Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #4076
HOMEBREW Digest #4076 Fri 25 October 2002
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org
***************************************************************
THIS YEAR'S HOME BREW DIGEST BROUGHT TO YOU BY:
Northern Brewer, Ltd. Home Brew Supplies
http://www.northernbrewer.com 1-800-681-2739
Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********
Contents:
Re SNPA ("Grant")
yeast blending results ("Spinelli, Mike")
Spreadsheet for Lables ("Pete Calinski")
Holes in SS/conical seal (jayspies)
Conical Info ("Christian Rausch")
RE: SECONDARY posting by Kevin (Graham Stone)
Bottle Labels or Label Glue for Home Brew ("Romanowsky, Paul")
re: discussion about pH and Astringency ("Steve Alexander")
Subject: Re: yeast blending (G C)
Virus Alert (and apology for the interruption) ("Dave Flotree")
Re: SNPA (Bill Frazier)
Re: Subject: Re: yeast blending (Jeff Renner)
*
* Show your HBD pride! Wear an HBD Badge!
* http://hbd.org/cgi-bin/shopping
*
* Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!
*
Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org
If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!!
To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to request@hbd.org FROM THE E-MAIL
ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!**
IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, you cannot subscribe to
the digest as we cannot reach you. We will not correct your address
for the automation - that's your job.
HAVING TROUBLE posting, subscribing or unsusubscribing? See the HBD FAQ at
http://hbd.org.
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 or read the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org.
JANITOR on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 06:59:57 +1000
From: "Grant" <gstott@primus.com.au>
Subject: Re SNPA
G'day all,
Many thanks to all who took the time to help with my SNPA request.
SWMBO 's response was,"what have you been up to, to be getting so many
e-mails.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 07:36:19 -0400
From: "Spinelli, Mike" <paa3983@dscp.dla.mil>
Subject: yeast blending results
HBDers,
Thanks to Jeff, Jim, Christian and Mark for weighing in on my question.
Most agreed not to add the Nottingham yeast to the Victory Hopdevil slurry.
After the slurry settled out, I had 1/3 pint (4 oz.) of pure yeast instead
of the 8 oz. I thought I had. To me, it didn't seem enough for 20 gallons
of a 1.060 IPA.
So last night I cooked up a 1.5 gallon DME 1.060 starter and pitched in the
1/3 pint slurry. It was at high krausen this morning in a 6 gallon carboy.
I plan on brewing 3 days from now, at which time most of the yeast will be
settled out by then.
Thanks again,
Mike
Cherry Hill NJ
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 09:02:59 -0400
From: "Pete Calinski" <pjcalinski@adelphia.net>
Subject: Spreadsheet for Lables
The spreadsheet I use for labels is in the HBD Preserve at:
http://hbd.org/pcalinsk/Labels.htm
It does rectangular labels not round. I used to use Avery and other brand
stick-on label material but it is too much of a pain to clean off the
adhesive. Now I just use milk. Dip the label in milk and stick it on. Any
kind of milk works, whole, 2%, skim. Washes off in seconds.
Only disadvantage, if you ice the bottles, the labels will come off.
Pete Calinski
East Amherst NY
Near Buffalo NY
***********************************************************
*My goal:
* Go through life and never drink the same beer twice.
* (As long as it doesn't mean I have to skip a beer.)
***********************************************************
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 14:04:00 +0000
From: jayspies@att.net
Subject: Holes in SS/conical seal
All -
All I have to say is WOW! My original post about drilling holes in my TMS
conical elicited a flood of responses....goes to show you what a wealth of
knowledge exists out there and how willing people are to share it.
Anyhoo, I was going to take Zymie's advice and buy a multi-step Unibit when
local HBD'er Dave Towson offered up his 7/8" Greenlee punch. So, being
opportunistic, I think I'll take that route. Thanks to all for the advice.
As for the related thread of sealing the top of a TMS conical, I noticed that
Beer Beer & More Beer (NA,YY) has silicone tubing on their site. This stuff,
from what I had heard, stays flexible and pliable at both hot and cold temps,
and might provide a better seal if slit and fitted around the conical lip than
would a similar piece of vinyl tubing, which tends to harden up at colder
temps. Any thoughts?
BTW, Zymie, lemme know when you have the conical stand up for sale and I'll be
first in line........ ;)
Jay Spies
Charm City Altobrewery
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 12:30:11 -0400
From: "Christian Rausch" <christian@rauschbiercompany.com>
Subject: Conical Info
Thanks to everyone showing interest in the conical project. I have gotten
quite a few inquiries about product selection, suppliers, and contact
information. I have gotten back to many of you but I think it will be easier
to publish a report when I have finished. So, please hang in there until I
can fininsh the project. I will publish all costs, suppliers, contact
information and opinions about the quality of the service and products used.
Enough information for you to come to your own conclusions.
Thanks.
Cheers!
Christian Rausch
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 17:37:32 +0100
From: Graham Stone <gstone@dthomas.co.uk>
Subject: RE: SECONDARY posting by Kevin
The issue about secondary fermentation is very confusing and badly written
in most homebrew books. In fact, it confused the hell out of me for some
time! Here's how I understand the terminology - it's not precise! In a nut
shell, primary fermentation is an expression that generally refers to the
process of fermenting wort to a desired final or finishing gravity. At his
point, you often have to do something to stop fermentation. Commercially,
this is generally done by cooling the fermenting wort to about 12C over a
period of about 30 hours or more. Sometimes the wort is racked into a clean
container so that it is removed from the bulk of the yeast. The beer is
then left to stand in a conditioning tank for between 2 days and 2 weeks or
more (different breweries do things differently). During this time, because
the yeast is not producing much CO2, it tends to sink to the bottom of the
vessel. After this, the beer is racked into casks. What's important at
this point is there there is an appropriate yeast count (ie cells per
litre). Now, the expression Secondary Fermentation is what takes place in
the cask. This results in the beer producing, ideally, about 1.5 volumes of
CO2 giving the finished beer a slight sparkle on the tongue - it shouldn't
be fizzy! This sparkle on the tongue is called Condition. Therefore, the
purpose of Secondary Fermentation is only to produce Condition and not, per
se, to drop the gravity of the beer any more than necessary (we allow about
0.5 degrees for Customs and Excise purposes). It is generally at the point
of racking into casks that the beer is also fined with isinglass too
(although secondary finings are sometimes added to the conditioning tank
instead).
In our brewery, this is how we do most beers:
1. Fermentation takes 2-3 days to get to the desired finishing gravity (say
1048 to 1012)
2. Rack into clean FV and chill to 12C over 48hrs
3. Rack into casks and store for at least 2 days, longer for stronger or
darker beers
4. Transport to pub and stand in cellar at 12C for minimum of 2 days
After that, it's ready to drink! So if we're desparate to try a new beer,
we could be drinking it 7-9 days after making it. So Kevin's schedule of
several weeks is, in my opinion, rather lengthy for many recipes. However,
there are some aspects to storage of casked beer you need to consider:
1. Different yeasts produce differing quantities of acetaldehyde and other
unwanted by-products. Acetaldehyde gives new beer a green apple taste
(acidic, tart, etc) and hence the expression Green Beer. This abates in
time and is part of the maturation process.
2. Bitterness abates slightly through time and hop/dark malt flavours
change too. This in turn affects the malt/hop taste balance as well
3. The longer you store the casked beer, the more condition it will acquire
(up to a point)
So, the length you store it for ought to be regarded as much a part of the
recipe as it is a part of the brewing process. That is, I would dream of
serving a strong winter brew after only 9 days (this should probably have at
least 4 weeks or more) whereas a 100% pale ale recipe with moderate hop
levels would, with our yeast, drink beautifully!!
Graham Stone
www.portchesterbrewery.co.uk
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 13:55:14 -0400
From: "Romanowsky, Paul" <paul.romanowsky@siemens.com>
Subject: Bottle Labels or Label Glue for Home Brew
Has anyone found a real good source for label stock, that when used to
create home printed labels for beer bottles, will come off easily when
soaked??
Or has anyone found a good glue/adhesive that when used on home printed
labels on plain paper will allow easy removal of labels.
My problem is that I like to label my beer, especially when giving it to
friends and family. I tried printing labels from a LaserJet printer, (ink
won't run when wet like from an inkjet printer), and adhering them to the
bottles with plain MILK. This works OK, but problems are that the milk glue
smells as it spoils on the back of your label and beer that lasts awhile
before drinking sometimes develops a mold on the label.
Most commercially available labels have adhesive that IS TOO GOOD and hence
makes it hard to remove the labels afterwards. So, I'm looking for a good
solution. I'm sure someone out there has cracked this nut and I would like
to know how. Thanks in advance.
Paul Romanowsky
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 13:50:24 -0400
From: "Steve Alexander" <steve-alexander@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: re: discussion about pH and Astringency
Hans Aikema writes ..
> [...] I found the next data:
[...]>extract%: FW=16.3 S1=13.9 S2=5.3 S3=1.6
>Polyphenols (mg/liter) FW=171 S1=172 S2=184 S3=294
>Anthocyanogene FW=80 S1=78 S2=117 S3=222
[..]
>Does this help Steve??
Thanks very much for the data Hans. The trends in this data
completely contradict results that appear in M&BS (pp 294, 295,
273). This adds to the current confusion, but sometimes
confusion is a good thing - it requires that we rethink the issue.
The earlier study by Stone & Grey in 1948 show
extract%: FW=20.5 S1=16.9 S2=8.9 S3=6.0 S4=5.0
tannin: FW=78 S1=49 S2=25 S3=24 S4=18 mg/L
On pp 273 M&BS shows graphs from a continuous sparge
that show total phenols, and anthocyanogens following about
the same trend as the Grey&Stone study above. That is the
concentrations in mg/L drop off dramatically late in the sparge
tho' the extract drops off even faster. This by Woof & Pierce
in 1966 JIB.
I find the Stone and Grey brew with 4 sparges odd since the
extract remains so high (5P) in the last sparge. The Woof & Peirce
data on extract look more realistic to me. As does Hans' Narziss data.
There is a huge difference in these data sources. Narziss'
anthocyanogen numbers rise roughly by a factor of 3 at the
factor of about 3 from the peak to the last runnings.
None of this data really tells us if the pH increase late in the mash
*causes* tannin release or if it just correlates, nor if lowering
sparge pH would prevent much tannin extraction.. The M&BS
p295 graph that shows the pH+tannin correlation best is from a
1936 German study by Schooled.
As English sparges proceed the phenolic levels fall.
In Germany as the sparge proceeds the phenolic levels rise.
I hope to find a more satisfying explanation!
-S
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 12:01:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: G C <gsd4lyf@yahoo.com>
Subject: Subject: Re: yeast blending
Aren't there big differences between
harvested/repitched brewery yeast cells and lab-raised
yeast cells (i.e. lab-raised yeast is grown under
aerobic conditions, which makes for healthier cell
walls and thus, healthier cells). Lab-raised yeast is
also purer. Doesn't this partially account for the
differences seen in suggested pitching rates between
repitched brewery yeast and lab-raised yeast?
In the March-April BYO issue, Dave Logsdon of Wyeast
suggested that healthy lab-raised yeast could be
pitched at a rate that is 1/2 to 1/10 below the
standard rate, which would seem to explain why one
relatively small pitchable vial of healthy commercial
yeast can successfully ferment a five gallon batch of
wort.
What does the current research/data indicate about
differences between lab-raised v. harvested yeast and
suggested yeast starter pitching rates?
Guy
Los Gatos, CA
Mike Spinelli <paa3983@dscp.dla.mil> writes from
Cherry Hill NJ:
>>I'm doing a 20 gallon all grain IPA batch with a
1.060 OG this weekend. I've got about 8 oz. of solid
yeast slurry from Victory Brewing I plan on using.
I'm concerned I might not have enough yeast, so I was
thinking of throwing in 5 packets of dry Nottingham
(re-hydrated) for insurance.
Questions: Do I need the extra dry yeast? If so,
what effect will the
blending of the 2 yeast have on the batch?>>
And Jeff Renner <JeffRenner@comcast.net> responds:
>>I don't think you need the extra yeast. The rule of
thumb is that ideal pitching rate is 1/2 fluid ounce
(one tablespoon, or 15 cc) yeast solids (thick, like
putty or peanut butter) per gallon for ales, one ounce
per gallon for lagers. So you are just a little
under ideal, but way above the usual pitching rates.
Think about even the newer pitchable tubes - the can't
contain more than a fluid ounce, yet they work pretty
doggone well for five gallons.
You could just boost your yeast by feeding it with
some wort the day before. I'd suggest a pint or two
in a carboy so you have lots of head space for
available oxygen and foaming. But I'll bet it isn't
necessary.
As to question #2, I'm sure the yeast will get along
OK (although there are some yeast with the killer
gene). It will change your character some -
Nottingham is quite attenuative and neutral in my
experience. Since Victory's ales are fruity (more to
my liking), I'd suggest sticking with their yeast.
Jeff
- --
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA,
JeffRenner@comcast.net
"One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American
Musician, 1904-1943>>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 13:11:10 -0700
From: "Dave Flotree" <dave@flotree.com>
Subject: Virus Alert (and apology for the interruption)
Hello, You might have received an email from me with a subject: "[name] you
have an E-card from Dave". PLEASE DO NOT OPEN THE LINK. This spreads a
benign virus that will email a similar message to all people in your
Outlook address book if you have one. If you did end up loading the linked
program, use "Add/Remove Programs" in your Control Panel to remove the
"friend greetings" program. Sorry for any inconvenience.
- Dave
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 04:50:07 -0500
From: Bill Frazier <billfrazier@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: SNPA
Scott - Here's a few pointers to help with your SNPA clone. The beer is a
distinctive tasting ale...the main flavor impact is from the Cascade
hops. You must dry hop the beer to come close to the real thing.
The pilsner malt is fine but I use 50% pils and 35% vienna malt. A better
flavor IMO. Instead of vienna about 10 to 15% munich would be good. Try
5% crystal 40L and I add about 5% malted wheat.
Perle is fine to bitter with (that's what SN uses). However, I've used
Cascade for all hop additions and the beer is excellent. Use about 5 HBU
of bittering hops. This addition, plus the flavor & aroma hops, will get
you about 39 IBUs. You must use Cascade for flavor and aroma (about 1/2
ounce each for a 5 gallon US batch). Be sure to dry hop with Cascade (1/2
ounce for 5 gallons US is nice).
Use W1056 or White Labs WLP 001 yeast. And, be sure to use lots of
yeast. Grow up a big starter.
Adjust your grain bill to give an OG of about 1050. My recipe ferments
down to 1012 usually.
I like the beer a bit darker that SNPA so I add 1 ounce of finely crushed
Caraffa malt to the mash tun just before I start the sparge. That addition
gives a nice dark ale, a bit lighter in color than a Coke.
I adjust the brewing water so the sulfate concentration is 150ppm.
Good luck with your beer.
Bill Frazier
Olathe, Kansas USA
Being in a Metric country I brew 23 Litre batches & weigh in grams & Kg.
Questions. 1. What O.G should I aim for?
2. How dark (SRM)
3. How Bitter (IBU)
Any other pointers?
Thanks in advance for your help.
Grant Stott
[9906, 260] AR (statute miles) or [15942.2, 260] AR [K
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 23:15:40 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <JeffRenner@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Subject: Re: yeast blending
At 12:01 PM -0700 10/24/02, G C wrote:
>Aren't there big differences between
>harvested/repitched brewery yeast cells and lab-raised
>yeast cells (i.e. lab-raised yeast is grown under
>aerobic conditions, which makes for healthier cell
>walls and thus, healthier cells). Lab-raised yeast is
>also purer. Doesn't this partially account for the
>differences seen in suggested pitching rates between
>repitched brewery yeast and lab-raised yeast?
I'm no expert, but you are certainly right that lab yeast is higher
in glycogen reserves, for example, and potentially lower in petit
mutants and dead cells. But I don't think that properly harvested
yeast is by any means exhausted or depleted.
On the other hand, it is well known among big commercial breweries,
at least lager breweries, that the first batch of beer made with lab
yeast is not up to the standards of subsequent batches, and must be
blended with these later batches.
I have repitched yeast and had quick, healthy starts. I especially
like top cropping ale yeast that is harvested on the third or fourth
day when fermentation is still somewhat active. This yeast seems
very healthy and vigorous. There are traditional ale breweries that
continue to repitch for years and maintain high quality.
I think that Mike Spinelli's seven ounces of harvested yeast will
work for his 20 gallons of wort, even though it may not in in as good
condition as lab raised yeast.
>In the March-April BYO issue, Dave Logsdon of Wyeast
>suggested that healthy lab-raised yeast could be
>pitched at a rate that is 1/2 to 1/10 below the
>standard rate, which would seem to explain why one
>relatively small pitchable vial of healthy commercial
>yeast can successfully ferment a five gallon batch of
>wort.
Sounds like a good expert source of information. I am always amazed
how a tube of White Labs yeast takes off.
>What does the current research/data indicate about
>differences between lab-raised v. harvested yeast and
>suggested yeast starter pitching rates?
I'll leave this up to the HBDers who follow research like Steve
Alexander and Alan Meeker.
Jeff
- --
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, JeffRenner@comcast.net
"One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #4076, 10/25/02
*************************************
-------
