HOMEBREW Digest #2389 Thu 03 April 1997

[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]

		Digest Janitor: janitor@ brew.oeonline.com
		Many thanks to the Observer & Eccentric Newspapers of 
		Livonia, Michigan for sponsoring the Homebrew Digest.
				URL: http://www.oeonline.com

  World Cup Results (DAVE SAPSIS)
  sulphates and pH/mash heating/Wales/protein rests/AHA competition (korz)
  stretchy scum in bottles and fermenter/blowoff/spores (korz)
  decoction and wheat (Brian Dulisse-1)
  Re: alpha and beta amylase (Steve Alexander)
  Plate type heat exchanger (haszarda)
  Electric Immersion Chiller (Jim Elden)
  Protien Spectrum (DepThought)
  Alt recipe (Matthew Arnold)
  March in Montreal / Planispiral chiller / Black and Tan / lost mail (Eamonn McKernan)
  Incomplete conversion? Starch? - summary (Dave Riedel)
  Bittering Hops - what's the difference? / Hop Survey (Dave Riedel)
  Shorter brew day (Randy Ricchi)
  1997 National Homebrew Competition ("Brian M. Rezac")
  Re:RE: Wyeast 1275 (John Lifer jr)
  New Orleans Homebrew Supply (DD)
  RE: Setup in New House (Art Steinmetz)
  glass grenades? & distilling questions (kathy)
  RE: AHA ("Richard Scotty")
  AHA NHC Again (Bill Giffin)
  barbeque conversion (Joe Shope)
  Kegging preferences/Isinglass (Dave Bartz)

NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS: brew.oeonline.com Send articles for __publication_only__ to homebrew at brew.oeonline.com (Articles are published in the order they are received.) Send UNSUBSCRIBE and all other requests, ie, address change, etc., to homebrew-request@ brew.oeonline.com BUT PLEASE NOTE that if you subscribed via the BITNET listserver (BEER-L at UA1VM.UA.EDU), you must unsubscribe by sending a one line e-mail to listserv at ua1vm.ua.edu that says: UNSUB BEER-L Thanks to Pete Soper, Rob Gardner and all others for making the Homebrew Digest what it is. Visit the HBD Hall of Fame at: http://brew.oeonline.com/ If your account is being deleted, please be courteous and unsubscribe first. Please don't send requests for back issues - you will be silently ignored. For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to lutzen at alpha.rollanet.org ARCHIVES: An archive of previous issues of this digest, as well as other beer related information can be accessed via anonymous ftp from: brew.oeonline.com /pub/hbd ftp.stanford.edu /pub/clubs/homebrew/beer 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: Tue, 1 Apr 1997 10:52:43 -0800 From: DAVE_SAPSIS at fire.ca.gov (DAVE SAPSIS) Subject: World Cup Results World Cup '97 is now behind us. A big thank you to all our sponsors, entrants, and folks who helped out. A smashing success. Lots of fine efforts all around. Mailings targeted to go out by the end of the week. 163 entries, the winners are: 1997 WORLD CUP OF BEER WINNERS CATEGORY BREWER STYLE America 1 first: Nancy Hawkins Cream Ale second: Eric Chang/Steve Bruce Cal. Common third: Mike Riddle Cal. Common America 2 first: Matt McDougal Am. Pale Ale second: Ray Francisco Am. Pale Ale third: Eric Chang/Steve Bruce Am. Pale Ale Belgium 1 first: Richard Mansfield Tripel second: Lee Shephard Tripel third: Forest Gray Dubbel Belgium 2 first: Gary Harstead lambic- kriek second: Martin Wilde lambic-peche third: Ray Francisco gueze Austria first: John Cary Marzen second: John Cammarota Vienna third Brian Schwind/ Brian Bumgarden Marzen Czech Republic first: Ken Schroeder Pilsner second: Ray Fransisco Pilsner third: Jim Johnson Pilsner England 1 first: Ray Francisco Best Bitter second: Tyler Yarbrough ESB third: Doug Ashcraft Ordinary Bitter England 2 first: Ray Francisco Porter second: Mike Ollinger Porter third: Pat Laughran Porter Germany first: Tom Strand Doppelbock second: John Cary Maibock third: John Cammarota Traditional Bock Ireland first: William Warren/ Nile Zacherle Dry Stout second: Pat Laughran Dry Stout third: Jack Dawson Dry Stout Scotland 1 first: Chad Thistle Scotch Ale second: Leigh Ann Hussey Scotch Ale third: Paul Wright Old Ale Scotland 2 first: Scott Bickham Barleywine second: Ray Francisco Barleywine third: Norman Dickenson/ Rick Larson Barleywine Best Of Show: Ray Francisco Porter --dave Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 1997 13:19:27 -0600 (CST) From: korz at xnet.com Subject: sulphates and pH/mash heating/Wales/protein rests/AHA competition Sorry, but I deleted the author's name of this post: >Why is Burton-on-Trent famous for its pale ales, while Munich is known for >its darker beers? It's because of the brewing water's pH. OK, it's really >from the dissolved minerals in the water, but that's what changes the >water's pH. Lighter grains leave a higher pH in a solution of neutral water >than darker, more acidic grains. Water that has a high concentration of >Sulfates is lower in pH than neutral water. Put another way, water that is >high in Sulfates is good for brewing pale grains in because the resulting pH >allows the enzymes to work most efficiently. To sum up, adding Gypsum lowers >pH, while adding Chalk raises pH. Burton-on-Trent water is high in Sulfates >(just like adding lots of Gypsum), and thus lends itself to the making of >pale ales. (This water also accentuates the bitterness of hops, and >therefore is useful for making very hoppy beers.) Darker grains, and thus >darker beers, are made where the water is high in carbonates. So all of the >arguments about matching water to your favorite brewing locale pretty much >boils down to getting the right pH balance for the type of grains that you >want to use. One more word about salts and pH. Chalk does not readily >dissolve in neutral water. It needs a slightly acidic environment to be >suspended in (such as grains in water in your mash tun). This is mostly right except for the pH effect from sulphates. It's the calcium in the Burton-upon-Trent water that causes the mash pH to go down and not the sulphates. It's true that Burton water is high in sulphates but it's also high in calcium. Gypsum is calcium sulphate and again, the calcium is the ion that reacts with the mash to lower the pH. Other than that, yes, carbonate water requires the more acidic, darker grains to get a more reasonable mash pH (Dublin is an even better example with carbonate levels upwards of 700 and they are famous for their stout). *** Randy writes: >1. The main question is, how important is it to raise the temperature to >the next step relatively quickly, or are gradual increases in temperature >not a problem? What says the collective? The risk with raising the temperature too fast is scorching. Traditionally, the rate among commercial brewers has been 1 degree C per minute (if I remember correctly from one of George Fix's articles). >2. In about two weeks, I will be in Cardiff, Wales area (reading HBD from >the laptop). Can anyone recommend to me (via private e-mail) the best way >to spend my beer hunting time? I am looking for brewery tours (Brains does >not offer one this time of year) and the best pubs. Across the street from Brains brewery there is a corner pub which serves well over a dozen guest beers from all over Wales and England. Very upscale decor (Saloon bar) so you may feel a little odd in cutoffs and a t-shirt. Great food, too! *** Dave writes: >Charlie Rich partially quotes me and gives me the opportunity to once again >say - if one is giving advice on temperature and holds it is necessary to >indicate the type of malt and grist composition being used. In my >discussion I was addressing predominantly the case for people who wanted to >decoct pale ALE malt. Malts that do fine in single malt infusions - AKA >pale Ale malts already have plenty of protein and parking at the protein >rests at 135F will produce perhaps more Mid-Mw protein than desired. This >could lead to excessive chill haze. Isn't it the high-molecular-weight proteins that contribute to haze and not the medium-weight? Also, simply saying "Pale Ale" malt is incompleat (yes, arcane, but I like it). I find that DeWolf-Cosyns Pale Ale malt is far less modified than many *Pilsner* malts. When I use DWC Pale Ale malt, if I don't do a protein rest (I do it at 135 to 140F), I get a half-gallon of cold break in the fermenter! This is far too much, in my opinion and this is why I have taken to doing a protein rest with this malt whenever I use it. >I suggested for pale ALE malts to avoid this problem, move to 145F and >allow it to drop to 140F or so over the time it takes for the decoction. >The reasoning being that If this malt is fine for a single temperature >infusion it already has the correct protein balance, etc. Moving to 145F >is in the middle of the beta amylase region, but so what? Limited alpha >activity at this temperature does not give the beta anything to operate on, >so very limited simple sugars get produced. The reason for moving to 145F >was to denature all the proteinaceous enzymes so as to not upset the >protein balance in this malt intended for a single infusion. I believe (working under the assumption that HMW proteins are responsible for cold break and haze) that it does not hurt to break down those HMW proteins down to MMW proteins. I have not noticed problems with chill haze on any of these beers, in fact, I believe that protein rests will only decrease chill haze. Comments? *** Just for the record, I think that the judging at the AHA Nationals tends to be variable, I too have had the AHA lose scoresheets, but California has had more than it's share of AHA 1st-place ribbons: except for last year when the Chicago Beer Society won the HB Club of the Year Award, the Sonoma Beerocrats were 9-time winners, if I'm not mistaken. Al. Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL korz at xnet.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 1997 20:59:58 +0000 From: "MS1 Lapell" <lapelll at nassau.navy.mil> Subject: ADDRESS REQUEST Would anyone having the address of East Coast Brewing Supply in Staten Is.NY please forward it to me by private email preferably Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 1997 14:00:32 -0600 (CST) From: korz at xnet.com Subject: stretchy scum in bottles and fermenter/blowoff/spores Randy writes: >It seems whenever I brew a beer with a weizen or a belgian yeast, I get >rings around the necks of my bottles. The beers taste fine, so I don't >think they're infected. If I had this problem with only my weizens or >witbiers, I would think they might be "protein rings", but I've noticed >this same phenomenon in my all-barley belgian ales as well. I don't have >this problem with my other ales or lagers. I either do step infusions, or >(usually with weizens)single decoctions. <snip> >By the way, I have a weizen in secondary right now and there is a film on >the surface of the beer. It sort of looks like an oil slick and where it >contacts the carboy sides, the smudge looks like the same stuff I get in my >bottles. Once again, the beer tastes fine. I tried blaming that kind of ring on proteins, but later found that it's bacterial... it's some kind of aerobic bacteria, I think. Try switching to filtered air or oxygen for aerating/oxygenating and see if that doesn't fix the problem. *** Mark writes: >For many years I have been using the blow off tube to deal with the ferment >head. In my five gallon carboy it seemed like the the thing to do. I >recently went to a 6.5 gallon glass for primary. I'm curious (the curse of >being a homebrewer, eh?)... what are the opinions of any who do either way >(to blow off or not to blow off) and especially those that have done both. >Comments could be couched regarding off flavors, etc., with mentions of I have an article on this very subject in the May/June 1996 issue of Brewing Techniques. You can read the article for the details, but the bottom line is that even experienced judges found that bitterness was the only difference. Tests at the Siebel Institute backed up these findings. Protein, higher alcohol, and ester levels were not that different. Blowoff reduced IBUs by 13 to 18%. Also, don't believe what Dave says about blowoff tubes being sources of infection... I use 1" ID blowoff hoses and they may be stained but all the crud comes off from a 1-day soak in bleach water. Furthermore, how could the infection crawl out of the tube and into the fermenter? *** This reminds me that a few months ago, Dave asked what yeasts produce spores... since I'm at home nursing a slipped disk (brewing related, but not from heavy lifting), I can wobble over to the library and get MBS. >From page 529... Saccharomyces, Pichia, Hansenula, and Sporobolomycetes are some of the genera that form spores. Incidentally, this last genus of yeast form ballistospores. Could this be the way that infections get from the blowoff tube to the wort? ;^) I also happen to know (thanks to Jim Liddil) that the difference between Brettanomyces and Dekkera genera are that the former does not form spores whereas the latter does. Al. Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL korz at xnet.com Return to table of contents
Date: 1 Apr 97 12:38:08 EDT From: Brian Dulisse-1 <Brian_Dulisse-1 at sbphrd.com> Subject: decoction and wheat the decoction thread has been excellent, the best thing we've had here in a while . . . a question: does decoction offer lautering benefits when using mashes containing a relatively high (50 - 70%) proportion of malted wheat? given the discussion, if there's no lautering benefit, i may start experimenting with infusion mashed weizen . . . it would be nice to be able to chop a bit of time off the process. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 1997 15:24:13 -0500 From: Steve Alexander <stevea at clv.mcd.mot.com> Subject: Re: alpha and beta amylase Edward J. Basgall wrote that Simon Gilroy wrote that I wrote ... >>.... Also that the beta-amylase is concentrated in the >>>allurone layer(sub husk) and the outer portion of the endosperm. ... >re: the sources of amylase enzymes in malted barley.... >>aleurone is an endosperm tissue >> >>beta amylase is found in the starchy endosperm - there's a neat story about >>a-amylase activating the beta amylase that was laid down as the endosperm >>formed by breaking the starch grains it is trapped in. Aleurone produces a >>bit of every hydrolytic enzyme knwon to man but beta amylase is not its >>major thing. I should have written (and spelled) 'sub-aleurone' - mea culpa. Beta-amylase is found in the endosperm. Protein and enzyme concentration in malt both decrease at you go deeper into the starchy endosperm. Aleurone tissue is listed as a BA source in the Enzyme Handbook, tho' it's concentration is not. But BA is not, from my reading available within in the starch granules per se. Is it part of the starch granule surface? The version of the 'neat story' that I have seen in the reviewed literature is that it has been known since the 1940s that another hydrolase, a papain-like protease is responsible for freeing BA from a larger protein, and that virtually all of the BA present in malt is also present in the raw grain endosperm. A large fraction, but not all is in this bound form. The activity of the freed BA increases dramatically. I have several recent papaers showing that there are several isoenzymes of BA formed this way - different molecular weights, possibly differentiated by proteolysis. I'd be most interested in reading the reference source of Simons' description for further information. It's certain that my understanding in this area is incomplete. Is a limited hydrolysis with enzymes supplied by the aleurone layer the first step making the endosperms granule surface matter soluble when malting ? Or can the endosperm absorb water and enzymes without enzymatic degradation from the aleuone tissue? >>>Alpha-amylase is formed in the embryo and concentrated near the >>>embryo/endosperm barrier tissues. ... ... >>The embryo does make some amylase (wimpy). Its the scutellum (cotyledon) >>that is the best amylase tissue for the embryo and it is the organ that >>makes the endosperm/embryoo border. But if you wnat amylase the aleurone is >>the place to be! The scutellum is listed as part of the embryo in the source I've just checked [do I need a new reference?]. It is the portion of the embryo at the embryo/endosperm layer just as I've indicated. Actually if I'd read my M&BS more closely I'd have realized that they estimate that 85% OF AA is from the aleurone and 15% from the scutellum. This surprises me. >>www.bio.psu.edu/faculty/gilroy/lab.html Some nice stuff here and on the links to Jones Lab at UC Berkeley. Thanks for the correction, sincerely, and even more for the improved understanding. - -- Re: the original HBD topic tho - the realization that the aleurone layer is the most significant source of AA doesn't detract from the argument that AA is largely soluble shortly after cracked malt hits the mash water. Steve Alexander Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 97 15:51:21 EST From: haszarda at stricom.army.mil Subject: Plate type heat exchanger Does anybody have or know of any plans for construction of a plate type heat exchanger? Are these devices applicable as wort chillers? Thanks, Mac (email - haszarda at stricom.army.mil) Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 1997 16:43:05 -0500 From: Jim Elden <elden at accumedic.com> Subject: Electric Immersion Chiller With the summer weather just around the corner, I will no longer have the luxury of tap water that is <40F. A discussion with a friend, who is well-versed in air-conditioning technology, resulted in the idea that we could construct an immersion chiller from 1) a recycled air-conditioner 2) a plate-sytle heat exchanger 3) a copper-coil immersion wort chiller 4) a circulator pump 5) propylene glycol (anti-freeze 50/50 might just do) The idea would be to run the coolant from the air conditioner through one side of the heat exchanger and the glycol through the other. The glycol would be circulated through the wort chiller coil. How many BTUs does it take to chill 10 gallons of wort from boiling to 70F, in a reasonable time? I'll only attempt this project if it can be done with a 110v unit. Has anyone else done anything like this? Am I nuts? Is my beer ruined? <g> Should I build a counterflow chiller instead? Jim See the brewery at http://www.accumedic.com/docs/jim/ Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 1997 18:06:41 -0500 (EST) From: DepThought at aol.com Subject: Protien Spectrum Al says: > There are two groups of proteolytic enzymes at >work in the "protein rest" range which is about 112 or 113F to about >140F (45-60C). 122F (50C) is sort-of the "middle" of the range and >is said to be the temperature that maximizes the contibutions of both >groups of proteolytic enzymes. >Peptidases create amino acids from proteins of all sizes and the >proteases create medium-sized (body-building and head-retaining) >proteins from large (haze-producing and break-producing) proteins. I've been contemplating proteases and peptidases and alpha and beta amylase, how they work. My understanding is that the beta amylase and peptidase (herafter referred to as "beta protease" per a related thread) "nibble" at the ends of the starches and protiens, producing only single sugars and amino acids, while the "alpha" proteases and amylases "chop" large strings into smaller ones. Being of an analytical bent (and having entirely too much time on my hands) I built a little computer model to compare and contrast beta and alpha activity. Starting with a population of molecule chains all of length 300 and letting either the alpha or beta "enzymes" loose for a few hundred iterations, I found that the beta enzymes left with you with a lot of single molecules, a fair number of really big molecules, and NOTHING in between. In the protien department, this translates to plenty of yeast nutrition, a good amount of break, but no mouth feel. In contrast, the alpha run showed a fairly uniform distribution of molecule lengths. The single molecule numbers were still 75% of the beta run (little yeasties are far from starving) but break should be greatly reduced, and mouth feel greatly increased. Bottom line: I'm not going to worry about the beta range in protien rests any more, although there's still a balance to be struck in starch conversion. I have had some very tasty beers with very poor head retention lately, and I think the 122 deg rest is the culprit. I rested my last brew at 135 deg, and I'll bet I'll see a big improvement. Thanks for indulging my long windedness. My little exercise helped my understanding of brewing chemistry. I hope it didn't bore y'all too much :) Pat King DepThought at aol.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 1997 23:32:26 GMT From: mra at skyfry.com (Matthew Arnold) Subject: Alt recipe Greeting collective homebrewing (sub/un)conscience: I recently made an extract Alt. FWIW, here's the recipe: 6.6# Northwestern Amber LME 1# 40L Crystal 1/3# Chocolate 2 oz 8.8% N. Brewer pellets (60 mins) 2 pkg Munton's dry yeast Four days in primary (68 F), eleven in secondary (45-50 F) It turned out rather nicely, but I would like to make it more authentic. I don't have immediate access to Ireks extract, plus it is almost twice as expensive as Northwestern. To improve this recipe, I'm going to try a liquid yeast (Wyeast German Ale or European Ale). I also thought of ditching the crystal malt and replacing it with a pound or so of Munich malt and do a partial-mash. Would this give me the flavor I'm looking for, or would I need more Munich? (And would I need a protein rest, or can I do a single-step infusion with Munich?) I'm trying to find Zum Uerige (sp?) or the like so I can get a better idea of what I should be shooting at. I've tried August Schell Schmaltz Alt and Summit's Duesseldorfer-Style Altbier. They were entirely different, and I'm not sure which one is more "stylistically correct." I'm not _overly_ anal about getting the style absolutely perfect, OTOH I don't just want a glorified amber ale, either. I've seen a lot of Alt recipes with hop additions for flavor and aroma (some even with dry-hopping). Am I right in my understanding that an Alt is to have very little or no hop flavor and aroma at all, just big bitterness? Thanks as always, Matt Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 1997 18:40:29 -0500 From: Eamonn McKernan <eamonn at atmosp.physics.utoronto.ca> Subject: March in Montreal / Planispiral chiller / Black and Tan / lost mail Hi all, I recieved some mail from someone about corporate sponsorship for the Canadian Amateur Brewers Association. I deleted it accidentally before getting the information back to the individual in question. I now have the answers if you're out there... - ---------------------- Does anyone know how a Black and Tan works? Apparently pouring Guiness on top of Smithwicks creates a layered beer which is stable. I've never seen one myself, but viscocity alone won't explain it to my satisfaction. And if the SG of Guiness is higher (is it?) it should sink to the bottom. Any thoughts? - ------------ Some of you may recall from a while back that I had some problems implementing Ed Hitchcock's planispiral wort chiller. This chiller is a copper tubing immersion chiller with all the coils in a plane circling towards the centre, suspended at the top of the wort. Cold wort on top creates a convective flow which obviates the need for stirring. I believe the solution is as follows: Ed had all of his coils touching each other in a tight loop near the perimeter of his pot. My coils were fairly evenly spaced all the way to the centre of my bucket. In order for strong convection to form, it makes more sense to have a strong localised flux of heat, rather than a diffuse, weaker flux. Ed's works, mine didn't. I now have a counterflow chiller, so I don't intend to test this hypothesis, but anyone interested in building one is advised to keep their coils as closely spaced as possible. Any experimental results from planispiral immersion chillers would be interesting to hear... - ------------ Below are the results of the Canadian Amateur Brewer's Association's March in Montreal contest. Thanks to all who entered! Hopefully I'll be able to offer more warning in the future... In fact, here's some warning about our next event: The Great Canadian Homebrew conference and competition are scheduled for June 7. More details to follow when I get them. Cheers, Eamonn McKernan eamonn at atmosp.physics.utoronto.ca MARCH IN MONTREAL 1997 AND THE WINNERS ARE Blanche De Chambly -- Look Alike 3rd Place from Calgary Alberta, with a beer entitled Wifey's Wit, Dan Morley 2nd Place from Montreal, Pierre Valois 1st Place from Montreal with a beer entitled Blanche Neige, Deborah Wood CLASS 1 CONTINENTAL LAGER 3rd Place from Saskatoon Sask., with a beer entitled Hop to it Pantyhose Lager, Mark Nesdoly 2nd Place from Edmonton with a beer entitled Pays d'en Haut Pilsener, Ian Maclaren/Keir Pearson 1st Place from Montreal with a beer entitled Pilsener, Pierre Valois CLASS 2 PALE ALE 3rd Place from Edmonton Alberta with a beer entitled Prairie Pale, Harry Wagner. 2nd Place fromDorval Quebec, with a beer entitled Pale Ale, Denis Barsalo. 1st Place from New Westminster B. C. with a beer entitled Brew housenPale Ale, Tim Vandergrift. CLASS 3 NO ENTRIES _ BROWN ALE CLASS 4 PORTER 3rd Place from Edmonton Alberta, with a beer entitled Pretentious Porter, Harry Wagner 2nd Place from Edmonton Alberta, with a beer entitled Committees Punch Bowl Porter, Ian Maclaren. 1st Place from Etobiecoke Ontario, with a beer entitled Porter Punch, Dave Camilleri CLASS 5 STOUT 3rd Place from Rexdale, Ont.with a beer entitled Quakers Oatmeal Stout, Lorne Romano. 2nd Place fromNew Westminster B. C. with a beer entitled Caeneddi's Black Wine, Tim Vandergrift 1st Place from St Hubert with a beer entitled Black Knight, Karl Boutin CLASS 6 SPECIALTY-Herb and Unique Fermentables 3rd Place from Missisauga with a beer entitled Red one, Gord Nevery 2nd Place from Beaconsfield, Quebec with a beer entitled Olde Apple Smoke, Ed Godberson 1st Place from Montreal with a beer entitled Citrounele Ale, Stephane Laroche CLASS 7 & 8 BELGIAN BEERS (Combined class 7 Belgian extra strength with class 8 Belgian Sour due to only two entries in the Belgian Sour class) 3rd Place from St Hubert with a beer entitled Great Fall, Karl Botin 2nd Place fromToronto with a beer entitled Firkin Frambozen, Martin Sewell 1st Place from Rexdale Ontario, with a Belgian Holy beer entitled Smack Test Dubble, Lorne Romano BEST OF SHOW 3rd Place from St. Hubert Quebec with a dry stout Karl Boutin 2nd Place from Montreal with a Pilsener Pierre Valois 1st Place from Rexdale, Ont.with a Dubble Lorne Romano BEST NOVICE ENTRIES Pale Ale fromDorval Quebec, with a beer entitled Pale Ale, Denis Barsalo. Porter from Etobiecoke Ontario, with a beer entitled Porter Punch, Dave Camilleri Specialty (Herb & Unique fermentables) fromMontreal with a beer entitled Citrounele Ale, Stephane Laroche BOS from Montreal with a beer entitled Citrounele Ale, Stephane Laroche Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 1997 16:40:11 -0800 (PST) From: Dave Riedel <RIEDEL at ios.bc.ca> Subject: Incomplete conversion? Starch? - summary Last week I reported that my first all-grain batch tasted disturbingly starchy after the recirc-sparge. If you recall, I did an iodine test which was negative, so I proceeded to boil, cool, pitch and ferment. Thanks to Nathan Kanous, John Mulholland, Tony Schmidt and Jim Thomas for their advice, which was basically "Sounds like your beer is fine, perhaps your were tasting 'grainy-ness' which is new to you at the moment; RDWHAHB." This past weekend, I racked the beer into the secondary and diverted a sample to take the SG and taste. The SG read about 1.013 (from ~1.048-9) and the taste was *delicious* - I was truly amazed at how good it was. (If you are hesitating about making the jump to all-grain, do it! You'll be glad you did.) Perhaps I just don't get fresh extract around here, but this AG batch is far better than my best partial mash. For the batch I made this weekend, I did a conversion test after 1.25 hrs (temp generally 152-149F). The test was negative. The wort, as the week before, has a grainy-ness to it. This time I'm not worried. BTW, I've only used a single-step infusion mash in these first two batches. I'm using Canadian Malting 2-row. What would I gain from, say, a 15-30 min rest at around 135F. Is it worth the effort? Dave Riedel Victoria, Canada Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 1997 16:41:29 -0800 (PST) From: Dave Riedel <RIEDEL at ios.bc.ca> Subject: Bittering Hops - what's the difference? / Hop Survey I'm going to be making a bulk order for whole hops from a mail-order source to build up a general selection of hops on hand in my freezer. I understand the obvious reasons to have a selection of aroma and flavour hops, but I'm not sure I'm aware of the reasons for choosing various bittering hops. 1. Is the bitterness produced (for a set IBU level) by different hops significantly different? If so, in what way? The spec sheets often mention aroma... isn't the aroma contribution of the bittering hops pretty much boiled off? 2. For example, 2 pale ales made identically except one uses XX IBUs of say, Galena, and one uses XX IBUs of Northern Brewer; both have 1 ounce of EKG as finish. How would the two beers compare? Having said all that, it's time for an HBD survey. If you were setting up a 'pantry' of hops for the next several months' brewing of ales (all kinds: British Mild to American IPA to Scottish Wee Heavy to Belgian Wit and Bavarian Weizen), what kinds of hops would *you* buy? Try not to get overly specific and suggest the accepted standards for each ale style. What 4-6 hop varieties would you buy? Concentrate on versatility and quality. I'll post the results. Dave Riedel Victoria, Canada Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 1997 21:54:37 -0500 From: Randy Ricchi <rricchi at ccisd.k12.mi.us> Subject: Shorter brew day In response to Randy Reed's quest for a shorter brew day, here's what I've been up to. I've brewed almost 100 batches since switching to all-grain, and since the third batch I've split my brew day into two days. I mash and sparge one evening, cover the collected wort, and leave until the next day. I then boil, chill and pitch the following evening. By doing this I can brew during the week and have two leisurely evenings of brewing related activity rather than one long tiring day of brewing on a weekend. Even when I do brew on a weekend I would split the session in two: mash & sparge on Fri. eve., for instance, then boil, etc. on Saturday morning. By breaking the session up like this you can clean everything up after day one, and then day two is almost like an extract brewing session. I've never noticed any problem with malt flavor, stability or anything from leaving the wort overnight. There's not enough time for bacteria to do anything to the wort, and you'll soon be sterilizing it in the boil. I have barley wines over two years old made with this method and absolutely no signs of hot side aeration or oxidation of any type. Try it once and see! The only thing is if you're into first wort hopping, I don't know how this method would work. I just started doing this and have done straight-through brewing sessions because I wasn't yet comfortable with the idea of hopping and then leaving the wort overnight. Randall B. Ricchi 394 Lakeview Drive Hancock, MI 49930 (906)482-3754 "Should anyone thirst, let them come unto me and drink" Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 1997 20:08:40 -0700 From: "Brian M. Rezac" <brian at aob.org> Subject: 1997 National Homebrew Competition First, I would like thank everyone for their input on this topic. We were only attempting to protect the individual homebrewers/entrants. We realize that this may not be possible to do. Let me explain our motives for making any change to the NHC rules. The reason that we changed the NHC rules is that the AHA was contacted by one of the NHC winners who informed us that his recipe was printed in another publication without any attribution to him or the award that he won. He asked for our assistance. While we encourage the printing of NHC winners' recipes in other publications, we do want to ensure that the homebrewer and the award that he or she won gets attributed correctly. As a standing policy and as a courtesy to the brewer, we ask each potential publisher to contact the brewer directly and get his or her permission to print. If you look at Rule F from last year, you will see that we only required that the entrants "agree to allow (at no cost) publication of their recipe by the Association of Brewers or any of its divisions in any publication. Entrant will receive all due credit." This is all that the AHA wants to do with any of the recipes. But the wording wasn't strong enough to prevent the un-attributed publishing of recipes. We apologize for the confusion and I have passed the posted comments on to people here responsible for the wording of the rules. Thanks, again, for all your input. Keep Brewin'! - Brian Brian Rezac Administrator American Homebrewers Association (303) 447-0816 x 121 (voice) 736 Pearl Street (303) 447-2825 (fax) PO Box 1679 brian at aob.org (e-mail) Boulder, CO 80306-1679 info at aob.org (aob info) U.S.A. http://beertown.org (web) Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 1997 05:20:54 -0600 From: John Lifer jr <jliferjr at mail.misnet.com> Subject: Re:RE: Wyeast 1275 Ken said >From: Ken <kbjohns at oscar.peakaccess.net> >Subject: Wyeast 1275 > >I would have disagree with Charles Epps conclusion of problems with 1275. I >have used it in 4 batches and found that my comments mirror those of Alex >Santic below: > >"I've made 3 fine batches with 1275 and experienced no imbalance of esters >or phenolic off-flavors. In fact, it seems like a relatively neutral >strain. The reported results can be easily explained on the basis of >common procedural problems. In particular, many people ferment ales at >relatively warm room temperatures. I would strenuously disagree with Charles and Ken. I have brewed 5 batches varying from a porter, a stout two milds and an IPA and ALL have had a very pronounced grapefruit taste. Obviously the stout and porter suffered the least as I use a large percent of roast- chocolate malt but the taste was there. The milds and IPA were almost undrinkable by anyone but me and I will drink just about everything I brew-- some have been pretty disgusting. I fermented all of the above at between 50 and 65f my freezer is in my shop and is not really temperature controlled when the outside temperature is below the setpoint of the freezer. This is not on the high side of fermentation temp for ales. I will not use this yeast again. I will go back to the other British yeasts. John in Mississippi -----'nother brewin' fool Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 1997 06:33:48 -0600 From: DD <dunn at tilc.com> Subject: New Orleans Homebrew Supply - --MimeMultipartBoundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Will be visiting New Orleans the end of this week and wonder if there is a homebrew supply in the area? If so, could someone give me directions? dd - --MimeMultipartBoundary-- Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 1997 08:27:26 -0500 From: Art Steinmetz <asteinm at pipeline.com> Subject: RE: Setup in New House Don Mille(r?) <milledon at ix.netcom.com> is building a basement brewery... After 8 brewing years of dragging stuff up from the basement and setting up on the back patio, then tearing it down I did what you're planning. I'll offer a few thoughts. I basically installed our old kitchen cabinets in a 14x13 room in the basement. I reused the old dishwasher and sink. Had an old fridge already and I left room for another. I bought a SABCO RIMS ($$$) fitted for natural gas but I also installed a 2-burner electric cooktop for starter prep/decoctions, etc. Think about how you are going to get the four ancient elements in and out of the brewery; earth, air, fire and water (well, skip the earth unless you count spent grain). You need to get water into the kettle and a lot of waste water will be dumped down the drain (tub sink?, floor drain?). Your heat source, if gas, sucks up a lot of air and will need an exhaust fan. Don't forget a CO detector in this case. If electric, make sure your outlet is GFCI protected. Think about clean up. Before I just had vessels to wash and I hosed down the patio. Now I've got to clean up a room with lots of surfaces. I don't know what the best cleaning regime is yet. I mop the floor and counter with Ammonia. I sanitzize glass and hoses with bleach, stainless with idophor. Finally, I use stainless cleaner on the kettles. Stainless cleaner is kinda neat; it is basically water, silicone and mineral oil aeresol. Safe for widows and orphans. - -- Art Brewmeister, janitor Brauerei Steinmetz Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 1997 09:08:29 -0500 From: kathy <kbooth at scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us> Subject: glass grenades? & distilling questions followed my usual ale procedure, had a great ferment, waited 13 days to bottle and at the end of a 10g bottle finally remembered to take a SG. Shock!!!! My 1.054 OG stout and porter had finished at 1.022, much higher than the usual 1.015 or so. I finished with the last several bottles a bit perplexed and eventually thot I'd better check my basement fermenting temperature.....the usual 66F or so was reading 60F at floor level. With a large starter of Wyeast 1084 Irish, generous pure O2 aeration, all grain process for plenty of FAN, a low brewing temperature seems the only possibility for a 1.022 finish? Am I missing something? If the storage conditions warm up and the ferment drops 6 pts or so in the bottle, do I have very fizzy stout, gushers, or glass grenades? Second question, a hbing friend is asking about distilling and whether an early fraction of the distillation should be discarded to avoid being blinded or worse. I remember a distilling thread from HBD's past but if someone has a good reference or summary of the topic, please share it with me. He is not going to use car radiators or any thing with lead as a condenser. TIA and cheers jim booth, lansing, mi reply at kbooth at waverly.k12.mi.us Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 07:46:15 -0600 From: "Richard Scotty"<rscotty at uswest.com> Subject: RE: AHA From: Richard Scotty on 04/02/97 07:46 AM MST I too have become disgusted with the AHA. Several posts on rec.crafts.brewing directed to the AHA leadership regarding their organizational structure have gone unanswered. Cahrlie and Cathy take the money and run. Zymurgy has become mediocre at best (Couldn't have lived without the special edition and the history of bottle openers). Brewing Techniques blows this rag into the weeds. The NHC is a fowled up mess. They damn near killed the HBD. Somebody show me how they're helping us. I recieved my AHA membership expiration notice last night. At the bottom it says that the AHA is "a membership driven organization". You'd have a difficult time convincing me of that these days. Nothing about the AHA is membership driven with the exception of the contribution of monies to their coffers. There is clearly only one effective course of action for us to take if we want to effect change in the behavior of the AHA: *** Withold Your Money ***. I do not intend to renew my membership and emplore others that are equally disgusted with the AHA to do the same. Its the only message that will have any effect. The AHA: Just Say No. Rich Scotty The Crapshoot Brewery Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 1997 10:34:52 -0600 From: Bill Giffin <billgiffin at maine.com> Subject: AHA NHC Again Good afternoon all, Steve <Meercat> Quarterman said: >Hmmm, it is my understanding that there are locals who organize the AHA first round judgings. Well, at least here in my town it is. I would think that it would be the organizers and possibly you, or accepting the judging of the barleywines after judging the ales, who would be at fault and NOT the AHA. < Gee Steve don't you think that the AHA should at least have a representative at all the first round judging? When you have a finite amount of time to judge the beers sent to the first round and a finite number of judges you do what has to be done. Or would you rather that the some of the beers shouldn't be judged because that would over tax the poor judges palates? THE FAULT IS WITH THE AHA!!!! Don't try to past it off to the judges, many of whom have travelled hundreds of miles and had to pay for a couple nights in a hotel to judge. >Oh I see, only if you are on the east coast can you recognize beers that match the style guidelines. It is true that the west coast brewers do like hoppy beers and such but that in no way means that those of us that live on the west coast do not know how to judge beers properly. < If you take the time to analyse the recipes for the winners of the past five or so years of AHA NHC and compare the recipes to the guidelines you will see that the majority do only have a nodding aquaintance with the guidelines. I know that you will find the original gravities of many of the winning beers to be as much as twice the highest guideline original gravity . Calculate the bittering and compare it to the guidelines and you will see that many of the beers appear to be overhopped. Many of the recipes have ingredients which are not approptiate to syle. Steve I guess based on the recipes that have been published in Zymurgy that none of us know how to judge beer. Maybe though, the beers were presented so cold that they couldn't be judged properly and that is the fault of the AHA! Bill Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 1997 07:55:27 +0000 From: Joe Shope <sltp5 at cc.usu.edu> Subject: barbeque conversion Brethren, I've recently been given a gas grill and was wondering about the possibility of converting it to an outdoor cooker. Ideally what I would like to do is convert it so that it has two burners. Has anyone had any experience with a conversion like this? Private E-mail is fine: jshope at biology.usu.edu OR: sltp5 at cc.usu.edu ciao, joe shope, Logan UT brewin' in the promised land Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 11:52:11 -0500 From: Dave Bartz <gbrewer at iquest.net> Subject: Kegging preferences/Isinglass HBDers Recently I have been asked, a couple times, what style of ales/lagers are most commonly kegged at the homebrew level. Bitters, Pale Ales and such lighter English styles seem to be the most popular to keg, but I was interested in what others on this forum like and don't like to keg in cornie kegs. Its fairly obvious that stronger beers would be candidates for the bottle, because of their long term evolution, but has anybody out there kegged those for the long run? Also has any body used Isinglass in liquid form that hasn't been kept in refridgeration? Does it spoil? Any feedback is appreciated. TIA Dave Bartz The Gourmet Brewer "Beer is good" 5000 BC Return to table of contents