HOMEBREW Digest #2789 Thu 06 August 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

  Help, Low Carbonation! ("Penn, John")
  Fast Ferments... ("Rolfe, Joe")
  sulfitesHomebrew Digest #2785 (August 02, 1998) (fwd) (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
  more sulfites... (ALAN KEITH MEEKER)
  Jethro Gump ("30hollywood")
  Brewery Finance 201(b) ("Gregory A. Lorton")
  Canning/Propane ("Rosenzweig,Steve")
  RE: holes in my fridge (LaBorde, Ronald)
  Wheat, White, Wit, What? (Paul Ward)
  Too-subtle humor; canning lids; carageenan (Samuel Mize)
  Problems w/ carbonation in bottled beer ("Victor Farren")
  lids, Pitching rates (Paul Niebergall)
  JS (Some Guy)
  RE: holes in my fridge (Steve Potter)
  attenuation/yeast starters (John Wilkinson)
  Re: CAP (Jeff Renner)
  History of stout (Doug Moyer)
  re: propane tanks (Kevin TenBrink)
  Mistake in last post (Jim Bentson)
  Oak in brewing (Al Korzonas)
  PAA and Bleach (Jon Macleod)
  Re: Women Brewers ("Miller, Monica")
  dried yeast pitching rates and viability (Dirk Server)
  RE: Lifting Carboys ("Frederick J. Wills")
  Weiss/fruit/head? (rsda)

There will be a Sunday Digest this week... 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: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 10:12:04 -0400 From: "Penn, John" <PennJE1 at SPACEMSG.JHUAPL.edu> Subject: Help, Low Carbonation! Well now its happened to me, a batch with very low carbonation. I brewed two 2-1/2 gallon batches of Barley Wine based on Rob Molines recipe and the Big Brew event. Both batches were nearly identical extract recipes using steeped 40L crystal malt, and M&F light extract and an OG of about 1.098 and an FG of 1.021 for a whopping 10% abv. Plenty of yeast was pitched and based on the attenuation it seems that I certainly pitched enough. The differences between the batches is that one was hopped to about 55-60 IBUs (per Rager) and used Wyeast 1728 Scottish Ale yeast, the other was hopped to 75-80 IBUs (per Rager) and used Nottingham dry yeast. I figured I'd just be patient when my early samples showed almost no pop or carbonation but now its been 6 wks. and the carbonation levels haven't changed. The batch with Nottingham seems to have a slight fizz sound when I open the bottle so I think its slightly more carbonated than the Wyeast 1728 batch. Both sat in the fermenters for 3 weeks so I don't think I waited too long to bottle. I always weigh my sugar as I found that using volume like 3/4 cup was a mere 3 oz in some cases. Settling of priming sugar was too inconsistent for my tastes so I weigh the amounts and use batch priming with a slight stirring in the bottling bucket to get even carbonation in the bottles. So, should I put a pinch of yeast (Nottingham) in each bottle and recap? What has worked for you other HBDers especially with such a high alcohol beer? TIA John Penn Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 10:19:01 -0400 From: "Rolfe, Joe" <jrolfe at mc.com> Subject: Fast Ferments... Dave Burley wrote... {SNIP} > Forced fermentations are probably very useful to determine if > your beer will have a shelf life (most often we don't care) and to > evaluate your basic cleanliness in your preparation. However, I believe > they are a cumbersome, 1800s, time consuming and full > of error method of determining a fermentation endpoint. Worst of all > these errors are indeterminate and vary from batch to batch. {SNIP} I am not sure of what your getting at here. If I wanted to know exactly what was left in a beer, I would do my own lab work or send it off to Siebels or similar. Not may homebrewers can afford to send it out or do it themselves. Granted I never used Clinitest, and it would be a nice extra data point to stack next to the fast ferment data I had. Fast ferments are typically not used for "bug detection" altho you can plate from it along side of the tank. One key to insuring a good test is "clean" sampling. For most homebrewers this is not possible, for most commercial micros this is not possible (ever take apart a zwickle - they suck period.) There are other sampling points and tests to determine stability. If you have visible problems at this point - your screwed anyway. Time to distill or dump it. As for the measurments varying batch to batch, it could -granted. But every time you perform the fast ferments the parameters "should" be the same. (again this is for the brewsheet of the particular beer being produced) All of these: time drawn, cell count at the draw, cell count at the "end", temp of the fast ferment, agitation speed, and probably a dozen more parameters need to be monitored. One of the key points in doing this is to find out with the yeast you are using "how low can it go". In most cases the tank will not get this low - but you have the bottom. Provided you have a nice set of hydrometers/sacharometers - not the $5 per - more like the $80 per and a set of three. I was fairly sloppy with some of the parameters, but did this method on over 300 batches, and there was not alot of variances typically. On maybe 5-10% (dont have the brewsheets handy) there was variance, but I did not need the fast ferment to show that. Primed CO2 levels where very consistent over a wide range of products. But the key to this is "how low can it go". 1800's - sure it is. time consuming - it depends, for a home brewer to "waste" several hundred mL, yeah I would go Clinitest too. But it is the only simple, easy to do , cheap method that can determine what the pitched yeast will do to the wort. These measures come into effect with the priming calculations (if you do that pre 1800's thing). Not knock Clinitest again, I wish I had had it... Good Luck and Gret Brewing Joe Rolfe Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 10:58:44 -0400 (EDT) From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker at welchlink.welch.jhu.edu> Subject: sulfitesHomebrew Digest #2785 (August 02, 1998) (fwd) David Burley wrote in part: >As far as "natural" goes, remember that some wine yeast make sulfite. >Sulfite in the form of sulfur candles has been used in making wine >for more than two millenia by Greek, Roman and French vintners. The Romans also used to put lead into their wine... >Although I know this was not your direct point , Dick, I see people are >often concerned by the "contains sulfites" label on wine bottles from >France. I think this marketing ploy ( like "contains no tropical oils" >by >US oil producers) by nitrogen-using, large US vintners has gone far >enough. I have yet to see any reason not to use this simple compound in >moderate amounts and challenge anyone to provide me with scientific >documentation that it is harmful in the amount that normally occurs >in wine. This is especially true, since we can routinely detect 100 ppm >of sulfite by smelling it and won't drink wine at this high (yet safe) >level. I don't think this is just a marketing ploy. I believe that the "contains sulfites" label serves as a warning to the small portion of the population that is sensitive to the presence of sulfites in foods, beverages, and medicines. There is indeed a vast literature on this topic in scientific journals. I bumped into this by accident after challenging a co-worker who was complaining that MSG in Chinese food gave her a headache. I'd heard lots of stories about this and always dismissed it as an old wives tale. She challanged me to put my money where my mouth was so I did some checking and damn if it wasn't true! There are a whole class of verified sensitivities to food additives, notably MSG, sulfites, and nitrites with catchy names like "Chinese Resteraunt Syndrome" and my favorite "Hot-dog Headache." (the names are uncharacteristicly humorous coming from clinicians but the publications are in respected journals such as Lancet...). This whole class of disorders falls under the name "Resteraunt Syndromes" and also includes sensitivities to naturally occuring chemicals such as amines found in cheese, wine, and chocolate. But, I'm straying from the topic at hand, namely sulfites. Apparently, sulfite hypersensitivity is usually, but not exclusively, found in chronic asthmatics. Studies vary as to the proportion of asthmatics that are sensitive but the consensus seems to be around 5% - 10%. There's a good review by Lester in the Journal of American College of Nutrition which I'll quote from: "As food additives, sulfiting agents were first used in 1664 and approved in the United States as long ago as the 1800s... They are currently used for a variety of preservative properties, including controlling microbial growth, preventing browning and spoilage, and bleaching some foods. It is estimated that up to 500,000 (<.05% of the population) sulfite-sensitive individuals live in the United States. Sulfite sensitivity occurs most often in asthmatic adults--predominantly women... reactions vary widely, ranging from no reaction to severe. The majority of reactions are mild. These manifestations may include dermatologic, respiratory, or gastrointestinal signs and symptoms... bronchoconstriction is the most common sensitivity response in asthmatics. The precise mechanism of sensitivity response has not been completely elucidated..." So, it appears that in some small fraction of the population there can be a problem with sulfites. Does look like the rest of us needn't wory though. But, if you have friends who have asthma you might want to keep an eye on 'em while they're trying out your latest batch of wine. Take Care -Alan Meeker Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 11:05:09 -0400 (EDT) From: ALAN KEITH MEEKER <ameeker at welchlink.welch.jhu.edu> Subject: more sulfites... Hi All. Another brief note on sulfites - yes they are in fact produced by yeast during fermentation. In fact, there were a couple of papers published recently in which attempts were made to increase the amount of sulfites produced by the yeast. This was done by inactivating a yeast gene called MET10 which codes for a subunit of the enzyme sulfite reductase. Inactivation led to an increase in sulfite accumulation and it was claimed that beer made with such yeast showed increased flavor stability... -Alan - ------------------------------------------------------------------ "Graduate school is the snooze button on the alarm clock of life." -Jim Squire -Alan Meeker Johns Hopkins Hospital Dept. of Urology (410) 614-4974 __________________________________________________________________ Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 11:13:54 -0400 From: "30hollywood" <30hollywood at email.msn.com> Subject: Jethro Gump Research indicates that Jethro Gump is a descendent of the Beverly Hillbillies who was dropped off in the mid-west while on the trip to California because he insisted on making homebrew beer and not homebrew hooch. Mr. Sammy Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 08:31:17 -0700 From: "Gregory A. Lorton" <glorton at cts.com> Subject: Brewery Finance 201(b) Randy Lee of Viking Brewing (who's living my dream) responded to Kyle Druey: >> Depreciation is a fixed cost of production. At Viking, you don't have >> the G&A that the megas do, and you have more flexibility with expanding >> or contracting it, thus my point. Your depreciation, on a proportional >> basis of capital, should be similar to A/B's. >This is true. I get to use the same Depreciation schedules as the Big >Boys and therefore I'm paying about the same depreciation for scale >(give or take). What makes the difference is that the Big Boys have a >utilization rate much higher than the micros. They put a lot of beer >though the tanks and keep them full. At a micro you do less of that. We >don't do 7 day lagers ;-) Therefore the cost of that equipment (although >probably about the same on a time line) is higher on a volumetric basis. The other factor that the Big Boys have going for them is the significant economies of scale in terms of the actual cost of capital equipment. A lagering tank for a megabrewer that has 50 times the capacity of a microbrewer's aging tank doesn't cost 50 times as much, it's more like 7 to 10 times as much (if those equipment scaling cost factors that I looked up in my design book are really valid). Therefore, on a cost per barrel basis, the megabrewer's tank is only 14 to 20% of the microbrewer's tank. Apply this to most of the other capital equipment. It's cheaper to build a megabrewery than a micro when you're looking at it from a $ per barrel of production basis. Greg Lorton Carlsbad, CA ...playing with accounting and finance when I'm not doing engineering (or homebrewing) P.S. The IRS depreciation is really just a tax deduction (to make you feel better since they wouldn't let you deduct all of your capital expenditure in the year you spent it). Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 08:16:30 PDT From: "Rosenzweig,Steve" <Steve_Rosenzweig at wb.xerox.com> Subject: Canning/Propane Bill Coleman in HBD 2787 asks about a couple of issues: Canning lids: of course the manufacturer says to use the lids once - they sell more of them that way! You can use them over and over, but, eventually they may not make a good seal any more. Check out a new one versus one used a few times - see that the rubber has been compressed on the used ones. I use mine over and over until they look just too beat, or if they get a spot of rust on the inner lid (like from stupidly using a bottle opener on it!) Think of the lids as Grolsch Bottle gaskets - they last quite a while, but eventually they do need to be replaced. Propane: I have found that I can get about 3 or 4 10 gallon batches out of a standard 20# propane tank. If you are going to use the small ones (1 or 2#) it better only be as a spare since my numbers would indicat that you'd probably need about 2-3# for even a 5 gallon batch. Currently I only have about 4 spare 20# on hand - not counting the two on the grills . . . but I think when my neighbor moves, he's going to leave behind another couple . . . I don't find a problem keeping them around (just keep them out of my wife's sight!) . . . then again Ontario is a bit different than Brooklyn ;-> Also, I can usually get them filled for about $7-8 around here. Stephen On brewing Hiatus in Ontario NY Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 10:51:59 -0500 From: rlabor at lsumc.edu (LaBorde, Ronald) Subject: RE: holes in my fridge Date: Sun, 2 Aug 1998 12:40:12 -0600 (MDT) From: Robert Johnson <robertcj at lamar.ColoState.EDU> >any suggestions as to where to drill the hole >for the gas line My suggestion is that you use a very small gas line. What I will do (someday) with my setup, but haven't done yet, is to drill a small hole and use tiny 1/8 tubing, or even smaller metal tubing, then place a pin lock gas-in connector fitting on the outside cabinet on a bracket of some kind. This will be connected through the tiny tubing into the fridge inside where I will connect a pin lock connector to use for my kegs in the fridge. The small tubing allows as much pressure, just a slower flow rate. We are not concerned with flow rate here, so you can use very small tubing and only need a small hole. Whadda ya think?? Ron Ronald La Borde - Metairie, Louisiana - rlabor at lsumc.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 12:05:24 -0400 (EDT) From: Paul Ward <paulw at doc.state.vt.us> Subject: Wheat, White, Wit, What? I'm not a very classy type of guy, just a little old hillbilly up here in Vermont. I'm not even sure which type of knife it is socially acceptable to eat my peas with. Anyway, this whole business of beers made from wheat has me very confused (actually many things have me confused, but this will do for the moment). While driving through New Hampshire on my way back from the seacoast I stopped at a small grocery store for some beer to drink on the long ride home (my wife was driving). It was the end of the weekend, funds were low, and I saw some 'Blue Moon Belgium White'. I don't want to bring up that old thread again, but having lived through the arguments, I was curious just what it tasted like (bear in mind that I'm from Vermont and to this day have never seen a Cellis or Hoergarden). What the heck for $4.99 the price seemed reasonable. For better or worse, I liked it. This is the first 'wheat beer' I can truly say that about. Sam Adams, Pete's, Long Trail, Breckenridge,...I just don't like that 'wheat' character. And I have NEVER noticed any bananas or cloves in any of them, although I've looked for those flavors. After all this, my question is - "was I supposed to shake the yeast back into suspension, or decant off the yeast in the bottom of the bottle?" This Blue Moon is the first wheat beer (white? wit?) I've had with a sediment in the bottle, and I know that some wheats are supposed to have the yeast in suspension when you drink it. Paul "clueless" in Vermont paulw at doc.state.vt.us - -- According to government height/weight charts, I'm seven and a half feet tall. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 11:41:21 -0500 (CDT) From: Samuel Mize <smize at mail.imagin.net> Subject: Too-subtle humor; canning lids; carageenan Greetings to all. First off, I was laughing AT the people who call Jack S a money-grubber, when he GIVES AWAY info on how to make his product yourself. Too subtle for the medium, I guess. - - - - - - - - - - Bill Coleman asks about reusing canning lids. The rubber seal has to squish into place, and is less reliable after one use. It doesn't mean they all WON'T hold, it just increases your risk of lid failure. - - - - - - - - - - > From: Fred Johnson <FLJohnson at worldnet.att.net> > Subject: Irish Moss vs Carrageenan > If my assumptions are correct, why should I not use the > active ingredient, carrageenan, in my brewing instead of Irish moss? I doubt that anyone has tried it. I didn't know until recently that it was extracted and used by the food manufacturing industry. My best advice is to give it a shot and report back on how it works, if you feel like trying it. It may be that the moss itself provides sites for protein coagulation, but that's rank speculation. Carageenan is sold as a gelling agent, and is expected to remain in the food. I assume it's extracted so you don't have to add visible/tangible moss, and so you can measure it very precisely and repeatably. Neither issue really matters for us. So, I'd use whichever costs less and does the job. Best, Sam Mize - -- Samuel Mize -- smize at imagin.net (home email) -- Team Ada Fight Spam: see http://www.cauce.org/ \\\ Smert Spamonam Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1998 13:23:46 -0400 From: "Victor Farren" <vfarren at smtp.cdie.org> Subject: Problems w/ carbonation in bottled beer I will present a problem that a new brewer friend of mine presented. I couldn't give him a good answer so I have decided to present the collective in hopes that combined experiences will yield an answer. My fiends problem: Some of his homebrews have carbonation and some don't after 2+ weeks in bottles. He brewed a wheat beer w/ dry yeast (of unknown type) and bottled w/ 3/4 cup bottling sugar after 1 week in the primary and 2 weeks in the secondary fermenter. He created a sugar solution and racked his fermented beer on top of it, mixed it up and bottled. He purchased bottles from a homebrew store and ran them through the dishwasher w/ no soap before bottling. The beer was fermented and stored in his basement which has a temperature in the low to mid 70's (here in the Washington, DC area) The only thing I can think of is that there wasn't enough yeast in solution (unlikely since some if his beers carbonated) or that he didn't mix the sugar solution well enough. I have discounted detergent residue in some bottles b/c he ran them through the dishwasher with no detergent. He did bottle while the bottles were still hot, but I don't think the heat of the bottles could have killed the yeast. Anyone have any ideas? Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1998 13:09:42 -0500 From: Paul Niebergall <pnieb at burnsmcd.com> Subject: lids, Pitching rates MaltyDog at aol.com wrote: >So I wonder exactly why you're >not supposed to reuse the lids. If you're >boiling & pressure cooking them, >well, they become sterile, don't >they? Or am I missing something? You can re-use the dome lids if you want, it is just not recommended. After a few uses the gummy material that forms a seal with the lip of the canning jar will deform and not seal properly. Also the lid itself becomes bent with repeated use (prying it off with a bottle opener, for instance). Sterility is not the question, a proper seal is. As long as it still seals, you should be o.k. But extra lids are cheap, why take chances? The threaded ring part is re-useable any number of time. I usually use mine for years until they become so rusty from repeated use that they will not tighten properly. Scott Murman wrote: >First of all, Sam Mize didn't write that snippet, I did. Paul then >tries to both mathematically and sarcastically prove that I'm being >overly zealous. >I think most of us are just trying to help others by offering advice >based on experience, not trying to condemn others that have a >different view than ours. Sorry if I identified the wrong poster. I snipped the material directly from HBD 2781 (July 29) and it appeared in my post exactly as in appeared in HBD 2781 (heading and all). Anyway, I am not trying to *condemn* anyone. And my advice is based on experience also. All I am suggesting is that if after some threshold, over-pitching yeast can cause stability and flavor problems in finished beer, pitching the equivalent of a 5 liter (1.32 gallon) starter in a 5 gallon batch of moderate gravity ale may be approaching this threshold. This hypothesis is based solely on information that I read in the HBD last week. And, as I indicated in my previous post, I do not necessarily believe or disbelieve it. I am just trying to figure out *when is over-pitching, over-pitching*. Either over-pitching occurs or it does not. You cannot have it both ways. What if I were to suggest pitching 3 or 4 dried yeast packs? Based on your post that a typical dried yeast package is 50 times the yeast of a Wyeast smak pak, this would be the equivalent of pitching a starter volume of 7.5 L to 10.0 L (or about 2 to 2.6 gallons). Am I over-pitching yet? I do not know and I am just trying to figure it out. Somehow I do not think that pitching even 4 dried yeast packages will cause harm to the beer. Therefore, either the information that you supplied that a typical dried yeast package is 50 times the yeast of a Wyeast smak pak (which I tend to agree with) is false, or over-pitching is a myth. Maybe under-pitching is too! Brew on, Paul Niebergall Kansas City Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 14:12:18 -0400 (EDT) From: Some Guy <pbabcock at oeonline.com> Subject: JS Greetings, Beerlings! Take me to your lager... I may have been a pretty harsh critic of Jack Schmidling at one (or a few) time(s), but I have come to understand something about him over the years: It's not that Jack is a money grubber. Not at all. I believe him when he says he doesn't need the money generated by selling brew stuff. Unfortunately, Jack's zeal and pride in what he does is both to his credit, and his undoing. He doesn't bash competing products because he wants the sale: he does so because he is convinced that his is better. (In many regards, so am I.). Jack, though he "sells" product, remains a hobbiest. I wish I had his means and ingenuity... See ya! Pat Babcock in SE Michigan pbabcock at oeonline.com Home Brew Digest Janitor janitor@hbd.org HBD Web Site http://hbd.org The Home Brew Page http://oeonline.com/~pbabcock/brew.html "Just a cyber-shadow of his former brewing self..." Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1998 13:39:22 -0500 From: Steve Potter <spotter at MERITER.COM> Subject: RE: holes in my fridge Dear Collective, Robert Johnson wanted some suggestions as to where to drill a refrigerator for a CO2 line. I just got rid of a veeeeery (sorry about the spelling AlK ;^) ) old Frigidaire that had the freezer inside the refrigeration compartment. It was drilled on the right side about 6 inches from the bottom and 6 inches from the back. I replaced it with a newer Kenmore which I drilled on the left about 6 inches from the bottom and three inces from the back. When I say I drilled the hole, I really used a hole saw on a drill to accomplish it. I drilled from the inside, cut through the inside layer and then stopped. The side of the refrigerator had fiberglass insulation, so I was able to kind of push the insulation aside (watch out for the sharp edges!) and peer into the refrigerator wall to see if there were any refrigeration lines in the way. As it happened, it was clear, so I finished it up. As usual, YMMV. Steve Potter Madison, WI Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 98 14:08:34 CDT From: jwilkins at wss.dsccc.com (John Wilkinson) Subject: attenuation/yeast starters There has been discussion lately about attenuation from different yeasts and I thought I would add what I have noticed. I have not compared ale to lager yeasts but I have split a batch and pitched different ale yeasts. One was Wyeast 1968 and the other another Wyeast British ale yeast whose number I don't recall. The 1968 batched finished and dropped clear in a week while the other batch took two or three weeks to clear. They both ended within one point of each other in FG, though. Also, I could not reliably tell the difference in the beers when comparison tasting. As to starter size, I have had higher FG with smaller starters and/or poorly aerated worts but can't say what the taste differences were, except that the higher FG made a sweeter beer, to my taste. John Wilkinson - Grapevine, Texas - jwilkins at wss.dsccc.com Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 15:53:38 -0400 From: Jeff Renner <nerenner at umich.edu> Subject: Re: CAP keith christiann <kchris1 at lausd.k12.ca.us> wrote a week or so ago (I've been on vacation and catching up) >I would like to brew a batch of CAP in honor of my child that will be here >soon. My kids are gone a lot, too. ;-) >For a 10 gallon batch, I am considering the following recipe/procedure: > >15 lb. American 6 Row (will I need to adjust the gap on my Malt Mill?) >4 lb. Flaked Maize Sounds good. I find that a double pass on the standard MM gap works well for 6-row >15-min rest at 122 (should I skip this one) >15-min rest at 140 >45-min rest at 158 >10-min 168 Mashout If you're up to step mashing, I'd mash in at 40C (104F) and just pass through 50C on the way to 60C with no rest. That's what I do with good results. Of course, I can ramp at about 1 degree C/minute with my bottom fired RIMS. (Gee, I hope your text reader can handle these abbreviations and acronyms). Also, I'm beginning to think that a 70C (158F) rest, while historically correct, in my system results in a less attenuated, less crisp beer than I'd like. My last batch, presently lagering, I rested at 153F, then 158F (George Fix has reported improved foam stand with 15 min. at this temp). One of the nicest, crispest CAPs I've had was single temp infusion mashed (probably with mashout) at 152F. So we may be overbrewing, so to speak. On the other hand, I like fussing. But don't think that you have to step mash, because it ain't so. >Yeast: >I have Wyeast 2112 available on slant but feel it may not be appropriate. I >do like its clean taste. Or should I buy Wyeast 2007 and add it to my yeast >bank? Back in pre-Fritz Maytag times, Anchor Brewery used to get yeast from whichever local lager brewery had yeast when it was time to brew. I suspect that later Fritz chose a yeast that he was happiest with, and that it was probably a local lager yeast. But we'll probably never know; they play their cards close to the vest. 2112 is reputed to be that yeast, and should probably work. I have had friends ferment CAPs with it at lager temps with good results. 2007 is reputedly Anheuser/Busch and very neutral. That's OK, but maybe you'll want a little more character. I do. A friend got diacetyl in a CAP using it. I don't know his fermentation temperature regime. If you use a yeast that is prone to throw diacetyl, be sure to give a 60F rest at the end of the primary, when there is still a little fermentation going on. >Hop to 30 IBU >FWH Saaz or Styrian Goldings >Bitter with Cluster >Flavor with Styrian Goldings >Saaz or EKG ?? knock out All are good except the EKG. Historically and stylistically inappropriate. It seems strange that Styrian Goldings, which is Fuggles grown in Yugoslavia, should be appropriate, but it was used historically, and it doesn't taste English, at least to me. I think it would be better to not use it for FWH, however, but go with Saaz, Hallertauer or a combination of both. I've not found historical evidence for FWH in the US, but there is evidence of it in Germany 100 years ago, so I have to think that some German brewers who emmigrated to America brought the practice with them. Good luck and let us know how it turns out. Oh, and congratulations on the impending arrival of the new brewer. Brew now while you can, because the next 18 years are a roller coaster ride with no getting off until the end of the ride. Right now you're on that slow clank, clank, clank up the up the first hill. The bar is down across your lap and you're locked in, but the ride hasn't really started, yet. Then you reach the top and wow! Your world is changed forever. But I wouldn't have traded my ride for anything. Jeff -=-=-=-=- Jeff Renner in Ann Arbor, Michigan c/o nerenner at umich.edu "One never knows, do one?" Fats Waller, American Musician, 1904-1943. Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1998 15:59:44 -0400 From: Doug Moyer <Douglas.Moyer at geics.ge.com> Subject: History of stout Brewers, Towards the end of June, I asked the collective for some information regarding the history of stout. My intent was to sum it up for a club meeting. Thanks to those of you that responded. For anyone that is interested, I've posted my write-up on our club's web page at http://hbd.org/starcity/style/199807a-history.html While I certainly welcome feedback and constructive criticism, I have no real intention of updating the contents. It is a snapshot of my presentation in July. If you have some interesting comments, I may add them at the bottom. Let me know if you would like credit for your comments if you do wish to comment. I've asked so many questions, it is nice to give something back, however minor! Cheers, Doug Moyer Salem, VA, USA Star City Brewers Guild: http://hbd.org/starcity/ Pictures of my baby: http://www.rev.net/~kmoyer/ P.S. I think Sam Mize should be flogged in public for having the audacity for attempting to introduce humor and sarcasm into these hallowed bytes. Bad Sam, bad! Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1998 14:49:18 -0600 From: Kevin TenBrink <tenbrink at jps.net> Subject: re: propane tanks In #2787 Bill inquired about the duration of propane tanks. I have 2 different propane cookers. One is the Cache Cooker SH-140L, the other is the King Kooker H/S PK 90. The King Kooker is the "jet burner" type and I have found that I can do about 10 70 minute boils before I start getting too low on propane. The Cache Cooker is a ring type burner with 24 flame points. I have done 5 70 minute boils, and heated my sparge and strike water for my first all grain batch and I still have over 1/2 a tank left. There are three ways to determine how much fuel is left in a tank: 1) Weigh it when it is brand new sans fuel. Weigh it before each use to see how close you are to this empty/dry weight. You can also weigh it after it is full and after your first use to see how much fuel in weight you are using for each batch. 2) There are magnet like strips sold in the bar-b-que section of most hardware stores that are temperature sensative. You apply this to the propae tank and it changes colors depending on the level of fuel in the tank. The propane is under pressure inthe tank, as some of it is released, the metal of the tank will get very cool. There will be a marked temperature gradient in the metal corresponding to the level of fuel in the tank. 3) Related to #2 and the simplest way to determine level of fuel in a tank. After the tank has been running for 10 minutes or so, the tank will begin to collect a small amount of condensation on the side. The level of this condensation will correspond to the level of the fuel in the tank. Hope this helps Kevin Salt Lake City Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1998 18:06:02 -0400 From: Jim Bentson <jbentson at longisland.com> Subject: Mistake in last post The other day I mistakenly attributed a humorous sentence in a post to George DePiro. I was wrong, it was from a post by Jim Liddil. Sorry guys, I was pasting and cutting and picked up the wrong name. Jim Bentson Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 18:38:22 -0500 (CDT) From: Al Korzonas <korz at xnet.com> Subject: Oak in brewing Alan writes: >Hi All, I have lately become enamored of a certain red wine that, >according to my wine-knowledgeable friends, has a strong oak character. >This of course immediately led me to ponder what oak could do for my beer. >I've seen oak chips for sale but haven't the foggiest idea how best to use >them so am asking the collective for advice and any experiences they'd >care to relate concerning the use of oak in beer Many authors mistakenly suggest that oak flavours are appropriate in IPAs, however, there are a number of reasons that I feel that they are *not* appropriate: 1. they used European oak as opposed to American oak (which is far more "oaky") to make the casks... there are a number of old English brewing books that specifically say to NOT use American Oak for casks because it *imparts a flavour* to the beer, 2. even storing beer in European oak will impart some oaky flavour, but this takes a long time (see below) and according to Tom Thomlinson in Brewing Techniques, the trip was about 3 months from England to India... not long enough, 3. the oakiness of any cask will fade with use (see below)... if you were sending a cask to India with little hope of getting it back, would you use a brand new one or one that has been well-used? 4. some casks were lined with brewer's pitch which would completely isolate the beer from the wood. Although, of the modern English brewers that I know of (e.g. Samuel Smith's) who use oak casks for dispensing some of their beers, NONE of them line the casks with pitch. I've tasted only Samuel Smith's "from the wood" and it was not oaky, even at Ye Olde Cheshire Cheese in London (far from Tadcaster). I did have one other beer "from the wood." If I recall correctly, at 5pm every Friday evening, the beerhall associated with the Schneider brewery (famous for it's Weizen and Weizenbock) taps a wooden cask of Pilsner. The texture of the beer was different than their regular Pilsner, but it had no oakiness. On the other hand, brewers of Flanders Red Ales intentionally impart oaky flavour to their beer... Rodenbach Grand Cru is stored in huge oak tuns (thousands of liters) for up to 18 months, until it gains an oaky flavour and aroma. Every two batches, the tuns are disassembled and a fine layer of oak is scraped of the inside of each stave to increase the flavour effect. Regular Rodenbach is a blend of Grand Cru and a much younger beer, so the oakiness is not nearly as noticeable. Many years ago, although I don't think it is available "oaked" anymore, Ballentine's fell pray to that notion that traditional English IPAs were oaky and so when they made theirs, they added a special "conditioning" stage in which they stored the Ballentine's IPA in American oak casks for a short time... just long enough to get some oak flavour (this can be a few days with a new American oak cask). My tone above may imply that I'm anti-oak. On the contrary... I'm only against the adding of oak flavour to IPAs *WITH THE INTENT OF MAKING THEM MORE TRADITIONAL*. Add oak flavour to any beer you like, but don't pretend that it's more traditional. I am on the BJCP Beer Style Committee and one of the things I will be proposing is that we split the IPA subcategory into "Traditional English" and "American." I will propose that the American IPA be defined as one that is made with American hops and *may* have oak flavour/aroma (thanks to Ballentine's... just like acetaldehyde, normally a fault, must be considered acceptable in an American Light Lager because Budweiser has a lot of it). There is a recent microbrewed oak-aged beer... someone will post more on it... I believe it's called something like "Double Barrel." I've tried it. It doesn't pretend to be an IPA... it claims to be a beer aged in oak. I think it's a very intersting beer. The jury is still out on where the oaky aroma/flavour in Lambics (Lambieks in Flemish) comes from storage in oak casks or whether it comes from some microbiota... I tend to believe that in most beers, it comes from the latter. This is because I have tasted Jim Liddil's excellent AHA National Competition Best of Show pGueuze and it had an oaky aroma, despite being fermented in *plastic*. Futhermore, if I recall correctly, Oud Beersel Geuze (Flemish spelling) also has an oaky aroma, although it is fermented entirely in CHESTNUT casks. I spoke with the brewmaster (Vandervelden ?) and he said he uses only chestnut casks to avoid any oakiness from the cask. Finally, as I mentioned above, with use, the oak loses its ability to impart flavour/aroma... some casks at Cantillon are over 100 years old, having had more than 30 batches of beer in them. Surely there would be no oakiness left in those casks. >Any commercial examples of oaked beers worth seeking out? Rodenbach Grand Cru is (in my opinion) the finest. Petrus (difficult to find) is also a Rodenbach Grand Cru-like Flanders Red Ale. Also, the aforementioned Double Barrel (if I got the name right) is worth a try. If you like oaky wines, by the way, many Chardonnays (my favourite type of wine) are quite oaky and need not as much aging as a good red wine (so a wine of similar quality will be cheaper and can be enjoyed sooner). Al. Al Korzonas, Palos Hills, IL korz at xnet.com http://www.brewinfo.com/brewinfo/ Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1998 20:53:26 -0400 From: marli at bbs2.rmrc.net (Jon Macleod) Subject: PAA and Bleach I only saw the response to the post asking about peracetic acid. I agree with the responder; just use sodium hypochlorite bleach. If you're concerned about the corrosive effects of bleach, you ain't seen nothing yet. PAA is a great sterilant, but is also very corrosive. That's why those medical sterilizers that use it have pretty advanced pH balancing and anticorrosive chemistries. As for making it?! OK, its a simple reaction between hydrogen peroxide and acetic acid, and you're probably not trying for industrial effeciencies, but this seems like a hard way to go. PAA is an equilibrium reaction that is fairly dependent on your controls to ensure any given concentration. If you're not clean about it, it may never make, or may break down as fast as you do. Either way, you won't be stabilizing it, so......? Also, not to minimize the concern for housekeeping, but none of us really need to "sterilize" anything. We are only sanitizing/disinfecting to the point to give the yeast a head start. Most routine methods/materials are adequate if used diligently. Mike Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 20:19:19 -0500 From: "Miller, Monica" <MMiller at dowagro.com> Subject: Re: Women Brewers Monika Schultz brings up some interesting points in # 2787 regarding women and the "culture" of beer. Or, more specifically, the culture of industrial American light lagers over the past 60 years or so. I certainly agree with her that women have been sent the message that beer is a "guy thing". And I think that this is definitely a factor in why more women don't brew. Obviously, if men tend to identify with beer, it stands to reason that more of them will be interested in homebrewing. However, I do disagree with Monika's statement that "most women simply don't like beer". I don't question your observations, but I think you may be misinterpreting them. I find it hard to believe that gender determines whether one likes or dislikes beer. I do know some women who basically think they shouldn't like beer, so they aren't open to it. (And, these are usually the women who give me "the look" when I say I'm a homebrewer.) Friends of mine, both male and female, who really don't like beer also tend to be the folks who don't like strongly flavored anything. As for me, eight years ago I fell in love with Guinness stout and Anchor Porter. Beer like that was hard to come by where I was living. Luckily, I had a (male) friend who brewed and inspired me to make my own. Monica Miller from scenic Sadorus, IL Return to table of contents
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 1998 02:02:25 +0000 From: Dirk Server <mminsw at ozemail.com.au> Subject: dried yeast pitching rates and viability I'm not sure where this idea sprung up about getting huge pitching rates from dried yeast... >From DCL's own data, their yeast packets contain > 6x10^9 cells per gram Thus an 11.5 g package contains > 6.9 x 10^10 cells. Viability of their yeast is about 70% when rehydrated in 23C water, thus one package contains more than about 5 x 10^10 cells. When pitching into 20l, this means the pitching rate is around 2-3 million viable cells per ml, which is about 1/5 the "recommended" level of 15 million cells per ml for lagers. Take this as you may... 5 packets of yeast per brew is getting very pricey... Incidentally, the DCL saflager S-189 looks interesting. Has anyone used it? It seems that it may appear to be the same yeast as Wyeast 2278 from the DCL spiel. Dirk Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 21:58:03 -0400 From: "Frederick J. Wills" <Frederick_Wills at compuserve.com> Subject: RE: Lifting Carboys Okay, Let's try and put this brewing myth (my opinion) to rest for once. There are enough homebrewers reading this digest (most of us handling full carboys with those orange carboy handles on occasion I would think) to be statistically significant. Has anyone ever had a carboy neck snap off on them? I mean, geeze, no kidding, if you drop the things they break. But I don't think that directly translates to the necks snapping off and all the attendant worries. Regards, Fred Wills Londonderry, NH Return to table of contents
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 23:20:46 -0400 From: rsda at istar.ca Subject: Weiss/fruit/head? A question re head retention. I made a tasty wheat beer - 50% wheat malt, 50% lager malt, nondescript (but noble) hopping and a yeast kindly donated from a local brewpub brewer who had ordered it in from Germany and which I had enjoyed very much on draught. So a typical Bavarian type yeast. I made 10 gallons which I split into 5 gallons with a dash of coriander, and 5 gallons with 4 lbs of frozen apricots (reheated and debugged). The base weiss (with coriander) turned out perfectly with a beautiful head. The apricot weiss tasted fine (apricotty) but was as flat as a pancake. What gives? I have made fruit beers before and never run into a total zero head. Both beers were bottle conditioned with identical priming solutions. I would appreciate any input which would allow me to correct for future brews. Stuart Anderson North Vancouver BC Canada (home of the 65cent$) Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 08/06/98, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96