Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #3238
HOMEBREW Digest #3238 Wed 02 February 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:
slaked lime (Marc Sedam)
Mash temp too high (stencil)
Re: Fullsail Amber Ale ("Darren Gaylor")
water - pH and superheating ("Alan Meeker")
how much melanoidin malt is too much? (scott zimmerle)
pH of worts - what temperature? (Dave Burley)
arts and crafts and beer ("Jack Schmidling")
Glassware? (Badger Roullett)
Re: wyeast koelsch 2565 off-flavors ("Paul E. Lyon")
Re: BT Back issues (KKrist)
MATC Online Classes (WayneM38)
fruit late in the secondary? ("Stuart Ing")
old Wyeast package (Ballsacius)
Yankee Confusion ("Phil & Jill Yates")
WATER ("A. J. deLange")
wine haze ("Nathaniel P. Lansing")
wyeast 1098 and esters ("Czerpak, Pete")
Re: Efficiency improvements (MaltHound)
re: micro-bombs, the stuff of legends (MaltHound)
RE: Pressure Canner Woes ("Peter J. Calinski")
Re: Efficiency standards (MaltHound)
Practical Brewer Conversion ("Peter J. Calinski")
lube me ("Dave Sapsis")
No sparge follow-up question ("John Todd Larson")
RE: Presto canner rings (dstedman)
No response from beeronline.com (John Carpenter)
mash temp vrs efficiency (J Daoust)
Jack and The WordMixer Strikes Again... (Midwest Brewer)
Re:raw wheat in witbier ("Houseman, David L")
Microwave ... er ... OOPS .. ("Francois Zinserling")
Roasted corn et al.. (AlannnnT)
* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!
* Entry deadline for the Mayfare Homebrew Competition is 3/15/00
* See http://www.maltosefalcons.com/ for more information
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, 31 Jan 2000 10:50:33 -0500
From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam@unc.edu>
Subject: slaked lime
Hi all:
I've been reminded by several people that slaked lime is
Ca(OH)2, not NaOH (caustic soda). Both will work equally
well, and slaked lime has the advantage of adding calcium to
the mash. That's a benefit for soft water with low Ca
levels.
Which reminds me, I was mashing a double brew last weekend
(Imperial pilsener and a CAP). I didn't treat my water with
anything (mine's nearly as soft as Plzen's water). The mash
seemed to be proceeding quite slowly so I added a teaspoon
of CaCl2 to the mash. Within 30 minutes I saw a noticeable
clarification of the wort on top of the mash--my sign that
conversion is nearly complete. So, although it's been
posted recently (by Steve A, methinks) that, analytically,
the mash should have plenty of Ca to completely convert the
starch, practice suggests otherwise. My sole caveat is that
I won't mash for more than 75 minutes. The brew day is long
enough and if a teaspoon of CaCl2 will help meet my
requirements I'm all for it. I'm sure a 2-3 hour mash would
completely convert without addition of minerals, but I'm too
impatient for that.
Anyone have a good recipe to emulate Yuengling's Pilsener
(the original reddish version, not the newer Premium). I
tried to get my CAP to come close, but it's still too
golden.
Cheers!
Marc
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 10:53:18 -0500
From: stencil <stencil@bcn.net>
Subject: Mash temp too high
What will be the effect of too-high a mash temperature on
fermentability, flavor, and other qualities?
Specifically, the mash was allowed to heat to ca 166~170F, starting
from 156~158F, over a 45 minute period. (I was stacking firewood.)
When I discovered this I killed the heatsource and extended the rest
to 90 minutes total. In the final 45 minutes the temperature droop
was about 2deg. Mashout and sparge were unremarkable; sparge yield
was ca 7.5gal @ 1040, which boiled down to ca 5.5gal @ 1054, from
10.25lb grain charge, which is quite a bit better a yield than my
usual 25~28 pt-gal/lb.
Unprimed wort tasted pretty much normal. This is a lager, fermenting
(I hope) at ca 56F in a heated locker (air temperature in the brewing
and reloading bunker is 40F), so it will be some months before it will
be tasted. IMBR? What should I expect? The preliminary sip did not
seem astringent. And where did that extra extract come from?
stencil sends
RKBA!
==============================
Patoot
Te toot
Te toodley tooo. ---- Johann Sebastian Bach
==============================
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 08:20:18 -0800
From: "Darren Gaylor" <darren.gaylor@pensionsnw.com>
Subject: Re: Fullsail Amber Ale
I love this beer. One of the few commerical beers I have actually tried to
clone. It's too dark, malty and bitter by AHA standards to be called an
amber but I think it should be the prototype of the style.
It's a relatively simple recipe. Check them out online at
http://www.fullsailbrewing.com/fsbcbrews2.htm.
My 10 gallon recipe is as follows, adjust for your own system to target
1.058 OG, 42 IBU.
17.50 lbs Great Western 2 row. (Any pale/pilsner malt should do)
2.00 lbs Crystal 60l
0.50 lbs Chocolate
1.50 oz Cascade (60 minutes)
1.00 oz Cascade (40 minutes)
1.00 oz Mt Hood (20 minutes)
1.00 oz Mt Hood (0 minutes)
I usually do a single infusion mash at 152F, but higher temps wouldn't hurt
the beer.
They told me their yeast is proprietary, but 1056 works well.
Their IPA and VSP's are excellent beers, too.
Good luck.
Darren Gaylor
Vancouver, WA
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 11:24:07 -0500
From: "Alan Meeker" <ameeker@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>
Subject: water - pH and superheating
A.J - I agree for the most part with your assessment about the pH water
observations but two things still bug me - why was this water not alkaline
out of the tap as it seems it should have been and why the low (pH = 4.4)
value for the mash with the Colorphast papers? In my experience the
Colorphast papers work just fine and are within +/- 0.2 pH units of metered
values.
Regarding superheated water in the microwave; this is an all too real
phenomenon and is analogous to making a supersaturated solution with say
salt or sugar. In both cases the solutions are metastable and can react to
the smallest perturbation such as simply jostling the container. In the lab
we are VERY aware of this phenomenon since microwaves have in many cases
supplanted the old Bunsen burner as a handy way to bring solutions to a
boil. I had to personally escort a summer student down to the ER after he
suffered burns from a container of superheated agar solution which he
swirled while looking down the opening of the Erlenmeyer flask!
Be careful out there
-Alan Meeker
Baltimore, MD
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 10:47:05 -0600
From: scott zimmerle <szimmerle@mediaone.net>
Subject: how much melanoidin malt is too much?
Greetings all,
I am considering brewing a big (>1.100) partial-mash dopplebock.
I noticed that in St. Pat's catalog, their all-grain "Alligator
Dopplebock" kit contains 5# Munich, 5# Vienna, and 5# Melanoidin malt..
I have been told that in regards to Melanoidin malt, "a little goes a
long way". Is 5# melanoidin too much? I'm not even sure what flavors
would result from "too much" melanoidin; I don't think it could result
in too dark a color for a dopplebock. I imagine harshness or excessive
esters is what is feared. Any comments welcome.
Thanks,
scott zimmerle
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 13:15:14 -0500
From: Dave Burley <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com>
Subject: pH of worts - what temperature?
Brewsters:
A question by e-mail prompted me to dig
into the pH of wort/temperature thing again
and may be of interest.
Here was my reply, which may clarify
the idea once again.
Let's start on page 274, vol1 2nd ed of M&BS
Hope this table makes it!
Preparation pH of mash-tun
and nature wort
of water at room temperature
Cold water
extract,
distilled water 6.2-6.3
Wort pH,
water temporary
hardness
(about 15 grains
of CaCO3/gal 5.89
wort pH,
distilled water 5.76
Wort pH,
permanent hardness
(4 grains of CaSO4) 5.65
Note that all of these pHs were
measured with the sample at
room temperature. Which I
think is the standard method
technique. Now if these pH's
were measured at 150F or so
they would be 0.35 pH units less
( the approximate drop on heating.
p 279 , op cit) due to the higher
dissociation constants of the
various acids as well as other
physical considerations ( like
"activity" which I believe is
temperature dependent) ,
at the higher temperature.
If you subtract 0.35 from these
above RT values, you will
see numbers like 5.53 - 5.30.
at wort temperatures.
Note, also the cold water extract
( which is what you get before
you begin to heat your wort)
has an expected higher value
as the phosphate and other
stuff has not yet reacted. It will
when you heat it ( see the"wort -
distilled water" value) and the
pH of the wort will fall to some
value as calcium phosphate
is precipitated and the protons
are freed from the partial
phosphate salts in the malt.
Remember the calcium sulfate
concentration above is in
"grains per British Gallons".
If you used more CaSO4, your
results would give you a lower pH
up to a point where all the phosphate
is precipitated.
Page 279 op cit says:
"An infusion mash is best carried
out at 5.2-5.4. Consequentially,
the pH in the cooled wort will
be 5.5 - 5.8"
Not much question there about
what is meant..
Note again this says
"cooled wort" which means it
has been heated and cooled.
Do not attempt to adjust the pH of
a mash ( as I sense some HBD
authors are doing) which has not
been heated.
BTW, the pH adjustment using
calcium sulfate or calcium carbonate
is not instantaneous as these are
relatively insoluble salts as is the
calcium phosphate formed.
The calcium phosphate may even
coat the added dry particles, further
slowing equilibration.
Keep on Brewin'
Dave Burley
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 12:40:53 -0600
From: "Jack Schmidling" <arf@mc.net>
Subject: arts and crafts and beer
From: jliddil@VMS.ARIZONA.EDU
>I'm considering replacing the base on my Maltmil(tm) with a piece of
quarter-sawn oak and suing oak cabinet plywood for the hopper etc. anyone
done such a thing?
As a matter of fact it is a $400 option on the MM but it also includes a
sterling silver crank.
However, I would not demean the project with plywood and quarter saw oak would
be very boring and of no particular help in this application. Actually, flat
sawn wood is probably stronger so you could use half inch stock. The value of
quarter sawn wood is that it shrinks evenly in all directions but this is not an
issue for a base. I would make the hopper sides out of the same 1/2" stock and
find someone with a plane to plane down the same stock to 1/4" for the panels.
Sounds like a fun project but would not fit into the decor of the World's
Greatest Brewery.
I am currently working on a treasure chest for my grandaughter out of oak and
cherry. Living in a hardwood forest, I have become as obsessed with wood as I
am with beer. I start with an axe and end up with a project.
Beer.
js
PHOTO OF THE WEEK http://user.mc.net/arf/weekly.htm
HOME: Beer, Cheese, Astronomy, Videos http://user.mc.net/arf
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 10:58:06 -0800
From: Badger Roullett <branderr@microsoft.com>
Subject: Glassware?
A bar I go to is in need of glassware, and as they are my favorite hang out
spot on the weekends, I thought I would be nice, and buy a case or two of
glasses for them as a present. (a big chunk of the employees are my personal
friends).
Can you recommend a good mail order place (or a local place in Seattle) that
sells glass ware for bars at good prices? Pints and 5 oz.
Thanks in advance, and private replies are appreciated.
badger
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 14:59:10 -0500 (EST)
From: "Paul E. Lyon" <lyon@osb1.wff.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: wyeast koelsch 2565 off-flavors
In HBD #3231, From: "Dan and Kim Lyga" <lygas@snet.net> writes:
> I was wondering if any has encountered any off flavors when
> using Wyeast kolsch 2565. When I racked the beer into the
> secondary, and even after tasting the beer a week after bottling, it
> had a distinctive mineral, almost medicinal, taste that seems to
> linger. I fermented in the mid-to-upper 60s and did not notice any
Dan and Tim,
I just recently brewed a Koelsch with this yeast and noticed no off
flavors, though I fermented in the lower 60's. It sounds to me like you
have an infection. Check your sanitation procedures. Fermenting in the
upper 60's would at worst give you more ester/fruity flavors, not medicinal
ones. As Volker mentioned in hbd#3235, you may notice friuty notes initially.
I fermented in 1.5 weeks and kegged, then cold conditioned for another week
and notice no fruity tones. This Koelsch has fermented very clean and is
clear now, but took longer fine than other beers I brew with standard ale
yeasts.
You may want to chill the wort right after pitching the yeast and
ferment
at the lower range of the yeasts tolerant temps for the first few days to
avoid the fruity tones. Then warm to upper range before the beer is finished
to get rid of any diacetyl, then cold chill for aging. This may clean up
some of the fruity esters, but I still think that a medicinal flavor is
probably a sign of an infection of some wild beasty.
Hope this helps,
Paul
31-Jan-00 14:57:56
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 22:03:56 -0500
From: KKrist <kkrist@bigfoot.com>
Subject: Re: BT Back issues
In Homebrew Digest #3236 K. Reinhard had a reply from Stephen Mallery.
While Stephen's reply sounded good, it is nothing but pure BS.
Stephen found the time to charge me for 4 additional issues I ordered.
I guess he was too busy to honor the 6 they owed me.
If anyone still has not replied to the BT offer, don't waste your time,
your postage, the time of your life or any additional money.
If I sound mad about getting ripped off, I am.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 01:10:46 EST
From: WayneM38@aol.com
Subject: MATC Online Classes
In a message dated 1/31/00 11:06:31 PM Central Standard Time, Steve writes:
<< On re-reading the e-mail I would add two things. First, It is my belief
that classes at MATC are the best value on the market. Second, I also think
that getting Laurel's e-mail address is worth the cost of taking the class.
How often do you get the ear of someone who teaches chemistry, is a Seibels
graduate, and brewed with one of the majors for over 20 years.
Now that Phil is taking the classes, perhaps he can sing the praises of the
classes in three part harmony with Wayne and me. With Seibel closed, it
becomes ever more important to support brewing education.
Steve
P.S. Wayne tells me that Laurel may be offering a brewery design class in
the spring. Care to sing lead Wayne?>>
Steve:
Anyone who has met Laurel will agree on her commitment to brewing. Class
act. I hope the Brewing Certificate Program she is developing will begin in
the fall of 2000. MATC has an excellent Food Science program and the Brewing
program will be a great addition. I also ran through the Malting course
online and it was very complete. The weekend workshops are a great place to
meet serious brewers and share and learn new brewing information. How often
do you get to ask Hans Kessler, from the original 'AugsBurger' fame,
questions about your Oktoberfest recipe? Great stuff.
Me sing?
Well, if it is OK with Laurel, I will sing the praises of RIMS brewing for a
segment of the brewing design class. Big Fun Brewing is transportable!!!
Besides the MATC courses and workshops the 2000 Craft Brewers Conference is
being held in Milwaukee in April. Going to save a few vacation days for that
event.
I was sure to win the drawing for the two week Siebels course at that
event... A day late and $9000 short......
Wayne
Botanist Brewer
<A HREF="Big">http://member.aol.com/bfbrewing/BigFunBrewing.htm">Big Fun Brewing
RIMS Homepage</A>
http://member.aol.com/bfbrewing/BigFunBrewing.htm
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2000 02:06:46 PST
From: "Stuart Ing" <penfold314@hotmail.com>
Subject: fruit late in the secondary?
I have a wheat beer going right now, pretty hoppy, but comming along nicely.
It originally started as a strawberry wheat, but it now has no strawberry
taste to it anymore. I used about 4# frozen strawberries, steeped them in
the hot wort after the boil, crushed, and removed the pulp. Should I have
left the strawberries in the primary and taken it out at the transfer to the
secondary?
Now I have this beer sitting in the secondary for about 3 weeks and I'm
wondering if I can still add some fruit flavoring to it. I don't really
want to use fruit extract, but I do have a lemon tree in the yard. So can I
add lemon this late in the brewing process? I was thinking about using 4
lemons, adding just the zest and the juice. Would I have to pasturize the
lemons or would the alchol in the beer be enough to keep down any
infections?
Stu
penfold314@hotmail.com
stuarti@lava.net
ICQ #37779652
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 06:45:01 EST
From: Ballsacius@aol.com
Subject: old Wyeast package
I recently "found" an old Wyeat pack of yeast when cleaning out my brew
fridge. The package is dated Aug 1998. I popped the starter and waited to see
if it would swell up. It did! It is 1084 Irish ale yeast. It has been two
days since I smacked it and it is already just about an inch or so thick! I
have had less swelling from some fresher yeast packs! So my question is, can
I still use this package? It has been in the refridgerator this whole time.
Also, I was originally going to brew a Honey Porter(ala Sam Adams Honey
Porter). But can not find the recipe that I had. Does anybody have a recipe
for this? Thanks in advance!
Bob Fesmire
Madman Brewery
Pottstown,PA
Ballsacius@aol.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 22:36:44 +1100
From: "Phil & Jill Yates" <yates@acenet.com.au>
Subject: Yankee Confusion
I was going to jump in and lend a hand to my good friend Jack who has been
coping a bit of a beating lately but when he insulted my even better friend
Volker with this:
>Living in "the rest of the world" is a self inflicted wound.
>You will just have to convert to the real units.
Well I felt obliged to give Jack a bit of a beating myself (besides, he
loves it).
Jack, if you crazy loonies can't even learn to drive on the proper side of
the road, what hope do you have coming to terms with the metric system?
Volker might also drive on the wrong side of the road, but if he can talk
kilos per litre, well I don't mind having to occasionally swerve around him.
Fact is, back in the 70's the USA missed a great opportunity to run with a
far better measuring system, and now you all have to live with that
decision. I suggest you all lower the red, white and blue from your back
yards and hoist up the union jack. It's their system you are still clinging
on to. But even they got wise and dumped it.
Now please, no comments on penal colonies thank you!
Cheers
Phil Yates
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2000 13:52:03 +0000
From: "A. J. deLange" <ajdel@mindspring.com>
Subject: WATER
Condolences to Kurt and the people of College Station, TX. Theirs is
about the worst water report (from the viewpoint of brewing) I have ever
been asked to look at. The most simplistic statement about brewing water
one can make is "Hardness good, alkalinity bad." Kurt has almost none of
the former and lots of the latter. I toss out "Residual Alkalinity" here
(as do a couple of other folks) as often as I can because its a quick
and dirty way of guessing performance in the mash tun. It should be less
than 50. Kurt's is 387 i.e. almost exactly the same as his total
alkalinity and that's because RA = (alkalinity) - (calcium_hardness +
magnesium_hardness/2)/3.5 and there is no calcium hardness to speak of
here. As a rule of thumb, mash pH shifts from the distilled water pH
(5.75ish) by .00168 units per ppm of residual alkalinity or, in the case
of the present water, a whopping 0.650 pH units! Thus Kurt has a
problem which is the opposite of Troy's and would be constrained to
brewing beers with lots of dark malts in order to lower mash pH to a
region where the enzymes would be happy.
So some decarbonation is in order. Kurt is right that boiling would not
do him much good as there is no calcium and he is also right that adding
gypsum and/or calcium chloride to get the calcium up could result in
excessive amounts of those anions. More chloride would be especially
disastrous as this water must taste marginally salty already and more
chloride would only augment this. There is lots of room to maneuver with
respect to sulfate, however. If you don't want sulfate, the best calcium
source is lime i.e. slaked lime i.e. grocery store pickling lime which
is Ca(OH)2 [not NaOH Marc though I'm sure you caught that one yourself
by now]. This can be used to soften the water. Make up a slurry in a
small volume of water, dump in enough to make the water being treated
cloudy and stay cloudy after stirring and add a pinch of calcium
carbonate to the water being treated. Now wait until the water drops
clear and decant off the precipitate. You will have dropped the
carbonate alkalinity greatly at this point but the hydroxide alkalinity
will be high and you must neutralize this with acid. The obvious choice
here is sulfuric since sulfate is so low but unless you are a lab rat I
don't recommend fooling with sulfuric acid and you may want to keep
sulfate low (for lagers) anyway. The best choice from the safety and
cost aspect is carbonic acid which is supplied by mother nature at no
cost in virtually limitless supply in the air. Bubble air through the
decanted water as vigorously as possible or recirculate the water
through a nozzle with a pump. Eventually, though this may take some time
depending on how you do it (and use of CO2 from a bottle through a
carbonating stone is probably the quickest), the pH will come up to a
nominal value around where you started i.e.8.3 or so and, if you use
bottle CO2 can be brought lower. Remember that it isn't pH you care
about, it's alkalinity. Once the pH is down to 8.3 the hydroxide
alkalinity (which came from the excess lime) is neutralized and you're
left with the bicarbonate alkalinity which is going to be around 50 or
less.
The trick here is being able to tell when the pH is less than 8.3. A
meter is obviously the best way, pH test strips will work as well but
perhaps the best indicator in this application is phenolphthalein
solution. When water to which this stuff is added turns red the pH is
above 8.3 and but if this indicator is clear, the water is at pH below
8.3. I recommend this indicator because it is easily obtained (it's in
any alkalinity test kit which will do both P and total alkalinity ) and
it defines the end of the range of hydroxide alkalinity which is what
you are trying to get rid of with the CO2. Do not, however, put this
stuff in the volume of water you are treating. Take samples for pH
checking. While phenolphthalein is not particularly poisonous it is a
powerful laxative (older brewers may remember "Phenamint Chewing Gum").
If no indicator or meter is available, just spray or aerate for a couple
of days. Equilibrium will eventually be reached at a pH a bit above 8.5.
So now you are decarbonated but there is still way to much sodium for
most beers. The only ways to beat this are RO, ion exchange,
distillation or dilution. Ion exchange is probably not feasible because
the exchanger would load up with anions and cations so quickly with
water with this level of TDS. Dilution aside RO is probably the best
cost option for producing brewing volumes of water (affordable units
produce 5 - 10 gal per day so you must collect for a couple of days). RO
water is, like distilled or deionized water, nearly ion free so some
salts must be added for most brewing applications. Kurt asked for a
nominal recipe. The following will give a typical east coast surface
water (modeled after the Potomac river so if you find yourself lying to
the people, accepting bribes from Peking and chasing floozies, adjust
the pH). Add per liter of deionized (or nearly deionized) water:
NaCl 2.46 mg/L
CaCl2.2H2O 29.82 mg/L
Epsom Salts : 81 mg/L
Chalk: 69.93 mg/L
Sodium Bicarbonate: 29.58 mg/L
You will have to bubble (much better to use a "stone") CO2 through the
water to get the chalk to dissolve. The water will become clear when
enough CO2 has been added. Stop bubbling at that point and then aerate
by pouring back and fourth or spraying to allow excess CO2 to escape.
This isn't that critical as the heat of the hot liquor tank will drive
off excess CO2.
Ca hardness will be 90.3 ppm as CaCO3, Mg hardness 65.3 ppm as CaCO3,
alkalinity 89 ppm as CaCO3, chloride 16 mg/l, sodium 9 mg/L and sulfate
32 mg/L. Residual alkalinity is 59 ppm as CaCO3. This water is suitable
for the majority of brewing applications. For Bohemian Pilsners, use 1/4
of the specified amount of Epsom salts.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Ant set the pH of his brewing water and wonders why the pH of his mash
was not closer to that of the water. The answer was alluded to above.
The pH of the water is not very useful information by itself. One must
also consider the alkalinity. When you change the pH of the water from
8.3 to 5.3 you convert about 95% of the bicarbonate (but not all of it)
to carbonic. The remaining bicarbonate still has to be neutralized (the
alkalinity of the adjusted water is about 6). Now the grist you
specified should have more than enough acid in it (nominally) to do the
job. Remember that you must drop a couple of tenths from cooled mash
readings so the pH of your mash was probably about 5.4 at temperature.
This is a very respectable mash pH.Individual malt characterisitics can
swing things a couple of tenths of a point so I'd say you are O.K.
Also note that the phrase "I used a pH meter for the first time while
brewing. The results were a bit odd." is one that is not uncommonly
heard.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 09:01:02 -0500
From: "Nathaniel P. Lansing" <delbrew@compuserve.com>
Subject: wine haze
Bill Frazier asked about a hazy wine:
>>The wine has a haze. He has used
bentonite and Sparkolloid. He's filtered thru a 0.5 micron filter. Yet
the
haze persists. <<
If a .5 micron didn't clear it I would bet it has a metallic haze from
contact with copper or brass or other non-oenologic metal.
..........................................................
>>The idea of microwaves "building up" in a cup of water is about as far
fetched as shining a flashlight into a beer can for 2 minutes, then
removing
the flashlight, and if you look into the can quick enough, you will be
blinded for life, because of all the light that accumulated in the can
...<<
Not the same concept, it is the heat build-up that causes the sudden
boil over in MW heated liquids.
...............................................................
On MW ovens: DO NOT pop the door open with the latch during a cook cycle.
This can let MWs escape before they finish reflecting around the cavity.
This
is especially noticable if you have a small mass in the cavity (such as a
teacup)
as compared to a turkey.
This has been measured and is not conjecture. If you want to open it hit
"pause"
then open the door.
Yes Steve, this is Del in Pittsburgh
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 09:28:33 -0500
From: "Czerpak, Pete" <Pete.Czerpak@siigroup.com>
Subject: wyeast 1098 and esters
Just a followup to my last week question on Wyeast 1098 (british ale) and
ester production.
Has anybody tried this in a high gravity brew like barley wine or imperial
stout. How did you find the ester level after fermentation, after a few
months in the keg/bottle? Is it best to leave the beer to condition at
warmer or cooler temps to get the fruity esters to lessen? I used a huge
starter from a previous porter. Also, just positive CO2 pressure, in a keg,
negatively effect the conditioning time?
Do all esters mellow with time (including those ones made purposely) or is
it just those esters formed through bad fermentation conditons?
Would anybody think of using this in a high gravity beer or should the
fruity/estery description moved me towards something else? Did I make a bad
decision?
Thanks for any help,
Pete Czerpak
Albany, NY
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 10:05:03 EST
From: MaltHound@aol.com
Subject: Re: Efficiency improvements
In HBD 3237 kurt@greennet.net (Kurt Goodwin) writes:
<< All the talk lately about calculating efficiency has led me back to
something that used to bug me. My system only yields about 60-62%
efficiency. While it's not that hard to adjust recipes to deal with
this, it occasionally irritates me that I can't get better. Following
is a brief description of my set-up and procedure, any suggestions to
improve would be most welcome... >>
...and then goes on to describe his system.
This is a perfect example of why I previously suggested the use of pts/lb (or
yes, pts/kg) in lieu of percentage. Your 60 percent efficiency may be
respectable enough to just leave it alone.
Your measurement accuracy (grain weight, volume and wort gravity) and maximum
yield reference points may be causing your results to look less attractive
than what they really are.
Assuming this is not the case, the things I would say you should try to
increase your yield would be:
#1) Completeness of crush. Even if you think you have a good crush, crush
it more. Try running it through the mill twice (once at a courser than your
normal setting, the second time finer than normal) to get to a finer crush
with minimal damage to the husks. IMO, the idea that you will get "husk
astringency" and stuck sparges because you over crush are seriously
over-rated and are the main reasons why the majority of homebrewers
*under*crush thereby reducing their yields.
#2) Recirculate and then draw off the first, high gravity runnings from your
mash *before* adding any sparge water. This way you will not dilute these
first running and will maximize their gravity. You can run it dry if you can
get away with it. However, most people that use false bottoms (vs.
manifiolds or easymashers) will find that just as the mash goes dry it throws
a lot of particulates in the wort. To avoid that, calculate how much you can
run-off without running the grain bed dry.
#3) After step 2 add sparge water to just reach the top of the grain bed and
wait. This will allow the sugars to diffuse into the fresh liquor. Then
begin to run-off and sparge as normal, but do it *slowly*.
I think these are the significant few things that I have instituted over the
years to go from 25-26 pts/lb yield to the 31-32 pts/lb. range.
Good Luck,
Fred Wills
Londonderry, NH
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 10:13:44 EST
From: MaltHound@aol.com
Subject: re: micro-bombs, the stuff of legends
Whew. Much discussion of this latest internet / urban legend.
One thing to note is that to be classified an U.L. does not indicate that
there is no factual information in the message. It should be apparent that
the "delayed boil" and "nucleation site" mechanics are real, etc.
What makes it a "legend" is more in the telling and distributionof the tale.
The fact that the author and the victim are nameless goes a long way to the
incredibility of the story. That and the urging to forward this important
information to the world is indicative that it was probably penned by
someone wanting to see how far he can manipulate society.
Very similar to those pesky hoax virus warnings we all get on a regular
basis...
Regards,
Fred Wills
Londonderry, NH
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 10:09:40 -0500
From: "Peter J. Calinski" <PCalinski@iname.com>
Subject: RE: Pressure Canner Woes
Just a quick comment about Presto. Within the last 30 days I purchased a
replacement gasket and relief valve from them (for less than $8.00
including shipping and handling). This particular pressure cooker was my
mother's and must be over 50 years old. It is the model 40. Four Quart.
Pete Calinski
East Amherst NY
Near Buffalo NY
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 10:37:38 EST
From: MaltHound@aol.com
Subject: Re: Efficiency standards
In HBD3237 "George de Piro" <gdepiro@mindspring.com> writes:
<< Huh? The difference in describing efficiency in pts./pound/gallon versus
percentage of the course lab grind is the same as measuring something in
inches or centimeters. Both values tell you the same thing, just in
different units. >>
Ah, but there's the rub. Homebrewers do not consistantly state their yields
as a percentage of course lab grind. Some do, but most don't. Most
homebrewers don't even know what the malt analysis is for the particular
grain they are brewing with. Many just use some other arbitrary anecdotally
determined maximum yield values such as those presented in the Zymurgy Great
Grains issue among other places. These are the most common maximums seen in
the various brewing recipe calculation programs.
The advantage of using pts/lb when publicly discussing homebrew yields is
that you *know* you are looking at the "raw" data and are more or less forced
to concern yourself with the other factors involved. When presented with a
percentage, I always ask myself; "Percent of what?"
AFA predetermination of recipe outcome, I agree that in every case you will
need *some* kind of maximum yield estimate (by ingredient) to come close.
Whichever method one uses in the privacy of their own brewery in order to
estimate outcome would seem to make little difference.
Regards,
Fred Wills
Londonderry, NH
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 10:33:14 -0500
From: "Peter J. Calinski" <PCalinski@iname.com>
Subject: Practical Brewer Conversion
A few days ago I proposed that the Practical Brewer could be reduced in
volume considerably and be more useful for searching if text in the
document were converted to text format. I noted that I had tried it but
didn't have the proper software tools. I also noted that I didn't know the
copyright implications of such a conversion.
Since then I have received an number of messages (some of which were also
posted in the HBD) from people saying they had the tools and were going to
try it. Marc Sedam also posted his interpretation of the copyright rules.
Pat Babcock also announced that he was asking the MBAA for permission to
mirror the Practical Brewer on the HBD site.
I think we have to see how this unfolds. If Pat gets the permission, I
hope he makes it clear that the version may be in a different format. In
my original post I suggested that the new format be made available to the
MBAA since I am sure their members would find it more useful.
For now, based on Marc's assessment, if I had been able to make the
conversion, I would not feel comfortable distributing it to others. In
fact, if someone offered me a converted version, I would have to refuse it
even though I would really like to have it.
Hopefully Pat will get permission. Perhaps others in the HBD that have
contacts in the MBAA or are members can help this come about.
Pete Calinski
East Amherst NY
Near Buffalo NY
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 07:43:29 -0800
From: "Dave Sapsis" <dsapsis@earthlink.net>
Subject: lube me
The topic of keg fitting lubrication has once again popped up, and it
compells me to once again sing the praises of ASTROGLIDE personal lubricant.
It is simply wonderfull. We wont go into all its uses, but safe to say, its
a multidimentional product.
peace. dave, sacramento
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 08:28:27 -0800
From: "John Todd Larson" <larson@amazon.com>
Subject: No sparge follow-up question
After following the "no sparge" discussion recently, I am interested in
trying some form of limited sparging on my next batch. I know I must adjust
my grain bill accordingly, but do I increase only the mashable grains, or
all the entire grain recipe (including crystal, etc.) by the same %? Thanks
in advance for any thoughts.
Todd
J. Todd Larson
Treasury Manager
Amazon.com
larson@amazon.com
(206) 266-4367
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 11:03:14 -0600
From: dstedman@csc.com
Subject: RE: Presto canner rings
Nathan asked about replacing his pressure canner rings:
I was having the same problem and found that a little silicone keg lube on the
rings
reconditioned them enough that I don't have any more leaking problems...
dan
(my first post ever after reading the digest for four years!)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 09:34:39 -0800 (PST)
From: John Carpenter <john_darts_carpenter@yahoo.com>
Subject: No response from beeronline.com
I placed an order with beeronline.com on December 30th
and still haven't received my product. I've sent them
emails and have tried calling (got a machine that
wouldn't allow me to leave a message). Does anyone
know what's going on with them? Did they have a Y2K
crash? Has anyone ordered from them and got their
order or heard back from them this year?
John
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2000 09:56:28 -0800
From: J Daoust <thedaousts@ixpres.com>
Subject: mash temp vrs efficiency
OK, I understand the correlation between higher mash temp giving a
"sweeter" brew, but does that also give less efficiency? If so, is there
a scale we can use to forecast the efficiency? Like 158 degrees =70%;
156=75%; 154=80% ??? Thanks, Jerry Daoust
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2000 12:14:29 -0600
From: Midwest Brewer <mgeorge@bridge.com>
Subject: Jack and The WordMixer Strikes Again...
Jack Sez:
> (snip)
You know, I was going to reiterate Jack's usual twisting of words and
meanings and continue the barrage of banter that would ensue with the
slightest disagreement with him. However, in the light of brevity, I'm
not going to do that. It is apparent that no matter what one says, we
all will become victims to the mighty "JSP
Crap........ERRRRRRRRR......WordMixer".
However, I will say this:
Brewing is a hobby. There is no one absolute perfect way to do this
hobby, as evidenced by this board and its readers/posters. Yet Jack,
you continue on these paths of discussion that there could not possibly
be any other way for successful brewing other than yours.
I do have one honest question for you Jack: Are we using obsolete
equipment because...WE DIDN'T FATTEN YOUR DAMN WALLET???
MWB
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 13:40:53 -0500
From: "Houseman, David L" <David.Houseman@unisys.com>
Subject: Re:raw wheat in witbier
Keith says he uses whole wheat flour from the grocery store in his wit. I
like the idea enough to try it but, what's the equivalent in pounds of wheat
berries/seeds? Or rather what's the points per pound of whole wheat flour?
Anything special in trying to mash this with pils malt? No guey mess trying
to sparge?
Dave Houseman
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 21:47:23 +0200
From: "Francois Zinserling" <francois@designtech.co.za>
Subject: Microwave ... er ... OOPS ..
Have you ever had that feeling of ... "now I've really screwed up" ? Hardly
had I posted my 2 cents worth on the Microwave Bombs, when replies started
coming in from the REAL professionals. I must confess, I did not know it was
possible to heat water over 100'C without subjecting it to pressures above
atmospheric. Well, now I do ! (Maybe I should have paid more attention in
chemistry class)
May I apologize in advance to all those who have replied with scientifically
backed data; it was not my intention to ridicule anyone !!
(And never will I so hastily post my title with an article again ....)
BEERGARDS to all of you,
Francois Zinserling
South Africa
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 20:34:54 EST
From: AlannnnT@aol.com
Subject: Roasted corn et al..
Some of the the fun things in the book, American Handy Book of the Brewing,
Malting and Auxiliary Trades, 1902 , scanned in at
http://hubris.engin.umich.edu:8080/Wahl/
include the notations about Roasted Corn and potato starch.
First it describes Roasted Corn as an adjunct made in a similar fashion as
black malt. That is, by heating. Its use is described as a colorant, the same
as black malt.
The book also mentions that potato starch is (was) used "extensively" in
Germany. Wow, you mean that profits might have been more important than
tradition? Does that mean that German brewers may have bent a law or two?
Anyone ready to do a brew with Roasted corn? Maybe a pre-pre-prohibition pale?
- -----
Dave suggested buying some lye for cleaning lubricating grease residue from a
Hardware store. Most Hardware stores will have large containers of scented
lye for drain opening and oven cleaning. You should be able to buy a smaller,
unscented quantity in a homebrewshop. It is distributed in 4 or 6 ounce
containers of food grade liquid to homebrewshops.
Gotta run now, I'm going back to try to boil some water in my microwave. I've
never used it for anything except popcorn, I didn't know it could heat water
too!
Alan Talman
sent my GPS out to get recalibrated, it didn't know Jeff was the center of
the universe!
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #3238, 02/02/00
*************************************
-------
