HOMEBREW Digest #2410 Fri 02 May 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

  easy decoction for beginners (Gavin Scarman)
  RE: nitrogen/co2 (erikvan)
  Broken Thermometer. Arrrgh!! (RedlackC)
  Re: Secondary fermentation... (Spencer W Thomas)
  Got a Recipe? (Brad Kazmer)
  Mash Tun Insulation (eric fouch)
  garage sale draft system (Barrowman)
  135 F Rest in not-so-pale malts (Russ Brodeur)
  Cornies/Mini-kegs/Biting Yeasties/Maris-Otter ("C&S Peterson")
  Hefeweisen (Brian Deck)
  re: Brew Clubs ("Bridges, Scott")
  Homebrew potency & flat brew (Dave Bartz)
  Yeast Autolysis (DAVE BRADLEY IC742 6-7932)
  Small Batches and Recipes ("John Penn")
  Gelatin Clarifier ("Nathan L. Kanous II")
  Help me clarify myself! (Matt Harper)
  Corked Beer Flavor / Vienna&Maerzen Info (David C. Harsh)
  Great Canadian Homebrew Competition correction / web page (Eamonn McKernan)
  Stupid Questions, Poor eyes ("David R. Burley")
  Corn Grits or Meal (Darren Gaylor)
  Pin Lock and Ball lock connectors (Cory Chadwell)
  Piranha solutions (Kevin Kane)
  botulism redux (OH NO!) (SClaus4688)
  RE: Gelatin as a clarifier (John Wilkinson)

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: Thu, 01 May 1997 10:59:10 +1500 From: Gavin Scarman <scarman at box.net.au> Subject: easy decoction for beginners I've read a lot about people having trouble with decoctions, and saying they are too difficult. My first ever all-grain (with 50% wheat) was a decoction and was a complete success and very much easier than I thought it would be. My equipment is as simple as you can get. So here is my method that has worked well for me over a number of decoction mashes. Equipment- 20l (5 gal) SS pot (cost me A$30,US$25) 8l (2.5gal) SS pot (quality A$40) old plastic fermenter/ bottling bucket with homemade 'ez masher' for lautering put crushed grain in 20l pot with 13l of 104F water, hold for 10 min. heat to 135 in 15 minutes (gas stove makes this rate easy to control) rest for 25 min, and then pull decoction; I do this by taking first just the grain via a strainer until decoct pot is 2/3 full, then I top up with just liquid so the decoct is 2:1 grain:liquid I then put the lid on the rest mash and wrap in an old blanket - the thermal mass of the main mash means it drops only a few degrees at worst. heat the decoct in 15 min to 160F and rest until iodine test negative heat in 15 till boiling, hold for 20 mins. slowly add decoct back to rest mash over 10 minutes. (It never seems to overshoot the next temp but if I think it's going up too fast I add some cold water to the main mash - maybe a cup or 2). heat to 147F if not already there, rest for 20. heat in 7min to 160F, wait til iodine test negative. heat to 170F, hold for 5 then transfer to lauter-tun. The thing that makes this easy is that the mash is done on a gas stove meaning I don't have to worry about getting quantities exact. Mashing in a picnic cooler must be a nightmare in comparison. Regardless of choice of temperatures the method is still easy and I have done double decoctions the same way. All my beers have come out very well. BTW, "my method" was developed with a lot of tips from here and the R.C.B. newsgroup. - ---------------------------------- http://www.satech.net.au/~scarman mailto:scarman at satech.net.au - ---------------------------------- Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 20:27:24 -0500 (CDT) From: erikvan at ix.netcom.com Subject: RE: nitrogen/co2 Jeff Sturman asks: One of my customers is hell bent on using nitrogen to serve his homebrew. He wants to know if he can carbonate the beer with straight co2 and then serve the beer with straight nitrogen. Mainly because pure nitrogen is considerabely cheaper than a mix of nitrogen/co2. Will this work? I told him the reason for the mix probably has something to do with keeping the beer carbonated. Pure nitrogen pressure on the keg probably wouldn't do this. Did I lie to him? Help, anyone? Jeff, >From my experience with nitrogen beers, you must actually force carbonate the beer with the nitrogen, which by the way, is harder than force carbonation with co2, due to the smaller bubble size, causing a more difficult time getting into the liquid. If you simply co2 carbonate the beer, then dispense with nitrogen at say, 8 psi, all you're doing is pushing the beer out the tap, not giving it that famous Guinness head. Yes, nitrogen might be cheaper, but you just can't put it into your co2 bottle. You need a different regulator, (big bucks), and, if you want the Guinness effect, you need a special tap (more big bucks). Simply, you want to force nitrogen the keg, and dispense with co2. You may however, depending on how soon the beer is consumed, have to re-carbonate (with nirtogen) the keg. Is it all worth it? I think so. Erik Vanthilt The Virtual Brewery Http://www.netcom.com/~erikvan/brewery.html Games, hints, reviews, recipes, a free newsletter, and more... Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 22:22:22 -0400 (EDT) From: RedlackC at aol.com Subject: Broken Thermometer. Arrrgh!! Friends and beer lovers, I have run into a small dilemma. I broke off the tip of my floating thermometer into my partial mash the other night. The thermometer itself is encased in a long glass housing and has a host of lead beads at the bottom that are held in place by an unknown red substance. Only the glass case broke and a few dozen of the lead balls fell into the wort along with a few bits of glass. The thermometer itself did not break, and it is of the alcohol variety. The mash temperature never exceeded 170 degrees. I strained the wort through a *very* fine nylon hop bag which caught any of the unwanted glass and lead (almost all of which had settled to the bottom of the lauter tun. I'm 100% percent sure that I removed all of the glass and lead from the wort. But, I don't know what the hard red substance (not the red alcohol in the thermometer itself) is that may or may not have entered the wort. If any did end up in the wort, it was a very minuscule amount. Less than half a drop at most. My question is this: What is the hard red substance that holds the lead beads and thermometer in place inside of a glass floating thermometer? Is it harmful, toxic, deadly? Has anyone ever experienced this before? I'd prefer not to throw out the batch unless it's going to make someone ill. Any help would be appreciated. Private email is more than welcome. Thanks, Chris Redlack Rockville, MD "Shut up brain, or I'll stab you with a Q-tip." - Homer Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 01 May 1997 03:29:04 -0400 From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer at engin.umich.edu> Subject: Re: Secondary fermentation... Generally, I'd agree that "session" ales don't need to be racked to a second fermenter before packaging (this being what we homebrewers incorrectly call a "secondary fermentation"). Big ales will benefit from getting off the primary yeast & trub after a week or two, even though they're not finished fermenting. However (you knew that was coming, didn't you), there are circumstances... I made a "party beer" last week. Tonight, I racked it from the plastic bucket to a carboy. Later this week, I'll keg it. Why? Because it had big chunks of yeast and/or trub floating on top. These will hopefully settle in the "secondary", and in any case more of them will get left behind in the second racking. It certainly didn't need any further fermentation. It went from an OG of about 1.040 to a FG of 1.006. I think it's done. :-) =Spencer Thomas in Ann Arbor, MI (spencer at umich.edu) Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 04:23:53 -0500 (CDT) From: Brad Kazmer <kazmerbn at vuse.vanderbilt.edu> Subject: Got a Recipe? I've searched Cat's Meow amongst others and haven't been able to find a good clone recipe for Sam Adams Stock Ale. I would appreciate any help I could get. Extract recipes preferred. Private e-mail okay. Will post results. Thanks in advance. Brad - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- | '|E Brad Kazmer | | # kazmerbn at vuse.vanderbilt.edu | | # | | _#_ "Mister, I ain't a boy, no I'm a man, | | ( # ) and I believe in the promised land" | | / O \ | | ( O ) -Bruce Springsteen, | | ` ----- The Promised Land. | - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 01 May 1997 06:45:45 -0500 (EST) From: eric fouch <S=fouch%G=eric%DDA=ID=STC021.efouch%0004972576 at mcimail.com> Subject: Mash Tun Insulation - --Boundary (ID i.g+01I_ICREDA,R4K9-0MVK.4DGI2IG) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii - ----------------------------- Application message id: STC010 970501074243624061 Posted date: THU MAY 01, 1997 3:42 am GMT Importance: Normal Grade of Delivery: Normal - ----------------------------- - --Boundary (ID i.g+01I_ICREDA,R4K9-0MVK.4DGI2IG) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Description: 7 BIT ASCII Date: Thursday, 1 May 1997 7:41am ET To: STC012.PREQUEST at STC010.SNADS From: Eric.Fouch at STC001 Subject: Mash Tun Insulation In-Reply-To: The letter of Friday, 25 April 1997 2:04am ET HBD- Just some anecdotal data on tun insulation- I built a neat little box to fit around my tun out of 1/2" insulation. It didn't work well at all. The best insulation system I found is to lay two beach towels down on the counter in an "X". Then, set the pot down in the middle of the "X", and wrap the towels up and around the mash tun. Works great, and is pretty cheap. This weekend I'll be brewing up a Belgian brew, either a wit or an old strong using Wyeast 1388. Any info on this yeast? Eric Fouch Bent Dick YactoBrewery Kentwood MI - --Boundary (ID i.g+01I_ICREDA,R4K9-0MVK.4DGI2IG)-- Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 08:30:10 -0400 (EDT) From: Barrowman at aol.com Subject: garage sale draft system My father (bless his heart) just picked a draft system at a garage sale for $20. It was used to deliver soda to one of those bar server things with all of the buttons on the nozzle. He has described it to me over the phone and there is one piece that doesn't make sense. The system includes a pump the has a name plate on it reading 'Carbonizer'. It has a brass body and 1/3 hp motor. If it weren't for the name plate I would assume it would be used to recirculate cleaning fluids through the lines. Does anyone know what this is and what it might be used for? Laura Charlotte NC Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 01 May 1997 08:38:13 -0400 From: Russ Brodeur <r-brodeur at ds.mc.ti.com> Subject: 135 F Rest in not-so-pale malts Some of the recent discussions regarding head retention and body enhancements (or lack thereof) due to use of a rest at 135'ish F has once again piqued my interest. I believe this rest will indeed result in beneficial high molecular weight protein (HMWP) degradation in PALE malts, ie. lager and pilsner malts; but I am not so sure about the benefits of using this rest with higher-kilned malts, such as pale ale, Vienna, Munich etc. which are also commonly used base malts. Are the proteolytic enzymes responsible for HMWP degradation denatured in these malts during kilning and/or roasting?? This reminds me of an off-line discussion between myself, AlK and Steve Alexander a few months back, but the question was never definitively resolved. Since then, I have been incorporating ~10% pils malt to an otherwise all-Munich grist to boost its "proteolytic power" (PP) and using a 135-40 F rest. I also use a double-decoction mash schedule, so I get a great deal of BA activity in this range as well. This procedure has been yielding well-attenuated, crystal clear lagers, but I am not 100% sure HMWP degradation is responsible. Does anyone out there have any information to share regarding the proteolytic enzyme content of various malts, both pale and not-so pale?? TTFN - -- Russ Brodeur in Franklin, MA mailto:r-brodeur at ds.mc.ti.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 1 May 97 12:39:09 UT From: "C&S Peterson" <CNS_PETERSON at msn.com> Subject: Cornies/Mini-kegs/Biting Yeasties/Maris-Otter HBDers - As for a source of cheap cornies, I was able to get mine for $10 apiece from my local Pepsi distributor. You have to call around a bit, but Pepsi is trying to get rid of these things and were plenty happy to sell them for more than what they'd get for scrap. They even ran the things through their cleaning system (a caustic washer, I believe). I did replace the large 0 rings and the exterior 0 rings ($4/each for the large o-ring, Home Depo #9 rubber washer in the faucet dept for the in/out seals). Before taking the cornie plunge, I developed a large inventory of mini-kegs and taps. I definately recommend the metal tap if you go this route, but have had plenty of problems with this kind of system. First, the kegs (I have the Frass-Frisch varitey) tend to give the beer a tinny flavor after several uses. I took one of these kegs apart and found small spots of exposed steel along the seam. I only use iodaphor for cleaning/sterilizing, so I don't think these rust spots were caused by my cleaning agents. Second, the taps themselves tend to develop leaks. I would load a cartridge, dispense for a few days (4 pints or so), and then find my beer flat -- no gas. When this happened with my plastic tap, I eventually found that shear stress fracture developed where the cartridge handle screws into the tap -- I almost shit my pants when the thing broke free while I was screwing on a fresh cartridge! My metal tap seems to work a bit better, but has also developed leaks around the inlet. IMHO, the mini-taps aren't bad for a short term solution, but in the long run it's cheaper to go with the cornie from the get go, since that's probably where you'll end up. I just wanted to add a datapoint to some of the discussions on yeast bite and how long you can keep you beer on its yeast. I have keep beer on secondary yeast for lenghy periods (like two months), but have taken steps to keep it cool (<60F) without any problems. Now that I'm filtering some of my beers, I have experienced another interesting phenomenon with suspended yeast. An experienced German-trained brewmaster (from Fordham BC in Annapolis, MD) once told me that there is a slight harsh bitterness that yeast will contribute, and that is one reason he likes to filter via DE (nominally a 5u filter). So armed with my cartridge filter, this year I compared several bottled versions of the same beer -- one version unfined and unfilted, one version filtered and bottle conditioned with a small amount of yeast/sugar. I noted that the filtered/bottled conditioned beer had a somewhat less bitter flavor than the unfined and unfiltered beer. So, the lesson (for me anyway) is that if you plan to filter, you need to add a few more IBUs to the kettle if you are working from a recipe designed for unfilted/unfined beer. I guess if I were to do this again, I'd like to see if there is a difference between a fined beer and a filtered one -- maybe next year! This year I have brewed extensivly with many varieties of Beeston Malts, including Maris Otter Pale Ale, Golden Promise Lager, and Halyceon (sic). I initially had trouble with the Maris Otter during sparge, but found that I was simply grinding the grain too closely. My theory is that these malts grind very easily, so it "feels" like you aren't working hard enough when you are cranking on the mill handle. My reaction was to close the gap on my mill till it "felt" right, and I ended up creating too much flour. Since adjusting my mill back to its "Klages" setting, I have had no problem with stuck sparges. FWIW, I use a slotted manifold in my mash/lauder tun. The only thing I noticed with the Beeston malts is that they are a little short on conversion power. So if I'm including say a pound of barley flakes in the mash, I'll use a pound of Briess Klages in the grist. Chas Peterson Laytonsville, Md Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 08:16:57 -0500 From: deck at pathbox.wustl.edu (Brian Deck) Subject: Hefeweisen Hey Folks: I don't recall anyone ever talking about homebrewing a hefeweisen, or maybe I don't pay enough attention. Anyways, do any of you make them? I have collected a few hefewiesen yeasts (ie. Paulaner, Franziskaner (sp?), even Michelob) that I could easily propigate. Now, both the Paulaner and Michelob state on the bottle that they are ales, and I must admit I was never sure if a hefewiesen yeast was ale yeast or lager yeast. If I wanted to make an extract batch, I assume I would just substitue wheat malt extract plus some hops (what hops are in authentic hefeweisen?) and brew and bottle it as if it were a standard ale...or should it treated differently? Thanks in advance for any sagery, Brian Deck "I drank what?" -Socrates Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 01 May 97 09:15:00 EDT From: "Bridges, Scott" <bridgess at mmsmtp.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM> Subject: re: Brew Clubs George De Piro writes: > I believe it was Pat Babcock who started this thread by telling us > about the great guest speakers at the Princeton area homebrew club. I > thought that some of you who are just starting your own clubs might > find this interesting, so I'll talk about some of my experience. [snip] > I hope this was useful to somebody, have fun! George and others, While this discussion may outside the normal bounds of this group, I'd like to encourage it. Maybe as an off-line email-type exchange. Our club seems to struggle with ways to keep things lively. We are in a relatively small city (Columbia, SC) and have not been able to attract a large number of members. We have about 20 regulars and a number of others who attend sporadically. With this small number of people involved, it's difficult to pull of anything that takes a large amount of organization. I'm very interested in hearing about what other clubs do for programs and activities. As the brand-new president, I want to make some things happen for the club. If anyone has some specifics about stuff you do that works (i.e., fun, educational, fund-raising, etc), please send email. If there is any interest, I'd like to generate some off line dialogue. I'll post a summary unless there is a major objection. Scott Bridges President, Palmetto State Brewers scott.bridges at columbiasc.ncr.com Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 08:32:11 -0400 From: Dave Bartz <gbrewer at iquest.net> Subject: Homebrew potency & flat brew Brewing madmen/madwomen Eugene Sonn asked >>I've been brewing for over 5 years and one thing continues to surprise me about homebrew is how quickly you may feel its alcohol affecting your system........... Are there any explanations for this? Is the alcohol in homebrew more easily metabolized than in commercial beer?<< I've def. noticed this as well and in rapping with homebrewing friends, we have concluded that it must be the relative freshness of the alcohol. Is the younger alcohol more potent. My guess is yes. Ellery Samuels asks: >I recently made an IPA using extract with specialty grains. Followed procedure that I've successfully used for 8 other batches. This time the beer came out flat (minimal carbonation) and there was NO head in glass when pored. Any suggestions as to what happened? The beer has been in the bottle for wo weeks now and I plan on leaving a while longer to see if there is some improvement. Do you think that will help?< This could be the result of a number things. First of all I would be patient. It will more than likely become more carbonated as time goes on. This of course depends on the amount and type of primer you used. Also, serving temperature of the brew dictates how much CO2 stays dissolved in the beer. If there is any oil or soap that has been inadvertently introduced into the beer this would have an negative impact on the quality of head and carbonation as well. Dave Bartz The Gourmet Brewer "Beer is Good" - 5000 BC Thanks and keep on brewin'. Dave Bartz (Prez) The Gourmet Brewer P.O. Box 20688 Indianapolis, IN 46220-0688 Visa, Mastercard, A E and Discover welcomed. (317)924-0747 (800)860-1200 X166739 e-mail:gbrewer at iquest.net Home of Bartz' Beer Brewery "Beer is good" - Unknown, around 5000 B.C. OOOOOO OOOOOOOO /_| OOOOOO // | OOO \\_| OO | \_| O| |______| Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 01 May 1997 13:30:10 +0000 (GMT) From: DAVE BRADLEY IC742 6-7932 <BRADLEY_DAVID_A at LILLY.COM> Subject: Yeast Autolysis Nathan writes that he has 'yeast bite' in some of his beers, and wonders if this is similar to the autolysis I've been troubled with. I _think_ I've tasted beers with 'yeast bite', some older bottle conditioned beers of homebrew and commercial origin. To me it is a taste something like a powdery sourdough bread, but that's just me. I can unequivocally say I have autolysis in my beers. The yeast slurry I have collected (see original post) is repugnantly sulfurous. This taste _fades_ over a period of months from the actual beer, but there is a hint of this exact flavor residual in some of my lighter beers. I believe this autolysis is emphasized in my conical bottom fermenter because the yeast cake is 2-4" deep, and the bottom layers of yeast are quickly compacted and deprived of nutrients. Commercial conical systems have coolant on the cones. Can anyone tell me if such commercial systems have the cones cooled below the temp of the actual fermentation? IE, are the cones held at 50F and the beer at 60-65F? What other factors do we know may induce autolysis within 1-2 weeks? Oxygen levels? Metals? Use of gelatin? Thanks for your help! db Return to table of contents
Date: 1 May 1997 09:43:01 -0400 From: "John Penn" <john_penn at spacemail.jhuapl.edu> Subject: Small Batches and Recipes Subject: Time:9:11 AM OFFICE MEMO Small Batches and Recipes Date:5/1/97 Recently I've seen requests for recipes like SNPA which are on the Cats Meow. I hope everyone in HBD knows where to find those at http://alpha.rollanet.org/cm3/CatsMeow3.html. As for small batches I could not relate to that one homebrewer who makes 5 gallon batches and throws some away to make a small batch. I'm trying to keep expenses down so I'd rather scale it down, especially when trying a new recipe that I'm not sure if I'll like or not. I once made a 1 gallon batch to see if I liked liquid smoke and would probably do likewise for extracts like spruce or hazelnut in the future. I scale linearly except for hops which I use Rager's formula to compensate for bittering hops in concentrated boils, such as boiling a 2 gallon extract version of a 5 gallon all grain full boil for instance: I hope I get this right. If not, check the Brewery pages. For a 45 minute boil (Rager) IBUs = 74.62 * HBUs * 0.269 / (total gallons) (((est OG - 1) * concentration factor) - 0.05)/0.2 + 1) Step 1) Calculate expected gravity of original recipe, then calculate expected gravity of scaled down recipe and iterate to match gravity. I use 34 ppg for liquid extract, 45 ppg for dry extract, and 20 ppg for crystal malts. Miller and Papazian have numbers for other adjuncts. Step 2) Compensate bittering hops for a change in the boil concentration. If you scale a 3 gallon batch from a 5 gallon batch and keep the boil volume/final volume ratio the same, just scale the hops by 3/5! When adjusting for a change in boil concentration, for a 2 gallon boil of a 5 gallon all grain batch it usually works out to about 25% more hops than what is called for in a full boil. Use Ragers to be more precise. Hope this helps, I've mostly made 3 gallon batches but I've used this technique to scale a 5 gallon batch upwards too! John Penn Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 01 May 1997 09:47:17 -0400 From: "Nathan L. Kanous II" <nkanous at tir.com> Subject: Gelatin Clarifier George DiPiro mentions his positive results while using gelatin as a clarifying agent in the secondary. Two questions. First, will this leave enough yeast in suspension for natural carbonation? I suspect it will, but will this lead to the second problem. You've taken care of your problem in the fermentor, will the yeast in suspension recur when the beer is subsequently bottled and naturally carbonated? Does this become an exercise for force carbonated keg beer only? This relates to my question yesterday about finings and Wyeast Thames and London yeasts. TIA. Nathan in Frankenmuth, MI Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 10:19:55 -0400 From: Matt Harper <matth at bedford.progress.com> Subject: Help me clarify myself! Ok, I'm a bonehead. Made a nice (I hope) Belgian Dubbel this weekend and forgot to put the Irish Moss into the boil. It is still fermenting away nicely and I'm trying to decide what, if anything, I might do at this point to help clear up the brew before I bottle it. I see a couple of possibles: 1) Boil up the Moss and add it. Won't get the full affect, but due to the way it works (positive <-> negative ion attraction) I should still get some benefit 2) Use some geletin or some other 'normally-added-to-the-fermentor' approach 3) Chill the snot out of it and review when the dust (yeast) settles 4) Just ignore it and claim any haze is due to the 1 lb of wheat I added that was in the recipe. :-) Any and all help appreciated! -Matth Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 01 May 1997 09:51:49 -0400 From: dharsh at alpha.che.uc.edu (David C. Harsh) Subject: Corked Beer Flavor / Vienna&Maerzen Info Greetings collective- I've noticed an off flavor in Biere de Gardes (Jade, opened last night) and Belgian ales (Roman Dobbelen, had about 6 mos ago) that are in corked bottles. Specifically, the taste is metallic and the aroma is quite reminiscent of "moldy corks" in a too old bottle of white wine. I'm curious if beers tend to dissolve flavor and aroma components from the corks if they are too old. I know that some compounds are water soluble (I remember doing an extraction from cork in organic chemistry) - the question is whether this is a rapid process. Personally, I know that wines need to be stored with the cork wet to insure a good seal and prevent oxidation and I've always assumed that the same would go for beers. Has anyone else noticed this? I'm somehow suspecting that its because the beers are too old. - ----------------------------- I'm looking for information about recipe formulation for Vienna and Maerzen styles. I've read the AHA style volume and found it to be fairly unhelpful. Any other sources that people recommend? Dave Harsh Cincinnati, OH Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 11:50:46 -0400 From: Eamonn McKernan <eamonn at atmosp.physics.utoronto.ca> Subject: Great Canadian Homebrew Competition correction / web page Sorry about this folks, seems Michael Stirrup of Wellington will NOT be speaking at the conference. We're still finalising speakers since we had so many good suggestions. I'm sorry about the message format too. One of my e-mails was fine, the other wasn't. Go figure. Thanks for all the Black and Tan discussion earlier. Beer is truly a mysterious creation. Time for more study... - ---------------- On another note, CABA (the Canadian Amateur Brewers Assoc.) is looking for a volunteer to design and or maintain a web page. We're non-profit, and operate on a small budget, so this would be an unpaid position (as are all CABA positions). Anyone interested please contact me at the address below. Cheers, Eamonn McKernan CABA Secretary eamonn at atmosp.physics.utoronto.ca Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 12:06:02 -0400 From: "David R. Burley" <Dave_Burley at compuserve.com> Subject: Stupid Questions, Poor eyes Brewsters: "Charles Rich" says about my comment on poor quality experiments and drawing earth-shaking conclusions from a single poorly constructed experiment: " The only stupid question is the unasked one" Of course, I agree 100% with this, but it has NOTHING to do with my comment at all. Had Charlie said "I got these results and I don't quite understand them in light of brewing technology I have read." That is very legitimate and I encourage these sorts of questions as you do. But to say that all brewing technology, enzyme holds, etc. should be questioned as a result of one poorly constructed and carried out experiment, as Charlie did, is what I objected strongly to and still do. - --------------------------------------------------- John Wilkinson, Wilkerson or whatever of Grapevine,TX sent me this note ( after the double carats) and I responded as indicated ( after the single carats): >John, >> I was just chuckling over Scott Dornseif's response to your misspelling >> his name. >I have to admit I didn't understand it that way, just thought he was being funny and I laughed along. >> I don't know if this applies to you but I am the owner of a >> rather old pair of eyes >It does! Been brewing since before it was legal. >> and unless things are at the right viewing distance, >> an "eif" could easily be taken for an "ett". Wait until their eyes get stuck >> at one focus, then they may understand. >May they live that long! >Thanks for your comment. >If you don't mind I'll pass this above note, properly documented to HBD as a form of apology. Any problems? John didn't mind and said his name was often being mis-spelled also. I do not like to mis-spell anyone's name and apologize to Scott DornseIF as well as anyone else whose name these tired eyes have mis-read. Let me know, please, but I guess you'll have to be more direct than Scott. Maybe its not just my eyes that are tired! {8^) - --------------------------------------------------------- Keep on brewin' Dave Burley Kinnelon, NJ 07405 103164.3202 at compuserve.com Dave_Burley at compuserve.com Voice e-mail OK Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 01 May 1997 09:45:29 -0800 From: Darren Gaylor <dwgaylor at pacifier.com> Subject: Corn Grits or Meal I plan on making some lawnmower beer using corn as an adjunct. I've used flaked maize before but want to try a double mash with a non-gelatanized corn adjunt. The bulk food section of our grocery store carries both corn meal and grits. Which would be better for brewing purposes? Darren Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 11:41:13 -0500 From: cory at okway.okstate.edu (Cory Chadwell) Subject: Pin Lock and Ball lock connectors THX to the collective, Aside from some good natured ribbing for missing the painfully obvious I now feel confident that I can now tell a pin lock from a ball lock connector. I decided to pass along the info in case anyone else going to keg has the question sometime. The info is as follows... Ball locks look like: The attachment points on the keg have a little groove running around their circumference. The connector has a spring-loaded sleeve with little ball-bearings inside. It is attached by putting your thumb on top of the connector, pull up on the sleeve -- this takes the pressure off the little ball bearings. Push down on the keg connection point, and let the sleeve go. The sleeve going down should force the little ball bearings to lock into the groove on the attachment point. Pin lock connectors: The attachment points on the keg have pins sticking out of the sides, near the base. 2 on the gas in and 3 on the liquid out. Thanks to all for finding delicate ways of saying "Hey goofball, pin lock connectors have pins!!!" :) THX, Cory Black Cat White Stripe Homebrew "It might seem like a skunk but I swear it's not!" Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 10:33:07 -0700 (PDT) From: Kevin Kane <kkane at uidaho.edu> Subject: Piranha solutions A word of caution about mixing acid or base with hydrogen peroxide: be sure to use GLOVES and GOGGLES when mixing or using this stuff. Even with the 3% H2O2 available to the public, this stuff is aggressive. It's true that "piranha solution" is an excellent cleaner for glass, but in my laboratory we discourage it's use because of the risks. More importantly, don't use the "more is better" approach with this stuff. Keep the amounts small, because the mixing can generate LOTS of heat. I once diluted acid with water IN a carboy and cracked the bottom from the heat generated. Do not mix Piranha with ammonia or bleach, either. Brew on! Kevin M. Kane, Ph.D. Department of Chemistry University of Idaho Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 15:19:20 -0400 (EDT) From: SClaus4688 at aol.com Subject: botulism redux (OH NO!) "It was the salmon mousse!" -Mr. Death (from Monty Python's "The Meaning of Life"). Anyone up for a congenial discussion of botulism? Okay, before I get into this, I just want to say I'm really, really, really sorry to reopen this can of worms. I saw a post last week (from Dave Burley) mentioning botulism potential in boiling water bath canned wort. Having used the boiling water bath method for several years, I became concerned that it may be only a matter of time before I unwittingly serve my friends a batch of Jonestown Punch Ale. I subsequently searched prior HBDs for a discussion of botulism, and, wow, I certainly found it. As some prior debate was contentious, I truly hesitated bringing it up again (I'm now setting my flame shield at maximum). However, as it's literally a matter of life and death, I think additional discussion is warranted. It is clear from the prior posts that the toxin created by botulism infection is outrageously powerful and, for that reason, although it is very rare, the risk cannot be ignored. It was also clear from those posts that canned wort appears to have characteristics that make it a candidate for botulism infection (e.g., pH above 4.6, presence of vacuum to encourage anaerobic activity, thin enough consistency that "water movement" is not impeded). However, having scanned the internet, I found no reported case or study of botulism infection in wort. I find this unusual, given the considerable body of microbiological research done on the various bacteria that can spoil wort. This, together with the fact that no one apparently has died from wildly fermented Belgian ales, makes me wonder the following: 1) The toxin created by botulism infection is known to be heat labile. How stable is it in other respects? Does it degrade in the presence of oxygen? If so, would it be dissipated by a couple days in a well aerated yeast starter? Similarly, do alcohol, carbon dioxide or any other products/byproducts of fermentation have any affect on the toxin? 2) Botulism's toxin seems adept at killing just about any living organism it encounters. Will it kill yeast? If so, could a non-starting yeast starter function as a "canary in a coal mine" that would warn us of the presence of the toxin? 3) The literature I found on the internet focuses on canned meat and vegetables as the hosts for botulism infection. Is there any difference in the chemical makeup of these items from that of wort which makes them more hospitable to botulism (e.g., presence of unconverted starch in vegetables, absence of some substance that is isomerized out of hops into wort ...)? 4) Most of the HBDers involved in the prior discussion of this said "I'm no microbiologist, but ..." Well, I know there are some microbiologists who read the HBD, and maybe they could give some input. Possibly, someone could innoculate a beer wort sample with Clostridium botulinum and see what happens! 5) The prior discussion said something about mortality of heat resistant bacteria increasing with the length of exposure to 100C temperatures. Is it possible to eliminate botulism risk in canned wort by simply increasing processing time? If so, what is the proper processing time? (Note that this is a more viable option for wort than for vegetables or meat, which would likely be cooked to mush by long processing times). 6) There was a difference of opinion in the prior discussion on whether gases would be given off during botulism toxin production. Such gases would either swell the jar lid or give off smells that would warn against use. What's the straight answer on this? 7) As others have noted, the two most popular homebrew texts seem to be completely oblivious to any potential botulism danger from storing wort that isn't pressure canned. From a liability standpoint, I would guess their publishers would be concerned if they were disseminating info that could lead to the tragic death of an entire party of beer drinkers. Has anyone tried to contact Dave M. or Charlie P. about this? I'll shut up now (and let the fur fly). -Steve "I didn't mean to kill 'em" Claussen in PDX Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 1 May 97 15:39:32 CDT From: jwilkins at imtn.tpd.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson) Subject: RE: Gelatin as a clarifier George De Piro said: >I have read that gelatin is not the best clarifier to use on its own, >simply because it doesn't work well. My recent experience with it is >somewhat different, however. I have to agree with George, I have been using gelatin alone as a clarifier for the past several months and have been experiencing crystal clear beer. I use Irish moss in the kettle but always have. I have not done any scientific experiments to know for certain it is the gelatin but will on a batch I have in two secondaries. I will fine one and not the other and compare them over time. If one turns out cloudy I can always fine it later. I have noticed a remarkable clarity in my beers, however, and it coincides with my use of gelatin. John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkinson at imtn.dsccc.com Return to table of contents