HOMEBREW Digest #2729 Tue 02 June 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

  Open fermentation my (and Eric Warners) opinions... (Jon Bovard)
  Outdoor cookers (Andrew Quinzani)
  "The Practical Brewer" (dcstanza)
  Decoction / Lagering (Matthew Arnold)
  Tasting survey; mash equipment; Big 10 pitching; sweet hops; two-day risks (Samuel Mize)
  natural gas cooker conversion/standard beer evaluations (Stephen Ross)
  Schwartzbier (Chas Peterson)
  FWH, steeping, and estimating flavor contributions (Chas Peterson)
  Rubarb beer (Chas Peterson)
  Re:  Twist offs... (Mark T A Nesdoly)
  Re: NHC California site (Amahl Turczyn)
  Cutting Time Out of the Brew Session ("Kaczorowski, Scott")
  BUZZ Boneyard Brew-Off; June 13; Champaign Illinois ("Joel Plutchak")
  AHA NHC (Al Korzonas)
  Pectic Enyzme - Works Great! (Charley Burns)
  Re: Mash/Sparge One Day etc. (irajay)
  Re: LaChouffe Yeast Clone ? (nancy george)
  AHA books- Fuller's Summer Ale- Sour Mash (AlannnnT)

BUZZ's Buzz-Off competition is June 27-28. Information is available at www.voicenet.com/~rpmattie/buzzoff or via R. Mattie at rpmattie at voicenet.com. 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 hbd.org 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: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 17:54:59 +1000 (EST) From: Jon Bovard <j.bovard at student.qut.edu.au> Subject: Open fermentation my (and Eric Warners) opinions... Well heres my 2 cents... There must be a lot of good reasons why English brewers continue to use open fermentation systems..besides making skimming easier. I might add its not always the traditionalists, new breweries opening in England often tend towards open fermentations. Eric Warner talks about it in "German wheat beer". He points out that open fermented beers exhibited higher amounts of Esters than closed fermented beers. He continues to mention that open fermented yeasts stay healthier, whilst closed fermented, they must be recultured after 10 re-pitchings.. Albeit large volumes produce more protective gasses than 1 man's 20litre plastic brewing bucket... but if its good enough for England and good enough for a whenstephan graduate to lend their support to,..its probably good enough for me. Jon, Brewing open fermented ales in Brisbane Australia Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 08:54:26 -0400 From: Andrew Quinzani <quinzani at mediaone.net> Subject: Outdoor cookers > Subject: Natural Gas Fired Outdoor Cookers > > This last winter I moved into a new house with a natural gas stub on the > back patio for BBQ, etc. > Does anyone have any experience with this type of setup? I have the propane outdoor cooker and also have an outside hookup for the natrual gas. The reason I went to propane was well researched road and I will share with you what I learned.... It all boiled down to (no pun intended) the amount of time it would take to bring to boil the water, wort, etc. I was informed that bottled gas has almost twice the BTU's comming out of the burner as opposed to the conversion to natrual gas. King Cooker told me this and they would have made more money by selling me the extra kit to convert. They said that NG is low pressure while propane is high, hence the regulator but it is still higher (whats comming out of the burner) than NG. So if you want to not have to worry about running out of gas and don't mind waiting for the water to boil and the tap is in a convenant location, use the natrual gas. It WILL boil one way or another, I opted for the speed. Happy brewing! - -- "Q" Brew Brewery...Home of Hairy Chest Ale - ------------------------------------------------------------ quinzani at mediaone.net Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 11:05:26 -0500 From: dcstanza at OCC.PASEN.GOV Subject: "The Practical Brewer" Coming out of lurk mode for a quick observation......... Due to the recent discussion on "The Practical Brewer", I went to the MBAA website (thanks to Tidmarsh Major for pointing this out) for a look at the book. I am still just glancing over it and will spend a little more time over the following weeks (or months, or years!) reading it a little further. It does look interesting. Just thought I'd pass this on - the combined files take up approximately 146MB! Fortunately, the MBAA has them (wisely) broken into seperate files per chapter - but they're still rather large. I've downloaded them all and I 'm going to have them transferred to a CD-ROM for easier use and portability (146MB is a decent chunk of hard-drive real estate!). Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 15:17:01 GMT From: marnold at netnet.net (Matthew Arnold) Subject: Decoction / Lagering To prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that I have lost my mind, I am considering trying a decoction mash. These insane thoughts arose as I contemplated my second-place (no, wait, make that _fifth_ place) Dunkel, while reading the University of Utah's own (insert smiley face here) Spencer Thomas' article in the Jab/Feb BT. In my Dunkel, I only used .5# of 150L Crystal, but that flavor (combined with 4 oz of Chocolate) overwhelmed the beer, IMO. Decoction would darken the beer without having to use so much dark malt and would make it maltier. A perfect fit, or so it would seem. I planned on trying a single Decoction, employing a rest in the 131-135F range and using a decoction to bring it up to 156-158F. My concerns are these: 1) How long do you decoctors (is that a word?) rest the decoction at saccrification temperature before boiling? Most things I've read say "a short time." 2) Using the single decoction mentioned above, and assuming that I rest the decoction at sacc. temps for 15 mins and then boil for 15 mins, that means that the main mash will be at 135ish for 45 minutes (figuring a 15 minute initial rest). Isn't this way too long? Or will it be OK, since ~40% of the grain bill will be decocted anyway and thus not affected by the extended protein rest? 3) Could I improve color and maltiness sufficiently enough by just draining and boiling the first runnings and using those to bring the mash up to mash-out temperatures (and not doing a grain decoction at all)? I've read what I could find on the 'Net and the information in New Brewing Lager Beer (it's amazing what you can get from the local library!). Spencer's BT article is really what prompted all this insanity. I'm of 100% German stock so I love a good Dunkel, Doppelbock, Pils, etc. Methinks decoction is the best way to get those great malty flavors (especially in the darker styles). FWIW, I would propose the following malt bill: 9# Weyermann Dark Munich (my local hb shop can get it after all!) .5# Weyermann Melanoidin .5# Wheat malt I have a fridge so I could do a real lager. Any suggestions for a yeast for a Dunkel? Wyeast Munich? Wyeast Bavarian (I hear this one can be flaky)? White Labs German Lager? I've never done a lager before, so should I do the starter in the fridge or my 68F basement? Thanks for any help, Matt - ----- Webmaster, Green Bay Rackers Homebrewers' Club http://www.rackers.org info at rackers.org Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 10:19:15 -0500 (CDT) From: Samuel Mize <smize at prime.imagin.net> Subject: Tasting survey; mash equipment; Big 10 pitching; sweet hops; two-day risks Greetings to all, and especially to: > From: Robert Parker <parker at parker.eng.ohio-state.edu> > Subject: create a survey of tasting notes > > I'm looking to the hbd for help to improve my neophyte ability to evaluate > beer. Good decision, there's a lot of good info here. However: >I'd like to gather tasting notes on a relatively brief (5-10) list > of beers from those among you that excel in beer evaluation. Your problem here is that shipping can have a tremendous impact on flavors. For example, I'm told that Corona is a good example of its style at the brewery, but by the time it hits the USA it's gotten so light-skunked that places stick lime wedges in the bottle necks when they serve them. Heat and time take a big toll too. And, these erratic flaws are some of the flavors that you want to learn to identify, for judging. However, you may be able to get a suggestive list up anyway. I look forward to seeing whatever results you can get from the skillful folks here. - - - - - - - - - - > From: Mike Isaacs <misaacs at bigfoot.com> > Subject: Mashing Equipment > I have a thought or two and hope it starts a discussion for you. > > A flat false bottom is superior to a dome shaped false bottom in a mash tun > and the flat false bottom is superior to copper tubes with slits. Maybe so, if you're trying to get Ultimate Efficiency. On the other hand, I just did my first all-grain batch with an EvenEasierMasher(~TM) -- a choreboy at the tun's outlet. I didn't get grain one in the outflow. >From what I've read, I doubt that the difference between various manifolds and false bottom and EasyMasher(TM) designs is measurable with a homebrewing rig, at least at the five-gallon size. Maybe a point or two. If you enjoy making a manifold or whatever, that's cool. - - - - - - - - - - > From: "Jay Spies" <spiesjl at mda.state.md.us> > Subject: Belated Big 10 / Wedding brew > First, the recent thread about yeast aeration / over and underpitched / > sterol / fatty acid use has left me somewhat woozy. Me too. My best synthesis of the data is that we want the yeast to reproduce a few times at the start, no matter how heavily we pitch. But we don't want them to keep reproducing throughout the fermentation. I don't fully get it. However, the conventional wisdom for barley wines seems to be: 1. Pitch a huge amount of yeast (on homebrew-scale terms) -- the yeast cake from another batch is a good idea. 2. Aerate the living whatsis out of it when you do so. Use an oxygen stone if you've got one. The next most effective method seems to be pouring between two food-grade 5-gallon pails. I recommend this as fast, easy and effective, even if you will then funnel it into a carboy. Least suggested: put wort into a 5-gallon pail, submerge your head, blow bubbles. - - - - - - - - - - > From: marnold at netnet.net (Matthew Arnold) > Subject: Re: Bitter/Sweet Help Needed > To my taste buds, copious amounts of flavor hops add a sweet, almost sugary > taste to the beer. ... > Am I the only one who thinks this? Nope, it's mentioned in some write-ups on specific hops. I find that East Kent Goldings (probably Goldings in general) can give a heavy, floral sweetness if used heavily. I'm sure there are others. - - - - - - - - - - > From: irajay at ix.netcom.com > Subject: Re: Mash/Sparge One Day > ... I have often > thought about the benefits of breaking up the brewing process, but as > you, the only things I have heard have been reasons why it is > dangerous to do so. It is good to hear that someone has actually > done it without all those dire predictions coming true. Someone has done almost anything you can think of while brewing, and still gotten a decent batch. One person claimed that his cat threw a hairball into a batch, and it came out OK. Another spit into a batch, just to see what would happen. (Nothing, that time.) On the other hand, Al K gets an off flavor if he doesn't filter his aeration air in the summer months. Reliably. Much depends on your equipment, procedures, materials and recipes. Any time someone says "X risks Y" they are saying that a problem MIGHT happen. Usually it's a question of increased risk -- your chance of a problem for that batch may go from 0.2% to 5.0%. With a five percent risk per batch, you have a 50/50 chance of no problems in 13 batches. (If they say "X causes Y" you should usually read "X risks Y.") You should understand about brewing risks: 1. Many of the risks discussed are low-probability. 2. Many of us consider the loss of a batch to be a big pain, so we seek to reduce even these small risks. 3. YM, as always, MV. Your next comment is the perfect example: > I have recently been reading copy from people who are > convinced that any water added to wort has to be sterilized or the > batch will infect. Some people have hideous trouble with water-borne infections. Others, like me, can cheerfully use tap water (I use a faucet-end charcoal filter to reduce chlorine, since we use chloramines where I live.) The point is, you should never assume that a method will be a problem for you just because there's a risk associated with it, NOR should you assume that it will be trouble-free for you just because other people do it. Your local microflora may cause you problems; or, they may bless you with the best beer you've ever made, and you'll never buy yeast again. (The likeliest result is neither.) Best, Sam Mize - -- Samuel Mize -- smize at imagin.net (home email) -- Team Ada Fight Spam - see http://www.cauce.org/ Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 09:49:17 -0600 (CST) From: Stephen Ross <ross at lights.com> Subject: natural gas cooker conversion/standard beer evaluations COMMERCIAL BEER PROFILES? Rob Parker wrote asking for standard commercial beer evaluation comments and profiles. Earlier someone also asked for a list of known of flavours in commercial beers. I'd like to add my plea. It would be very useful, as Rob has noted, to have standardized commercial brews with consistent flavour profiles for palate training. The FlavorActive kits are very expensive. So far, what I have gleaned is: Bud for acetaldehyde, Rolling Rock for DMS, Red Hook for diacetyl. Any others? Would some BJCP judges care to share comments sheets from commercial mega brews? PROPANE BURNER -> NATURAL GAS I also have a stand & burner type propane cooker. It would be great to run it off the patio's natural gas stub. Is this a cost efefctive and/or wise thing to do? The cooker is made by Morrone. TIA, Stephen Ross in Saskatoon SK. Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 11:55:22 -0400 From: Chas Peterson <chasp at digex.net> Subject: Schwartzbier Tidmarsh - Coupla suggestions on you proposed grain bill: - Way too much chocolate malt -- go with 1/8# or less. If you can get a hold of it, try the "light chocolate" (beeston malt, I think) that has 220 Lovibond (hint: the weighted average lovibond of your grain bill should be 35-45) - Go with at least 50% Munich malt in the mash -- there really is no way around this - Try some other darkening malts. I like D/C Caramunich and special B myself -- aromatic is nice too - Stay with a bavarian lager strain and decoct if you can - try a mild amount of bitterness (22-24 IBUs) and a slightly heaver amount of flavor hop (about 1 to 1.5oz per 5 gal) - use the softest water you can find Course, this is for my tastes. YMMV. Brewing Techniques had a great article on dunkles and schwartzbiers in 1995 -- check it out if you can! Good luck, Chas Peterson - ------------------------------------ Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 12:15:13 -0400 From: Chas Peterson <chasp at digex.net> Subject: FWH, steeping, and estimating flavor contributions HBDers - Every spring about this time I try to do a little post mortem on my fall/winter brewing efforts. This year, it was clear that nearly every beer overshot the hop flavor component. While not scientific, my brewing logs do reveal that: - First Wort Hopping (FWH) contributes additional flavor, but not much aroma to the finished beer - Steeping hops post boil also contributes substantial flavor characteristics to the beer (maybe even more flavor than aroma after fermentation) My best guess is that I need to count the steep and FWH hops at a rate of about 50-60% toward the total flavor additions. This is only interesting since I think most brewing texts generally advise that FWH and steep hops only add aroma components. For the future, I will only try to get aroma through dry hopping, and/or hop tea, and count these two types of additions toward bitterness/flavor for FWH and flavor for steep (actually, I think i will skip the steep altogether). Again, these results are NOT based on any scientific experiments -- only the brewing logs and interpretation of an experienced, albeit novice, homebrewer. I wanted to share this with the collective to see if others approach FWH or steeping with an eye toward hop flavor, or if I simply missed something in the brewing texts I've *read*. Another outcome of my little analytical review is that the 135 rest does matter -- for clarity anyway. I have long since dropped the 122 rest from my mash schedule in favor of a 135 rest -- and the head retention of my beers as improved greatly. But I recently brewed two old stand-bys as a single infusion rather than a step with a 135 rest. They turned out fine - -- except that they do have a permanent chill haze. Lagering for several weeks hasn't made a dent in the haze. Previous versions with the 135 rest cleared after two weeks at 45F+PPV. I will go back to this 135 rest in the future. I'm sure (hoping actually) that some will take objection to some of these conclusions. I would like to hear from those with similar/different experiences. Chas Peterson Laytonsville, Md - ------------------------------------ Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 12:21:14 -0400 From: Chas Peterson <chasp at digex.net> Subject: Rubarb beer HBDers - I wanted to follow up to a post Tom Bergman had made on the Rubarb beer we made for the AHA 1997 homebrew invitational "25 keg" *competition*. Tom and I did this on a whim, not sure how it would turn out at all. Before send the keg off to Cleveland, Tom CPed a few bottles. I pulled one out of the dark recesses of my basement this weekend and chilled. The result? Quite nice actually. Not sure if the beer tapped in Cleveland sucked, but with a year under its belt it really got a clean sourness that is most refreshing. Rubarb turns out very similar to raspberries. A strawberry-rubarb beer might be in the making for next fall or spring..... Chas Peterson Laytonsville, Md - ------------------------------------ Return to table of contents
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by mail.usask.ca From: Mark T A Nesdoly <mtn290 at mail.usask.ca> Subject: Re: Twist offs... Chris Storey asked about twist-off bottles in HBD #2727 I've used regular Canadian beer twist-off style bottles for my bottling exclusively with absolutely no problems. The only reason why I still don't use them is that I now keg my beer. You don't have to save the old twist off caps that came with the bottle; you can crimp on new caps (available at your local brew store). The brew stores around here sell two different kinds of caps: regular and twist-off. The only difference between the two is that the twist off caps are perhaps just a hair thinner than the regular caps so that they can crimp onto and mold into the threads more easily. I've used the regular caps on twist off bottles before: they require a little more elbow grease to apply, but they still work. I've heard horror stories about people trying to cap the twist off bottles with the wing-style cappers--I've always used a bench-style capper and have had absolutely no problems with it. The only problem that you *might* have is that sometimes the threads on the bottle will crack/break when you open a beer. That happened on maybe 12 bottles total out of all the batches that I bottled (about 30 batches). When that happened, I just poured out the beer (because I really didn't want to drink glass shards). If you have trouble finding a local brew store that carries the twist off caps, check out www.wineart.com -- they're a Canadian brew store chain and they carry the twist offs. No affiliation, of course. - -- Mark Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 10:46:43 -0600 From: Amahl Turczyn <amahl at aob.org> Subject: Re: NHC California site I would just like to congratulate the Mountain Mashers Homebrew Club for a job well done at the NHC first round site in Grass Valley, California. I had heard a few concerns about their ability to handle the site because of their relatively small size and lack of experience, but organizer Michael Williams and everyone else there pulled off the competition like they'd been doing it for years. We received and judged 400 entries at that site. Also a big thanks to Russ Wigglesworth and all the other judges who took the time to come and support the event. Amahl Turczyn AHA Return to table of contents
Date: 1 Jun 1998 10:28:41 U From: "Kaczorowski, Scott" <kaczorowski#m#_scott at apt.mdc.com> Subject: Cutting Time Out of the Brew Session Kyle "Jazz in 6" Druey says: > 4) Warpspeed Sparge. I open up my 1/2" ball valve all the way > and let the mash tun drain as fast as possible. > ... > I can sparge this way in 10'-15', cutting about 40'-50' out of the > sparging process. I used to be a strong and vocal proponent of this method. I still agree with whoever said "Life is short, grain is cheap" but I think that this is one of those pesky system-dependant things and I found that there was little benefit from a hurried sparge on my 3 tier: > 5) Start the Boil while collecting the sweet wort. Kyle can bring his runoff to a boil much faster than I can. I use the 35K BTU Superbs, and in my system it makes little sense for me to collect 13.5 gallons of runoff in 20 minutes and then wait around for another 35-40 minutes for the boil to begin. So, since it occured to me that it doesn't matter one whit whether the sparge is proceding or not while I'm waiting for the boil to start, I now throttle the runoff back a little, and heat while collecting. I collect 13.5 gallons in about 45 minutes, and stay just ahead of the boil that way. At the end of the sparge, I'm only about 5 minutes away from boilage. Perhaps an argument for a bigger burner under the kettle... Regardless of your system type, heating the kettle concurrently with sparging is a good way to save time (unless yer one 'o them FWH'ers). > I think that RIMS gives me the > ability to sparge very quickly like this without significantly > impacting my extraction rates. I disagree. Efficiency on my manifold-equipped 3 tier went from 85% efficiency to ~92% (still figuring it out) when I switched from a 20 minute sparge to 45 minutes. > 6) Use as short a boil as possible. I now boil for 60' for all my I cut down on the mash time as well. Certainly, things are grist-dependant, but I almost never sacch rest for more than 45 minutes. (Since this statement always seems to get some folks all worked up, I'll add the disclaimer: This works only for ME in MY system. YOU should mash for many, many hours. ;-) > Anyone else please add your time saving ideas, maybe I can get > it down to less than 3 hours! A tremendous time-saver for me is to have help. REAL help, not I'll-drink-your-beer-and-occasionally-smell-the-boiling-wort- and-say-mmmm-that-smells-good! help. This means that cleanup is almost complete by the end of the boil and can save at least 30 minutes. You can also skip the mashout (though I don't) and save some time there, while giving up only a little efficiency. Also, if doing multiple rests, use boiling water infusions as much as possible rather than direct heat. Scott Kaczorowski Long Beach, CA kacz at deltanet.com http://users.deltanet.com/~kacz/3_tier/3_tier.htm Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 12:44:33 -0500 From: "Joel Plutchak" <joel at bolt.atmos.uiuc.edu> Subject: BUZZ Boneyard Brew-Off; June 13; Champaign Illinois Entries are now being accepted for the Fourth Annual Boneyard Brew-Off, organized by the Boneyard Union of Zymurgical Zealots. The entry deadline is June 10. Full details including on-line entry forms and judge sign-up can be found at: http://starfire.ne.uiuc.edu/buzz/contest4.html Judges can hand-carry entries in the day of show, but let us know before the June 10th deadline what you'll be bringing. Otherwise, ship entries to: Piccadilly Beverage Shop ATTN: Boneyard Brew-Off 505 S. Neil Street Champaign, IL 61820 2 bottles per entry; 10-16 oz. unmarked bottles; $6 first entry, $5 each thereafter; *** BJCP categories ***, plus special High-Gravity category. Make checks payable to B.U.Z.Z. Use AHA or BJCP entry forms and bottle ID forms if you can't grab our custom forms off the web. PLEASE NOTE: High-Gravity Brew-Off entries only require a single bottle. - -- Joel Plutchak President, Boneyard Union of Zymurgical Zealots Champaign, Illinois Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 13:05:14 -0500 (CDT) From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com> Subject: AHA NHC Scott-- When you slam the NHC, you are actually slamming Roger Deschner, Brad Reeg, Tom Fitzpatrick and then in previous years (Tim Norris, Dennis Davison... many many others)... these are the people who are doing the best they can with the judges and stewards who show up at the NHC. They send out invites to all Midwestern judges months in advance and send reminders and make phone calls and really do just about the best anyone can expect them to. I've entered over 50 beers in the NHC over the last five years and I've never had one be in the wrong category. Some of the judging was bad, but there's no doubt that the beers were in the proper category. This year, I thought my Munchner Dunkel was one of my best beers... alas, it did not win. I also thought my Bamberger Rauchbier was one of my best and it did not win, but I tasted one last night and I really don't think it deserved to win... some odd off-flavour. I'll have to taste a bottle of that Dunkel... it may have an off flavour too. We just got done with the Chicago site judging this weekend and at least three times I though we had a beer that was in the wrong category. I also witnessed other judges who had beers suspected of being miscategorised (like that jet black American Pale Ale in Ed Bronson's flight). In every case, we called over the organiser and asked that he check the entry forms. He even checked to see if the same entrant had any other beers entered that may have been swapped (either by the entrant or the unpackers). In all four cases I know of, the error was clearly by the entrant. In any event, I'm sorry that your beers got into the wrong categories, but your experience was very different from mine and (in my opinion) unrepresentative of the AHA National Homebrew Competition, in general. Al. Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL korz at xnet.com http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/ Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 98 13:17 PDT From: cburns at egusd.k12.ca.us (Charley Burns) Subject: Pectic Enyzme - Works Great! A couple of weeks ago I posted a question about how to clear the pectin haze from my recently brewed Strawberry Blond. A number of you replied privately - get some pectic enzyme. Apparently it comes in both liquid and powdered form, the powdered being much more easily stored. I purchased a two ounce (by weight) bag for $0.85 (US). Really expensive huh? I mixed one ounce into about a half pint of the beer (mixed really well) and poured it back into the keg. I suspected that room temp would be more likely to hurry things along so I pulled the keg from the frige and stored it in the basement (~62F). After about 4 or 5 days (didn't pay that close attention) the beer cleared. In fact, it cleared to the point that now I see bits and pieces of strawberry pith floating around in it. The beer is now back in the fridge and still clear. My next step will be to put a little nylon cloth filter over the end of the dip tube(good idea Randy, thanks). If that doesn't clear it I've got a friend with a filter (last resort). Anyway, 1 oz by weight in 5 gallons of fruit beer with pectin haze does the trick for me. I don't know if it clears in faster than 5 days, didn't check it daily. Charley (no longer hazed and confused) in N. Cal Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 18:14:27 +0000 From: irajay at ix.netcom.com Subject: Re: Mash/Sparge One Day etc. Jack Schmidling writes about letting his wort sit until it cools, not cooling it with a wort chiller. This was in response to Randy Ricchi writing about yet another unorthodox method in brewing. As I thanked Randy, I now would like to thank Jack. I don't even own a wort chiller and have never artifically cooled my wort. And like Jack, no problemo. It gets me to thinking that what this list could use is a thread for debunking long held beliefs about brewing that have no basis in practice. I'm not suggesting we stop paying attention to sanitation, but I sure think a good area for debunking would be in the field of all that attention to sterilization. I have had any number of emergencies occur in brewing where I simply had to either break sanitation practice or throw out 5 gallons of beer. I have always opted for the former and I have yet to lose a batch to infection. I know it can happen and probably will sometime, but is it worth the obsessive-compulsive rituals we are all going through? Ira Plotinsky Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 22:21:44 -0400 From: nancy george <homsweet at voicenet.com> Subject: Re: LaChouffe Yeast Clone ? >From: "Frederick L. Pauly" <flp2m at avery.med.virginia.edu> >Subject: LaChouffe Yeast Clone ? >Does anyone know of a commercial yeast available to homebrewers >that is simialar to that used by the Belgium Brewery LaChouffe to >brew their Golden Ale? I'm trying to grow the yeast from the >bottle but am skeptical of the outcome. >thanks, >Rick Pauly Rick, I've had very good results using Wyeast #3942 (Belgian Wheat). It has a very fruity character and gives pretty comparable results. I believe La Chouffe pasteurizes before shipping. Perhaps taking the first draw off a keg could provide viable yeast? Cheers! George Nancy & George %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% /|||| HomeSweet Homebrew | | | Beer & Winemaking Supplies Since 1986 | | 2008 Sansom St. Phila PA 19103 USA | | 215-569-9469 215-569-4633 (fax) | | homsweet at voicenet.com | %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%/ ************************************ Return to table of contents
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 22:34:19 EDT From: AlannnnT at aol.com Subject: AHA books- Fuller's Summer Ale- Sour Mash Recent discussions about AHA style books found on sale for cheap cause me to post the following. Please do not be angry if this sounds like a commercial. The AHA [Storey publications] 'remaindered' these books. That's the equivalent of a publisher's yard sale. Note that the Principles of Brewing Science by George Fix is included in this list. Waldenbooks has some or all of them, depending on location, for about $4.00. My shop has all of them in ample stock for $5.95. Check with your local shop, they should be able to offer similar prices. Current sale books include the AHA style books, Belgian Ale, Pale Ale, Porter, Vienna, Lambic, Continental Pilsner, Scotch Ale, Wheat and the Principles of Brewing Science. [all the brewers who paid over $24 for PBS say 'ouch'] On a more important note, has anyone tasted Fuller's Summer Ale? [I think that's the complete name] Perhaps someone with some info can explain why this beer has the most overpowering butterscotch flavor ever encountered in a beer. The aroma and flavor are so strongly butterscotch that I thought it was intentional, and I reread the label to see if butterscotch flavor was a listed ingredient. Any ideas? On the sour mash thread; the Historical Companion To In House Brewing makes an interesting suggestion. To safely replicate the flavor of a sour mash, you can add some malt vinegar [to the mash]. It's easy to control the amount of sour flavor this way. If you find out you don't like sour mash flavor, you haven't wasted much effort. Best Brewing, Alan Talman Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 06/02/98, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96