---

	FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
		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


Contents:
  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

---