic pricing.
Donald then goes onto to asking all to avoid buying from those who charge
handling fees. I think most homebrewers are intelligent enough to look at
the total cost of a transaction and decide when the goods are worth the price.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 18:50:46 -0700
From: "Dana H. Edgell" <EdgeAle@cs.com>
Subject: SS Fittings & Quick-Connects
Rod Prather asks about s.s. bulkhead fittings and quickconnects.
Rod,
I use Swagelok brass bulkhead fittings (male pipe to compression) on my
kegs. The aren't too expensive ($4 each?) and work well. I beleive they are
available in s.s. at a higher cost. check out http://www.swagelok.com for
your local distributor.
NOTE: I use a homemade teflon washer to make the seal with the curved keg
sides.
As for quick-connects, I have tried brass ones made for high pressure
washers but I noticed many small bubbles and feared they weren't an
airtight seal. To avoid HSA concerns (if you beleive in HSA) I now use
Acetyl plastic fittings from Colder Products (http://www.colder.com). They
are also available in polysulfone if you want to pay more for ones rated up
to boiling. I have had no problems with the acetyl probably do to the
relatively short contact time and temp losses as the wort leaves the kettle.
NOTE: I use an electric system. I probably wouldn't put plastic QC's on a
direct fired kettle w/o a proven heat shield.
Dana Edgell
- --------------------------------------------------------------
Dana Edgell mailto:EdgeAle@cs.com
Edge Ale Brewery http://ourworld.cs.com/EdgeAle
San Diego
Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 23:02:19 EST
From: WayneM38@aol.com
Subject: Spruce Beer/Brewing Techniques Vol. 4, No. 2
I am looking for Brewing Techniques Vol. 4, No. 2
"Specifics on Using Spruce in Beer"
Anyone have this issue? Helping a friend with a spruce beer for Revolutionary
War reenactment weekends.
Thanks in advance
Wayne
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 23:51:53 EST
From: RBoland@aol.com
Subject: Rauchenfels
Jeff and Pat talked recently discussed the smokey flavor, and inconsistency,
of Rauchenfels steinbier. I watched it being mad this past November. Porous
rocks are heated in a natural gas furnace (no beechwood here). The hot rock
is repeatedly dipped into about 50 gallons of wort and sugars caramelize in
the pores and on the rock surface. The rocks are then added to the lagering
tanks, the burned/carmelized sugars dissolve into the wort, and voila,
steinbier. It is all handwork, a pitchfork of sorts is used to handle the
hot rocks, so variability is not surprising.
The Rauchenfels folks were great hosts and justifiably proud of their beer.
Give them a call if you're headed for Bavaria and you'll not be disappointed!
See you at MCAB.
Bob Boland
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #3225, 01/18/00
*************************************
-------
