Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #4687
HOMEBREW Digest #4687 Fri 31 December 2004
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:
Happy New Year! ("Pat Babcock")
Wyeast 3822 ("melanchthon")
Commercial yeasts: mixtures of strains? (Fred Johnson)
Finishing fermentation in kegs ("melanchthon")
Slaked Lime Treatment ("A.J deLange")
Re: Commercial yeasts: mixtures of strains? ("Dave Burley")
Yeasty flavors ("Peed, John")
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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, 31 Dec 2004 01:39:00 -0500
From: "Pat Babcock" <pbabcock at hbd.org>
Subject: Happy New Year!
Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your rendition of Renner's Egg Nog...
Wishing you all a happy and safe new year!
- --
See ya!
Pat Babcock in SE Michigan
Chief of HBD Janitorial Services
http://hbd.org
pbabcock at hbd.org
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 07:05:06 -0500
From: "melanchthon" <rhayader at bellsouth.net>
Subject: Wyeast 3822
I recently purchased some Wyeast "Dutch Castle" #3822 from Nothern Brewer. I
did this because I didn't remember seeing it around before and its
description sounded interesting so what the heck, right?
After searching some books and the web however, I can find no recipes using
it or accounts of experiences with it, only people asking the same questions
I am. Can anyone enlighten me about this? Even a rough recipe style idea
would be extremely appreciated!
Chris Hart
D ungshovelerson & Son's Brewery
Gainesville, FL
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 08:26:09 -0500
From: Fred Johnson <FLJohnson at portbridge.com>
Subject: Commercial yeasts: mixtures of strains?
Dave Burley made an interesting statement in his recent post regarding
Wyeast 1318:
> If this is a true London yeast mixture of powdery and flocculant
> strains and
> not a single strain,...
I was not under the impression that the yeast strains we purchased
could be a mixture of strains unless stated so on the package. Is it
true that London "strains" are often mixtures? I do realize that we
aren't necessarily getting a clone, but I didn't realize we were
getting known mixtures. If this is true, it is a very important point,
as Dave noted. If one is selecting yeast from the secondary rather than
the primary, one will be propagating yeast with significantly different
properties.
I, personally, don't usually save a repitch the yeast from either
fermentor. I save part of the starter in the fridge and grow that up as
a new starter for the next batch, so I don't think I've selected the
powdery strain away from the more flocculant strain.
(I don't want to get into the Clinitest thing again. I was never
convinced that a beer with a lot of unfermentables will give the same
results by Clinitest as a beer without a lot of unfermentables when
fermentation is complete.)
Fred L Johnson
Apex, North Carolina, USA
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 09:08:25 -0500
From: "melanchthon" <rhayader at bellsouth.net>
Subject: Finishing fermentation in kegs
I have an additional, perhaps stupid, question.
When I have finished fermenting in the secondary in carboys and proceed to
keg my beer, I get a gravity reading and force carbonate. Sometimes a keg
will go right into the fridge and sometimes it will sit in my office at room
temperature for even a few months.
These are all ales and what I want to know is: Does the kegged beer under
pressure ferment further at room temperature as it sits? I believe I heard
somewhere that pressure suppresses the yeasts fermentation abilities. I know
I can attempt another reading but I want to know first in theory if this is
possible. So should I begin taking readings also on the day I put the kegs
in the fridge?
Chris Hart
D ungshovelerson & Son's Brewery
Gainesville, FL
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 15:11:39 +0000
From: "A.J deLange" <ajdel at cox.net>
Subject: Slaked Lime Treatment
I think part of the confusion with regard to statements to the effect
that slaked lime (quick lime works just as well but is a little trickier
to handle and store) is ineffective in treating water with high levels
of permanent hardness is that lime treatment is thought of as a way of
softening water when in fact it is actually done to reduce alkalinity
i.e. to decarbonate. When the hardness is temporary there are equivalent
amounts of calcium and bicarbonate (in fact the temporary hardess is
defined as the amount of bicarbonate equivalent to the calcium) and the
rection is
Ca(OH)2 + Ca(HCO3)2 ---> 2CaCO3 + 2H2O.
For permanent hardness one must add calcium equivalent to the remaining
bicarbonate and the reaction becomes
Ca(OH)2 + 2Na(HCO3) + CaCl2 --> 2 CaCO3 + 2H2O + 2NaCl
in which I used calcium chloride as the source of the extra calcium.
Note that in both cases all the calcium precipitates and in both cases
the pH is not effected (thoretically). This is the basis for Hubert's
scheme in which the lime is added to a portion of the water and the rest
then added gradually until the pH falls back to its original value. So
decarbonation is possible in both cases. The difference is that with
temporary hardness you get rid of the bicarbonate. Period. With
permanent hardness the bicarbonate is removed but it is replaced by the
anion of whatever salt you used to supply the extra calcium. The
concentration of anion is equivalent to the alkalnity removed. Why not
use extra lime to get the calcium? The reaction to clear all the
bicarbonate would be:
Ca(OH)2 + 2NaHCO3 + Ca(OH)2 --> 2 CaCO3 + 2H2O + Na+ + 2OH-
in other words the pH would go up (extra hydroxyl ions) and you would
have replace bicarbonate alkalinity with hydroxyl alkalinity when your
goal was to reduce total alkalinity. Over time CO2 from the air would
dissolve
2CO2 + 2Na+ + 2OH- --> 2NaHCO3
and you'd be right back where you started from.
The particular water in question is alkaline to the extent of about 2
mval (100 ppm as CaCO3). As a practical matter one can expect to
decarbonate to about 1 mval using lime and that's with a well controlled
process. Hubert Hanghoffer is the guy to see about how to do it most
effectively but his scheme requires a pH meter (to detect the leveling
off of pH drop mentioned above). Given the low calcium level we can say
reasonably accurately that the 1 mval removed by lime treatment would be
replaced by 1 mval of chloride (35 mg/L).
The real problem with the water in question is the whopping sodium
level. There is no simple way to remove this and so the best plan might
be to blend the well water with RO or deionized water say 1:3. This will
reduce the sodium to 17 ppm, the total hardness to 4 ppm and the
alkalinity to 25 ppm as CaCO3. You ought to be able to do a decent Pils
with that plus perhaps a pinch of calcium chloride.
The high sodium level and low calcium beg the question as to whether
this water has been run through an ion exchange softener either in the
house or at the well ("private well" suggests that it could be a
community well serving a small group of houses or it could serve only
one dwelling). If a softener is involved you'll want to bypass it for
brewing. The other thing of concern is the high pH. 9.3 is above the WHO
approved level for potable water and the high sodium level with that pH
suggest leaching of something into the water. I'd assume the lab eould
have warned if anything were amiss.
A.J.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 12:13:40 -0500
From: "Dave Burley" <Dave_Burley at charter.net>
Subject: Re: Commercial yeasts: mixtures of strains?
Fred,
I know Wyeast provides some mixed strains but I believe these are identfied as
such. No guartantee that yeast identified as actual strains of London yeasts
aren't composed of a mixture of strains, though
London ale yeasts classically had a powdery and a flocculant strain and often
two or more of each. This corrected for the various fermenting conditions and
permitted the beer to finish out quickly and with a unique flavor profile.
This likely was not a choice as when these original yeast were developed there
wasn't even an understanding of how fermentation worked. But a good lesson of
how we have progressed technically under the influence of skilled adepts.
I thought you had tried Clinitest and had a kit.
My point about the Clinitest was that it would provide you with some
pertinent information about apparent attentuation ( that is, are the yeast
finishing out the sugar?). This is information which you can get no other way
without using Clinitest.
Why not tie your other arm behind your back also? {8^)
Keep on Brewin'
Dave Burley
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 12:14:13 -0500
From: "Peed, John" <jpeed at elotouch.com>
Subject: Yeasty flavors
Denny suggests that I look at all aspects of my brewing process to find the
source of yeasty flavors in my cream ales. I agree, but I don't know where
to look! Obviously, the best way to remove yeasty flavors is to remove the
yeast, and the best way to do that is filtration. That can be argued any
number of ways, but I've proven to myself that probably the best thing you
can do to improve the flavor of your beer is to properly filter it.
Although I can't be certain that I've seen this notion backed up in the
literature, experience tells me that tiny hop particles, proteins and other
particles cling to yeast cells and if you remove the yeast cells, you also
remove all this other stuff. The result is that the taste of the beer is
much cleaner, better defined and more refined, with cleaner malt flavor and
less harshness in the bitterness. I've heard it said that filtration only
improves the appearance, not the flavor - in no way is that true. I've also
heard it said that filtration has no place in home brewing, and that also is
completely untrue - filtration is as much a key to excellent homebrew
results as just about anything else. It isn't all that complicated and it
requires very little equipment beyond the standard keg setup, but it does
involve extra time and work, and you have to learn how to do it correctly.
But that rant aside, and having filtered the yeast out of the beer, where
now do I look for the source of yeasty flavors? I've read Fix's Principles
of Brewing Science and An Analysis of Brewing Techniques, and I can remember
having seen only one reference to yeasty after-flavors. I know darn well
that I highlighted it, but I'll have to look very methodically to find it
again. At any rate, I remember thinking that it was fairly obscure and
probably not a common problem. Other than that, I have no idea what to
suspect, other than the yeast strain. I'm betting that's the source, and
I'll let you know the results of future attempts with other yeasts. Bear in
mind that we're talking about a very subtle flavor here, in a beer that
demands subtlety. I want a very subtle corn sweetness in the finish,
balanced by a clean, subtle hop briskness - not bitterness, just briskness -
and anything else (other than a very gentle hint of maltiness) will pretty
much stomp all over the beer. Even a whisper of yeastiness will come across
as a shout, and you'd never detect it in an American Pale, or most other
styles. I will say this: lagering helps cream ales, and the yeastiness is
diminishing as it ages.
John Peed
Oak Ridge, TN
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #4687, 12/31/04
*************************************
-------
