HOMEBREW Digest #2613 Mon 19 January 1998

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

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

  Exploding Bottles/Dry vs. Liquid yeast (Al Korzonas)
  Optimum Mash Grain Depth (919) 405-3632" <danz at rtp.semi.harris.com>
  anti-oxidants ("Dr. Dwight A Erickson")
  yeast in a lagered ale (Loren Crow)
  re: Bottle Labels ("Michel J. Brown")
  Trademarks (Mark Riley)
  Dead Danstar/Coors clone/souring beer with lactic acid (Al Korzonas)
  Morgan's Liquid Malt Extract finishing 1.020 (The THP)
  Don Watts Lemon Beer (Jeffrey C Lawrence)
  Re: Phosphoric-Lactic (was RO/Phosphoric-Lactic/pH) (brian_dixon)
  War and Peace ("Eric Fouch")
  Looking for Recipes for Black Beer (Bowden Wise)
  The End Is Near!/Andy Walsh is God ("Rob Moline")
  Kegging Equipment, What would you call it? (Alex Paredez)
  Predicting %AA using 60/70: Followup (Kyle Druey)
  Unfinished Ale batch (MacRae Kevin J)
  pwit (David Kerr)
  alcoholism ("John Robinson")

Be sure to enter the... The Best of Brooklyn Homebrew Competition Brooklyn Brewery, Brooklyn, NY Entries due by 1/31/98, competition 2/7/98 Contact Bob Weyersberg at triage at wfmu.org for more info. NOTE NEW HOMEBREW ADDRESS: hbd.org Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org (Articles are published in the order they are received.) If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!! To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to request@hbd.org. **SUBSCRIBE AND UNSUBSCRIBE REQUESTS MUST BE SENT FROM THE E-MAIL **ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!! IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, the autoresponder and the SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE commands will fail! For "Cat's Meow" information, send mail to brewery at realbeer.com Homebrew Digest Information on the Web: http://hbd.org Requests for back issues will be ignored. Back issues are available via: Anonymous ftp from... ftp://hbd.org/pub/hbd/digests ftp://ftp.stanford.edu/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer AFS users can find it under... /afs/ir.stanford.edu/ftp/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 14:10:02 -0600 (CST) From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com> Subject: Exploding Bottles/Dry vs. Liquid yeast Back from vacation... a little behind in reading... I've gotten caught up so I don't re-answer any questions. Pat writes: >No flames, just facts: Gasses are compressible. Liquids are not. >This is why both air compressors and brake systems work. Your >brakes work because the brake fluid is incompressible. Your tires >inflate when you go to the air pump because gasses are. (NOTE: >liquids with gasses dissolved in them ARE compressible, but not >enough to be a consideration in our discussion.) No flames, and I agree with your initial statement, but your second analogy needs work. Your tires will inflate even if you fill them with water, but the ride would not be so smooth ;^). >If you had excess fermentables and NO headspace, the pressure has >nowhere to go. KABLAM! as they say on that weird Nickelodeon show. >With adequate headspace, the gas in the headspace will compress >"cushioning" the force from the bottle walls. With inadequate >headspace, the pressure has nowhere to go but through the bottle >walls. Not quite... the issue is not pressure but rather generated CO2. The generated CO2 would go somewhere: into solution. The only reason any "cusioning" would be needed (I've read here in HBD) is that if the bottle was very full and get hot or begin to freeze, there would be no room for the liquid to expand and you would get "clink" (not "blam!") as the glass cracked. <snip> >Depends on the pressure. Most kegs are rated for a minimum of 180 >psig. Most are quite a bit higher <snip> I've purchased several new Cornelius kegs. They were rated (new) at 130 psig. *** David writes: >By underfilling the bottle, more oxygen is left in it for the yeast to >metabolize the priming sugar or malt. If this is the case, it would mean >that in a normally filled bottle, the amount of air in the bottle is the >limiting factor of carbonization, not the amount of priming sugar. It >would also mean that unfermented priming sugar is left in the finished >beer. I don't have all the data handy, but in a private correspondence, a chemist (I believe) and I discussed this. He had calculated that the difference in CO2 production from the small amount of oxygen (remember air is only about 17% O2) in the headspace was not enough to create a big difference in pressure. >This could also explain variance in carbonation from bottle to bottle >within a batch. Bottles with more open space at the top would be more >highly carbonated. I contend that it's a combination of two things, one perception and the other physical. Firstly, if you have a big headspace, you hear a big "fffft" when you open the bottle. This could make you think there is a difference in pressure. Secondly, based upon some experiments I did and repeated several times (another HBD'er also did them), if you leave very little headspace (like 1/4" or less), you get slower carbonation rates and possibly even a lower final carbonation level too. If you overprimed (or bottled too early) AND you overfilled some of the bottles, you could have normal carbonation in the overfilled bottles and overcarbonation in the underfilled bottles. *** Eric writes: >I have some questions = >about dry and liquid yeast. First what is the difference, if any in = >taste of the beer? What are the differences in brewing with dry yeast = >vs. liquid? As in the actual steps to use, is one harder / easier than = >the other. 15 years ago all we had were dry yeasts. Most were made by companies that make bakers' yeast. As a result, we got yeast that was usually not very good for making clean, tasty beer. Now, with pressure from liquid yeast mfgrs, dry yeast makers have had to clean up their act or go out of business. The dry yeasts we have today are very clean and make great beer. The problem is that not all strains of yeast will survive the dehydration. Therefore, you get a lot more variety if you choose your yeast from both dry and liquid varieties. Yeast strain makes more difference in the finished beer flavour than malt brand or hop variety, so the biggest difference between most brands of beer (of the same style) is their yeast strain. To properly use dry yeast, you should rehydrate and temper it. See http://www.lallemand.com/ . To properly use liquid yeast, you should make a starter. A starter takes more planning and work, but there are certain styles of beer (Weizen, for example) for which you cannot buy an authentic yeast in dry form, so you must use a liquid one. Personally, most of my favourite yeasts happen to be liquid, so I use them most of the time, but I really like the yeast from Lallemand (Nottingham, Windsor, London, etc.) and I miss the new Red Star Ale (which was pulled due to infection problems and I haven't seen it now for more than 3 years). You have to hand it to them for pulling it, though... if it comes back, you can be pretty sure that it's clean. Al. Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL korz at xnet.com My new website (still under construction, but up-and-running): http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/ Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 15:30:47 -0500 From: "George Danz (919) 405-3632" <danz at rtp.semi.harris.com> Subject: Optimum Mash Grain Depth Recently I switched from a 10 gal. mash system (cooler with 4 Cu slotted 1/2" pipes and cross pieces for manifold). The old system worked great with at least 85% extraction. Grain depth was less than 12in. The new and BIGGER system uses a 17" perforated stnlss screen from Stainless in Seatle inside of a 1/2 barrel keg cooler. This cooler holds just about 24 to 25 gals. of water including the underletting depth of about 1 in. This cooler is slightly tapered so that it is perhaps 19 in. in diam. at the top. Grain depth in this cooler is about the same as the old system or maybe a bit deeper, say 12 to 13 in. This new system seems to take about 45 mins. to lauter and sparge. We need to process about 35 gallons of liquid wort so that after boil we'll have about 32 gallons (that's our goal) of 1050 to 1052 wort. We are considering some real heavy brews in the future and we could use a thicker mash and institue mash recirculation and stepping so that we don't end up overfilling the tun. Presently we step mash for temp. changes and the added water almost puts us to the very top of the tun. With heavy mashes we won't have that luxury and will have to go to a recirc. system with heat added for the steps. But here's the rub... we believe that our lauter and sparge times will increase significantly if we add 50% to the grain quantity or possibly even 75% if we do a very HEAVY recipe. We worry that there may even be the distinct liklihood that we'll get a stuck sparge with so much grain. It might reach a depth of 18 to 20" in a particularly heavy mash. This depth is higher than the screen is in diameter!! Does anyone on the HBD have any experience with this problem? What is a good guideline for ratio of grain depth to tun diameter? We've noticed that some commercial tuns have depts of 2 to 3 feet with diameters up to 8 feet or more! If this is optimal, then we might be flirting disaster? Please send comments also to gdanz at harris.com When we've completed the experiment we will post our results for others' benefit and enjoyment. Thank you, George Danz Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 12:43:46 -0700 From: "Dr. Dwight A Erickson" <colvillechiro at plix.com> Subject: anti-oxidants I wonder if anyone has tried incorporatiing SOD (super oxide dismutase) into their brew recipies in order to reduce oxidation in the bottle. SOD is a very powerful anti-oxidant and basically flavorless.. I wonder hoit might owrk for longer stored brews. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 14:41:18 -0600 From: lorencrow at earthling.net (Loren Crow) Subject: yeast in a lagered ale Greetings! I've been "lagering" an ale I made (i.e., making an Old Ale) for a couple of weeks at 32-34F and need to know whether or not there will be any active yeast to carbonate the beer after a couple more weeks of this. I did step the temp down at the rate of about 3 degrees per day (sometimes a bit more than this due to falling ambient temps). Will I need to pitch a packet of dry yeast for carbonation before bottling? Thanks again for all your help! Loren ========================================================================== # Loren D. Crow, Ph.D. ++ Office Phone: (903) 927-3219 # # Department of Religion ++ Fax: (903) 938-8100 # # Wiley College ++ # # 711 Wiley Avenue ++ Email: lorencrow at earthling.net # # Marshall, TX 75670 ++ # ========================================================================== As a spider spins out threads, then draws them into itself; As plants sprout out from the earth; As head and body hair grows from the living man; So from the imperishable all things here spring. (Mundaka Upanishad 1:7) Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 12:27:34 -0800 From: "Michel J. Brown" <homemade at spiritone.com> Subject: re: Bottle Labels KE:Dave Thomson asks about label-making software for bottles. At least since version 6.0, and possibly before, MS Word under the tools/envelopes & labels menu allowed the making of nice *colored* labels. You can either define the size and number directly, or enter the appropriate Avery number (#6464 in this case). KE:My goal was to produce something in color that wouldn't smudge or run under the KE:unpredictable conditions of my recipients' holiday ice chests or whatever. The Avery #6464 labels are inkjet compatible, and after drying, can be sprayed with inkset, or if you're cheap like me, then you can use egg white for that "old masters" look and feel ;^) KE:By virtue of the automatic multiple-up printing, the labels were nicely aligned so I could cut KE:them out with broad strokes of an Exacto knife rather than having to cut them out KE:individually with scissors. The huge assortment of graphics and word-art features make it KE:quite easy to make slick-looking labels. Word also allows this, and additionally, you can print the ubiquitous gov't warning (mine's a rye wit poking fun at the inanity of the liberal's warnings) in a fine pitch font. You can preview, test print, and even print multiple copies. The best part is that the Avery #6464 labels are easy to peel off and make for easy cleanup when returned for reuse! KE:Many word processors and database programs have multiple-up mailing label capability. KE:For simple labels, this may be adequate. If you're into lots of color & graphic effects, KE:though, you'll need a more graphic-oriented application. Guess that you never tried MS Word 8-) It does a very nice job, and allows for sideways printing, as well as imbedded graphics from paint programs, and other art type programs (even 3D art from Imagine, TrueSpace, Caligari, and LightWave). Clip art is, as always, acceptable. KE:I used a single thin bead of "Tacky Glue" around the edge of the label to affix them to the KE:bottles. This allows easy removal by running under hot water for a few seconds. For non-KE:returnable gifts, more glue would be OK, but not necessary. "Glue sticks" also work well. True enough, but the Avery #6464 labels use a really excellant adhesive that won't come off unless you want it to. Besides being the right size for beer bottles, they hold up well without smearing/smudging, and come off without tearing, or leaving a sticky residue. TTYL, God Bless! Dr. Michel J. Brown, D.C. {Portland, OR} homemade at spiritone.com http://www.spiritone.com/~homemade/index.html "Big Man don't drink no stinking light beer!" "Big Man drink beer what got BIG TASTE!" Big Man Brewing (R) 1996 Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 13:56:24 -0800 From: Mark Riley <mriley at netcom.com> Subject: Trademarks I wrote: >P.S. (USA only) Don't you actually have to *sell* something across >state lines in order to trademark it? To which Jack S. replied: >No. In fact you don't even need to register it until or unless you >wish to sue someone for violation as long as you can prove prior use. >In actual practice, a suite would be less complicated if it were >formally registered but it is no necessary at all. > >The encircled "R" indicates that the trade mark has actually been >registered and the TM is a warning of a sort of common law claim >that it will be defended if challenged. Both have equal weight in >the courts. The Nolo Press website has some detailed information on trademarks: http://www.nolo.com/ChunkPCT/PCT.index.html#4 I did a little digging there and in a couple books I have. Apparently you *do* need to put the trademark in use "in commerce that Congress may regulate" if you are filing for a federal registration of trademark (i.e. selling said product across state or national boundaries). Also, in reviewing the material at the Nolo website, it seems it is rather inappropriate to use the (R) unless and until the trademark is actually registered. Cheers, Mark Riley Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 16:55:44 -0600 (CST) From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com> Subject: Dead Danstar/Coors clone/souring beer with lactic acid Steve writes: >Could dropping the dry Danstar yeast into plain water have done >something bad to the yeast, e.g., like rupturing the cell walls? Seems >unlikely to me. More likely, in my view, is that the yeast was not >good. Plain water is what dry yeast *prefers* for rehydration. Rehydrating in wort is bad for the yeast and can seriously increase lag time. Sounds like the yeast was indeed bad... was it refrigerated at the store? I've heard of store owners saying that dry yeast *must not* be refrigerated. This is *absolutely* wrong. Rehydration temperature is also a factor... you don't want to use cool rehydration water... you want 90 to 110F. See http://www.lallemand.com for more info. *** Jeff writes: >According to George Fix and Michael Jackson (I think), Coors contract grows >and malts its own Moravian II strain of two row barley, which is somewhat >closer to continental than typical US two row. Perhaps you could use half >US and half German. I'm pretty sure that they do not use corn as you >suggest, only rice. I'd guess maybe 25-30%. I thought it was Morivian III. My understanding is that Coors uses corn, not rice, and the percentge is closer to 40%. *** Jim writes: >Mike Rose recently quoted a stout recipe that called for 40cc of 88% lactic >acid at bottling. > > Dave Burley wrote in that this would be undrinkable and suggested 2 to 4cc >as more reasonable for a 5 gal batch. I think that it really depends a lot on your water. It seems to me that high-carbonate/bicarbonate waters would require you to use more acid to get a similar sourness than if you had very low-alkalinity. > The moral of the story is to ALWAYS add acid slowly , stir well, measure pH >as you go and have a target pH in mind to stop at. The target pH can be >gotten from any of the many 'style' books. >A pH of 4 would probably be a good target number for stouts. Pg 37 in >Lewis's 'Stout' gives the pH of Guinness Extra Stout as 3.99. The pH of >other stouts mentioned in that book range from 3.6 to 4.5. This is fantastic advice. You can also use your palate, but clear it often with water and bread, and have the target beer handy for comparison. Al. Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL korz at xnet.com My new website (still under construction, but up-and-running): http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/ Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 19:11:59 EST From: The THP <TheTHP at aol.com> Subject: Morgan's Liquid Malt Extract finishing 1.020 Greetings Beerlings, I, though being an all-grainrt, and like many thousands of you out there got a Beer Kit for Christmas. I had a spare evening before new years and went ahead and made the beer. The it was Morgan's an Australian maltster. I got a 3.3 lb can of dark liquid malt extract and a 2.2 kg can of Dark Crystal liquid malt extract, as well as 1 lb Laglander Dark Dry Malt extract. Hops included were 1 oz. EKGoldings pellets (A=5.9%)which I supplemented with 1 oz more EKG plugs (A=4.5%)I had. I used the seasonally not so soft water from the local brew pub--its free and doesnt have any clorine. Full volume boil, 90 min with 60 and 30 min hop additions. Chilled to 70F. Airated with pure O2 (2 20 sec blasts 5 min apart) and pitched half of the just washed (no acid) yeast slug from my previous 5 gal batch of Stout (Wyeast Irish). Caried to the basement to my fermentation corner (64F), put a tee shirt on it, and had a beer. So far, so good. 6 hrs and there were bubbles just forming around the edge of the carboy. A week later it was at 1.020. Since Im used to my ales being done at this point, I decided maybee it was too cold, So I took it upstairs to the coat closet (70F) for a week. Still at 1.020. 2 weeks still at 1.020 My question is why? I know laglanders has a high percentage of unfermentable sugar, Does anyone outhere have any experience with Morgans. Especially those of you downunder? This is the first year I've seen there product on the market. Next Question--What can I do about it now? Its been 3 weeks in the primary and its time to rack or keg. Other question is What is it? Black as night and no roast character at all.??? Phil Wilcox Poison Frog Home Brewery Sec/Tres. Prison City Brewers Editor--The Sentencing Guide (our newsletter) Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 21:14:20 -0500 From: brewmaker1 at juno.com (Jeffrey C Lawrence) Subject: Don Watts Lemon Beer Good evening, Sometime last spring or thereabouts, a gent named Don Watts of Goose Creek, S.C. posted this recipe to the newsgroup rec.crafts.brewing. I would like to contact him for some further information. Here is the extract recipe for the beer 3.3 lbs Light malt extract 2 lbs M&F extra lite dme 1 oz cluster pellets (bittering) 2 tsp irish moss 2 packs ale yeast 3/4 cup priming sugar 1 fresh lemon heat 1 1/2 gal water and remove from heat, add liquid and dry malt stir well. Bring to boil and slow boil for 35 min, add irish moss and hops and continue slow boil for 15 min. cool and add to fermenter for 5 gal. when active fermentation stops, chop the peel of the lemon very fine and add to secondary, rack wort in to sec. bottle in 6 days after sec. If anyone knows Don, would you pass this message on to him? I made the beer in the early summer and everyone ranted and raved over how great it was. Thanks in advance, Jeff Brewmaker1 at Juno.com Woodstock, GA Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 98 18:53:02 -0800 From: brian_dixon at om.cv.hp.com Subject: Re: Phosphoric-Lactic (was RO/Phosphoric-Lactic/pH) >Phosphoric does pull calcium - this is not a rumor - and I suppose >you >could argue that this is a reason to prefer lactic but not very >convincingly. We need calcium mostly so that phosphates from malt can >pull >it and thus lower mash pH. This takes place at the pH of the strike >water >and, as much less precipitation will occur at the lower pH of kettle >wort >and fermenting beer, there should be plently left for other duties >provided >that the mash-in precipitation didn't drop it all out. At pH 5, for >example, 10 mg/L calcium is in equilibrium with approximately 70 >mMol/L >total phosphate. Need calcium mostly so that phosphates from malt can pull it and thus lower mash pH? I'd say "not mostly, but maybe 50:50". For those of us that have experienced poor fermentations due to our soft water (we think anyway) that is very low in calcium, I'd say the other half of the calcium equation is that it is needed by yeast for proper metabolism. Even for mashes that don't require pH adjustment, I'll either toss in a tiny bit (< 1/4 tsp) calcium chloride, or approximately 1/4 tsp each of calcium sulphate and carbonate. I'm not sure if yeast nutrients or yeast energizer contains calcium or not ... I've just been research-lazy and have simply been tossing in a bit of the salts to make sure the calcium is at least 50 ppm or so. BTW, the calcium in our water is naturally around 8 ppm during the winter...when I brew! >The question I always ask is "Do you really need to acidify the >sparge >water?". If the sparge water is of low alkalinity (regardless of its >pH) it >will have a hard time competing with the buffering capacity of the >mash/wort and pH will rise slowly. If you've decoction mashed you've >already extracted tannins (yes, yes, I know the pH is lower but >tannins >still get extracted - getting them to complex and drop out is one of >the >reasons for lagering in traditional brewing) and you're not as >sensitive to >additional extraction at sparge. Well, it might be argued that you don't need to acidify sparge water ... I didn't for years and all was well with my soul. But then I made an oatmeal stout that had a huge amount of oatmeal in it (25% of the total extract). Because I'd never used that much before, I decided to do everything I could to prevent a sticky or stuck sparge. Rice hulls not being available, I purchased a couple of pounds of oat hulls. Oat hulls contain oils and tannins that could reach excessive levels if you are not careful. Careful? Yes, wash those hulls in a large coarse grain bag over and over until the water runs clean, then ACIDIFY your sparge water (to around 5.6-5.7) to minimize tannin extraction from your unusually high husk content in the mash. As far as I can tell, this procedure worked wonderfully, and the lauter ran better than my normal batches. Running better, BTW, is a good thing. In other words, if the sparge liquour can flow through the mash more easily than through the false bottom, then the grain will not compress and cause a sticky or stuck mash (lauter, really). Just my 2-bits worth on another reason why some may want to acidify their sparge water! Happy brewin'! Brian Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 23:07:36 -0500 From: "Eric Fouch" <fouches at iserv.net> Subject: War and Peace HBD- Not really, but this is a long one....... First, I have a question about an "Old Ale" that is two weeks old in the bottle. Particulars: 5# Munich, 5# Pale Ale, 1# raw wheat, 1# Tapioca starch, .75# wheat malt, .25# Chocolate malt I did a cereal mash on the wheat malt, tapioca and 2# pale ale malt 40-50-60C-boil, then combined it with mash two (which was at 151 F) and mashed at 155 F for about an hour (sorry 'bout switching units- I'm a cosmopolitan kinda guy). Anyway, I fermented with a German Alt yeast at around 62 F for two weeks or so, racking to secondary after 7 days. Two weeks after bottling, it has very strong black licorice (anise?) notes. It's too early to wonder if MBIR, but it's the first time in two years of brewing all grain that I have found this flavor. Anybody else find it? How long did it persist? On to the mashing thread. All this talk about mixmashing, RIMS, RSMS, and mashmixing got me reminiscing. 'Memeber back a few years here in the HBD somebody (from Down Under, I think) wrote about a mashing system using a central "lift pipe", a lot like an old style coffee percolator, with a small hobby motor pumping the mash liquid up the pipe and onto the top of the grain bed? I was surprised nobody has brought it back up yet, so I built one. I mounted it in my old 7 gallon plastic fermenter with a Zap-Pap bucket bottom and CPVC lift pipe coming up the center. I ran a proof of concept 'speriment tonite and the thing worked quite well on hot water. I just need to rewire my immersion heating coil. Anyway, I have a question about flow rates: The water seemed to be coming out the top pretty fast, and I doubt the grain bed could keep up with it. How fast do you rimmers (I mean RIMS'ers) run the flow? Any of you mates who posted originally about this setup still here, or are you on a Walkabout? I may have to put in a restrictor plate or modify the impeller, but how fast a flow should I be looking for? If it works (and it looks quite promising) I'll have RIMS type benefits for a mere $25 in pieces parts (I already had the immersion heater laying around). Any further comments on this type of setup vs. mixRIMSing or RIMmashing? About my cider- I dumped the must onto the yeastcake from the forementioned "Old Ale" and it has been very slow in the going. Then I thought "Hey, maybe the cider had preservatives!" I got it at a farmers market out of a 40 gallon drum. Didn't think to ask 'bout preservatives. Anyway, can I over power the perservatives by periodically pitching more yeast? It went from 1.085 to 1.065 in two weeks, and bubbles profusely when I shake it (not that, the fermenter), and generally shows postive pressure. Perhaps I should make another batch of documentedly unpreserved cider and dilute it out? Whaddaya think? Thanks Eric Fouch Bent Dick YoctoBrewery Kentwood, MI efouch at steelcase.com Even God cannot change the past. - Agathon (quoted by Aristotle, NE 6:2,1139)- As quoted by Loren Crow If He did, how would we know? "Remember back when...ummm...never mind." Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 00:01:58 -0500 From: Bowden Wise <wiseb at acm.org> Subject: Looking for Recipes for Black Beer Hello I have been sarching for recipes for a bavarian black beer. If anyone has ever had Saranac Black Forest, i would like to make something similar. So send me your fave' black beer recipes! Bowden wiseb at acm.org Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 98 00:04:51 PST From: "Rob Moline" <brewer at ames.net> Subject: The End Is Near!/Andy Walsh is God Greetings, And yes, we are duly chastised, for we have not given the level of service we promised.... But, after 9 hours of classes per day... and the best part of the day, having beers with the instructors, after school.....one really has very little time to deal with the Web....again, much to my dismay..... But, even if it takes me until I get back home to respond to all the 3 Questions you folks have submitted, I will get it done, and respond.... The first day I was here, being over-enthusiastic, and worrying about being late.....I arrived and waited in the ante-room at the doors of Siebel....EVENTUALLY, someone heard me reading my newspaper and let me in....and advised me to go to a certain door up the stairs, and to the left...... I walked into a bar-room......nice wooden chairs on both sides of long tables, and thought...."This is where they teach?....How Cool?"...but later learned they don't teach there....they have separate class rooms for this..... two of them, equipped with centralized controls for slides, video, audio, overhead, and ambient light..... But the bar room is apparently unique in the whole globe of brew schools....in that, and this is confirmed by a brew staff of instructors that have trained at Doemens, Weihenstephan, VLB, South African Breweries, UC Davis......look, these fellas and ladies have been everywhere...BUT, they all say ...there is no brewschool, where one leaves a class, and walks to the breakroom, some 20 feet away, and one can get a beer, and shoot the breeze, before rejoining your class again.......for the next lecture.... .........as one gazes around, the view includes,,, a couple of mounted Buck's heads, scores of Steins, a piano, a bar with multiple taps, and handles for product that revolves on a rapid basis, ( one of the instructors told me that when he took the Diploma Course in the sixties, his class went through 3.5 kegs per week!!!!!....and that was at school only!!)......there is an organ, hockey sticks hanging from overhead, glassware from the planet of beer on shelves, and backbars.........plaques from previous classes...commemorating donations of beer coolers to the Institute, or artwork, or MAJOR beer carvings from highly notable Beer Associations....baseball bats with beer promotions.......banners, pennants from Budvar, and God Knows, any brewery thats ever been a brewery........guitars, stuffed Kiwi's, dominos...the most elegant set I've ever seen,(from Corona, in an elegant box).....glassware, and Good Lord, the place has breweriana and neon that I would die for!!! And they DO hold classes here,........the Roundtable Discussions, where anything is up for grabs..... George here: The round tables here are great; one of my favorite parts of the experience. It will probably be a long while before I find myself in a room with 2 dozen brewers of varying experience discussing all matters of beer and brewing. It's like a super-hyper homebrew club meeting, or the HBD in real time! It is amazing how many of the topics we have discussed here at Siebel have been recently discussed on the HBD; bleach and other chlorinated alkalis, HSA, etc. You would think that the folks here were all readers... Oh, yeah, Dave: Rob asked an instructor outright if he had heard of Clinitest and if it was useful to brewers: he said, yes, although it has its limitations. Some of those were discussed here recently...don't ask about boiling your mash sample before an iodine test, though! I'm really loving my time here at Siebel. It's hard to believe I only have 1.5 weeks left. Oh yeah: Rob says, "It sucks. I only have two days left." I would say that most homebrewers with extra time and money would greatly benefit from course work here at Siebel. I especially think that the taste panel training should be a part of every aspiring brewer's training. Not only do I know how specific chemicals affect beer character, but i know my thresholds for many of them now! It's too cool! Well, I'll write more some other day. Have fun! Rob again: By the way, Andy Walsh won't let you know this because he prefers not to be seen as "big-noting" himself, not that he needs us to do this... As was recently reported in a major international brewing journal, a very low percentage of applicants to the IOB brewing exams passed muster and gained certification. Andy was amongst those who did pass! Discussing this last night with some of our instructors, Lyn Kruger (formerly of SAB) commented that he must be the only homebrewer in the history of the IOB that has ever attempted or passed the exam. She then asked her colleagues if they knew of any homebrewers achieving this. They did not. Perhaps Andy is the only amongst us to have achieved this distinction? George De Piro and Rob Moline Brewer At Large brewer at ames.net Ames, Iowa. "The More I Know About Beer, The More I Realize I Need To Know More About Beer!" Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 22:35:31 -0800 From: Alex Paredez <aparedez at sdcc14.ucsd.edu> Subject: Kegging Equipment, What would you call it? Hello all, I am working on putting together a kegging system. I have collected or bought everything except the co2 bottle and regulator. I have replaced the gaskets in the 3 kegs I have and was wondering what most people here prefer to use for sanitizing kegs? The reason I have not bought a bottle and regulator is that a friend of mine is getting them for free. What concerns me though is that they were used in an industrial application. He said they used them to charge a sprayer that was filled with experimental chemicals (fungicides, herbicides, etc.). The other problem is that he said while the regulator works fine, one of the gauges is bad. The regulator is supposed to be of very high quality since it was used in R&D where everything must be accurate and usually certified. I was wondering if the bad gauge can simply be replaced, and if there is any difference between industrial co2 and beverage co2 tanks (he said it has to be siphon filled whatever that means)? On of the guys at my local home brew shop (who has thus far only given me what I believe is good advice) said that he does not recommend using steel co2 bottles because he has noticed that some of them have a rusty odor in the gas? Well if my friends bottle and regulator fall through, I was wondering if anyone had an opinion on what I should buy since I don't want to wait any longer (I hate bottling)? Option 1 cheapest: $60 for a 10lb reconditioned steel cylinder from a gas company and a single gauge regulator for $46 Option 2 splurge: $80 for a new 5lb aluminum cylinder (it looks nicer) and $55 for a dual gauge regulator. Note: I am not an extremist I just didn't feel like mixing and matching a bunch of options but any opinion is appreciated. At any rate I am going to put the system together before the Super Bowl. A question for the experienced beer competitors! I brewed a most excellent beer and I want to enter it in a local competition but am uncertain to what category I should enter it in. It is the Americas Finest City Homebrew competition in San Diego they are judging all categories by the 1997 guidelines. My beer: 10.5# 2 row .5# Munich .5# 10L crystal .5# cara pils 1 0z Mt Hood Boil 1 Oz Sazz Flavor .5 Oz Sazz dry hop 50% of the water was ddH20 compliments of UCSD. WLP080- Pilsner Lager Yeast : Classic Pilsner strain from the premier Pilsner producer in the Czech Republic. Somewhat dry with a malty finish, this yeast is best suited for European Pilsner styles. Attenuation is 72-77% Flocculation is Medium to High. Optimum fermentation temperature is 50-55 degrees. Available Aug.-March. I had an OG of 1058 and the beer is a crystal clear golden color. Which pilsner category would be the best? I just drink beer indiscriminately so I am not confident in my ability to classify this other than saying it is the best I have made. Perhaps it was because I made it Halloween night :-{> . I originally wanted to call it a German Lager but the OG is higher than the guideline. Does it really matter? I bottled the beer Dec. 15 will the stuff hold out until March 7. I guess I will cross my fingers and hope I can slip the beer into some category. I honestly just want a judge to give me some feedback, so I am not certain if I really care about stringent guidelines. Thanks for reading my gibberish Alex Brewing Without style in San Diego. Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 15:09:10 -0800 From: Kyle Druey <druey at ibm.net> Subject: Predicting %AA using 60/70: Followup > From: Steve Alexander <steve-alexander at worldnet.att.net> >I am very appreciative of your 60C/70C time versus fermentability >result. The linear relationship is something that I have been implicitly >using without supporting data. Dave Burley is correct in noting that >there are a lot of reasons why the relationship can't be truly linear, >but the fact that you're getting excellent fit to a linear approximation >over a decent range of time gives us a basis for a simple first order >approximation. Yes, Dave Burley has motivated me to look for a better model for my mashing data using the 60/70 mash schedule. I have since added a few more data points and have developed a new model that is exponential: %AA = [A * (e^(B * t))] + C %AA = percent apparent attenutation of the finished beer t = time the mash is held at 140 F in minutes A = -0.247 B = -2.042 X 10^-2 C = 0.873 the equation is valid for t >= 0 through t <= 90 The constants were determined using the mashing data that I posted a while ago, and solved for in Excel using the solver tool. The mash data included a variety of different base malts, adjuncts, sugars, crystal malts, and yeast. The resulting equation has an R^2 of 0.99 with this data. I am able to use this equation with my mashing system to estimate the alcohol content of the beer and the apparent attenuation. The equation can be rearanged and solved for t to provide the time needed to rest at 140 F to produce a desired apparent attenuation: t (at 140 F in minutes) = [ln((%AA - C) / A)] / B I know this may look complicated to some but it is very simple to use. I also realize there are many complex factors involved in how the apparent attenuation is determined. But for homebrewers we need rules of thumb and must try to make things as simple as possible. Steve, thanks for answering my off the wall RIMS questions. Kyle Druey Bakersfield, CA Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 08:46:05 -0500 From: MacRae Kevin J <kmacrae at UF2269P01.PeachtreeCityGA.NCR.COM> Subject: Unfinished Ale batch I brewed 12 gallons of an all grain Stout December 20, 1997. The OG was 1.072. I split the batch into two 6 gal carboys. In one I added a starter of WY Irish Ale Yeast, about 1 quart. To the other, the yeast from the secondary of a lager batch WY 2206. Both fermented in the same room with an ambient temp of 64-67F. The lager started violently, active within 6 hours. The ale started more slowly, active in 24 hours. The lager 2206 finished out in 3 days to 1.012. The Ale is still bubbling, almost one month later, about every 4 or 5 seconds, and has only dropped to 1.032. (It tastes good, but sweet). Without raising the temperature what is the best way to finish out the Ale? I was thinking of: 1. adding additional ale yeast, Edme dry (because I have it on hand). 2. adding some of the lager batch to the ale, hopefully transferring enough yeast to finish out the job. 3. Adding fresh lager yeast, from a starter. After adding the yeast, I believe I should not aerate. Will the new yeast take off properly? Kevin MacRae reply to: Kevin.macRae at PeachtreeCityGA.NCR.COM Just south of the Atlanta airport. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 09:32:26 -0500 From: David Kerr <dkerr at semc.org> Subject: pwit Charles L. Ehlers wrote: "What makes Hoegarden and Celis so dad-gum superior to Blue Moon Belgian White?...so, for those who say "pwit" is the last sound heard before Blue Moon hits the ground..." I'm the one to blame for the "pWit" joke, and intended it as only a joke (it was in response to a post asking what the "p" in pLambic stood for, was there such a thing as a pWit, etc). I had tried the Blue Moon BWA a couple of years back and thought that it was drinkable, had a nice orange/coriander nose, but was less sharp than the Celis version that I had had. I agree with Charles that the vicious slamming of the Blue Moon was overdone - perhaps due to the mega-brewer affilation? Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 10:44:54 +0000 From: "John Robinson" <robinson at novalistech.com> Subject: alcoholism I too have been trying to stay away from this topic, but it is something I'm interested in. I haven't decided if I agree with the 'disease' theory. I see it as more of a symptom of a deeper problem, not a disease in and of itself. I find the popular conception of what constitutes an alcoholic quite fascinating. I heard a 'public service announcement' on the radio the other day that greatly disturbed me. The message was 'work and alcohol don't mix' which I would agree with if it was amended to 'work and alcohol abuse don't mix' but it very clearly was against the whole idea of someone having even one drink with lunch during a work day. Everyone's circumstances are different. I weigh in at 225 lbs. One 20 oz pint doesn't produce any noticable effect on me with food, and the effect of two with a meal disapates within about an hour. Having one or two drinks at lunch from time to time doesn't strike me as a problem. Some people here in Nova Scotia (and I'm sure elsewhere) seem to feel that if you drink every day, you must be an alcoholic. These same people often feel that it is quite acceptable to go out on Friday night and get so drunk you can't get home by yourself. In my opinion, regular binge drinking is abuse of alcohol, every bit as much as daily overindulgence. Being a quantitative soul I was quite distressed when I tried to pin down a definition of alcoholism. Basically, what I got was that if you or someone close to you thinks you have a drinking problem, you have a drinking problem. I fundamentally disagree with this. The *only* hard information I was able to find came from the back of Fred Eckhardt's Brewing In Styles. His guidelines as to what constitutes abuse are six ounces of ethanol (not beer, wine or spirits, pure ethanol) daily for 'an extended period of time'. This is a definition I can live with. It is at least partially quantified, and doesn't depend on the half baked emotional opinions of people around you. He provides some references. Six ounces of ethanol is a lot. If you're drinking 5% beer, that's six 20 ounce pints of beer per day, every day, for an extended period of time. It is also 15 ounces of 40% hard liquor a day, every day, for an extended period of time. Even this definition is one that I can quibble with (I can quibble with just about anything) because it doesn't say anything about how the alcohol is consumed. I strongly suspect, but have no evidence to support it, that the effect alcohol has on one's body depends on not only how much is consumed, but how much is consumed at once. For example, if I have 2 pints for breakfast, 2 pints for lunch, and 2 pints for supper, I've had six pints of beer, but this is (I think) different than if I go out after supper and have six pints. This definition also doesn't say anything about the weight of the individual, and I suspect that the imact on the body and organs is more a function blood alcohol concentration than it is daily totals. The bottom line in my opinion is that we really don't know enough about alcohol and its effect on the body to quantitatively define abuse in the general case. This will be the last I will post on this subject here, but I welcome civilized private correspondance on the subject. - --- John Robinson "When I am working on a problem I never think about beauty. Software Developer I only think about how to solve the problem. But when I NovaLIS Technologies have finished, if the solution is not beautiful, I know robinson at novalis.ca it is wrong." - Buckminster Fuller (1895-1983) Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 01/19/98, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96