Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #3256
HOMEBREW Digest #3256 Wed 23 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:
FAN/amino acids in yeast nutrient ("Pannicke, Glen A.")
More (but different) Yeast questions (David Lamotte)
Calcium Chloride (phil sides jr)
commercial pitching rates ("George de Piro")
RE: Cold break layering ("George de Piro")
Re:Plastic fermenters ("Dic Gleason")
Kolsch yeast (Richard_R_Gontarek)
MBAA (Terence Tegner)
Kettle/Bucket Mashing (Matthew Comstock)
heads and tails (Marc Sedam)
Re: Misguided Post Hogs ("Pannicke, Glen A.")
N2 fixation and one more thing about fusels (patrick finerty)
Yeast Growth (RCAYOT)
Continuous agitation (Jeff Renner)
Pitching Rates and Munich Malt (JDPils)
Ester production? ("Paul Kensler")
Puerto Rico Brewpubs or Beer Bars (woodsj)
underpitching (JDPils)
Not one Element but Two (Brad Miller)
Questions on Hops, Decoction, and Watering Down (Steven Gibbs)
MCAB 2 - Be There. (RBoland)
Wisconsin Water (Keith Busby)
Bluff City Brewers 12th Annual Homebrew Competition (JGrabowski)
Stones & Phillers:Don't drink and post! (Aaron Perry)
* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!
* AOL members: Visit the AOL Homebrewing boards before they're gone!
* Go to aol://5863:126/mBLA:185893
* 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, 21 Feb 2000 15:14:38 -0500
From: "Pannicke, Glen A." <glen_pannicke@merck.com>
Subject: FAN/amino acids in yeast nutrient
On Fri, 18 Feb 2000 Fred L. Johnson asked about FAN/amino acids in yeast
nutrient:
>Could someone provide a brief summary of
>1) the requirement for free amino nitrogen by yeast for growth, (i.e.
>is free amino nitrogen "required" for growth or just to prevent fusel
>alcohol production?)
As you may have read already, FAN is an absolute requirement for yeast
growth. However, so far the postings have left out the importance of two
amino acids, specifically leucine and valine. According to G. Fix, yeast
usually cannot metabolize adequate replacements of these amino acids from
other sources of nitrogen (though maybe some can convert keto acids
appropriately). Apparently, worts deficient in valine also tend to lead to
elevated diacetyl levels as valine and leucine help (through later metabolic
pathways) to reduce these naturally occuring levels of diacetyl. I bring
this up since diacetyl is another hot HBD topic ;-) For more info see Mr.
Fix's article below:
http://brewingtechniques.com/library/backissues/issue1.2/fix.html
I don't believe that FAN levels within the acceptable range will have a
reducing effect upon fusel alcohols since fusels and esters are produced
from FAN constituents anyway via the Ehrlich mechanism. Dave Burley hit on
the best ways to reduce the fusel production. Add krausen blow-off or
skimming in an open fermenter a secondary measures as well.
Dave also mentioned agitation as contributing to increased fusel production.
Might that be due to the slight increase in metabolism and growth by
suspending the yeast and maximizing their exposure to the wort? Food for
thought here.
>2) the amino acid requirements by yeast for growth
The most oft cited suggestion I have come across is to keep FAN levels above
200 mg/ml to avoid stuck or slow fermentations.
>3) the concentrations of the above that can be expected in all grain
>worts, and
This is dependent upon a number of variables including your grain selection,
mashing regime, wort boil, etc...
But, if I may use the numbers George throws out in the above article as a
f'rinstance:
All-malt wort at 12 degrees P (SG = 1.048) approx. 300-325 mg/L FAN
All-malt wort at 10 degrees P (SG = 1.040) approx. 250-270 mg/L FAN
>4) the situations in which supplements to the wort might be required?
If your FAN is below 150 ml/L you might need supplements to avoid stuck or
incomplete fermentations. For more info refer to M. Lodahl's article in
Brewing Techniques (given below) and to M. Meilgaard's chapter on Wort
Composition in "The Practical Brewer" (not available any more on line).
http://brewingtechniques.com/library/backissues/issue1.2/lodahl.html
Yeast nutrient/energizer, however you want to package it, can be used for
stuck or slow fermentations, but your best bet is to avoid this situation by
carefully choosing malt extracts which are really ALL MALT, do a partial
mash or move to all-grain brewing along with keeping adjuncts low. Some
products labeled as yeast nutrients may only provide a source of the
ammonium ion such as urea or diammonium phosphate. Other may actually
contain peptones and yeast extracts. Personally, I only use these additives
as a last resort for a batch beer. I save it for my starters by adding a
few grams of each - you know, as a snack.
Glen Pannicke
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 14:31:02 +1000
From: David Lamotte <lamotted@ozemail.com.au>
Subject: More (but different) Yeast questions
Well it certainly is yeast season here on the HBD, and isn't it great.
With all this talk of starters, amino acids and contaminated smack packs
- I would like to focus on what Wyeast does well (rather than what they
may have done badly)
How do they prepare their foil packs so that the yeast stays viable and
(relatively) free from contamination for years ?
I have just smacked a pack of 1028 dated March 1998. No this is not a
misprint - it was nearly 2 years old. Admittedly it took 5 days to
swell to full size, but I will be pitching what I expect to be clean,
viable yeast into my starter tonight.
For comparison I have had an ozzie liquid yeast that was dead after 12
months in the fridge, but an old Wyeast has never failed me. I read in
texts that yeast should be stored under wort for a maximum of 2 weeks,
so how do they do it ?
Does anyone know what conditions the propogate the yeast under prior to
packaging, and can we adopt it for storing our yeast at home ?
Also I was amazed to read in Kunze, that a single yeast cell, under
ideal conditions, can split its own weight of glucose into Ethanol + CO2
each and every second - that equals 200 million molecules of glucose.
Boy that's fast - gotta love them yeast. And no I haven't performed
this experiment myself or seen it with my own eyes. On this occasion I
am happy to believe Kunze - unless of course it is one of the well known
typo's.
David Lamotte
Newcastle N.S.W. (thats a few hours North of the Baron)
Australia
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 00:43:50 -0500
From: phil sides jr <psides@carl.net>
Subject: Calcium Chloride
Anyone know a source for food-grade Calcium Chloride?
Phil Sides, Jr.
Concord, NH
- --
Macht nicht o'zapft ist, Prost!
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 01:32:49 -0500
From: "George de Piro" <gdepiro@mindspring.com>
Subject: commercial pitching rates
Hi all,
Bob expresses his view about commercial pitching rates:
"The debate rages. Several points have been made on the assumption that
commercial breweries pick their pitching rate for reasons of flavour etc.
"Sorry, they pitch high for one reason only, money. They cannot afford a 12
hour lag. If they can force through a batch of beer in 96 hours, a 3 hour
lag vs. a hour lag results in a 10% productivity gain."
Back to me:
While it is true that commercial brewers are concerned with money, which of
course = time, the successful breweries are actually concerned with flavor,
too. History has shown what happens to breweries that allow accountants to
alter the production techniques. The brewery goes under.
Schlitz was once one of the largest brewers in the U.S.A. Ever wonder what
happened to them? Is it that their marketing didn't include enough
big-breasted woman caressing beer bottles until the foam frothed out? Not
entirely. They chose to allow accountants to examine their brewing
procedures.
The bean counters saw that fermentation takes a relatively long time, and
time = money, so they asked if it could be reduced. The brewers were able
to speed up fermentation by using techniques common to yeast propagation,
including constant agitation of the wort. While this had a dramatic effect
on the rate of fermentation, it also had a dramatic impact on the flavor of
the beer.
You might think that your typical Schlitz drinker wouldn't know the
difference between well-made Schlitz and the accountant's version, but they
did. They also stopped drinking it. So much for Jeff Irvine's (aka "Dr.
Pivo") "full-flavored fusel lager."
While most of us agree that megabrews are boring, insipid products that
inspired us to begin this great hobby (or profession), you cannot simply
bash them with sweeping strokes claiming that they do not care about the
flavor of their beers. They care tremendously. The problem is the people
in charge of deciding what flavors are desirable also think Wonder bread is
great.
I'll stop my little rant, have fun!
George de Piro
C.H. Evans Brewing Company
at the Albany Pump Station
(518)447-9000
http://evansale.com (under construction)
Malted Barley Appreciation Society
Homebrew Club
http://hbd.org/mbas
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 01:39:34 -0500
From: "George de Piro" <gdepiro@mindspring.com>
Subject: RE: Cold break layering
Hi all,
Keith writes:
"I have noticed what I
take to be a layer of cold break suspended a few inches down from the top
of the wort. I do not recall seeing this until recently. Could it have
anything to do with my use of oxygenation (this is the only recent change
to my techniques)?"
Back to me:
Yes, it could be from the oxygenation. One method of cold break removal is
to bubble air through the wort and allow the bubbles to rise up with bits of
cold break attached to them. The cold break can then be removed from the
surface of the brew. I wouldn't have guessed that 2, 30-second bursts of O2
would be enough to float a significant amount of cold break, but hell, there
are far more obvious things in the world that I haven't figured out too
easily, so it could be.
Have fun!
George de Piro
C.H. Evans Brewing Company
at the Albany Pump Station
(518)447-9000
http://evansale.com (under construction)
Malted Barley Appreciation Society
Homebrew Club
http://hbd.org/mbas
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 23:55:52 PST
From: "Dic Gleason" <dicgleason@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re:Plastic fermenters
>A company called Hobby Beverage Equipment Company
>makes 5.5,6.5, and 12 gal plastic conicals with stands, thermometers,
>racking arm, bottom drain valve, etc..
I have the information from Hobby Beverage Equipment Company. While there
are no thermometers on the fermenters they do have everything else.
They have 2 different 6.5 Gal conical fermenters ($95.00 and $168.00)
12 gal for $225.00. A half barrel that holds 25 gal. is $350.00 and the
Full Barrel, 40 gal is yours for only $425.00.
No mention of shipping or handling costs.
I have only received the catalog and don't know anything about the company
so I have no affiliation with the company.
They are at www.minibrew.com
Dic
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 07:03:48 -0500
From: Richard_R_Gontarek@sbphrd.com
Subject: Kolsch yeast
I'm thinking about brewing a Kolsch, since it is one style I've never
done before, but I'm confused about which yeast I should use. Should I
go with Wyeast 1007 (German Ale) or 2565 (Kolsch)? If anyone has used
these yeasts in this style, I'd appreciate your advice. Thanks!
Cheers,
Rick Gontarek
Owner/Brewmaster
The Major Groove Picobrewery
Trappe, PA
Richard_R_Gontarek@sbphrd.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 15:26:07 +0200
From: Terence Tegner <wheaties@mweb.co.za>
Subject: MBAA
Hi brewing brethren,
South Africa to the rescue. I have downloaded the entire Practical Brewing
and burnt a CD with it. Anybody who is short a piece here and there is
welcome to contact me and I will attach the necessary. The CD is not for
sale. A crook I am not(not much anyway). The reason I downloaded it is
because I thought it might be the new edition (fat chance) as I bought the
original at great expense some years ago. A well worthwhile investment, I
might add.
Regards
Terence Tegner (pronounced TYNER) aka Phail
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 05:52:31 -0800 (PST)
From: Matthew Comstock <mccomstock@yahoo.com>
Subject: Kettle/Bucket Mashing
Kevin M. Mueller writes:
"I decided to try mashing in my old enamel over
steel brewpot. It has a small chip in it, and I
was wondering if this will effect my flavor."
I doubt a little chip in your enamel pot would be
a problem. If you mash and the little chip
starts to look like a big chip, then I'd worry.
But I'll tell ya. I mash in my bottling bucket.
I presume you've got one.
I'd guess I spent less than $10 for my set up, if
you ignore the cost of the plastic bottling
bucket. Here's what I use:
1. I wrap my bottling bucket in that reflective
emergency blanket stuff and a couple of belts. I
don't lose but a few degrees over a couple hours.
Fine with me. Towels would probably work just
fine.
2. I use, but probably don't need, a grain bag
that on the inside of the bucket, to kind of hold
the mash. That was $8.
3. I have a drain made out of CPVC, the heat
resistant type. It's shaped in a question mark
shape and sits on the bottom of the bucket it
screws on to threads on the back side of the
bottling spigot. I just bought a 5 ft. length of
CPVC pipe(and cut it to size), several CPVC
elbows and a threaded adapter to attach to the
spigot threads. I drilled holes in the longer
length of tubing that sits on the bottom and
wrapped a piece of screen around it.
This sounds way more complicated than it is.
Just go to Home Depot, visit the plumbing
section, and start sticking things together like
Tinker toys. Bring your bottling bucket spigot,
too. If it fits together, buy it. I doesn't
have to look a certain way. You've just got to
move liquid from point A to point B. If I can do
it....
One advantage of this setup is that you mash and
lauter in the same container; a combitun. None
of this transferring-hot-mash business like you'd
have with your kettle (unless you have a spigot
in your kettle).
For a better description of the basic idea here,
check out the Library at:
http://brewery.org
for an article written by Mr. Jack Schmidling:
http://brewery.org/brewery/library/KettleARF.html
Matt
(I-like-the-hbd-I-guess-that-makes-me-a-wanker)
Comstock in Cincinnati
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 09:35:25 -0500
From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam@unc.edu>
Subject: heads and tails
Steve A. wrote...
"Oxo-acids are the 'heads' of the amino acids, while
the ammonia ions are the 'tails'. Whenever yeast consume AAs
they
immediately separate the heads and tails even if they need to
rebuild the very same
amino acid they just tore apart. It probably has to do with the
regulation
mechanisms. Anyway if you feed your yeast just one, or a few
amino acids it will use
the 'tails' to make the others and to some smaller extent the
'heads' will be reused.
The unused 'heads' or oxo-acids are just begging to be made into
fusels or
aldehydes."
Heads and tails?? I hope Phil isn't listening and, if he is, has
stopped spinning that poor cat. Felines of Burradoo beware.
Cheers!
Marc
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 10:04:24 -0500
From: "Pannicke, Glen A." <glen_pannicke@merck.com>
Subject: Re: Misguided Post Hogs
On Sun, 20 Feb 2000 "MudGuts" spoke of Misguided Post Hogs
>to the guys who espouse great gobbets
>of knowledge beyond beer brewing
>dont post until you know what you are
>talking about. Theres a lot of brewers
> who are scientists and engineers
>who also know what is being written
>is worse than improbable - its often
>utter shite.
Henk,
Aside from ranting about us "wankers", do you have anything of value to
offer this forum? If you (or any of your technically inclined fellows down
under) see something which is "utter shite" then speak up! It's your duty!
We'll flame that fountain of misinformation until he cries like a little
girl and publicly admits his ignorance!
Granted, there's a LOT of bollocks being thrown around in here, but I happen
to have gleaned quite a bit from those you may consider to be some of the
major spewers. Half of the experiments run here are not designed, but then
who has the time, money or resources to run a proper DOE on hop schedules or
oxygenation? For the most part we'll have to live with simple "spurments"
like Dr. Pivo does. Not only is this forum a vehicle for the dissemination
of information, but it is a social environment and a form of entertainment
where people say hello, BS, argue and discuss (even the trite). I hate to
admit it, but some of the flames can be enjoyable too ;-) Personally, I'm a
relatively new voice on the HBD and I've lurked for a number of months
before ever speaking up. I can guarantee you that without this interaction,
the forum would be dead and lifeless.
Glen Pannicke
alehouse.homepage.com
Opinions are like a**holes - everyone's got one and they all stink!
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 10:19:27 -0500 (EST)
From: patrick finerty <zinc@zifi.psf.sickkids.on.ca>
Subject: N2 fixation and one more thing about fusels
howdy folks,
"Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander@worldnet.att.net> makes a
statement that is not quite right.
> Most bacteria and fungi (and in all probability yeast) can reduce
> nitrate to ammonia, or consume ammonia ions directly for use,
by far and away, most organisms are incapable of fixing N2 to NH3
(reduction of atmospheric N2 to ammonia). this is a 'hard' reaction to
do and requires a special set of enzymes (the whole complex is called
nitrogenase). bacteria that can do this process (Nitrosomonas,
Nitrobacter) are sometimes found in a symbiotic relationship with
plants. the bacteria form so-called root nodules and supply the plant
with NH3. it's best not to use probabilities when writing about
biochemical processes; save that for the geneticists and ecologists!
in a fit of mental weakness, i failed to use the appropriate
biochemical term for the process in which higher higher molecular
weight alcohols are produced.
if you care to search for info about this, the biochemical process is
called 'transamination' and is a part of a general process named
catabolism.
ok, back to the NMR spectra...
-patrick in toronto
- --
"There is only one aim in life and that is to live it."
Karl Shapiro,(1959) from an essay on Henry Miller's Tropic of Cancer
finger pfinerty@nyx10.nyx.net for PGP key
http://abragam.med.utoronto.ca/~zinc
------------------------------
Date: 22 Feb 2000 09:03:30 -0500
From: RCAYOT@solutia.com
Subject: Yeast Growth
while I really appreciate the comments Steve Alexander made about
fusels etc, tehre is a problem I have with his analysis of yeast
growth, to wit:
"Note that if we pitch REALLY big as in lager brewing, then 75% of the
final yeast cake is new growth, if you pitch really small, as from a
smack-pack, then maybe 99% of the final yeast is new growth. The
difference in flavor is not likely due to the difference of 75% vs 99%
new yeast growth. Adding an extra 32% (100*(99/75 -1)) of off-product
doesn't give the sort of night-and-day differences that underpitching
causes."
Well, if we have 75% new growth, then the 25% reproducted only three
times its orig9inal biomass, however if we have 99% new growth, the
result is about 100X increase in biomass, to me that is significant
yeast growth and would probably have a perceptible impact on beer
character.
Roger Ayotte
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 09:45:02 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Continuous agitation
Dave Burley <Dave_Burley@compuserve.com> wrote:
>Anyone care to
>explain how agitation causes the
>formation of fusel alcohols?
Don't know the actual mechanism, but I believe this is the reason for
Charlie P's admonition to "Relax, don't worry, have a homebrew." Worrying
can produce all kinds of bad effects, evidently including elevated fusels,
and is bad for your health anyway. It's nice to see scientific evidence
from M&BS to back up Charlie.
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: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 13:20:43 EST
From: JDPils@aol.com
Subject: Pitching Rates and Munich Malt
Greetings Fellow Brewer's,
Since early January I have been reading various posts on attenuation with
large amounts of munich malt, pitching rates in general, and of course
oxygenation. It has taken me a bit of time to formulate my experiences and
observations on these subjects. I too wonder how many of the great
"benchmark" German Beers such as Paulaner Salvator and Ayinger Dunkel can
acheive 80% attenuation and ferment in the high 40's to very low 50's and
produce a very clean tasting beer that is primarly munich malts and possibly
decoction mashed.
Being a lager head, I have strived to brew the best European, particularly
Czech and German styles. Attenuation has always been a focus for all lagers
I have made. I have never found my lagers to be too dry. I also beleive
higher residual sugars can compete with the various malt flavors and reduce
the mouth feel. I pay great attention to my yeast starters. In general, I
have found for lagers, the more yeast I pitch, the lower the ferment
temperature and the better results. I have been brewing both ales and lagers
for 11 years. I have made 22, 12 gallon batches of lagers since 1995, with
virtually the same process and equipment. Half were pilseners and half were
Munich or Bavarian styles.
On a side note, with my brewing practices below, I never have any problems
attenuating ales unless I am trying to make a high gravity beer. Apparant
attenution is close to the maximum for a specified yeast strain.
I have evolved my procedures to pitch 1/3 to 1/2 gal of starter solution
either by triple stepping a standard Wyeast smack pack or single stepping a
White Labs vial. Alternatively, I have repitched yeast from the primary
fermentor with or without washing in water and from the secondary by doing a
single starter to 1/3 gallons. I do not add yeast nutrients and only filter
hot break by using loose leave hops with a false bottom in my boiler. I
counterflow chill to 5F over the cold water temp, anywhere from 55 - 75F
depending on what time of year. I also oxygenate with a SS filter for 1
minute for a 6.8 gallon carboy.
I try to ferment between 48 - 55 absolute limits in a chest freezer. I have
seen lag times from 4 hours to three days, depnding on the pitching temp and
yeast starter used. There is a direct trade of between longer lag times and
subtle off flavors from higher pitching temps. The optimum condition is to
get the minimum lag time at the lowest pitching temperature. When stepping
up new yeast I always see longer lag times, however the beer still tasted
fine as long as the pitching temp was below 60 - 65F. Usually if I pitch at
or below 55F I need yeast from a primary fermentor be it mine or a local
brewery's to acheive short lag times. I consider less than 12 hours to be
acceptable.
This also brings up the question as to how we each detemine lag time. My
definition is visible foam, more than 10% of the area, on the top of the
fermentor without rousing.
I searched back about 5 years worth of recipes to try and understand how well
I have done. For pilseners I would say I have met with good success using a
variety of yeasts (WY2124, WY2178, WY 2206, WL Pilsener) at about 72 - 76%
apparant attenuation. These recipes use less than 10% munich and at least
90% pilsener malts.
For bocks, dunkels, and octoberfests I have used anywhere from 15% munich to
75% munich and in some cases 50 - 65% dark munich. For these beers
attenuation is a struggle. For those in the 15 - 25% range it appears I get
one or two percent less compared to a pils using the same yeast whereas for
30 - 75% munich about 3 - 5 points less. In one case I acheived only 65%
attenution with 67% dark munich malt.
My last batch of dunkel was 50% dark munich - 25% lght munich - 25% pils
malt. This beer had an apparent attenuation of 72%, which is 2% below what
the manufacturer says about the yeast strain. I pitched yeast from the
primary of a pilsener. This appears to be the best I can do wiothout further
advancements and I still am at FG's of 1.016 whereas I would like 1.014 or
1.012 for a 1.056 SG.
What I recommend is as follows:
1) For beers that use more than 30% Munich malts, yeast must come from the
primary of a previous batch or a commercial brewery to acheive the desired
amounts of attenuation. Even then expect a couple percentage points lower.
2) Pitch at the lowest temp possible. With the above yeast the lag time
should be 4 - 12 hours at 50 - 55F. For lagers with less than this amount of
munich, building up a starter will do just fine, but perhaps keep the
pitching temp up to 60 F until some CO2 is evolving.
3) Aerate or oxygenate at pitching is critical
In the future for high % munich beers I will try
1) mash temperatures in the 148 - 153 range to optimize fermentable sugars.
2) more yeast slurries from local breweries to reduce the ferment temp.
below 50 F, without increased lag or ferment times.
3) investigate water alkalinity and haardness to optimize more fermentables.
I hope this helps some of you in your quest for better beer. Any comments on
or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
Cheers,
Jim Dunlap
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 14:19:12 -0500
From: "Paul Kensler" <paul.kensler@attglobal.net>
Subject: Ester production?
I have something that puzzles me... Reading Kunze's book (Chapter 4),
regarding ester production, he states that INCREASED fermentation
temperature will LOWER ester production, and LOWER fermentation temperatures
will INCREASE ester production...
This seems counter to what I have previously known about ester production...
is there a caveat somewhere that explains this, or...? Admittedly, I have
not fully read the book yet, so is this in reference to lager yeasts
only?... Anyone with insight on Kunze's reference in specific, or ester
formation in general?
Paul Kensler
Lansing, MI
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 17:30:39 -0500
From: woodsj@us.ibm.com
Subject: Puerto Rico Brewpubs or Beer Bars
Have to make a quick business trip to Puerto Rico. I've searched
the Real Beer Page for brewpubs. No references to anywhere in
PR. Does the collective have any suggestions or experience ?
Looking for either brewpubs or good beer bars, either in San Juan
or anywhere on the island. Post replies to HBD or private e-mail is
fine. Thanks in advance. Somebody's got to do it..........
Jeff Woods
Camp Hill, PA
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 18:07:37 EST
From: JDPils@aol.com
Subject: underpitching
I cannot help put my two cents worth in on the concept of underpitching.
I think homebrewer's cannot avoid this with lagers, unless they are pitching
from a previous batch or from commercial yeast. Recommending underpitching to
a homebrewer can only result in grossly underpitching and inviting the
potential for off flavors and contamination. Most problems I have
encountered with off flavors in home brew come from poor yeast management,
usually underpitching. The only bad lagers I made were yeaars ago before I
didn't oxygenate and use large starters.
As for ales I think the only way to overpitch is to use an extremely large
slurry from a commercial brewery.
So, in general I beleive the best results will occur with the sortest lag
time and adjust the mash and ferment temperatures and select the correct
yeast strains to develop specific flavor profiles.
As for the claim that many American beers have no character due to
overpitching I strongly disagree and suggest that these claims be supported
by example so others may understand them.
I just went to a Winter Beer Festival at the Elysian Brew Pub in Seattle. We
tasted beers from many the larger and smaller breweries on the West Coast.
They all had what I call "house yeast character" Some were fruity, some with
hints of diacatyl, some having strong banna, and some clean. All reminicent
of other brews from these breweries.
Redhook's signature beer, ESB, which is OK and very consist when I have tried
it out of state, promotes diacatyl by stopping the fermentation prematurely.
Cheers,
Jim Dunlap
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 15:14:18 -0800
From: Brad Miller <millerb@targen.com>
Subject: Not one Element but Two
Does anyone know about running multiple heating elements at
the same time. Does this trip a breaker if they are on the same one?
I wanted to rig up my HLT with an element and run it at the same time
as my RIMS element. Would this work?
Brad
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 16:52:33 -0800
From: Steven Gibbs <gibbs@lightspeed.net>
Subject: Questions on Hops, Decoction, and Watering Down
While brewing this weekend a couple of issues came to mind: 1.) How do
you calculate bitterness units when reusing hops from a prior batch?;
2.) Has anyone done an analysis of the additional extraction rate on
modern malts when utilizing a decoction mash versus a single temperature
infusion mash?; and, 3.) If you have brewed a batch and received too
high of an original gravity, how do you calculate the addition of
sterile water to lower the gravity to the appropriate level?
I was brewing two batches and because I had utilized a large quantity of
noble hops in a Pilsner, I decided after draining the hopped wort into
my fermentors, to go-ahead and first wort hop (FWH) with the six ounces
of whole hops while also adding my normal during hops for the second
brew. I tasted the tea at the conclusion of the session just prior to
pitching the East and it tasted absolutely wonderful, and very different
from what I would normally expect.
The result of decocting my German 2-row Pils malt in a single decoction
mash schedule seemed to bump my extract up approximately 5 points on a
10 gallon batch. It would be interesting to see which techniques would
not only contribute positively to taste but also to economy by allowing
a higher extract rate without a tremendous amount of additional effort.
Finally, as you can probably tell from my last question, my pilsner
finished too high and so I added some boiled water which was left to
cool to room temperature prior to infuseing. I will soon find out the
results but I was curious for future reference on how to calculate this
type of high gravity brewing. Thanks for your answers.
Steve Gibbs
Bakersfield FOAM
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 20:54:36 EST
From: RBoland@aol.com
Subject: MCAB 2 - Be There.
The Second Annual Masters Championship of Amateur Brewing and Technical
Conference (MCAB2) will indeed be a national and international event! So
far, we have speakers, judges, and conference attendees from Alberta,
Alabama, California, Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Massachusetts,
Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, New York, New Hampshire, North Carolina,
Ontario, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, Vermont, and Virginia.
Don't miss this opportunity to rub shoulders and trade experiences with some
of the best brewers and judges around. You'll also have ample opportunity to
taste some great homebrew, including cask ales. When: March 24, 25, and 26,
2000. Where: Hampton Inn Union Station, St. Louis, MO. Information and
registration instructions are on the St. Louis Brews website,
www.stlbrews.org.
We've also just expanded the program, adding Dave Logsdon of Wyeast and Chris
White of White Laboratories to the agenda. They'll share the same stage so
get your registrations in and your questions ready!
We'll meet you in St. Louis.
Bob Boland
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 21:02:42 -0600
From: Keith Busby <kbusby@ou.edu>
Subject: Wisconsin Water
Anyone out there in Hartland-Delafield-Oconomowoc-Wales who can tell me
what the local water is like? I am moving there this summer and may be on a
well. Replies best off-list, I should think.
Keith Busby
George Lynn Cross Research Professor
Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies
University of Oklahoma
780 Van Vleet Oval, Room 202
Norman, OK 73019
Tel: (405) 325-5088. Fax: (405) 325-0103
Starting Fall 2000, Professor of French
University of Wisconsin-Madison
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 22:23:41 EST
From: JGrabowski@aol.com
Subject: Bluff City Brewers 12th Annual Homebrew Competition
The Bluff City Brewers and Connoisseurs are proud to announce the 12th Annual
Homebrewer's Extravaganza.
First round judging to be held Friday 4/7/00 beginning at 6:30pm at
Admiral Benbow's, hospitality party to follow.
Balance of categories will be judged on Saturday 4/8/00 beginning at
8:45am at Bosco's Pizza Kitchen.
Awards dinner that evening at the High Point Pinch.
Great prizes will be awarded for Best of Show, Best of Ales, Best of Lagers,
Memphis Metro Brewer of the Year and the second annual Johnny Appleseed Cider
contest.
1st, 2nd and 3rd place winners will receive our beautiful Commemorative Pint
Glasses and the all new 2000 Custom Commemorative 12th Annual Medals.
Entry packets and information is being added to the club's web page located
at memphisbrews.com and will be available by the end of February.
For more information, contact either Jay Grabowski (jgrabowski@aol.com) or
Rob Harris (robsteeler@aol.com). Best regards and good brewing!!!!!
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 23:54:42 -0400
From: Aaron Perry <vspbcb@earthlink.net>
Subject: Stones & Phillers:Don't drink and post!
<HTML>
Sorry to Dan.......but thanks,
<P>I think I had too many Tripples that night, I wasn't too clear.
I do in fact have a William's Carbonation stone(no affil.). This
unit consists of a long tube (stone on the end) that is fitted into the
short "in" tube with a provided washer. This results in getting the
carbonation stone(ss 2 micron) pretty close to the bottom of the keg.
So the gas "in" is still gas "in". The "out" is the normal unobstructed
dip tube. My problem is the beer was going through the stone, up
the tube and out of the "in" connection. After that it trickled down the
gas line of the philler and into the bottle............backwards!? I double
checked everything, then bottled a braggot with the same carb. level /
temp. This brew bottled smooth as could be,
<BR>normal, easy "counterphilling"(no affil.). After my good session
I figured I'd try the "stone" brew again... same out through the in routine.
I played with the pressure, high and low. I raised the keg as high as possible
figuring the extra couple inches might help the siphon pull the beer down
the "out" tube. No luck still. Just a steady trickle from the "in" tube!
<BR>Hope this clears things up. Better yet hope this helps to figure
out what's wrong
<P>Thanks a lot!!
<P>Aaron Perry
<BR><A HREF="mailto:vspbcb@earthlink.net">vspbcb@earthlink.net</A>
<BR>
<BR> </HTML>
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #3256, 02/23/00
*************************************
-------
