Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #3293
HOMEBREW Digest #3293 Fri 07 April 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:
attenuation again ("Doug Moyer")
Re: English/Scottish Ales (KMacneal)
Oasis Capstone ESB ("Leonard, Phil")
HSA & Glyco-Proteins ("Nathaniel P. Lansing")
Restarting stuck wine ("Nathaniel P. Lansing")
NA beer procedure ("Nathaniel P. Lansing")
Belgian Wit ("Pannicke, Glen A.")
Hops in my primary ("Charles Sprigg")
Carbonating Barlywine (Richard Foote)
Re: Kegging (Jeff Renner)
Re: Sanitizing on the cheap (Demonick)
Re: Sanitizing on the cheap (Jeff Renner)
RE: Phil Yates post ("Murray, Eric")
Mash Hops (Dana Edgell)
simple green (Ralph Link)
pretentions and thick dough-in (Jim)
Week long diacytl rest, Fining with Ising Glass (procedure) (Charley Burns)
Secondary Fermentation (John Leggett)
* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!
* Entries for the 18th Annual HOPS competition are due 3/24-4/2/00
* See http://www.netaxs.com/~shady/hops/ for more information
* 18th Annual Oregon Homebrew Festival - entry deadline May 15th
* More info at: http://www.hotv.org/fest2000
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: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 09:10:54 -0400
From: "Doug Moyer" <shyzaboy@yahoo.com>
Subject: attenuation again
Brewers (and brewsters),
"Penn, John" <John.Penn@jhuapl.edu> takes Alan Meeker's comments and
combines them with a single irrelevant data point and comes to a completely
illogical conclusion. (Sorry to be so blunt, John, but them's the apples.)
Without knowing the composition of John's wort (sold as a health
supplement?) no conclusions whatsoever can be drawn about his yeast's
performance. None. Period. (Also, just because the gravity is over 1.000
doesn't mean that fermentable sugars remain.)
All you librarians out there: what does the literature say about variations
between COMMON strains of yeasts and their ability to process various
sugars? (Let's not discuss the weird yeasts at this point.) Most of the
variation that I've seen discussed on the hbd refers only to lager yeasts'
ability to ferment mannose (or perhaps another dextrin), which ale yeasts
are not able to process. This is NOT relevant to my original question which
referred only to ale yeasts, but probably doesn't make an appreciable
difference anyway.
Assuming you had identical wort composition, why would 1056 attenuate
differently from 1728? Simple question. Anyone have a answer that isn't just
a WAG?
(Okay, the literature will most likely focus on lager yeasts. Whatever--as
long as you lay out the data in an informative fashion--not just broad
edicts.)
Brew on!
Doug Moyer
Salem, VA
Star City Brewers Guild: http://hbd.org/starcity
"There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness.'"
~ Dave Barry
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 07:19:00 EDT
From: KMacneal@aol.com
Subject: Re: English/Scottish Ales
In a message dated 4/6/2000 12:17:29 AM Eastern Daylight Time, homebrew-Alex
MacGIllivray writes:
<< Does anyone have a recipie for an English or Scotish ale that might have
been brewed around the 1890's.
Thanks,
Alex MacGIllivray >>
Alex,
Here's a recipe I adapted from the Scotch Ales book in the brewing series.
It's reported to be representative of beers from the 1860's. I've made it a
couple of times, but I haven't been able to get it to carbonate very well.
Use a large starter (I grew up a yeast pack to 1 gallon, decanted & pitched;
I also pitched on a yeast cake of a previous batch of lower gravity beer)
Mac's More Than a Wee Heavy
Category : Strong Scotch Ale
Method : Partial Mash
Starting Gravity : 1.131
Ending Gravity : 1.033
Alcohol content : 12.7%
Recipe Makes : 5.0 gallons
Total Grain : 21.13 lbs.
Color (srm) : 26.7
Efficiency : 68%
Hop IBUs : 57.4
Malts/Sugars:
1.50 lb. Biscuit malt
6.63 lb. Light Malt Extract Syrup
10.00 lb. Scottish Ale Malt
3.00 lb. Amber Dry Malt Extract
Hops:
4.00 oz. Kent-Goldings 5.0% 45 min
Boil temperature of water: 212F
Grain Starting Temperature: 65F
Desired Grain/Water Ratio: .95 quarts/pound
Strike Water: 5.02 gallons of water at 179F
First Mash Temperature: 158F
Water Absorbed by Grain: 2.11 gal
Water Evaporated during boil: 1.50 gal
Wort Left in Brewpot: 0.33 gal
Add 3.92 gal of water to yield 5.0 gal of wort
Notes:
Salt additions to mash water (I have very soft water):
1/4 tsp kosher salt
5g calcium carbonate
8g water crystals (gypsum & epsom salts)
Wyeast Scotch Ale Yeast
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 08:01:16 -0500
From: "Leonard, Phil" <p_leonard@dsionline.com>
Subject: Oasis Capstone ESB
Hello, I searched through the HBD archive hoping to find a recipe for this
great ESB but did not find one. I was wondering if anyone here has the
recipe.
Thanks, Phil
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 09:31:05 -0400
From: "Nathaniel P. Lansing" <delbrew@compuserve.com>
Subject: HSA & Glyco-Proteins
In reference to HSA; "The evidence documenting the negative effects of
hot-side aeration is extensive.
(For examples see Fix 1992, 15:5; Narziss, Brauwelt 1993, 3; Huige
1992.)"
Fix "Analysis of Brewing Techniques" page 25
On glyco-proteins; "Recent research has distinquished beer constituents
that are responsible for the formation of beer foam from those that
contribute to the foam's texture and retention (Heinz 1987; Siebert
and Knudsen 1989; Melm, Tung, and Pringle 1995). In regard to its
formation, dissolved carbon dioxide and moderate molecular weight proteins
(molecular weights near 10,000 daltons) are most important. In
striking contrast, foam stability is strongly enhanced by the presence of
carbohydrate/protein complexes.
The proteins consist of roughly 10% of the complex and have molecular
weights around 40,000 daltons."
ibid, pg 131
Glyco-proteins are also mentioned in a recent "Journal of the ASBC".
...................................
N.P. (Del) Lansing
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 09:31:06 -0400
From: "Nathaniel P. Lansing" <delbrew@compuserve.com>
Subject: Restarting stuck wine
Russ asked about restarting a stuck maple wine. The most sure way (not the
only way) of restarting
a stuck wine is:
Get a package of Lalvin K1-V yeast. Rehydrate as normal in 1/2 cup water.
After 15 minutes add 1 teaspoon sugar and 1 teaspoon of yeast
_energizer_the kind with vitamins and yeast hulls; it
should be brownish in color and smell of vitamins. When that mixture is
fermenting actively (15 min ?)
add 1/4 cup of the stuck wine. Do not aerate, and wait for the fermentation
to come back to Kraeusen.
Now add 1/2 the volume of the starter (you should have 3/4 cup now) of
stuck wine (you add 3/8 cup
stuck wine). Wait for that to come back to kraeusen, that can be a coupla
hours. Add 1/2 the starter
volume again in stuck wine (1 1/8 cup starter + 9/16 cup stuck wine). Wait
til this comes to kraeusen.
Continue increasing the starter volume by 1/2 its' volume in stuck wine,
each time waiting til active fermentation is evident. When you have 1/2
your batch as an active starter you can mix in the final
half of the stuck wine. This obviously will require a series of
increasingly larger vessels. The K1-V
yeast has a "Competitive factor" which helps it take over the fermention (
not a big deal, the other
yeast is shot) and is a neutral yeast which shouldn't taint the flavor of
the maple. An additional
teaspoon of yeast hulls halfway through the process will help the yeast
tolerate the alcohol that
is already present. The alcohol is why the repeated steps, slowly allowing
the yeast to adapt to the
high alcohol already in the wine. Just adding a fresh yeast will not
produce rapid results, it will be stunned
by the alcohol. Be patient through the process it will work.
Best of luck,
N.P.(Del) Lansing
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 09:31:04 -0400
From: "Nathaniel P. Lansing" <delbrew@compuserve.com>
Subject: NA beer procedure
I lost track of who asked about boiling off alcohol to produce NA beer.
I tried a method with some reasonable results. A local theater company
needed NA stout for
a play so the actor could drink 4 beers each play and not slur his lines,
it is a small venue and
the audience would have smelled rootbeer. The product was donated to stay
on the proper side
of the BATF. Take a 4 lb can of hopped malt extract and dissolve that into
5 gallons 190 degree water.
This should pasturize it suitably for our purposes. Let stand 15 minutes
before running through
a counterflow chiller. Add yeast and bottle as if this was homemade
rootbeer. When proper carbonation
is reached refrigerate the whole batch. Simple enough. It doesn't make real
beer, but it comes out
better than commercial NAs. A kit with an assertive hopping rate will help
counter the inevitable residual
sugar.
Be lucky,
N.P.(Del) Lansing
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 09:52:44 -0400
From: "Pannicke, Glen A." <glen_pannicke@merck.com>
Subject: Belgian Wit
On Wed, 5 Apr 2000 Chris Schiffer wrote of Belgian Wit:
>Interesting to know. Lynne claims she "will not reveal the type of
>coriander nor orange peel." But I will. The orange peel is Spanish or
>Haitian grown and the coriander is a good high oil content coriander
>intended for use in the liquor and liqueur industry.
Chris,
Thank you for providing this forum with *USEFUL* information that benefits
the entire homebrewing community by expanding our knowledge of the subject
and *NOT* using it as a vehicle for crass commercialism.
Glen Pannicke
glen@pannicke.net
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 07:05:48 PDT
From: "Charles Sprigg" <csprigg@hotmail.com>
Subject: Hops in my primary
Hello all,
I'm new to this whole home brewing world - I have only completed one 5 gal
batch so far, and I started my second last night. The first batch (an All
Malt Amber) turned out nicely (much to my surprise). The new one I just
started is an American Pale Ale.
My question is about hops in the primary.
First some information - on my first batch I placed my hops in a hop bag and
as a result it came out nicely at the end of the boil. With this last batch
I didn't use a hops bag. I added 1 1/2 oz bittering hops and boiled 55 min,
then added the finishing hops (another 1 1/2 oz) for the last 5 min.
When I went to pour the wort into the primary through a funnel (with a
screen) it clogged the screen almost immediately, rendering my funnel
useless. In a mild panic, I tried to clean the hops off the screen with my
brewing spoon. No luck - still clogged. So, I just dumped the wort into
the primary and went on with the process. Taking Mr. Papizans advice I had
a homebrew (yummmm...) and tried not to worry.
Right now my primary is fermenting away vigorusly, but there is/was a lot of
suspended hops in the liquid. Is this okay? Will it affect the quality or
flavor of the brew? Is there anything I can do to fix this?
I'm hoping it will settle out and when I rack to my secondary I'll have nice
clear beer. What are the chances of that?
Sorry to bother you with beginner questions. But, thanks for any advice you
can share. Private e-mail is great if this is not worth putting on the
list.
Thanks,
Charlie Sprigg
Bristol, Vermont USA
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 10:31:35 -0400
From: Richard Foote <rfoote@mindspring.com>
Subject: Carbonating Barlywine
Dale Fogg asks:
>I have a barley-wine (OG 1.100 - FG 1.012) that has been in the secondary
>since November. My question is this, what is the best way to carbonate this?
>Force carbonate, or is there enough active yeast left to just prime and
>bottle? And speaking of bottles, I would like to bottle in smaller (6-8 oz)
>bottles, but all of the sources that I have checked do not have any thing
>like this. Any suggestions? Thanks in Advance for your help.
I've tried three different methods with barleywine.
Method 1: Prime with dextrose only (O.G. unk. no doubt over 1.000)
Method 2: No priming (O.G. 1.120)
Method 3: Prime with fresh yeast and dextrose (O.G. 1.100)
Results:
Method 1: Worked great
Method 2: Flat as anything
Method 3: Worked great
Sorry I don't have more details, but I don't have access to my records
right now.
Source for bottles:
The 8 oz. Coke bottles work great. Since they are only very lightly tinted
green, keep 'em in a cardboard box to avoid the brew becoming light struck.
These bottles seem to be popular with the office crowd, at least around
here in the Atl area.
Hope this helps,
Rick Foote
Whistle Pig Brewing and Home Remodeling
Murrayville, GA
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 09:47:34 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Kegging
Richard Foote <rfoote@mindspring.com> wrote about Sankeys:
>Once you get the spear removed, you'll want to do the standard cut off the
>unless you filter, which would make cleanup between fillings much easier.
>A tubing cutter works great for this.
I don't filter and haven't found this to be at all necessary. I often keg
beer right out of the primary that's still slightly fermenting. That gives
natural carbonation (I may have to vent excess or add some via the CO2 tank
depending on how well I guessed at the remaining extract). Even with the
sediment from racking still fermenting beer, after the first glass or two,
I get perfectly clear beer until the keg blows. If I'm going to be
transporting the keg I'll rack it off the sediment to another.
Here's a racking trick I just picked up from watching Mike O'Brien of
pico-Brewing Systems. Mike puts an ordinary plastic picnic tap in line as
a valve. He just shoves the plastic line on the spout (I've done this with
a short hose for quick n dirty bottling) and uses the tap as a valve. You
can flip it backwards to make it stay on, of course. No more folding hoses
or playing with those little plastic hose clamps.
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: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 08:22:51 -0700
From: Demonick <demonick@zgi.com>
Subject: Re: Sanitizing on the cheap
From: "Hampo, Richard (R.)" <rhampo@ford.com>
> I use Iodophor for sanitizing carboys, kegs, and buckets. However,
> being the frugal type, I typically don't fill the whole carboy (or
> keg or whatever). I put in a quart or two and slosh the stuff around
> for the specified couple minute contact time. The question is: Does
> the recommended contact time mean submersion or is "wet" OK? I have
> not had any trouble with this method for the 5+ years I
If you haven't had any trouble for 5 years, it seems to be working.
Personally, I soak. If your container is sealable like a keg or
a carboy, you only need to fill the container somewhat more than 1/2
way. Let it soak right-side up, then turn it upside-down.
You can also use the same solution to sanitize the carboy as you do to
sanitize your brewing gear during a session. Sanitize the carboy,
empty the carboy into a bucket, seal the carboy, and use the solution
in the bucket to sanitize your gear during the brewing session.
Cheers!
Domenick Venezia
Venezia & Company, LLC
Maker of PrimeTab
(206) 782-1152 phone
(206) 782-6766 fax orders
demonick at zgi dot com
FREE PrimeTab SAMPLES! Enough for three 5 gallon batches. Fax, phone, or
email: name, shipping address (no P.O.B.) and phone number. (I won't
call. It's for UPS in case of delivery problems). Sorry, lower 48 only.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 11:45:43 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <nerenner@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Sanitizing on the cheap
"Hampo, Richard (R.)" <rhampo@ford.com> asks about sanitizing with iodophor:
>Does the recommended contact time mean submersion or is
>"wet" OK?
Wet is all you need. Big dairy tanks are sanitized with a few gallons that
are sprayed. That's why they have wetting and foaming agents. 25 ppm @
one minute should do the trick, or 12.5 ppm @ ten minutes, according to p.
9 of the new Williams catalog (where they sell test strips). I paid
~$10/gallon for dairy tank sanitizer bottle - that's really cheap!
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: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 13:36:12 -0400
From: "Murray, Eric" <emurray@sud-chemieinc.com>
Subject: RE: Phil Yates post
Phil writes:
When I first started brewing I worried about so many things that I should
and shouldn't do and it all came from reading books and listening to people
who I thought sounded like they knew it all. It was only from experience
that I gained confidence and somewhere down the track it occurred to me that
so much of what I had previously taken as gospel was complete and utter
bullshit.
Brewing good beer just isn't this complicated. Unless you want to make it
so.
All I can say about this Phil is, AMEN Brother.
Eric
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 11:10:24 -0700
From: Dana Edgell <EdgeAle@cs.com>
Subject: Mash Hops
Jeff Renner posts Hubert Hanghofer citing Ludwig Narziss
to state that FWH works because the hop oils are oxidized into soluble
forms without the guarding vapor blanket and vapor stripping.
Can we assume from this that when adding hops to the mash we don't actually
get any stabilization until the sparge stage when the already extracted hop
oils are exposed to oxygen in the kettle.
Is the standard stiring of the mash enough to oxidize the hop oils?
A more practical question for those with mash hopping experience: Are any
hop oils left behind in the grain bed absorbed by husks, grain etc. when
mash hopping so that the efficiency is lower and should be compensated for?
Thanks
Dana
PS: Does this mean that we have found a benefit from HSA (hop oil
stabilization) that can extend the wars even longer!
- --------------------------------------------------------------
Dana Edgell mailto:EdgeAle@cs.com
Edge Ale Brewery http://ourworld.cs.com/EdgeAle
San Diego
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 16:30:14 -0500
From: Ralph Link <rlink@escape.ca>
Subject: simple green
Has anyone had any experience using the cleaning product "simple green" as
a cleaning agent, kegs, carboys, etc. Thanks for any info provided, private
e-mail welcomed.
"Warm beer and bread
They say it will raise the dead"
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 21:14:55 -0400
From: Jim <jimala@apical.com>
Subject: pretentions and thick dough-in
Phil and/or Jill Yates write(s):
"When I first started brewing I worried about so many
things that I should and shouldn't do and it all came from reading books and
listening to people who I thought sounded like they knew it all. It was only
from experience that I gained confidence and somewhere down the track it
occurred to me that so much of what I had previously taken as gospel was
complete and utter bullshit."
Absolutely. This parallels my experience in brewing, and I suspect that of
many other lurkers, who read the Digest and giggle to themselves at the
silly pretentions of some (by no means all) posters. Kudos to Phil and/or
Jill for pointing this out.
Chad Bohl writes:
"Does anyone have any experience with a dough-in rate of about
2/3 qt. water per pound grain? "
Yep, I do that a lot. It's a bit hard to mix, though. I dough-in at 105F
for 20 minutes or so and then infuse to 150-160F, skipping the protein
rest, usually ending up with 1.75 to 2.25 quarts per lb., more or less.
And of course, relax and don't worry (see the above comments); hell, it's
just beer, after all. :)
Jim's Brewery Pages:
http://home.ptdprolog.net/~jimala/brewery/
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 18:24:14 -0700
From: Charley Burns <cburns99@pacbell.net>
Subject: Week long diacytl rest, Fining with Ising Glass (procedure)
I brewed my yearly dopple bock almost 3 weeks ago now. OG 1.085, Wyeast 2308,
2
litre starter (active when pitched). Primary for 14 days at 50-52F, got down
to 1 glub every 30 seconds so I pulled it out of the fermentation chiller and
brought up to 68F. Came up to 1 glub every 12 seconds and stayed there for 5
days. Now down to 1 glub per minute.
I think that was a bit more than a diacytl rest. Don't think it'll do much
harm though. When I pulled it out of the chiller it stank like sulfur. Smell
is gone now and it looks much better now that the yeast has mostly come out
of suspension.
I stopped by the HB shop today and picked up some Vienna malt to use this
left over 2308 to make a vienna. I picked up some ising glass finings to
try out (never used the stuff before).The instructions say to add it to a
little beer then mix it in to the main batch, but don't talk about sanitizing
it. I normally boil water, take it off heat and add gelatin, mix it up real
good, cool it down and then add to secondary. Can I do this with Ising Glass
too or is there some reason it can't be cooked?
Charley (working way too hard) in Sacratomato California.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 22:18:44 -0400
From: John Leggett <leggettjr@home.com>
Subject: Secondary Fermentation
Ok all you hard core all grain brewers, give the new guy a break and
tell me about secondary fermentation. I am brewing extract kit ales in
a primary for about 7 days. How long do I rack these brews to a
secondary? I'm just looking for some guidelines and general advice.
You posts are entertaining and valuable , but a little over my head
(currently). thanks for the advice.
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #3293, 04/07/00
*************************************
-------
