Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #4389
HOMEBREW Digest #4389 Sat 01 November 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:
Homebrew Classics... (Michael)
munich/andechs ("Steve B")
Re: Munich/Bavaria (Mike_Andrews)
Re: Brown malt - and how to make it... (Jeff Renner)
Why I stopped Brewing: (Tim Spencer)
Re: water chemistry experiment (Jeff Renner)
Milk stout ("John Adsit")
Stability test, grain beetles, foamy bottling, grain mash,diatomaceous earth ("Dave Burley")
Re: water chemistry experiment (Marc Sedam)
water chem experiment (Marc Sedam)
too old grain (Alan McKay)
Bavaria (Alan McKay)
Salt Lake City; Carbonation Drops? ("Ronnie Anderson")
Dr. Cone ("Patrick Hughes")
link of the week - Nov 1, 2003 (Bob Devine)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* The HBD Logo Store is now open! *
* http://www.hbd.org/store.html *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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. Note that the Digest now
automagically protects your address, so spam-proofing is a waste of
your time, anyway :^)
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.
JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Spencer Thomas (janitor@hbd.org)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 23:58:07 -0600
From: Michael <grice at binc.net>
Subject: Homebrew Classics...
What with the talk about "Old British Beers and How to Brew Them,"
I noticed there are also two books in the Homebrew Classics series
by Clive La Pensee & Roger Protz ("Stout and Porter" and "India Pale
Ale"). Has anybody out there read these? I'm curious as to how they
compare to the Classic Beer Style Series.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 08:00:29 -0500
From: "Steve B" <habenero92 at hotmail.com>
Subject: munich/andechs
While not having been to the monastary, I can agree with the recommendation.
If you don't make it but happen to be in Munich itself they have a
bierhall (I use the term loosely, it is more of a pub). It is called
Andescher am Dom. It is located behind the Frauenkirche (the main big one).
I highly recommend the dunklewiess. And the food was the best we found
while in the city.
S
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 08:49:51 -0500
From: Mike_Andrews at vfc.com
Subject: Re: Munich/Bavaria
Regarding the beer styles available in Munich............yes you can get
more than enough helles, dunkel, and wheat beers from the brewery sponsored
beerhalls. But many of the small restaraunts in the city center serve
styles from all over Germany. There is one in particular (the name eludes
me now) that actually advertises the fact that they are the only pub in the
city that serves kolsch.
Yes the trip to Andechs is well worth the rental car or train ride from
Munich. They do offer tours of the brewery, but you have to schedule in
advance. Have a good trip.
Mike Andrews
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 09:41:48 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <jeffrenner at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Brown malt - and how to make it...
Stuart Grant <grants at netspace.net.au> of Hobart, Tasmania, Australia writes:
>Jeff teasingly mention that "Old British Beers and How to Make
>Them" describes how to make brown malt at home. C'mon, then!
>Spill the beans... (or does this breach copyright...?)
>
>John Palmer's quintessential text talks briefly about toasting
>malt at home and says that pale malt, if given a little while in the
>oven and a certain temp (I've forgotten the figures), will yield
>something similar to commercial brown malt.
>
>Two questions then; if you've got pale malt and an oven...
> - How do you emulate modern brown malt?
> - How do you make brown malt AND retain it's enzymes?
Question 2 first because it's a short answer - I don't know. See my
reposting of Geoff Cooper's notes yesterday and today. We HBDers
should try to do this. I'd love to try to brew a 100% blown malt
porter made with the kind of malt that Geoff describes. If anyone
has success kilning this, please post.
Question 1 - John suggests toasting pale malt 60 minutes in an
350F/175C oven for an approximation of modern brown malt. See pp.
265-266 in the hard copy - don't know if the online pagination is the
same (http://www.howtobrew.com).
HBBAHTBT's instructions are a bit more detailed. Buy the book!
Oh, all right. I'll limber up my fingers and type up the
instructions for chocolate malt. I trust it's a short enough excerpt
to not violate copyright. But buy the book anyway. You'll like it
if you are interested in historic British beers.
"Roasting Method
"Line a large baking tin with aluminium foil, and pour in pale malt
to a depth of 12 mm (1/2 inch). Place in the oven (preferably
fan-stirred) at 110C (230F) for 45 minutes to dry out the malt, then
raise the temperature to 150C (300F). [instructions for pale amber
and amber deleted] ...
[after about 75 minutes] "raise the temperature to 175C (350F) and
wait until the cut cross-section [average of 15-20 corns cut across
the center with a sharp knife] is a full buff, i.e. about the colour
of the paler types of brown wrapping paper. When the correct colour
has been reached, remove the tray from the oven, allow to cool and
store the roast grain in an air-tight screw-top jar. ... If used soon
after production, the flavor imparted by home-roasted grain is
superior to bought grain."
Harrison cautions that the times and given are only a guide and you
may need to adjust them.
John Palmer suggests aging the grains for two weeks for "harsher
aromatics to escape." I have used freshly toasted/roasted grains
with no problems. I think that aging the beer a bit longer rather
than the grains is the way to go.
Hope this helps.
Jeff
- --
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, JeffRenner at comcast.net
"One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 07:56:51 -0800 (PST)
From: Tim Spencer <spencer_tim at yahoo.com>
Subject: Why I stopped Brewing:
During the period of about 7-10 years ago, I took up
brewing; brewed several batches from extract; and then
did some partial mash (which consisted only of
steeping grains in water before the boil). I was
never all that satisfied with the results. I did not
produce anything near as good as I had hoped. Then,
during that time period (1993-1996), great microbrews
became available at about $5-$6 per six-pack (which
is just about what it cost me to do an extract
homebrew.) So at that point, why bother. So I
stopped and became a microbrew enthusiast (still am).
I know going all-grain would have produced much better
results. I am now thinking about doing a couple more
batches to see if my interest perks up. But the cost
to produce 2 cases from an extract kit is approx.
$30-$50. At that price, you can buy 2 cases of many
fine microbrews and enjoy all the taste with no labor.
My main question: Can anyone relate an experience
brewing an extract that produced great results? I
do not mean superior, like I would expect from an
all-grain brew; but decent enough that it compares
favorably to a store-bought microbrew? If so, what
did you use?
Also, the great debate over yeast in HBD during the
93-96 period was that liquid yeast (Wyeast) produced a
better product. Any change in that opinion?
Thank you-I am reading HBD again!
Tim Spencer
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 11:25:32 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <jeffrenner at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: water chemistry experiment
Jeff Gladish <JeffNGladish at ij.net> of Tampa FL writes:
>On Saturday for Teach a Friend to Homebrew Day, I'm going to brew two five
>gallon batches of English pale ale with the only controlled difference being
>the water chemistry. I'll be trying to add to John Palmer's (?) experiment,
>prepared for the AHA Conference this summer, to see how much the water
>influences the hop expression.
As Martin Brungard pointed out
>it was Al Korzonas who unsuccessfully tried the experiment at the
>AHA convention last summer. The beers had not cleared yet.
And here we have a problem. Al's design was designed differently
from what I would have done. I think he added the salts (gypsum, as
I recall) to the half of the finished beer, not to the mash. This
ensured that there were no differences between the two batches beyond
their ion content. He was looking for differences in flavor,
especially hop character, from the sulfate. But this is not the way
beers are brewed. The minerals are present from the start of the
mash, and this makes a big difference. For one thing, I think that
the hop bitterness character that comes from sulfate may come from
reactions during the boil, not simply the presence of sulfate in the
final beer (although Al's experiment is a good test of just the
latter).
Furthermore, Ca++ in the mash and boil are important for proper hot
break formation and beer clarity. The fact that Al's beers hadn't
cleared is indicative of this. I seem to recall his efficiency was
lower than expected as well.
>The question is, should the other brew use distilled water or my normal,
>soft well water?
I think it depends on whether or not you want a good beer or a good
experiment. Since I'm not going to lose anything if the beer is
crummy, I suggest distilled water for contrast. ;-)
Three brews would be best, but that's more work. And, of course, it
is inevitable that there will be differences in the brews simply
because you don't have tight control on all the variables. (At least
I don't).
Marc Sedam's comments seem confusing and contradictory. I mean this
in the friendliest way. I'm sure he knew what he meant, but I don't:
>The best experiment would be to use distilled water. Your problem is
>going to be the calcium levels in the water to ensure proper conversion.
> If you can get your hands on calcium chloride to the tune of 50ppm in
>the water, that's the way to go. You could use slaked lime to get
>calcium in the water too, but it may drop the pH too much.
Did you mean to write "raise the pH too much," not drop it? I don't
think the pH lowering ability of the Ca++ in the mash reactions
(phytic acid and all that) is as strong as the pH raising ability of
the OH(-), especially since there are two OH(-) ions for every Ca++
ion you add. (see below)
>I'd prefer the lime addition (since the other ion is -OH, which is
>already in the water, versus Cl(-) which is not) but wouldn't do it
>without a pH meter handy to ensure the pH of the mash is in the 5.2-5.5
>range. My gut tells me you could add enough lime to hit the 50ppm Ca
>threshold and still convert the mash, but you may not want to take the
>chance.
You say that CaCl2 is "the way to go," but then you say that you
prefer lime. I'm confused.
Like you, I'd be concerned about adding OH(-) since there is likely
little dark malt in the grain bill for an English pale ale (although
crystal is somewhat acidic and will neutralize some alkalinity). You
may be right that you could get enough Ca++ with Ca(OH)2 without so
much OH(-) alkalinity that the mash pH would be too high, but I'm
doubtful.
Regardless, I think you may not have understood the design. Jeff was
proposing to use distilled water plus salts to mimic Burton water for
one brew. His question was for the other, "control" (my term, not
his) beer. He asked whether to use distilled water or his normal,
soft well water. Were you thinking that he was wondering whether to
use distilled water or his water for the starting point for the
Burton water?
I'm sorry to be jumping all over you, Marc. It looks like you just
hadn't had your second cup of coffee when you wrote this. Or maybe
we're just not on the same wavelength. ;-)
The experiment sounds fun. I look forward to the results.
Jeff
- --
Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan USA, JeffRenner at comcast.net
"One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 09:45:48 -0700
From: "John Adsit" <j.adsit at comcast.net>
Subject: Milk stout
Bob Paolino asks when to add lactose to a milk stout:
> . I have always heard of it being added during
> bottling to sweeten the finished beer, but the person
> who is planning to brew one this weekend has
> apparently also heard advice to add it midboil.
In 1999, the AHA made a controversial decision to use a milk stout as the
recipe for the big brew day in May. The recipe called for adding it to the
boil. That's what I did, and it turned out fine.
John Adsit
Boulder, CO
j.adsit at comcast.net
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 12:12:23 -0500
From: "Dave Burley" <Dave_Burley at charter.net>
Subject: Stability test, grain beetles, foamy bottling, grain mash,diatomaceous earth
Brewsters:
Steve Alexander remembers that G. Fix once suggested you take a wort sample
midstream and seal it in a sterilized vessel and keep it at an elevated
temperature ( 80F or so ) and observe the wort for spoilage.
First, George didn't invent this method if that is what you are suggesting
( it is a standard test method, as I recall) and I doubt George would have
suggested you seal it up without a vent of some sort, in case you get some
yeast in it or other CO2 producer.
I couldn't find it in his Amalysis of Brewing Techniques nor could I find a
book I used to have which is the ABA test procedures.
- -----------
Isaac, I'd take the grain beetle infested grain back if you can. If not, put
it an a heavy duty garbage bag and thoroughly flush it with carbon dioxide and
let it stand for a week or so. I'd repeat this. Keep it in a plastic box like
a Rubbermaid storage box to prevent your other grains getting contaminated and
millers all over your house.
- -----------------
Dave King suffered from foamy bottles when he recently tried to bottle some
beer.
Dave, foamy bottles are what you want when you bottle, as the foam ( fob)
helps push the air out of the bottle neck. Cap right on top of the foam. If
you are having trouble getting enough beer in the bottle then chill the beer
in a fridge first and if necessary chill the bottles also.
Look at it this way wth no food in the refrigerator you may lose weight from
not eating and your fridge will end up being the cleanest it has been in
years! Now, about the SWMBO, well, no advice there.
Make sure the beer is finished fermenting by using Clinitest kit to be sure
the fermentable ( reducing) sugars are less than 1/4%. This especially true
if you changed yeast as you said and if its still bubbling while you are
trying to bottle it..
- -------------------
Chuck Binkley asks about the difference between an all malt mash vs one with
gelatinized barley/malt mash.
Sugars should be about the same BUT you will get other stuff from including
the barley grain and that is a better head retention and the possibility of a
little haze if you don't mash in the lower T regions to take care of the gums
and some proteins. I would start at about 30% grain so you can see the
difference easily. Today's malt should go as high as 1:1 easily, but it may
take a little longer to mash, dependng on your mash T profile. Low T mash
region is important.
- --------------------------
Michael Hartsick is thinking about using a champaign ( sic) yeast to get to a
lower SG in his barley wines. This will only work if for some reason the
yeast you chose will not finish off the sugars. The final gravity is pretty
much determined by the mash profile in most cases unless the yeast cannot
ferment to the high alcohol level chosen.
- -------------------------
I sincerely doubt if diatomaceous earth will kill any grain beetles, but would
like to see some documented proof.
Keep on Brewin'
Dave Burley
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 12:25:48 -0500
From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam at unc.edu>
Subject: Re: water chemistry experiment
I think I probably missed a few cups o' coffee yesterday.
Lime (CaOH) raises pH, not lowers it. That would be...shall we say...a
major error. The underlying concept that it may swing the pH out of the
"normal" range for mash conversion is the same. OK...I'm grasping at
straws.
The other part about CaCl is more about what you're trying to
accomplish. Adding chloride to the liquid will have some effects on
palate fullness and other subtle tastes, in addition to adding the
required calcium. That may throw off the experiment. Adding slaked
lime has the advantage that no other ions are being added other than
hydroxyl groups (-OH), which won't effect flavor, but the pH will be
RAISED possibly out of range. I was guessing that you might could (a
good Southern saying) add lime in a quantity large enough to add
required calcium but low enough that the pH increase would be easily
compensated by the mash reactions. So I was punting to Jeff G. on what
he wanted to do.
I got the design though. I was trying to suggest that he should use
distilled water plus JUST enough of another salt to add 50ppm of calcium
to the mash and little if anything else.
Hope that was clearer.
Jeff Renner wrote:
> Jeff Gladish <JeffNGladish at ij.net> of Tampa FL writes:
>
>> On Saturday for Teach a Friend to Homebrew Day, I'm going to brew two
>> five
>> gallon batches of English pale ale with the only controlled
>> difference being
>> the water chemistry. I'll be trying to add to John Palmer's (?)
>> experiment,
>> prepared for the AHA Conference this summer, to see how much the water
>> influences the hop expression.
>
>
> As Martin Brungard pointed out
>
>> it was Al Korzonas who unsuccessfully tried the experiment at the
>> AHA convention last summer. The beers had not cleared yet.
>
>
> And here we have a problem. Al's design was designed differently from
> what I would have done. I think he added the salts (gypsum, as I
> recall) to the half of the finished beer, not to the mash. This
> ensured that there were no differences between the two batches beyond
> their ion content. He was looking for differences in flavor,
> especially hop character, from the sulfate. But this is not the way
> beers are brewed. The minerals are present from the start of the
> mash, and this makes a big difference. For one thing, I think that
> the hop bitterness character that comes from sulfate may come from
> reactions during the boil, not simply the presence of sulfate in the
> final beer (although Al's experiment is a good test of just the latter).
>
> Furthermore, Ca++ in the mash and boil are important for proper hot
> break formation and beer clarity. The fact that Al's beers hadn't
> cleared is indicative of this. I seem to recall his efficiency was
> lower than expected as well.
>
>> The question is, should the other brew use distilled water or my normal,
>> soft well water?
>
>
> I think it depends on whether or not you want a good beer or a good
> experiment. Since I'm not going to lose anything if the beer is
> crummy, I suggest distilled water for contrast. ;-)
>
> Three brews would be best, but that's more work. And, of course, it
> is inevitable that there will be differences in the brews simply
> because you don't have tight control on all the variables. (At least
> I don't).
>
>
> Marc Sedam's comments seem confusing and contradictory. I mean this
> in the friendliest way. I'm sure he knew what he meant, but I don't:
>
>> The best experiment would be to use distilled water. Your problem is
>> going to be the calcium levels in the water to ensure proper conversion.
>> If you can get your hands on calcium chloride to the tune of 50ppm in
>> the water, that's the way to go. You could use slaked lime to get
>> calcium in the water too, but it may drop the pH too much.
>
>
> Did you mean to write "raise the pH too much," not drop it? I don't
> think the pH lowering ability of the Ca++ in the mash reactions
> (phytic acid and all that) is as strong as the pH raising ability of
> the OH(-), especially since there are two OH(-) ions for every Ca++
> ion you add. (see below)
>
>> I'd prefer the lime addition (since the other ion is -OH, which is
>> already in the water, versus Cl(-) which is not) but wouldn't do it
>> without a pH meter handy to ensure the pH of the mash is in the 5.2-5.5
>> range. My gut tells me you could add enough lime to hit the 50ppm Ca
>> threshold and still convert the mash, but you may not want to take the
>> chance.
>
>
> You say that CaCl2 is "the way to go," but then you say that you
> prefer lime. I'm confused.
>
> Like you, I'd be concerned about adding OH(-) since there is likely
> little dark malt in the grain bill for an English pale ale (although
> crystal is somewhat acidic and will neutralize some alkalinity). You
> may be right that you could get enough Ca++ with Ca(OH)2 without so
> much OH(-) alkalinity that the mash pH would be too high, but I'm
> doubtful.
>
> Regardless, I think you may not have understood the design. Jeff was
> proposing to use distilled water plus salts to mimic Burton water for
> one brew. His question was for the other, "control" (my term, not
> his) beer. He asked whether to use distilled water or his normal,
> soft well water. Were you thinking that he was wondering whether to
> use distilled water or his water for the starting point for the Burton
> water?
>
> I'm sorry to be jumping all over you, Marc. It looks like you just
> hadn't had your second cup of coffee when you wrote this. Or maybe
> we're just not on the same wavelength. ;-)
>
>
> The experiment sounds fun. I look forward to the results.
>
> Jeff
- --
Marc Sedam
Associate Director
Office of Technology Development
The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
308 Bynum Hall; CB# 4105
Chapel Hill, NC 27599-4105
919.966.3929 (phone)
919.962.0646 (fax)
OTD site : http://www.research.unc.edu/otd
Monthly Seminar Info: http://www.research.unc.edu/otd/seminar/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 13:51:39 -0500
From: Marc Sedam <marc_sedam at unc.edu>
Subject: water chem experiment
I think I probably missed a few cups o' coffee yesterday.
Lime (CaOH) raises pH, not lowers it. That would be...shall we say...a
major error. The underlying concept that it may swing the pH out of the
"normal" range for mash conversion is the same. OK...I'm grasping at
straws.
The other part about CaCl is more about what you're trying to
accomplish. Adding chloride to the liquid will have some effects on
palate fullness and other subtle tastes, in addition to adding the
required calcium. That may throw off the experiment. Adding slaked
lime has the advantage that no other ions are being added other than
hydroxyl groups (-OH), which won't effect flavor, but the pH will be
RAISED possibly out of range. I was guessing that you might could (a
good Southern saying) add lime in a quantity large enough to add
required calcium but low enough that the pH increase would be easily
compensated by the mash reactions. So I was punting to Jeff G. on what
he wanted to do.
I got the design though. I was trying to suggest that he should use
distilled water plus JUST enough of another salt to add 50ppm of calcium
to the mash and little if anything else.
Hope that was clearer.
- --
Marc Sedam
Chapel Hill, NC
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 14:47:43 -0500
From: Alan McKay <amckay at neap.net>
Subject: too old grain
Harold is asking about grain that is too old. What, is JP trying to
pawn some of his stash off on you ;-)
I can't say I can tell you what the most likely consequences are, Harold.
But I can tell you I've used 5 year old malt and made wonderful beer with
it. When I buy malt I immediately double-bag it in ziplok freezer bags.
This summer I made several batches from 4 and 5 year old malt that was
stored this way. The ziplock bags were in large plastic bins, and the
bins stored in my shed. So 35C in the summer and -35C in the winter.
Heat does not seem to bother grain so much as long as you keep the
moisture down as well. Cold neither.
cheers,
-Alan
- --
http://www.bodensatz.com/
TCP/IP: telecommunication protocol for imbibing pilsners
(Man-page of Unix-to-Unix beer protocol on Debian/GNU Linux)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 14:53:37 -0500
From: Alan McKay <amckay at neap.net>
Subject: Bavaria
I'll 3rd the recommendation for Mittenwald. Make sure you go see
the "Klamm". There is some great alpen hiking there. And somewhere
nearby we went swimming in an alpen lake. That will shiver your
timbers in May (which is when we went)!!!
Here is the best European pub guide I know of :
http://www.xs4all.nl/~patto1ro/
http://www.xs4all.nl/~patto1ro/munipubs.htm (Munich)
http://www.xs4all.nl/~patto1ro/augspubs.htm (Augsburg)
- --
http://www.bodensatz.com/
TCP/IP: telecommunication protocol for imbibing pilsners
(Man-page of Unix-to-Unix beer protocol on Debian/GNU Linux)
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 16:47:13 -0500 (EST)
From: "Ronnie Anderson" <lerxst at webmages.com>
Subject: Salt Lake City; Carbonation Drops?
I'm heading to Salt Lake City in a couple of weeks for a conference. Does
anyone have any tips on good bars/breweries/pubs? I won't have a car.
I just found out that my LHBS is going to start selling Coopers
Carbonation Drops:
http://www.cascadiabrew.com/carbdrop.asp
Anyone have any experience with them? The idea is the same as PrimeTabs,
but you only need one of these (instead of 3-5 PrimeTabs).
TIA,
Ronnie
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 20:45:35 -0600
From: "Patrick Hughes" <pjhinc at eriecoast.com>
Subject: Dr. Cone
In the Better Late Then Never Department, I would like to extend a heartfelt
thanks to Dr. Cone for The Fortnite of Yeast. It was a wonderful learning
experience. It's great to take a brewing class while I'm home enjoying a
homebrew.
Prost!
Patrick Hughes
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 20:16:11 -0700
From: Bob Devine <bob.devine at worldnet.att.net>
Subject: link of the week - Nov 1, 2003
In the spirit of sharing interesting information found
on the web, I offer to start a semi-regular / weekly message
with the "link of the week". Each link will have some
relevance to beer or brewing.
As the first one, here is a PDF document with a great
overview of British malting:
www.hgca.com/ftpaccess/docs/RandD/mbg.pdf
I hope that with the reasonable audience size of HBD,
we don't "slashdot" a website.
Feel free to send me suggestions for other links of interest!
[ Perhaps, if this proves worthwhile, a page at hbd.org
could have the collection of them. Spencer, are you the
person I should bug about this? ]
Bob Devine
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #4389, 11/01/03
*************************************
-------
