Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #4692
HOMEBREW Digest #4692 Fri 07 January 2005
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Digest Janitor: pbabcock at hbd.org
***************************************************************
THIS YEAR'S HOME BREW DIGEST BROUGHT TO YOU BY:
Beer, Beer, and More Beer
Visit http://morebeer.com to show your appreciation!
Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********
Contents:
Hot To Trot On Apricot ("Phil Yates")
RE: Leaf Hops (Steven Parfitt)
Sulfur Smell ("A.J deLange")
Gap Settings ("Dan Listermann")
Re: gap settings (Jeff Renner)
Re: Stuffing What In My Pants? (Jeff Renner)
Tuscarora Mills - ouch! (Calvin Perilloux)
Re: gap settings ("Jason Henning")
whole hop brewing ("Steve B")
Re: answer about WLP005, question about yeast (chris)
Yeast aeration and growth (was: question about yeast) ("Fredrik")
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* The HBD Logo Store is now open! *
* http://www.hbd.org/store.html *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* Suppport this service: http://hbd.org/donate.shtml *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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.
LOOKING TO BUY OR SELL USED EQUIPMENT? Please do not post about it here. Go
instead to http://homebrewfleamarket.com and post a free ad there.
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 (pbabcock at hbd dot org), Jason Henning,
and Spencer Thomas
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 20:18:01 +1100
From: "Phil Yates" <phil.yates at bigpond.com>
Subject: Hot To Trot On Apricot
D.Clark writes:
>I regularly make a clonebrew of Magic Hat # 9,
>which is an apricot ale, and I have used both Nottingham and Safale S->04
>with very good results. Both ferment very quickly and floc out very
>well. The S-04 leaves the beer especially clean tasting.
Hmm, Mr Clark seems to be going down a similar track to me. I wonder what
Skotrat will say if I abandon my peach wheat for an apricot ale? Might be
more in keeping with my macho image.
Whilst I too have been very impressed with the DCL dried yeasts, they
haven't yet been able to offer a genuine Hefeweizen W68 in dried form. I
believe they are still working on the project. Until it becomes available,
I'll be sticking with White Labs WLP 300 for my Hefeweizen wheat beers.
In the mean time, I can't wait to see Scotty's face when I next see him at
the bar, and pull a hot apricot ale out of my shorts. He won't be calling me
a girl any more!
Phil
aka Phillis
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 05:20:34 -0800 (PST)
From: Steven Parfitt <thegimp98 at yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: Leaf Hops
Antony Hayes is experiencng problems with leaf hops
>I used leaf hops for the first time since 1998. After
> clogging my counterflow chiller and bursting a pipe,
> I was reminded as to why I moved to pellets in the
> first place. The infernal things get in everywhere
> and clog up everything.
... snip...
I have the opposite problem. I suspect you are not
using any kind of strainer on your pick up tube.
I use a Bazooka Screen on my pick up tube in my
kettle. It keeps the hops out, but allows them to form
a filter bed for the wort.
The only problem I have experienced with this is with
pellet hops plugging it. Whole hops are no problem.
Strange world isn't it.
The only other problem I have experienced with the
Bazooka screen was when I was not cleaning it
properly. I was just spraying it off with the hose to
clean it between brew sessions. I thought a high
pressure blast from the hose (Hose on line side of
pressure regualtor for the house) would be enough to
clean it. It eventually became clogged with residue
and needed a really good cleaning. Now I remove it
from the kettle and clean it by hand every batch.
=====
Steven, -75 XLCH- Ironhead Nano-Brewery http://thegimp.8k.com
Johnson City, TN [422.7, 169.2] Rennerian
"There is no such thing as gravity, the earth sucks." Wings Whiplash - 1968
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 13:21:46 +0000
From: "A.J deLange" <ajdel at cox.net>
Subject: Sulfur Smell
Sulfur smells are quite normal in the production of Czech Pils... up to
a point. I'm reasonably convinced that the lager brewers of yore
selected sulfur producing yeast strains not because of the way they
smelled but because the sulfite they produce keeps the beer in a reduced
state and thus "freseher" at the end of lagering. That said the smells
of sulfite and even sulfide assocaited with lager strains are part of
what the Germans call "Jungbuket" which is usually translated as "beer
stench". This should pass away eventually. It was always my experience
that the beer would stink for several weeks and then overnight lose the
bouquet and become drinkable. While I never tried it I always figured
one could accelerate the removal of Jungbuket by scrubbing with CO2
which is, theoretically, what is going on during lagering but at a
slower rate.
Now if the smell is definitely sulfidic rather than sulfitic and is not
evanescing then the problem may be infection rather that Jungbuket.
This hypothesis is strengthened by the comment that the starter was not
up to snuff when pitched. Examination of a sample under a microscope if
that's possible should be revealing.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 08:30:53 -0500
From: "Dan Listermann" <dan at listermann.com>
Subject: Gap Settings
"From: "D. Clark" <clark at capital.net>
I have a question for the collective regarding gap settings for crushing
malted barley and wheat. I received a Barley Crusher for Christmas
(another fun toy for dads' brewing days) and I was wondering if the preset
gap (.039) is the best setting to use."
I am no believer in a magical "best" or "optimum" gap setting for mills.
There might be good "compromise settings" but no "best." You are making
grist, not gaps. Learn to recognize a good grist. The old advice to " just
barely crush it" or the "break it into six pieces" might have been good for
Corona mills, but is very wasteful for a modern roller mill. The grist
should be crushed until it is difficult to find corns that appear intact and
those that you do find, appear undersized. Someone said,"Crush it until you
get scared."
" Should the wheat be crushed at a narrower setting?"
Very definitely.
Dan Listermann
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 08:51:45 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <jeffrenner at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: gap settings
"Dave Clark" <clark at capital.net> writes from Eagle Bridge, New York
>I have a question for the collective regarding gap settings for crushing
>malted barley and wheat. ... I was wondering if the preset
>gap (.039) is the best setting to use.
I double mill my grains in my adjustable MaltMill using the thickness
of a dime for the first pass. That's about 1 mm, which is about
0.039". Often I will slightly tighten the gap for the second pass.
Lately, I've been tempering my malt first with about 75-100 ml warm
water per 5 kg (that's ~1/3 cup per 11 pounds), and letting it sit
about 30 minutes. This toughens the husks so they stay more intact,
making a better filter bed. Only trouble is, sometimes the crushed
grain doesn't feed on the second pass because of their "fluffiness."
It bridges over the opening. What you want in a mash, intact husks,
isn't good for feeding a mill.
Since tempering the malt and milling a little tighter, I've increased
my efficiency a bit. Last brew was 80% using ProMash calculation,
vs. about 70-73% earlier.
>And what about wheat malt? The store mill can barely pass any wheat
>through the rollers
The trick with wheat malt is to mix it with the barley malt before
milling. That way the barley pulls the wheat thru. You can mill
wheat malt alone, but you need to open the mill a bit. This will
give a poor crush, of course, so you then tighten the gap and mill a
second time.
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, 7 Jan 2005 09:02:50 -0500
From: Jeff Renner <jeffrenner at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Stuffing What In My Pants?
Good to hear from Phil Yates down under, who writes
>How do you think I'd look Brian, wandering around the bars with peach wheat
>beers stuffed down my pants?
Reminds me of a favorite story.
It seems there were two college roommates. One was a suave, studly
guy - a kind of babe magnet. The other was rather a nerdy,
insecure, bookish type. They decided to go to the beach, but the
nerd was concerned. He could never pick up any girls. So the stud
suggested, "Just drop a potato down your swimsuit - the girls will
think you really have something and they'll all be interested."
So they went and it was even worse than usual for the guy. Girls
were actively avoiding him. When they got back, he complained to his
roommate, who replied, "It's OK, you did good for a first try. But
next time, drop the potato down the *front* of your shorts."
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, 7 Jan 2005 06:45:50 -0800 (PST)
From: Calvin Perilloux <calvinperilloux at yahoo.com>
Subject: Tuscarora Mills - ouch!
I dunno why Sid was posting what really looks like an ad
for Tuscarora Mill in Virginia on a national board where
everyone's probably got their own local (good) restaurant
doing beer dinners, but here's my comments.
If you can't make it to Tuskies' beer dinner to try out whatever
they are serving, under no circumstances should you venture in
later hoping to try any of the Stone Brewing beers. Here's why:
They had a Troegs beer dinner one evening. Later in the week,
after it was over, I happened to see the table tent ad and
mentioned to the waiter it would have been good to try some
of those. "No problem, monsieur, we still have them." Problem
was, instead of the usual $3 to $5 for a 12 ounce bottle of 6% abv
beer like all the rest they serve, they charged bloody $14 when
the bill came. Holy bejesus! Sure, I should have not assumed
the price (which was not listed anywhere), but that was completely
out of line for such an average -- and locally available -- beer.
Despite their good food, Tuscarora Mills will never, ever see me
in there again for any reason. They got their $14 but lost out
on probably hundreds of my beer dollars over the course of time.
Calvin Perilloux
Middletown, Maryland, USA
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 09:55:07 -0500
From: "Jason Henning" <jason at thehennings.com>
Subject: Re: gap settings
>From Renner's post:
>>And what about wheat malt? The store mill can barely pass any wheat
>>through the rollers
>
> The trick with wheat malt is to mix it with the barley malt before
> milling. That way the barley pulls the wheat thru. You can mill
> wheat malt alone, but you need to open the mill a bit. This will
> give a poor crush, of course, so you then tighten the gap and mill a
> second time.
For me the trick is to mill the wheat with a wide gap, just enough to crack
it. Then set the gap back to normal and mill it again, either alone or with
the barley.
Cheers,
Jason Henning
Whitmore Lake, MI
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 10:45:02 -0500
From: "Steve B" <habenero92 at hotmail.com>
Subject: whole hop brewing
Now I have just the opposite opinion with regards to whole hops. I love
brewing with them. I just pop them in a grain bag I have from my extract
days and ta-da no mess. Much easier to contain. I am loathe to use pellets
as result. The grain bag even works for dry hopping.
S
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 12:06:34 -0600
From: chris at mikk.net
Subject: Re: answer about WLP005, question about yeast
On Thu, 6 Jan 2005 09:51:38 -0500 , Jeff Renner writes:
> I no doubt have a proprietary interest in this yeast since I brought
> it back from Ridley's Brewery in Essex, UK, several years ago, and
> provided it to WhiteLabs.
Then I owe you a couple if we ever meet -- this is
my favorite yeast.
> It is somewhat fruity, though not strongly. It also has a woody
> character - almost like oak aging. Nicely dry, too. I find that
> many homebrewed bitters are not dry enough.
>
> I also love the fact that it produces a huge head of easily
> harvestable, very clean yeast for repitching.. Of course, it I
> didn't like its flavor profile, that wouldn't mean anything.
I get a little nuttiness, too, and find it brings out
the soft bready malt flavors quite well. It shines
in a brown ale, goes very well with fuggle hops, and
I found my bitters magically got better when I started
using this yeast for them.
I also love its top-cropping ability, and was converted
top this re-use technique by this strain, along with
my second-favorite (see below).
Many thanks for bringing this one over!
> I suppose I really should try some of the other British ale yeasts
> again - it's been a while. Maybe I'd like them better.
My close second favorite is one white labs number
over, WLP023 Burton ale. It's on the opposite end
of the British ale flavor spectrum, assertively
fruity and mildly tart. It shares the dryness and
great top-cropping ability.
It gives me good results in stouts and it pairs
beautifully with the aroma of Kent Goldings in one
of my favorite IPAs.
- --
Chris Mikkelson
St. Paul, MN
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 19:05:27 +0100
From: "Fredrik" <carlsbergerensis at hotmail.com>
Subject: Yeast aeration and growth (was: question about yeast)
Here are some speculations on Chad Stevens
ideas(#4690) on yeast aeration.
First I'm sorry if I misunderstand(?) the questions but
I sense the questions posed partly contains
some underlying IMO confusing assumptions about growth.
FWIW, here are some comments that maybe(?) can clarify some of this.
1) Unlike some other organisms, yeast growth does not
stop when the molecular oxygen is exhausted.
Yeast can grow for several generations without
oxygen (enough to promptly consume a batch of wort if the pitching
rate is appropriate). Though the biomass yield as well as
performance and alcohol tolerance etc does drops (which means
the growth slows, but not stops, if it really *stopped* there
would be a stuck ferment). Though I am still looking to
understand the exact shape of the biomass graph from pitching
to EOF (if anyone has some data on this I am very interested!),
but it's clear though that the population grows all the way
until the last sugar, though in the very end most of the energy
possible goes into cell maintenance and similar expenses and I
suspect the biomass yield is probably really low.
2) As I understand the reason for the pitching rate
recommendations is the depletion of *cellular* levels of
oxygen derived compounds(UFA's and sterols) during anaerobic
growth. These compounds are split and shared in the population
when it grows, and if the pitching rate is low, or if the
aeration or in general the initial UFA and sterol levels is
insufficient, the population will even more deplete the
*cellular* levels of these compounds (though I figure the
total amount in the population is fairly conserved?),
leading to performance problems. With a 1 million/ml/P
pitching rate, as per my crude estimates yeast will in a
typical wort grow for an average of 3 generations
(factor x8 = 2*2*2) and average cellular levels of these
compounds will drop to about 12.5% (1/8) of whatever the
inital value was. The lower the initial value, the worse
performance will you have in the end. Therefore, pitching
a given (normally sufficient) amount of yeast - but that
is depleted on sterols and UFA's and not giving it initial
aeration, is I suppose possibly about as bad (or at least
not much better) as pitching a too small amount of yeast
but with good aeration and inital levels of these oxygen
derived compounds? That said, at least mathematically one
can compensate the pitching rate for lower initial cellular
levels and poor aeration. I would suspect the best way is
probably the right amount of yeast, with the right level
of initial (or pre) aeration. Then one doesn't have to
"overpitch" to cover up for poor aeration, or even
the other way around. Unless you do it for the reason of
controlled tweaking of flavours...
About the flavour difference(?) in chad's example I think
this is a really interesting question that I would
also like to have answered in the general case! I
think the general basis for some potential
flavour difference is there but I am curious to
learn what the exact differences may be at times,
and how big they are (detectable at all?)
Until I know better I assume that the implications
depends on a range of other factors too
in the sense that it might be hard to reach a
general consencus. But related functions are
probably(?) related to a drop in biomass yield, cell
membrane function and cross membrane leakage of
various stuff and what that typically may imply in terms
of flavour compounds in each specific case. I think
one may have to consider various stages in fermentation
and see how each stage is affected. It seems to me
there are at least the acceleration phase, the peak
and then the deacceleration phase that all have different
functions. If something affects both the acceleration phase
and the deaccelerations phase in different way, predicting
the outcome might not be a piece of cake? At this point
I personally doubt that qualitative estimates will do to
resolve all these matters. Perhaps one has to try the best
possible way and nail numbers to each component and
then sum it up.
It would be interesting to hear from those who has for
any particular situations reached some fairly consistent
conclusions on this? (flavour impacts) Like for particular
receips, or strains?
/Fredrik
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #4692, 01/07/05
*************************************
-------
