HOMEBREW Digest #1736 Sat 20 May 1995

Digest #1735 Digest #1737

		Rob Gardner, Digest Janitor

  Hop Rhizome Planting ("Jim Webb")
  Screens, false bottoms, recirculation (Lance Stronk)
  Re: March pumps (LPCALC)
  Re: Irish Moss ("R. James Ray")
  Decoction Technique (Mike Inglis)
  Mash/Lauter Tun Fabrication Question (Mark Peacock)
  Bad batch of brew to malt vinegar ()
  Rcpt: Homebrew Digest #1707 (Ap (NEEVES)
  re:  NA beer (Keith Frank)
  Re: High FG, pumps (Jim Dipalma)
  triple distilled mercury (Dave Whitman)
  SUDS4.0 (Aaron Shaw)
  Water Salts... Extract (ROSSBEER)
  Trub removal ect (Michael Collins)
  Power Sparge (Jeff Stampes)
  RE: Rusty conv. Keg, old water (Chris Cooper)
  Utilization of Oatmeal Quest ("Palmer.John")
  What kind of grains do I have? (Darren Tyson)
  Wheat-fruit beers/Malt numbers/ftp.stanford (Bob Sinnema)
  SIGNOFF homebrew at hpfcmi.fc.hp.com (ESSNER RICHARD L)
  Trub removal ect. (dflagg)
  Diacetyl Rest (Hmbrewbob)
  Peptidase, peptones, & mouthfeel (Ken Willing)
  Q: Using mod.-modified malt (Ken Willing)
  Cleaning the stove! (Kevin McEnhill)
  Marzen (Chuck E. Mryglot)
  Stuck Ferments/March Pumping... (usfmchql)
  Re: Thanks/lager/Pete's Summer Brew (Frank Caico)
  Re: Electric stovetop brewing (Jim Grady)
  Re: Cu nutrient/ N2-CO2 blend ("R. James Ray")
  To crack or not to crack (Marla Korchmar)
  Re: Vice (Brian J Walter (Brewing Chemist))
  Stuck Ferments / Pressing (Norman Pyle)

****************************************************************** * POLICY NOTE: Due to the incredible volume of bouncing mail, * I am going to have to start removing addresses from the list * that cause ongoing problems. In particular, if your mailbox * is full or your account over quota, and this results in bounced * mail, your address will be removed from the list after a few days. * * If you use a 'vacation' program, please be sure that it only * sends a automated reply to homebrew-request *once*. If I get * more than one, then I'll delete your address from the list. ****************************************************************** ################################################################# # # YET ANOTHER NEW FEDERAL REGULATION: if you are UNSUBSCRIBING from the # digest, please make sure you send your request to the same service # provider that you sent your subscription request!!! I am now receiving # many unsubscribe requests that do not match any address on my mailing # list, and effective immediately I will be silently deleting such # requests. # ################################################################# Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew at hpfcmi.fc.hp.com (Articles are published in the order they are received.) Send UNSUBSCRIBE and all other requests, ie, address change, etc., to homebrew-request@ hpfcmi.fc.hp.com, BUT PLEASE NOTE that if you subscribed via the BITNET listserver (BEER-L at UA1VM.UA.EDU), then you MUST unsubscribe the same way! If your account is being deleted, please be courteous and unsubscribe first. Please don't send me requests for back issues - you will be silently ignored. For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to lutzen at novell.physics.umr.edu ARCHIVES: An archive of previous issues of this digest, as well as other beer related information can be accessed via anonymous ftp at ftp.stanford.edu. Use ftp to log in as anonymous and give your full e-mail address as the password, look under the directory /pub/clubs/homebrew/beer directory. AFS users can find it under /afs/ir.stanford.edu/ftp/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer. If you do not have ftp capability you may access the files via e-mail using the ftpmail service at gatekeeper.dec.com. For information about this service, send an e-mail message to ftpmail at gatekeeper.dec.com with the word "help" (without the quotes) in the body of the message.
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 18 May 95 14:16:01 -0400 From: "Jim Webb" <webb_j at sudhqc.ndm.gov.on.ca> Subject: Hop Rhizome Planting [This message is converted from WPS-PLUS to ASCII] Several members of my homebrew club bought hop rhizomes this year - the first time that any of us have tried growing them. However, the instructions that came with them were not clear at all on how you orient the cutting when you plant it. There was a diagram which showed a 'typical hop root system' giving some of us the impression the rhizome should be planted VERTICAL. However, others of us assume that all other plant rhizomes we see in the garden (from grass to iris) grow HORIZONTAL - the plant's way of propagating itself horizontally from the main plant - and placed our hops rhizomes accordingly. My horizontally-planted hops have sprouted about 2" tall, and the member's hops planted vertically have not. Which is the correct way to plant these things, and should those who planted them wrong gently dig them up and replant, or will they grow anyways? Many thanx in advance for your sage .....er hops advice. Jim Webb Ministry of Northern Development & Mines Sudbury, Ontario Return to table of contents
Date: 18 May 1995 09:36:53 -0500 (EST) From: Lance Stronk <S29033%22681 at utrcgw.utc.com> Subject: Screens, false bottoms, recirculation I have been reading the thread on screen size for the false bottom of mash/lauter tuns and was curious about something. My system uses a stainless steel screen with 70% open area to allow a higher flow rate through the grain bed. I use a RIMS system to heat and recirculate and because of the large open area of the screen, I get wort that is turbit to start and clear once the grain bed is established. This may take anywhere from 10-15 minutes of recirculation to get the wort clear. I have no problem with this since the heater is maintaining or boosting temperature during this time. My curiosity is this. What difference does it make whether it takes 1 quart to get clear runoff or 5 gallons to get clear runoff? If one is recirculating anyway (to maintain or boost temp) I don't see the point. The grain bed is the actual filter, not the screen, so why restrict the flow? Lance Stronk Lstronk at sikorsky.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 May 1995 10:08:05 -0400 From: LPCALC at aol.com Subject: Re: March pumps I've been using the Pico (RIMS)system for a couple of years and the pump is the weakest part. The guys at Pico chose this pump because of the flow rate. They said the slow rate would "minimize" stuck recirculation of mash water. Minimize is the key word. The grain bed will become compacted if you recirculate the ball value completely open, at least it has for me on occasion. I also have had difficulty, at times, pumping sparge water over the top the the mash tun. Best solution IMO is to make sure you've got a good flow going before you raise the sparge head over the side the mash tun. larry Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 May 1995 07:20:28 -0700 (PDT) From: "R. James Ray" <ray902 at uidaho.edu> Subject: Re: Irish Moss In HBD #1734 Patrick Humphrey wrote: > I also forgot to use Irish Moss in my latest Honey-Wheat brew and asked > Bill to forward his responses to me. Most respondents suggested that the > gelatin acts to bring the yeast out of solution and gel at the bottom of > the bottle. If this is true, then will we still get the chill haze from > the suspended proteins which the Irish moss would have taken out? Gelatin is not a substitute for Irish moss. I consider Irish moss to be a break enhancer, to make the hot break set hard and fast to the bottom of the kettle instead of becouming cold break in the fermenter. Gelatin simply helps yeast floculate, whether they feel like flocking or not. Don't worry. R. James Ray Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 May 1995 07:31:21 -0700 From: minglis at ix.netcom.com (Mike Inglis) Subject: Decoction Technique I am planning on brewing a Bavarian Weizen using a single decoction on Monday, 5/22, but I have a question which may sound a little naive. I have never done a decoction before and was just wondering what the detailed procedure for "pulling the thick part of the mash" is. Do you use a strainer or maybe just a saucepan and scoop out as much of the grain as you can? I have the actual schedule set so I just need this last piece of information. I am hoping that some decoction veterans can give me some ideas. Thanks in advance for any help. Mike Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 17 May 1995 17:53:48 -0700 From: mpeacock at oeonline.com (Mark Peacock) Subject: Mash/Lauter Tun Fabrication Question Quick equipment description: 7 gal SS stock pot, hole drilled in the bottom, fitted with a cock valve on the outside, 3/8" pipe thread through the hole, connecting to a female-to-compression adapter inside the pot. Problem: When assembled, I get a small leak through the bottom of the hole. I tried to seal it with some Teflon stem wrap, but the leak remains. Perhaps my tun will be like the SR-71 Blackbird -- leak like hell when on the ground, but sealed tight when hot and operational. However, I don't wish to bet an extended stovetop cleanup session on it. What I need is a washer/O-ring, but I'm not sure what will hold up to the temperature? Will rubber or neoprene stand the boiling/hot metal without melting? TIA (as always), Mark Peacock (mpeacock at oeonline.com) Birmingham, Michigan Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 May 1995 06:58:48 +0500 From: generic at be3067.be.ford.com () Subject: Bad batch of brew to malt vinegar Hi all. This has probably been posted before, I'm sure, but I haven't seen it lately. Anyone with a receipe/directions/process? Thanks for the help. Mike Preston, Secretary .~~~. The Detroit Carboys | |] "Habeo Hordea Fermentabo" |___| Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 May 95 10:14 From: NEEVES at mailgate.navsses.navy.mil (NEEVES) Subject: Rcpt: Homebrew Digest #1707 (Ap The following message has been deleted. ****** MESSAGE TOO LARGE The message text of this Email has exceeded the maximum allowable length for Email body size. The message has been enclosed as an attachment. You may view the attachment, or save the attachment to disk. This message wat automatically generated by the SMTP gateway. ****** Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 May 1995 10:33:06 -0500 From: keithfrank at dow.com (Keith Frank) Subject: re: NA beer Subject: re: NA beer In the May 18 digest Dave Silver posted a freeze and drain method for NA beer (original note from Matt Kelly) in PET bottles. Sounds like a great idea. Later this summer I'm going to try it with various normal beers around the house, analyze the alcohol by gas chromatography and will post to the digest. Bruce DeBolt Lake Jackson, TX Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 May 95 11:43:07 EDT From: dipalma at sky.com (Jim Dipalma) Subject: Re: High FG, pumps Hi All, In HBD#1733, Russell P. Brodeur writes about high FGs: >My first brew was a Scottish-style ale; OG ~65, FG ~22. I used 5# of dWC >Special B in this, >My second brew was a Munich-style dark lager. I used 18# dWC Pils and 2# >dWC Special B (I don't recommend this for use in lagers). >I brewed a light Munich-style lager using 17# >dWC pils and 1# dWC CaraPils, using Munich lager yeast. And John Palmer replies: >The five pounds of Special B is a LOT. No wonder there was a high FG there. >There would be tons of complex sugars left over. Then there was the lager yeast >split batch with 2 lbs of Special B. I think John's point is well taken. 2 lbs of Special B is a lot, 5 is absolutely mind blowing. I use 1/4 lb in a 10 gallon porter recipe, it's less than 2% of the grain bill, and the raisin-like sweetness contributed by Special B comes roaring through, despite large amounts of chocolate malt, hop bitterness, etc. A note about the DWC pils that may or may not be related. This malt has changed drastically from when it first appeared a few years ago. This malt has a low degree of starch modification, much lower than the original version. The degree of starch modification is determined by the fine/coarse grind extract difference. Most of the DWC malts come in at 1.5% or lower, the pils is at 2.2%, indicating a slight undermodification. John continues: >I will come to my point by saying that I could make a better case by looking at >yeasts and % lower fermentability specialty grains than trying to draw the line >between between Malting companies. I think your conclusion is overrided by the >differences between your recipes. Agreed. Looking over the description of the problem, virtually *every* variable which would effect FG is changed with every batch. Different grain bills, yeasts, mash schedules, fermentation temperatures. I suggest that you start by cutting back the amount of specialty grains that contribute non- fermentable sugars (Special B, carapils) to 5-10% of the grain bill, and leave everything else the same. It's difficult to draw any conclusions due to the lack of controls. ***************************************************************** In HBD #1734, Robert Waddell writes about problems with pumps: >Has anyone else out there had similar problems with these "March(tm)" pumps >with the Pico Systems? >But what's up with them being >able to pump a three foot distance one time and not an hour later? My three-tier system is homegrown, I'm not familiar with Pico Systems. I did purchase two different March pumps however, models MDX-3 and MDX. At 6 feet of head, the former is rated at over 5 gpm, the latter at nearly 2 gpm. The pumps have plenty of power, but they are non self-priming. This is true in general of the type of laminar flow, magnetic drive that we homebrewers use. From your description, it sounds like the pumps are not being well primed. Try using gravity or suction to fill the pump's impeller housing with fluid before turning it on. Cheers, Jim dipalma at sky.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 May 1995 12:32:22 -0400 From: dwhitman at rohmhaas.com (Dave Whitman) Subject: triple distilled mercury Lance Stronk writes about a pamphlet that came with his thermometer: >It also stated that there should be no fear of mercury >poisoning since the mercury was "triple distilled mercury" and could >not be absorbed through the skin. I never heard of "triple distilled >mercury" >and have asked others about it only to get some disbelieving >looks. Good quality mercury is normally triple distilled to increase its purity. The purified stuff is just as toxic as before distillation. >From the Merck Index: Mercury... Human Toxicity: Readily absorbed via respiratory tract (elemental mercury vapor, mercurial compd dusts), intact skin and G.I. tract. - --- Dave Whitman Rohm and Haas Specialty Materials dwhitman at rohmhaas.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 May 1995 13:07:18 -0400 From: ar568 at freenet.carleton.ca (Aaron Shaw) Subject: SUDS4.0 Could someone please send me the ftp address of SUDS4.0. TIA. - -- "Come my lad, and drink some beer!" Aaron Shaw Ottawa, Canada Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 May 1995 13:27:24 -0400 From: ROSSBEER at aol.com Subject: Water Salts... Extract I have read several HBD postings on the use of water salts. I'm still a little confused on the point of adding salts to an extract batch. My current understanding is that the extract company has taken care of this for the brewer when the extract is manufactured. Is this right? I brew with RO water that is very low in salts, I am afraid to add salts at this point in fear of over doing a good thing. Thank you for this great resource, and for your help. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 May 1995 10:35:16 -0700 From: equinox at halcyon.com (Michael Collins) Subject: Trub removal ect >I'm looking for a good way >to remove trub either from my boiling kettle or my settling tank. > I have tried this with >out success. I am only boiling 2.5-3 gallons in my kettle and the wort is >I would like to begin partial or all grain brews and want a good >trub removal system before I take the plunge. I am also going through the transition phase to do all-grain. I have done one all-grain batch and one thing I noticed- besides it being an entirely different process- is that there is a hell of a lot more leftover material in the wort. I have come to the conclusion that all the talk about trub removal is relevant only to the all-grain brewing process and that an extract brewer should not be concerned about removing it. After cooling the wort I sterilize a wide spaced screen and filter the wort through that into the fermentation vessel to remove excess grain or hops and then add the yeast. Since it is cooled I also benefit from some additional aeration. The brew doesn't get racked off until the initial fermentation is complete and the krausen subsides. One loses too much brew when trying to siphon off before then. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 May 95 09:23:24 MDT From: stampes at neocad.com (Jeff Stampes) Subject: Power Sparge Ok, I can't seem to get this out of my mind, especially after attempting to sparge my last Hefe-Weizen and being yelled at for having too many empty kegs in the shed in the same day. I saw a plan for a 2 keg power sparge system, and I can't help but think that with some modifications, it would be as good as any other system. Here's what I was thinking: Fabricate a copper slot-type manifold that I could fit through the opening of a corny and would sit on the bottom. The Liquid-out tube could be clamped onto the manifold. The gas-in tube could be slightly lengthened, bent at 90 degrees, and have holes drilled to make it an effective 'shower head' sparger. Another keg full of hot sparge water could be connected to the gas-in fitting, and the CO2 tank connected to that one. Advantages: seems the grain bed could still set up as a nice filter on the manifold. No stuck sparges...if it slows too much, turn up the pressure Full control over the speed of the sparge via pressure regulation With the kegg sealed, heat loss would be minimized over a Zapap-type or a phil's phalse bottom type system Disadvantages: That's for you to tell me! - -- Jeff Stampes -- NeoCAD, Inc. -- Boulder, CO -- stampes at neocad.com -- - -- Ultimate Frisbee...It's not just for dogs anymore. -- - -- Any fool can make bread out of grain...God intended it for beer! -- Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 May 1995 14:46:31 -0400 From: Chris Cooper <ccooper at a2607cc.msr.hp.com> Subject: RE: Rusty conv. Keg, old water In HBD 1734 Mike Maimone mentions finding the inside of his recently converted keg being rusty and proposes cleaning it up with a drill and a wire brush DON'T DO IT! Sorry to shout but this can be a big mistake. Not all stainless is the same and some has a tendency to rust, from my experience with corny kegs and surplus kitchen gear using a wire brush or wheel scratches the surface of the stainless and leaves behind small bits of the brush which act as nucleation points for future oxidation. Use a good grade cleanser and the non-metallic (scotch-brite) pads to scrub the keg. A recent post to the HBD mentioned a cleaner named King Kleen and I have used ZUD to clean stainless. Chris Cooper , Commerce Michigan --> Pine Haven Brewery <-- ccooper at a2607.cc.msr.hp.com --> aka. Deb's Kitchen <-- Return to table of contents
Date: 18 May 1995 12:02:17 U From: "Palmer.John" <palmer at ssdgwy.mdc.com> Subject: Utilization of Oatmeal Quest Hi Group, I want to understand Oatmeal. I want to understand how to best use it to achieve a creamy Oatmeal Stout. What is the component of Oatmeal that is responsible for the creaminess and mouthfeel of an Oatmeal Stout. I believe its the proteins. How are these components best developed in our beer? The following are the questions that I think will allow us to fully define Oatmeals role in brewing. Answer any you can, and either post or email me, I will post a summary next week. 1. Oatmeal is not malted, if it is Rolled or Instant/Quick to make part/all of the starches soluble, does it respond to Steeping? or does it need to be Mashed? In other words, is there any mouthfeel or head retention benefit from steeping oatmeal? 2. Does oatmeal need to be cooked (to a degree dependent on initial form) to fully realize its potential in a steeping or mash? Does cooking the oatmeal before use degrade the desired properties in the beer? or enhance them? 3. When Mashing Oatmeal, is a Protein Rest desired or is that counterproductive to the desired oatmeal effects? Assume the use of 1 lb of oatmeal per 5 gallon batch. Perhaps a short protein rest is needed to break up some of the proteins to avoid a stuck sparge, but maybe too long a protein rest would leave no oatmeal properties. I think that about covers it, it looks like I am starting to ask redundant questions. Respond away and hopefully we will arrive at the whole story. Thanks, John J. Palmer - Metallurgist for MDA-SSD M&P johnj at primenet.com Huntington Beach, California Palmer House Brewery and Smithy - www.primenet.com/~johnj/ Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 May 1995 15:24:39 -0600 (CST) From: Darren Tyson <TYSONDR at SLUVCA.SLU.EDU> Subject: What kind of grains do I have? Greetings fellow hoembrewers, I have a question regarding some grains I have received from my brother-in-law (who happens to work for Boston Beer Co.) He didn't know what kind of grains they were, and I would like to try to figure that out. I'm hoping after describing the grains I can at least get the possibles narrowed down. This should be an interesting problem to you sleuth-type grain gurus out there! One type is approximately the same color as the British Crystal malt I had recently purchased, however, the grains have a MUCH stronger odor. I could barely smell the Crystal, but the grains in question have a sharp smell. They make my nose sting a little when I take a whiff! The husks are not completely closed, possibly meaning that they have already been cracked for steeping? And the grains inside the husks appear darker than the husks themselves. The other type of grain I received is a darker grain that looks identical in color to the British Chocolate malt I have, however, the smell is much more sharp like the other grain in question. I think the darker grain may simply be a roasted version of the lighter color grain except that the size of the individual draker grains are a little smaller in size. Does the roasting process cause the grains to shrink at all? Well, that's all the information I can think to state. If anyone has an inkling as to what type of grains these could be, please email me. May all your beer be homebrewed, Darren tysondr at sluvca.slu.edu P.S. I would like to thank Michael Millstone for his recent summary of steeping grains. It came in handy today! Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 May 1995 14:59:36 -0600 (MDT) From: Bob Sinnema <rjsinnem at acs.ucalgary.ca> Subject: Wheat-fruit beers/Malt numbers/ftp.stanford I'm planning to make a blueberry-wheat beer and am curious about yeasts that others have used when making wheat-based fruit beers. There would seem to be little advantage to using a weizen yeast since one is not looking for the unique clove/banana/spice aroma of a weizen. Nevertheless, most of the recipes I've seen call for weizen yeast. So tell me, why shouldn't I use a garden variety ale yeast? I'm also interested in a more exhaustive compilation of malt/sugar/adjunct contributions to O.G. and color. I've tried SUDS, but it doesn't include some things I typically use -- fruits, toasted malt, etc. Is there a book or on-line resource which has data which could be input into SUDS or other recipe formulators? Finally, is it possible to have some of the directories at ftp.stanford subdivided? Whenever I try to get a file listing ("dir" command) for the docs directory (and for the yearly archives), I can never get the complete list. Usually, I end up with the first 20-30 files (thru c*) and the last few files (w* to the end). Sometime, I'd like to see the entire list -- its been a great resource for me and I know there's more out there. Bob Sinnema | Detendez-vous, ne vous inquietez pas, rjsinnem at acs.ucalgary.ca | Buvez une biere de menage! wwtl80a at prodigy.com | Beat Navy! . . .again! . . .and again! | (This could be habit forming!) Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 May 95 17:39:27 CDT From: ESSNER RICHARD L <C767SCB at SEMOVM.SEMO.EDU> Subject: SIGNOFF homebrew at hpfcmi.fc.hp.com SIGNOFF homebrew at hpfcmi.fc.hp.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 May 1995 22:03:32 -0400 From: dflagg at agate.net Subject: Trub removal ect. > DSWPHOTO at aol.com writes: > I'm looking for a good way to remove trub... I think it's already been hashed out here that *total* trub removal is not necessary and may actually be detrimental. That said, removal of most of the trub is both good and easy. The secret to good trub removal is to get the most of it out of solution, and the best way to accomplish that is with a fast cool-down. The faster the better. I use an immersion cooler and bring my wort from boiling to 58^ in 15-20 minutes. I agitate the wort by moving the cooler up and down constantly thru the 15-20 minute cycle. This action mixes up the wort, preventing thermal layering. Some have said this method may cause infection, but it has not been the case with me. I have a cover to my boiling pot (I use a BruHeat) with two holes cut in it for the immersion cooler tubes. I move the cooler by pulling up and down on the cold water tubing. I empty my cooled wort into a 6 gallon carboy, splashing and spraying as much as possible for aeration. I then let the carboy set for 2-3 hours after which virtually all the trub has settled to the bottom of the carboy. I then rack off the clear wort into my fermenting carboy, pitching the yeast at this time. Others have recommended pitching the yeast immediately after cooling. That may be a good idea in theory, but I believe a lot of the yeast is precipitated out by the falling trub and (in my system) does not make it to the fermentor. You had mentioned one method that called for trub removal 12 hours after pitching. You also mentioned you had not found this possible (I tried it and it didn't work for me either), and suggested you might wait the 12 hours to pitch. I would definately *NOT* recommend this. Get the yeast in as quick as you can! Even with my method, I hate to wait the 2-3 hours before pitching, but have not come up with a better system. Maybe some other contributor will... ************************************************************ Doug Flagg | "A Homebrew a day... dflagg at orono.sdi.agate.net | Keeps the Worries away!" ************************************************************ Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 18 May 1995 23:44:57 -0400 From: Hmbrewbob at aol.com Subject: Diacetyl Rest Hello Everyone, I had everything I needed for brewing a Vienna including my yeast,#308 Munich, when I decided to do alittle brushing up on brewing procedures and such. I was reading Roger Bergens' article in BT vol 1, no 2 on brewing O'fests were I find that #308 tends to produce alot of diacetyl, a bad thing in this style. Roger and others say to use a modern fermentation schedule with temps between 50-58F to reduce diacetyl and other bad things but what I have read about the production of diactyl I am going with a lower temp fermentation and a diacetyl rest before lagering. This is where I really get confused. I've read in Dave Millers' Cont. Pilsner book,pg 61-62 for those following along, that 53F for 1-2days will do the trick but in an article written by Dr. Fix, BT vol 1 no2 pg 22, he writes that a rest at 68Fat the end of main fermentation will reduce the diacetyl. I understand that different yeast strains reduce diacetyl at different rates but I don't believe that has any bearing on this question. Does it? So at what temp should I do my Diacetyl Rest? 53F or 68F or should I have used corriander... Thanks, Bob Ledden Caln,Pa Hmbrewbob at aol.com Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 May 1995 17:05:10 +1000 (EST) From: Ken Willing <kwilling at laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au> Subject: Peptidase, peptones, & mouthfeel Miller, Fix, Whitman and others appear to be in agreement that one of the key factors in beer body and mouthfeel is the content of medium-weight proteins (polypeptides and peptones). In typical homebrew beers, i.e. assuming non-extreme FGs and not-too-extreme levels of sweetness and alcohol, the claim would even appear to be that the protein factor is *the* overriding source of perceived variation in body. Questions: 1. Does anyone disagree with this? 2. If Miller, Fix et al. are essentially right in emphasizing the role of medium-weight proteins, the following seems to become a central issue: Which enzyme is responsible for degrading (and hence possibly *failing* to degrade, or, on the other hand, possibly "overcleaving") these polypeptides and peptones? Is this important function performed by peptidase, and peptidase alone? If not, what is the rest of the story? 3. Is there evidence that the medium-weight molecules have anything to do with perceived flavor (maltiness, etc.), as is strongly implied in one of G. Fix's postings on yield? Thanks. Ken Willing <kwilling at laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au> Sydney, Australia Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 May 1995 17:24:19 +1000 (EST) From: Ken Willing <kwilling at laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au> Subject: Q: Using mod.-modified malt Here in Australia we have a lovely new hybrid-based "Pilsener-quality"-like malt (called "Franklin") which is somewhat less than fully modified, in the protein sense. It's turning out to be a little tricky to handle. It appears to be not *quite* up to supporting adequate yeast growth without a protein rest at 122F (50C). The trouble is, if one gives it a half-hour rest at that temperature, that seems to knock it around quite a bit (loss of body, probably some loss of character too). Some of us have occasionally lucked into other ways of getting it to ferment OK (e.g. using admixtures of other malts), and that's how we know the terrific potential it has. But still not quite sure how to handle it. A 15-minute protein rest? A 20-minute rest? No rest, but amino-acid pills? I'd be very grateful for advice from anyone with experience of a "high-moderately" modified, i.e. borderline sort of malt. Thanks. Ken Willing <kwilling at laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au> Sydney, Australia Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 May 95 05:00:36 -0400 From: kevinm at rocdec.roc.wayne.edu (Kevin McEnhill) Subject: Cleaning the stove! pgravel at mcs.com writes: >My question is this: if (heaven forfend!) this ever happens to me >again, what is the Right Way to get that black, baked-on, carbonized >sugar off of the stove *without* destroying the finish? Since I >imagine this question might be of interest to others, if people e-mail >suggestions, I will post a summary of responses back here. Buy a BLACK stove! That way if ( I'm sorry ,I mean WHEN ) you boil over, the stuff that bakes on won't be as noticable. ********************************************************************** * * /|~~~~~| I was told by my wife that * * kevinm at rocdec.roc.wayne.edu * | | | if I brew one more batch * * * | | | of beer she would leave me!* * Kevin McEnhill * \| | * * * |_____| I'm going to miss her :-) * ********************************************************************** Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 May 95 08:05:35 EDT From: cem at cadre.com (Chuck E. Mryglot) Subject: Marzen Hi all... I've just returned from a trip to Munich, Vienna and points thru Austria (mainly the state of Corinthia). One interesting thing is that thru Austria many brewers offer a Marzen beer. It is not the Marzen/Ofest I would expect based on the style guidelines we are used to, but it is a very pale lager and appears to be the lowest gravity/least expensive offering of the brewer. ANy comments on this discrepency? BTW, My favorite beer during the entire trip (and I had considerable) was Budweiser Budvar which was served at a biergarten in Vienna. Truley excellent. The beer is a10 minute pour. The bar was about 30 ft long with 7 tap stations. A glassstarts at one end, is filled and passed to the next station and filled somemore when the head settles a bit. The beer eventually makes it thru the7th tap and is ready to serve. It has an incredible head. They said that when the biergarten is full that the taps run continuously. Oh yes... I did visit a small brewery in Austria and they were happy to give me a vial of their yeast. They had never heard of anyone brewing beer at home. Prosit ChuckM Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 May 1995 08:29:45 EDT From: usfmchql at ibmmail.com Subject: Stuck Ferments/March Pumping... In HBD 1735... >Ilkka Sysil "cannot see much point in considering cures for stuck >fermentation..." Later in your own post, you point out two very 'reversible' items that typically area at the heart of stuck fermentations. Also, there are means by which the sugars can be successfully converted; albeit the brewer can exert little control as to how far the reaction goes: amylase enzymes can be added, as has been pointed out in many previous posts. If done prudently, adding small amounts, the sugars can be converted to satisfactory levels. In an earlier digest, the question was raised as to how far the amylase will go in the beer since it acts as catalyst, and catalysts generally aren't consumed in the reaction. Now, I'm no expert, but I've asked around to some of my medical/biotechnical friends. As I understand it, the enzymes are not consumed in the reaction, but are somehow rendered inert, or non-catalytic - the verbage eludes me here - by the reaction. In other words, it simply gets 'used up'. Al Korzonas has compiled a faq on stuck fermentations. He's a busy man - I would venture to guess that he wouldn't have wasted his time on it if things had gone '*irreversibly* awry'. In HBD 1734... > "Robert Waddell" <V024971 at Tape.StorTek.Com> asks about March Pumps... I, too, have a pico Brewing Systems setup incorporating these pumps. They seem highly variable in their performance, one to another, perhaps justifying their low price. Anyway, I found that they like to run motor down. One of my pumps will not move an ounce if the motor is above the impellor. To me, this indicates cheap or damaged bearings, but I've been told its normal. My other two pumps work fine in the upright position, but perform better inverted as well. Go figure... Other that that, I *L*O*V*E* my system. 'Cept for that gonging noise it makes when my wife throws it off the bed at night. Women... "Drink all you want - I'll brew more!" Patrick (Pat) G. Babcock | "Yup, Kit's (Anderson) a brewer... President, Brew-Master | What he isn't is a woman." - Dan Hall and Chief Taste-Tester | "Let a good beer be the exclamation point Drinkur Purdee pico Brewery | at the end of your day as every sentence pbabcock at oeonline.com | requires proper punctuation." -PGB Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 May 1995 08:53:34 +0500 From: fcaico at ycc.Kodak.COM (Frank Caico) Subject: Re: Thanks/lager/Pete's Summer Brew >>>>> "Dan" == Dan Pack <danpack at grape-ape.che.caltech.edu> writes: Dan> Finally, over the weekend I tasted Pete's Wicked Summer Brew. It's a Dan> partial wheat brew with a subtle "tang of lemon" or so the label Dan> claims. There is a slight lemon flavor in the first few swallows Dan> which I found annoying but other than that I thought it was rather Dan> nice. It's not trying to be a true wheat beer, IMHO, but it seems Dan> they used some amount of wheat to simply lighten the body. Dan, Wheat will not *lighten* the body, but will in fact increase the body. Wheat is not as high in fermentable sugars as barley malt is and therefore does not produce the effect you describe. I believe that English commercial brewers often add a small percentage of wheat to their mashes in order to icnrease head retention and boost the perceived body of the beer. Frank - ---- __ __ __/\_\ -------------------------+------------------------------ /_/\__ __/\_\/_/ Frank L. Caico | Eastman Kodak Co. \_\/_/\__ /\_\/_/\_\ -------------------------+ 901 Elmgrove Road /_/\_\/_/\ \/_/\_\/_/ Internet Adress: | 2/5/EP MC: 35400 \_\/_/\_\/ \/_/\_\ fcaico at ycc.kodak.com | Rochester, NY 14653-5400 /_/\_\/ \/_/ -------------------------|------------------------------ \_\/ Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 May 1995 09:33:06 -0400 From: Jim Grady <grady at hpangrt.an.hp.com> Subject: Re: Electric stovetop brewing I apologize if this has already been discussed -- I haven't caught up on the HBD lately. In HBD 1732, Bill Sadvary writes about using an electric stove for boiling the full brew length and adds: > The downside is that the burners do go through some abuse and I can see in a > couple years having to replace the burners. No biggy. The burners on my electric stove are nothing fancy and they are $30 each. If you have to replace 2 of them because you are straddling two burners, then you have more than paid for a propane cooker (mine was $50 at the local homebrew supply shop). You also get the advantage of getting faster boil times. So, if you have the space to use a propane cooker, it might be a better alternative. That's my $0.02 added to the pot. - -- Jim Grady grady at an.hp.com Hewlett-Packard Medical Products Group Andover, MA Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 May 1995 06:59:37 -0700 (PDT) From: "R. James Ray" <ray902 at uidaho.edu> Subject: Re: Cu nutrient/ N2-CO2 blend Al Gasper asks: > What about brewing in copper would promote yeast growth? I'd > appreciate any comments. Copper is a trace element essential to healthy yeast. Sources are water, malt, and the brew kettle. As a trace element it is needed in very small amounts. When there is a shortage of copper the yeast can usually bud for several generations before their health declines and we notice a sluggish fermentaion. Copper problems were noticed when some of the megabreweries built new all stainless breweries. Todd Ehlers asks: > QUESTIONS: > What is the "correct" mix of N2 to CO2 in "draft mix"? > What is the effect of different mixtures? > What characteristics are the two gasses responsible for? > What is the correct pressure to tap beer (stouts) with draft mix? > Is that different from CO2? Why? > Is the flow control faucet used on Guiness and Oatmeal at bars essential? > Why? Is it essential due to increased pressure? > If I had separate CO2 and N2 cylindars how would I determine the > pressures necessary to obtain a certain ratio of gasses in the mixture? I have a very little experience with draft blend. We use and 85% N2 to 15% CO2 blend to reduce overpour and over carbonation. I due not know if a different pressure is needed but the N2 should allow a higher pressure to be used. I thought pressure had more to due with the length of the lines. R. James Ray Treaty Grounds Brewpub Moscow, Idaho Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 May 1995 10:14:12 -0400 From: Marla Korchmar <marlak at pipeline.com> Subject: To crack or not to crack A question for all you Belgian wit brewers (or anyone else who's used unmalted wheat): Unmalted wheat seems to be widely available in health food stores both in the cracked and uncracked form. Will using the already-cracked version negatively effect the my flavor of my wit? I've read that once you mill your grain it must be used relatively soon. Thanks. Marla Korchmar Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 May 1995 08:15:16 -0600 (MDT) From: walter at lamar.ColoState.EDU (Brian J Walter (Brewing Chemist)) Subject: Re: Vice Russell Mast wrote: > > From: dsanderson at msgate.CV.COM > > Subject: Using Weisse Yeast Without the Weissen > > I was pleasantly surprised this morning when a friend and colleague from > > Munich unexpectedly appeared in my office and presented me 2 bottles of > > Schneider Weisse. > > One bottle is for drinking, the other for culturing the unique Schneider > > yeast. > > First, I have to say you should drink most of the beer from BOTH and use the > slurry from BOTH. I second this! > Third, I don't know if Schneider's does this, but several commercial > weissbeers are filtered from their special (S. Delbruckii) yeast, then > primed with a regular S. Cerevisiaeou(and sometimes y) yeast. Thus, the > yeast you culture from this bottle might not be the yeast that gives the > beer its distinctive flavor. > > I'd be interested in comments or experience using a Bavarian Wheat yeast > > in a straight Barley brew? I am curious about how much of the > > distinctive Weisse flavor is contributed by the wheat and/or the yeast? Schneider is the one brewery that I know of that _doesn't_ use a lager yeast to bottle with. I had a friend bring me a bottle from France and the yeast I worked up was definitely a weizen yeast. Oh, and just a nit, but it is generally accepted that the weizen yeast is just a strain of S. Cervisiae (sp?) and not Dulbruckii (sp?). I have read this in Eric Werner's AHA styles wheat book, and also heard it from Dave Miller at the AHA conference in Denver last year. Basically just another bit of common lore that won't die. Brian J Walter Chemistry Graduate Student walter at lamar.colostate.edu RUSH Rocks Best Homebrewer & AHA/HWBTA Beer Judge Go Pack! "If I were Satan, I would have a mountain bike" - Butthead Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 19 May 95 8:18:28 MDT From: Norman Pyle <npyle at hp7013.ecae.StorTek.COM> Subject: Stuck Ferments / Pressing Ilkka Sysil wrote: >I cannot see very much point in cosidering cures for stuck fermentation. >Stuck fermentation definitely means that things have gone unfortunately >& *irreversibly* awry in much earlier stage of brewing process. Possibly so, but all is not lost. >There is no point doctoring the remaining much too high amount of dextrins >into fermentable sugars after fermentation stops (stucks) due to the fact >that >fermentable sugars have run out - quite natural! >In biotechnical process called brewing the ratio of fermentables vs. >unfermentables is adjusted a little bit earlier by performing a pretty >little thing called *mashing* exactly the way which comes up with desired >composition of sugars in wort. Ilkka, you are correct in that you can control the ratio of fermentables to unfermentables, but I think you are over-simplifying the phenomenon known as "stuck fermentation". Good beers, I dare say even great beers have been made from "doctoring" a stuck fermentation. Also, there are a number of causes of this anomaly, including, but not limited to, under-pitching, under-aeration, temperature shock, low fermentation temperature, high-dextrin wort, low FAN wort, etc. Many, if not all, of these can be fixed with a little ingenuity, resulting in quality beer. Don't throw it out because your mash schedule isn't just perfect! Finally, consider the possibility that many stuck fermentations are "owned" by brewers who use malt extracts rather than doing a mash. They cannot affect the mash, yet they are getting stuck ferments. Again, most of these can be fixed, with some effort. I believe, in most cases, this is time well spent. ** Troy Howard asks about Kirin's "pressing" in the lautering process. Coors uses presses to separate the grain from the liquor. They are long SS machines and I believe they literally squeeze the grain while rinsing it with sparge water. At least that's the impression I got from a recent tour. Cheers, Norm Return to table of contents
End of HOMEBREW Digest #1736, 05/20/95