Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #4241
HOMEBREW Digest #4241 Fri 09 May 2003
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: early hopping and ... ("-S")
Oktoberfest or Marzen: To age or to drink? (Jonathan Royce)
First wort versus bittering/flavor hops (Fred Johnson)
Re: World's scariest story (Jeff was being kind) ("Mike")
Source of 'Real Ale' Brewing Supplies in US (james ray)
Jalapeno Lovers Unite! ("Dewalt, Scott")
mash temperature and pH ("Dave Burley")
RE: Fickle malt (=?iso-8859-1?q?Joris=20Dallaire?=)
Hop trellis and Sugar in beers. ("Dan Listermann")
uh oh, the dreaded religion vs science thread! (Alan Meeker)
re: hops stringing ("Mark Kellums")
Re: hops stringing (Jeff Renner)
Water analysis help needed please (Denny Conn)
Stones for Steinbier (Richard Foote)
Cheapest Beer that is Non-screwtop? (davidedge)
Vegetables (davidedge)
Fw: Brett ("Chad Stevens")
Hop vine confusion (Ron Weaver)
lambic and evolution (Chris Colby)
Re: Faux Decoctions (Craig Agnor)
Decongestants & Judging ("Steve Dale-Johnson")
Decoction mashes - Schmitz process etc. ("Steve Dale-Johnson")
Vinegary Smell in Cornie (John McGowan)
Decongestants (Donald Hellen)
Stone Beer (Stephen Johnson)
*
* Show your HBD pride! Wear an HBD Badge!
* http://hbd.org/cgi-bin/shopping
*
* The HBD Logo Store is now open!
* http://www.cafeshops.com/hbdstore
*
* 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, 8 May 2003 02:38:21 -0400
From: "-S" <-s@adelphia.net>
Subject: re: early hopping and ...
Chad Stevens posted on FWH, but there is a serious misunderstanding here.
"Characteristic hops flavors" are the characteristic citrusy, spicy, ...
flavors that distinguish hop varieties. For example the spiciness of saaz.
This is NOT the only flavor imparted by hops. Hops also impart harsh,
bitter & astringent phenolics, varyingly bitter humulonic & lupulonic acids
(alpha & beta acids), esters, fatty acids products, certainly other flavors.
There has been growing evidence since the mid 1980s that hop character
flavor and aroma (spicy, citrus,floral ...) is almost completely embodied in
hop oils. Commercial oil extract are available commercially which closely
emulate varietal flavor and aroma of late hop additions. The character
flavor has been closely associated with oxygenated terpenoids while aroma is
associated with related ketones.
The "FWH effect" is related to hop character flavor. Late hop additions
and dry hop additions impart a lot of hop character flavor to beer. Early
boil additions impart only a little character flavor. Oddly FWH additions
impart more character flavor to beer than early boil addition. This last
point is difficult to explain unless some mechanism permits character flavor
chemicals from FWH to survive while those from early_boil additions are
destroyed. The "FWH effect" is that FWH character flavor survives the
boil. There are clearly other flavors, and other flavor differences
between these hop additions, but those are much easier to explain.
I answered Joels question about the FWH effect by stating that hop oils and
a particular chemical mechanism are sufficient to explain it. Chad
disagreed and presented a long note on albumin(protein)-flavanoid complexes
with no clear connection to hop flavor or FWH effect.
My question remains unanswered: What on earth does protein-flavanoid
complexation have to do with hop characteristic flavor ? I cited papers
that show that hops only contribute a small portion of flavanoids to the
beer, that flavanoids only impart bitter and harsh flavors, that flavanoids
in beer appear below their taste threshold, and that beers made with
absolutely no hops phenolics taste normal and comparable to beers made with
hops phenolics when fresh.
Chad writes ...
> I have seen it suggested however, that some protein/hop constituent
> complexes may survive the boil and contribute to flavor and the effect is
> more robust in the mash.
Who suggested it (citation please) and what does it have to do with your
original statement ? A protein/hop-constituent complex isn't the same as
protein/flavanoid complex.
>My only point, [...] to totally dismiss some protein complex as a possible
>contributor is a bit presumptive at this stage of the research game.
I don't dismiss all protein complexation - but I see no evidence that it's
related to the FWH effect. There is a lot of evidence that flavanoids and
other phenolics have nothing to do with characteristic hop flavor.
>Most of the protein related stuff I've been reading is dated after
>1999 however; material Hangofer would not have had
>available in 1997.
Hanghofer isn't the author of the idea - L.Narziss of Wehenstephan(1995)
was, and though tentative results are often published in journals, Narziss
was, more likely to publish only consolidated information in this
*textbook*. That doesn't mean it's the complete answer, but it does mean
there is likely to be a lot of German language lit supporting the mechanism.
I see NO evidence for an alternative mechanism to explain FWH effect. If
you have it - let's see the citations.
====
>From there the misunderstandings are severe .....
>Note, "contribute significantly." They ain't all the flavor, rather a
>significant contributor.
(1*) No one said it was "ALL the flavor".
Chad quotes me out of context, changing the meaning ...
>"Oxygen and hop oil and nothing
>else" contribute to hop flavor in the final product.
NO NO NO. I said that "Oxygen and hop oil and nothing else" contribute to
the FWH effect. I NEVER said this was the only hop flavor contribution to
beer. The oil fraction and Narziss' mechanism is sufficient to explain the
FWH effect entirely. No alternate flavor chemicals or mechanism have been
proposed which would even partly explain the FWH effect.
=====
I think Chad must be pulling my leg with this illogical jumble.
>For the sake of clarity, an analogy. I have tasted p-lambics [...] but
>they were one dimensional, [..]
>[...therefore the sesquiterpenoid fraction gives one dimensional flavor]
and
>So, assuming there is a lack of depth and complexity in the extract,
Why would we assume that ?
> [...] Weather this is a 5% or 25% contribution to hop flavor ...
Or whether it's a 90% or 98% contribution to *character* flavor
======
> But to say that humulene epoxides are the one and only
>contributors of hop flavor seems a ...
See (1*) above. The cited paper identified 21 chemical peaks, including
only two humulene epoxides(HEs). The paper agrees with a conclusion by
Irwin that HEs are NOT responsible for the flavor - their thresholds are too
high. How does this make the HEs the "one and only" factor of hop flavor
?
>But I would be very surprised indeed if all of hop flavor complexity
>winds up being attributed to one class of oils and to one mechanism of
>stabilization.
The terpenoids have been repeatedly pointed to as the primary source of hop
character flavor since Seibert's 1989 work and later studies by Chapman. No
other chemicals have been associated in this way as far as I know. Again
this is not "all of hop flavor complexity" (see (1*) above), but only the
spicy, citrusy, distinguishing character. Chad may be surprised, but there
is no other mechanism proposed or required to explain the FWH effect.
- --------
Not to abuse the deceased equine, but the hundreds of different oxygenated
terpenoids and other hop oil components are not all found in beer, and the
hops products found in beer are not all found in hops in their original form
. There are chemical reaction in the boiler, and fermenter that change the
mix. No one will ever be able to say that some specific hops extract
chemicals alone exactly gives the flavor of the modified hops products in
beer. That's a silly quest.
What can be said is that the only class of hops chemicals reliably and
significantly associated with hops character flavor in beer, the oxygenated
terpenoids, has an identified chemical mechanism which explains the FWH
effect.
BTW sesquiterpenes are also known as isoprenoids and consist of a 15 carbon
structure related to steroid and sterol synthesis.. Some example structures
shown here
http://www.fslemi.uni-bonn.de/gewuerze/html/stralsklasse/sqt.html
Here's a nice link for folks seeking a little more background on hops oils
http://www.brewingtechniques.com/library/backissues/issue1.1/haunold.html
-Steve
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 04:52:00 -0700
From: Jonathan Royce <jonathan@woodburybrewingco.com>
Subject: Oktoberfest or Marzen: To age or to drink?
Hi all:
I recently bottled a Marzen/Oktoberfest and my original plan was to
exert some self control and wait til the end of summer to start
drinking/serving it. However, I've since started thinking about the fact
that I do not have a place to keep 2 minikegs and 1 case of beer cold
during the summer months (no basement and no dedicated beer fridge). Is
aging therefore likely to hurt my beer, more than allow its flavor to
develop? Is it really necessary to age at "cellar" temps or is a warm
period of bottle conditioning okay?
Two pieces of important information here:
1) I did *NOT* use a lager yeast for this brew (because again, I don't
have any place cold enough to do that). Instead, I cold fermented (50-55 F)
using Wyeast 1007 German ale yeast.
2) All of the bottles and minikegs are primed with sugar, so I'm not
worried about oxidation (I'm assuming the yeast will scavenge the O2
in the headspace).
What do people think?
TIA,
Jonathan
Woodbury Brewing Co.
www.woodburybrewingco.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 07:55:18 -0400
From: Fred Johnson <FLJohnson@portbridge.com>
Subject: First wort versus bittering/flavor hops
Fellow brewers,
I believe I posted this call for an experiment before, but the recent
thread here on first wort hopping has prompted me to call for the
experiment again.
The argument has been that the bitterness contribution of hops added as
first wort hops is less than would be contributed if added shortly
after the beginning of the boil. The idea is that break material traps
the bittering compounds, and this would not occur if the hops are added
after the break forms. I have yet to see the alpha acid numbers to make
this argument, although I suspect it is probably true.
In addition, there have been a lot of testimonies out there from
reliable sources touting the flavor benefits of first wort hopping, but
I've never seen controlled experiments to bring credence to these
testimonies.
I propose the following experiment to answer the bitterness question
above and to test the notion that first wort hops contribute more
flavor than these hops added later:
Two beers would be brewed identically except that first beer has only a
first wort hops addition (which will contribute bitterness also) and
the second beer has the same amount of the same hops added 5 minutes
after the boil is rolling with no other hops additions. Alpha acids are
measured in the final products and triangle taste tests are performed.
The beers would also be subjectively judged for hops flavor (and
bitterness if you insist). The null hypothesis that there is not a
significant difference in these two beers.
I realize that such an experiment--as simple as it is in design--is not
easy to perform well. I would do the experiment myself if I had the
equipment, and I may be the only one out here who cares, so I may have
to try it on a couple of small batches.
Fred L Johnson
Apex, North Carolina, USA
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 07:58:58 -0700
From: "Mike" <Mike@Bronosky.com>
Subject: Re: World's scariest story (Jeff was being kind)
> Just another feed grain,
Jeff was being overly kind to barley. It would be lucky to be that. It
could end up being just another weed. One that we spray Round-Up on.
Mike
- ---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 05:46:19 -0700 (PDT)
From: james ray <jnjnmiami@yahoo.com>
Subject: Source of 'Real Ale' Brewing Supplies in US
Two places I have used for real ale supplies are:
http://www.ukbrewing.com/
http://brewinbeagle.com/
Jamie Ray
Montgomery,AL
rjraybrewer@aol.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 08:06:19 -0500
From: "Dewalt, Scott" <Scott.Dewalt@st-systems.com>
Subject: Jalapeno Lovers Unite!
I'd like to take my annual post to rise in defense of jalapeno beer.
Dash S writes:
>But is it beer ? Mom always told you not to play with your food...
>Mixing the two together is colossal mistake...
>If we don't agree - that's not bad.
Ah, jalapeno beer. I love it. Since when is adding an ingredient a
colossal mistake?
Opinions and derisions.
I'll continue to play with my beer and endeavor to improve on this
unique style. Try it, you might find life more entertaining outside
of the box.
Scott
http://texanbrew.com
[AR: Bristol told me my mind is too weak to figure this out]
P.S. Speaking of Larry Bristol, I'm ratting him out: HE HAS BREWED A
JALAPENO BEER, TOO! And it had witches in it!
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 10:03:13 -0400
From: "Dave Burley" <Dave_Burley@charter.net>
Subject: mash temperature and pH
Brewsters:
Here is a quotation from the second edition of "Malting and Brewing Science"
(1981) Vol 1 p 279
"..the pH of the mash or wort alters with temperature. At 65C (149F) the pH of
the mash will be about 0.35 unit less than at 18C ( 65F )...... Therefore
enzymes whose pH optima are known from determinations at 20C( 65F) appear to
have higher pH optima in the mash, if this is cooled ,<as is usual> (DRB
emphasis) before pH is determined. An infusion mash is best carried out at a
pH 5.2-5.4. (pH at mash temperature - DRB) Consequently, pH in the cooled
wort will be 5.5-5.8" The first edition (1971) says p. 213 "5.5 -5.7"
Although my recollection in my previous comment was a 0.2 pH difference
between hot and cold, my point was that the pH in older texts often refers to
( and is a result of measurement at RT) room temperature pH when looking at
hot wort, so be careful. Always ask "to what pH(Temperature) are they
referring?"
Modern temperature compensated pH meters can be used to easily determine the
actual pH at mash temperature. I don't know if the delta pH of 0.35 in the
above text is an actual measurement or a calculated one ( due to assumed free
energy differences), since I don't know the state of the instrumentation
technology when these numbers were determined. If the latter, it is likely
incorrect ( but not terribly so) as the mash has a very complex set of
equilibria, solubilities, etc. The comment "as is usual" in the above text
might lead one to believe the numbers were not measured.
Keep on Brewin'
Dave Burley
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 10:28:53 -0400 (EDT)
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Joris=20Dallaire?= <jorisdallaire@yahoo.ca>
Subject: RE: Fickle malt
On Wed, 7 May 2003, Michael from Middleton, said:
>Now, what you have to worry about are super-pests who
>laugh at both insecticides and organic farming
>methods. Given some bad luck and enough time, a nasty
>fungus from Malaysia could wipe out the
>world'scommercial hops fields, or some beetle from
>Paraguay could wipe out the world's barley crops. As
>I recall, phylloxera nearly wiped out the European
>wine industry in the 19th century. I've also read
>about some problems with hops.
Well, Michael, i don't know why those pests have to
come from Malaysia or Paraguay or other third-world
"evil" countries. I'd fear more a super
genetically-modified grain from Modsanto screwing up
the whole ecological equilibrium. And in that field,
we "civilized" countries are making our own bad luck
faster every day.
Soon we will have pesticid-resistant genetically
adapted critters coming from everywhere. Now, *that*
will be the world's scariest story. As a matter of
fact, do they grow hops or barley in Malaysia and
Paraguay?
Just my two cents.
Joris
brewing in Canada
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 10:58:02 -0400
From: "Dan Listermann" <dan@listermann.com>
Subject: Hop trellis and Sugar in beers.
Steve Alexander asks about hop trellis designs. I used PVC piping to make a
simple trellis. The 20' vertical poles are made from 10' 3" and 2" pipe
connected by a reducer. If I had to do it again, I would use all 3". I
have hooks screwed to the top that hold small pulleys strung with 1/4"
braided rope. The poles are attached to a fence with hose clamps.
The 20' horizontal beam is made from two 10' sections of 2" PVC pipe that
are connected by a "T" which has a 18" section pointing down. The two ends
have elbows that point up with 6" sections. The 2" pipe cannot support
itself much less hop bines this way so I made a truss using rope. The 18"
vertical section and the two elbows are drilled to anchor ropes that go from
one elbow to the bottom of the 18" section to the other elbow. Tightening
this rope keeps the truss from drooping. The 6" sections at the elbows are
drilled to accept the poles' ropes keep the truss vertical. The truss can be
raised or lowered with the poles' ropes.
John Palmer asks about the common belief that cidery flavors are caused by
excessive amounts of sugar. I used to make the canned kits that went out
of date in our store. Believing that sugar caused cidery flavors, I used
DME. These beers were undrinkably cidery without any sugar. I then made
a beer for a diabetic friend that I wanted to have a very low final gravity.
I made it with 50% corn sugar and grain. It was not cidery at all. Right
now I have a beer on tap that is 2/3 corn sugar, 1/3 Laaglander. It is not
cidery. Actually it is a bit skunky because I thoughtlessly left it out
under the florescent lights. I am now fermenting a "beer" that is 3/4 table
sugar, 1/4 Laaglander. I have tasted the gravity sample and it really seems
to have almost no flavor. It is only slightly bitter with some hop flavor
and some sweetness. I have come to the conclusion that the key to good
extract beers is fresh extract.
I believe that the belief that sugar causes cidery flavors is a
misconception. Cidery flavors are caused by stale extract. Sugar does not
cover this flavor as well as DME so cidery flavors came to be associated
with sugar.
Dan Listermann
Check out our E-tail site at www.listermann.com
Free shipping for orders greater than $35
and East of the Mighty Miss.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 10:59:47 -0400
From: Alan Meeker <ameeker@mail.jhmi.edu>
Subject: uh oh, the dreaded religion vs science thread!
"greg man" opens Pandora's box:
"...Given the depth with which you have studied science is
it not amazing the complexity an the organization of these things? Is it not
also true that they are so complex in fact that even at the highest levels
of study there becomes no more knowledge only debates between expert's?"
Yes, the complexity is quite amazing and our inherent curiosity compels us
to try and understand this complexity. This is a large part of the drive
behind the scientific enterprise. We seek to constantly improve our
knowledge about the natural world and how it works. Due to work at the
"highest levels of study" our knowledge does increase - in fact, it is doing
so at an exponential rate!
"If we as humans can not fully explain the complexity of our world in
even the smallest detail: take for example light is it a particle or a wave?
If we can not explain these things is it logical to assume we know how they
came to be here in the first place?"
Of course not. Science is just a way of looking at the world. The best we
scientists can do is to say that this is our best guess about how things
work given our current knowledge. Still, this approach has proven
/enormously/ successful in explaining the physical world we live in. Of
course, it could all change tomorrow, as indeed it has with various major
revolutions in scientific thinking in the past (paradigm shifts).
"...Can you then propose how it came into exist in the first place?"
Sure, we can propose theories that are in keeping with the body of
scientific knowledge and evidence that exist at the current time. Again, a
"best guess," albeit a highly educated one.
"For those that do, I have a question for you: we as a human race
are evolving right? But then we keep our sick alive and attempt to prolong
the life of the aged? Are we going to evolve or digress as a species? Since
nature selects only the fittest to survive are we not disrupting the natural
progression of life by attempting to treat people with medicine? Now many
diseases are cured and I'm not suggesting we allow people to die, however by
keeping them alive and if they have children we eliminate natural selection?
Is that not correct?"
The process of evolution merely involves the selection of the fittest
organisms by passing them through the sieve of the current environment.
Evolutionary fitness is usually equated with reproductive fitness - the
ability to have one's genes represented in the next generation. If the
environment changes then the selection criteria will certainly change, but
the overall process of evolution still functions. We are certainly changing
the environment, no doubt, but evolution still carries on. Put another way,
selection still exists, but it is heavily influenced by human activity, as
it has been since we started using tools, farming and domesticating plants
and animals.
"Theory's are wonderful but let us accept then for what they are
THEORIES."
No reasonable person would suggest otherwise. On the other hand, theories
are not mere whimsical flights of fancy, but are backed by a fair amount of
scientific knowledge.
"There is a great rift between the science world as to creation or
evolution. There are compelling arguments for each side, please investigate
both before you make a decision."
First, evolution, at it's most basic level, is a scientific fact not a
theory, and can be easily demonstrated. What some people have a real problem
with is the /application/ of evolutionary principles to create a theory of
the origin of Man as having descended from pre-existing species. This is
indeed a theory, not a fact.
"Remember it was not to long age we bleed people to let the bad spirits out
so they would get well!!
Today's geniuses's in 500 years will be considered children in there
understanding because"
Yes, and this highlights one of the best qualities of the scientific
method - that it is flexible and always open to change and improving over
the long haul. This is in stark contrast to many, probably most, religions
where knowledge is handed down intact from authority, inviolate and must be
taken on faith. In religion, questioning one's assumptions is usually
discouraged, while in science it is at the very heart of the enterprise.
Thus, science is constantly in the process of re-inventing itself through
the process of discovery, while religion is extremely resistant to change.
It took the Vatican over 350 years to admit they were wrong about Galileo.
However, it was encouraging when the Pope in '96 said that the theory of
evolution appeared to be valid and is compatible with Christian faith.
Indeed, many scientists are Christians as well as believers in the
application of evolutionary theory to human origins. Unless you insist on a
literal interpretation of the Bible (which translation by the way?) I see no
reason why the two cannot be reconciled.
-Alan Meeker
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 10:11:46 -0500
From: "Mark Kellums" <infidel@springnet1.com>
Subject: re: hops stringing
I'm looking at planting 20ft treated wood poles and stringing fencing wire
between. Any thoughts ? (I gotta get moving on this one - the bines are
already 3-4ft long).
-S
Steve,
In David Beach's book Homegrown Hops, he uses 18' treated poles sunk 3'
backfilled with gravel 25' apart with #9 wire strung between them. I've used
a variation on this only I used 12' poles sunk 2' in concrete (probably
overkill). It worked very well except for the wire sagging from the weight
of the hop plants. I partially solved that problem by propping up the wire
using 10' 2 X 2s notched at one end. Like propping up a clothes line.
There's got to be a better way to keep the wire taught but we moved before
I had a chance to work on that.
Mark Kellums
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 11:19:44 -0400
From: Jeff Renner <jeffrenner@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: hops stringing
"-S" <-s@adelphia.net> writes about stringing hops:
>Baling twine works quite nicely, but get the natural fiber stuff, not
>the plastic. The nat.fiber stuff is biodegradable and burnable.
I disagree about using the natural stuff - I did and it rotted before
the end of the season and the hops fell down. Well, actually, they
didn't fall down entirely, they they sagged and hung by the bines
themselves.
Some natural fibers may hold up a whole season - mine didn't. Now I
use thick nylon twine - it's rough enough for the hops to hang onto.
Jeff
- --
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, JeffRenner@comcast.net
"One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 08:44:30 -0800
From: Denny Conn <denny@projectoneaudio.com>
Subject: Water analysis help needed please
I just got an analysis of my well water from Ward Labs
(www.wardlab.com). I'd appreciate it if someone could take a look at it,
see if it makes sense, and give me a brief overview of my water. Here's
what they said...
pH 6.9
Na 9
K 1
Ca 62
Mg 13
Total Hardness, CaCO3 209
SO4 36
Cl 4
CO3 <1
HCO3 83
Total Alkalinity, CaCO3 68
I've been using this water as is about 90% of the time the last few years
with good results. Sometimes a tsp. of gypsum added to the boil for really
hoppy stuff, cut 9:1 with distilled water for pilsners. But a recent
disaster trying to treat water for a Dort export caused me to dig into this
a little deeper.
Thanks for any help,
Denny Conn
Eugene OR (somewhere Rennerian)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 11:48:58 -0400
From: Richard Foote <rfoote@mindspring.com>
Subject: Stones for Steinbier
Jon Sandlin of Bend, Oregon writes:
>What does the collective think about using basalt for the stones used in the
>making of steinbier? Any comments will be greatly appreciated.
Brewing of Steinbier is something I've been experimenting with annually the
past several years. Still haven't gotten all the nuances down yet, but
that's half the fun/challenge.
In Germany, Rachenfels (the revivor of this ancient brewing method) uses a
rock called Graywacke. By recollection, this is metamorphosed standstone.
The thing about this kind of stone is that it purportedly is said to
"bloom" on heating, supposedly creating greater surface area for
caramelized sugars to form.
Practically speaking, any heat resistant stone will work. I've been using
Granite with good results. I wash and then oven-dry the rocks in
preparation for the fire. SHMBO really likes to open the oven door to find
a bunch of rocks taking up space.
Anyway, I used to use a basket (a French...er um... "Freedom" fry deep
fryer type). After repeated firings, I find it to be much worse for wear.
Now, I just pop them in the coals and use gloves and long-handled tongs to
yank them back out. NOTE: Count your rocks first. It's also important to
check for fragments, as some may break.
Hope this helps.
Rick Foote
Whistle Pig Brewing
Murrayville, GA
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 17:11:15 +0100
From: davidedge@hsbc.com
Subject: Cheapest Beer that is Non-screwtop?
We helped out at a UK beer festival by taking all the non-returnable
empties from the foreign beer stall, putting the screwtops in the bottle
bank and keeping all the others.
Sure beats drinking that swill imho...
David Edge
Signalbox Brewery
Derby UK
** HSBC's website is at www.hsbc.com **
********************************************************************
This E-mail is confidential. It may also be legally privileged.
If you are not the addressee you may not copy, forward, disclose or
use any part of it. If you have received this message in error,
please delete it and all copies from your system and notify the sender
immediately by return E-mail.
Internet communications cannot be guaranteed to be timely, secure,
error or virus-free.
The sender does not accept liability for any errors or omissions.
********************************************************************
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 17:14:17 +0100
From: davidedge@hsbc.com
Subject: Vegetables
Steve says:
I hope to die from a Clostrium infection before I become so bored that I
resort to adding vegetables to beer.
I fancy he would not approve of our Treacle Chili Stout. A more pleasant
alternative to Clostrium might be our "Mrs Beare's XXXX Nut Brown Ale",
that commemorates a famous Derby publican and poisoner, by containing a
small amount of arsenic.
Don't try this at home kids.
David Edge
Signalbox Brewery
Derby, UK
** HSBC's website is at www.hsbc.com **
********************************************************************
This E-mail is confidential. It may also be legally privileged.
If you are not the addressee you may not copy, forward, disclose or
use any part of it. If you have received this message in error,
please delete it and all copies from your system and notify the sender
immediately by return E-mail.
Internet communications cannot be guaranteed to be timely, secure,
error or virus-free.
The sender does not accept liability for any errors or omissions.
********************************************************************
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 10:22:30 -0700
From: "Chad Stevens" <zuvaruvi@cox.net>
Subject: Fw: Brett
- ----- Original Message -----
From: Chad Stevens
To: post@hbd.org
Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2003 8:32 AM
Subject: Brett
Question:
To the best of my knowledge all seven of the Brettanomyces species were
condensed and reclassified as four Dekkera species in 1996. Can anyone
confirm this? Why do we so stubbornly hang on to Brett? "It smells
'Dekky'," just doesn't have as nice a ring to it?
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- -----
and as long as we're talkin' yeast....
re: World's scariest story--I think I liked the gyno thread better.
Chad Stevens
QUAFF
San Diego
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 10:25:11 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ron Weaver <ronweaver@yahoo.com>
Subject: Hop vine confusion
Well, after a little over a year of homebrewing I'm
really getting into this. I planted some hop vines
last year, and had a modest harvest which I gladly put
to good use.
Here's the problem: I can't remember which vines were
Cascade and which were Nugget. Does anyone know of a
way to tell the difference between the two? Can I
test the hops after harvest to determine which is
which?
Thanks in advance for any help.
Ron Weaver
Buffalo Grove, IL
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 13:26:24 -0500
From: Chris Colby <colbybrewery@austin.rr.com>
Subject: lambic and evolution
Lambic questions
Has anyone tried to make lambic with Wyeast's lambic blend and ended up
with a nice _Brett_ character, but not enough lactic sourness? How did you
overcome this?
I've got a one-year-old carboy of of lambic and a two-year-old carboy
of lambic in my shop. I want to brew a third batch and blend them into a
gueuze, but want to make the third batch as sour as humanly possible to
counteract the lack of sourness in the first two.
I've ordered the individual _Lactobaccilus_ and _Pediococcus_ strains
and plan to make a little starter with them. I'm also considering making
this year's batch larger than the first two. If it does get sour, the
greater volume with help the overall sourness of the blend. I also plan to
mash on the high end of the starch conversion range to leave a lot of
carbohydrates that the yeast can't touch, but (hopefully) the bacteria will
eventually break down.
Anybody else have any other suggestions?
Stuff About Evolution (not Homebrew) -- please ignore this if you aren't
interested
> Date: Wed, 07 May 2003 14:28:11 -0400
> From: "greg man" <dropthebeer@hotmail.com>
> Subject: evolution
> Since nature selects only the fittest to survive are we not disrupting
> the natural progression of life by attempting to treat people with medicine?
> Now many diseases are cured and I'm not suggesting we allow people to die,
> however by keeping them alive and if they have children we eliminate natural
> selection? Is that not correct?
Science describes what does happen. It does not proscribe what should
happen. If we "disrupt the natural progression of life" by treating people
with medicine, good for us.
> There is a great rift between the science world as to creation or evolution.
Actually there isn't . . . and there hasn't been for about 175 years.
Papers on evolution shows up in nearly every issue of the big, mainstream,
peer-reviewed science journals like Science and Nature. Proponents of
creationism do not even try to perform science. They operate solely in
political forums such as textbook adoption hearings.
> There are compelling arguments for each side, please investigate
> both before you make a decision.
A good place to investigate the creation/evolution controversy online is
www.talkorigins.org. Investigating both sides of the argument is indeed the
best way to understand the controversy. You'll notice that the talkorigins
site, which deals with mainstream science, links to nearly every creationist
site on the web. In contrast, you'll notice that creationist sites almost
never link to talkorigins or any other science-related sites. However, don't
take my word for it. See for yourself.
Chris Colby
Bastrop, TX
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 11:59:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: Craig Agnor <cagnor@emerald.ucsc.edu>
Subject: Re: Faux Decoctions
I find this faux decoction procedure quite interesting . Like Brian
Lundeen, I'd like to hear some more about it from some brewers who
have used this technique either successfully or unsuccessfully.
Let's hear some specific details of the styles brewed, the equipment and
methods used as well as impressions of the effectiveness of this procedure
relative to traditional decoction techniques (how much time and/or effort
is saved via faux decoction over say a single decoction and is the effect
on flavor comparable).
Below I've listed some specific questions about this procedure for
William Scott and the collective.
> On Wed 5/7/2003 William S Scott reponded to Brian Lundeen's post:
>
> I'm the culprit responsible for the Zymurgy article you quoted, and
> would be glad to add a few extra comments. The Schmitz process is
> briefly mentioned in volume 1 of De Clerck's "A Textbook of Brewing".
>
> Assuming you wish to decoct, it can save you time and effort (and
> mess) if you have the ability to boil the mash directly in the
> mash/lauter tun. The convenience lies in not having to pull the
> decoctions, then remix them in an attempt to hit your desired rest
> temperatures. Simply apply the heat to reach your temperatures, then
> draw off some of the wort before boiling the entire mash. Any starches
> released during the boil can then be broken down by the enzymes
> remaining in the wort that you drew off earlier. You just need to cool
> the mash down somewhat before reintroducing the wort.
William, thanks for the follow-up post on your article. What sort of
mash tun do you have? How thick is the decoction portion of your mash
(say in qt/lb) and how much liquid do you draw off prior to decocting?
And to the rest of the faux decocters out there, what sorts of mashing
equipment are you using (i.e. what type of mash tun: Easymashers, false
bottoms, slotted manifolds, ...etc.)? Can faux decoctions be done easily
on a RIMS system? Has anyone tried to recirculate during the decoction
instead of stirring by hand?
What mashing conditions make this procedure easier? How thick/thin should
the initial mash be in order to draw off enough liquid to retain some
enzymes and not leave the decoction mash so thick that it is difficult to
stir and easily scorched (It seems like it'd be hard to stir the entire
boiling mash in a 1/2 barrel mash tun if it were as thick as my usual
'~1/3 of mash' decoctions)?
What techniques are used to cool the decoction back to mashing
temps: cold water? an immersion chiller? recirculating through the
counter flow?
> I must confess that I have never used this technique to produce a
> Pilsner, but it makes for great bocks, dunkels, and O-fests. I haven't
> run any side by side experiments to directly compare it with other types
> of decoction mashes.
I wonder if this would work for a CAP. Anyone out there with a batch
of 'Your Father's Faux Mustache' on hand?
Sorry for all the questions, but would like to hear from the faux
decocters out there before taking the plunge with this technique.
Thanks & Cheers,
Craig Agnor
Santa Cruz, CA
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 12:36:50 -0700
From: "Steve Dale-Johnson" <sdalejohnson@hotmail.com>
Subject: Decongestants & Judging
Nils in Sacramento asks about decongestants....
I can not vouch for the impact on beer taste and aroma appreciation when
using conventional pseudoephedrine decongestants (I'm always too sick to
care about beer when I use these), but I _can_ vouch from personal experiece
that Flonase (a topical corticosteroid typically used for allergy treatment)
has not impaired by enjoyment of beer flavour or aroma in any way (quite the
opposite when used to remedy congestion). My only caution would be that
there is a slight floral odor to the product and it would be advisable to
avoid use immediately prior to judging.
Steve Dale-Johnson
Brewing at (1918, 298) Miles Apparent Rennerian
Vancouver, BC, Canada.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 12:41:54 -0700
From: "Steve Dale-Johnson" <sdalejohnson@hotmail.com>
Subject: Decoction mashes - Schmitz process etc.
As one who is just beginning to all-grain brew coming from steeping grains
in extract brews, I have the following confusion about decocting a mash:
I have always been told to remove the grain bag and all possible particles
of grain at 170-180 and never (never, ever...) to boil the grains for fear
of extacting harsh tannins from the husks. How can one do this in decoction
mashes without risking the same harshness and astringency from boiling the
grains??
Still just single infusion mashing, but curious.....
Steve Dale-Johnson
Brewing at (1918, 298) Miles Apparent Rennerian
Vancouver, BC, Canada.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 17:28:08 -0400
From: John McGowan <jjm1@comcast.net>
Subject: Vinegary Smell in Cornie
I gave a friend a cornie full of beer. He drank the beer and held onto the
keg for about 6 months. I just got it back (the keg that is). I rinsed it
out and filled it with PBW solution (5 TBSP PBW and 5 gal H2O) and let it
soak for about 2 hours. The keg is immaculate inside but has a noticeable
vinegar smell -- stronger than plain white vinegar. I checked the gaskets
and they seem fine. Any suggestions how to get this smell out before I risk
using this keg again?
TIA
John McGowan
Hopewell, NJ
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 18:44:28 -0400
From: Donald Hellen <donhellen@horizonview.net>
Subject: Decongestants
Nils A Hedglin wrote:
Hi,
The BJCP guidelines suggest avoiding decongestants before
a judging event. Why is that? I am trying to find ways to
overcome my chronic congestion problems that won't also
affect my judging. Is there a specific type of decongestant
that is bad (antihistamines?). What about some of the new
drugs like Claritin, Flonase or Allegra?
========================================
Claritin and Allegra are antihistamines. Antihistamines are
not the same as decongestants and work quite differently.
Flonase works different from both antihistamines and
decongestants.
Flonase is an inhaled nasal steroid and probably has the
lowest possible side effects. I use Nasacort AQ, a drug in
the same class as Flonase, and it works well for me. Nasal
steroids prevent inflammation of the nasal passages and must
be used for a few days before they work, but they do work
very well.
Antihistamines prevent histamine production, as you might
have in a reaction to allergens. The newer, no-drowsy
antihistamines aren't as effective for some people as the
older, first-generation (i.e., Diphenhydramine/Benadryl)
antihistamines. They also work, but many doctors seem to
prefer to treat allergy problems in the nose with drugs like
Flonase. As far as I know, Flonase would not affect your
sense of smell. Nasacort does not seem to me to have
affected my sense of smell, but it has prevented the nasal
congestion I often would get after drinking beer, especially
late in the evening.
Decongestants "pry" open your nasal passages and do not
treat the underlying inflammation. I'm not sure why they are
discouraged in beer judging, but I would guess that it
affects your sense of smell in some way.
Perhaps someone with a medical degree might shed more light
on this???
Donald Hellen
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 19:02:12 -0500
From: Stephen Johnson <sjohnson3@comcast.net>
Subject: Stone Beer
Beer aficionados in Nashville, TN, Memphis, TN, and Little Rock, AR
(soon) can savor the subtle and delightful tastes and aromas of Stone
Beer at any of the Boscos breweries in those cities thanks to the
brewing prowess of Chuck Skypeck and Fred Scheer. A search of the HBD
archives using Chuck's name as a search term should turn up plenty of
details on how to brew this style of beer, as he has posted here in the
past to answer questions about the style and how he brews it. There have
also been some articles in some of the trade magazines over the years,
along with a Zymurgy article a couple of years ago. What I can share
here is that he and Fred currently use a red granite that they get from
Colorado near Denver/Boulder. At the brewery, they heat the rocks in
their wood-fired (hickory) pizza ovens overnight, and place the hot
rocks into a stainless basket that is lowered into the first runnings
going into the kettle. The base recipe is mostly a pale malt (they use
one of the Briess base malts, along with some crystal, I think). The
aroma is a wonderful treat whenever I've had the privilege of being
there while it is brewed. Kind of like the smell of roasting
marshmallows over a campfire... This caramelizing of the high gravity
wort carries over into the finished beer and provides the beer with a
nice toasty flavor. I wouldn't necessarily call it a smoked character.
It is a relatively light colored beer, which allows the gentle flavors
to come through. Our homebrewing club, the Music City Brewers, have also
helped Chuck and Fred brew some special batches for the Great American
Beer Festival. These batches used the hot rocks to help raise the temp
of the mash (included some wheat, oats, and rye) when we did a juniper
beer. We actually used a post-hole digger to add the hot rocks into the
mash! This beer ended up winning a Gold Medal for the
specialty/experimental style that year. It was one of a kind...
Good luck with your efforts, and please let us know about your
experiences with this wonderful, yet infrequently brewed style.
Steve Johnson
Music City Brewers
Nashville, TN
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #4241, 05/09/03
*************************************
-------
