HOMEBREW Digest #4943 Fri 03 February 2006

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

		Digest Janitor: pbabcock at hbd.org


          Northern  Brewer, Ltd. Home Brew Supplies
Visit http://www.northernbrewer.com  to show your appreciation!
               Or call them at 1-800-681-2739

    Support those who support you! Visit our sponsor's site!
********** Also visit http://hbd.org/hbdsponsors.html *********

  RE: Reuse dry yeast cake... [Sec: Unclassified] ("Williams, Rowan")
  re: Lagers made from ale malt ("steve.alexander")
  re: reuse dry yeast cake... ("steve.alexander")
  Rice Hulls/Lager from Ale Malt ("A.J deLange")
  RE: Reuse dry yeast cake... (jeff)
  floating grains while sparging ? (leavitdg)
  Water results? ("Michael Eyre")
  Fred's big chill ("Peed, John")
  Re-using Dry yeast cakes (Trevor LaRene)
  Another Stuck Fermantation ("Pete Calinski")
  RE: hopbacking (RiedelD)
  WLP 565 Saison Yeast Question ("Steve A. Smith")

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * The HBD Logo Store is now open! * * http://www.hbd.org/store.html * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Suppport this service: http://hbd.org/donate.shtml * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy! * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * # America's Finest City Homebrew Competition is now # # accepting online entries. Goto: # # http://www.quaff.org/AFC2006/AFCHBC.html # * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org 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 FROM THE E-MAIL ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!** IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, you cannot subscribe to the digest as we cannot reach you. We will not correct your address for the automation - that's your job. HAVING TROUBLE posting, subscribing or unsusubscribing? See the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org. LOOKING TO BUY OR SELL USED EQUIPMENT? Please do not post about it here. Go instead to http://homebrewfleamarket.com and post a free ad there. The HBD is a copyrighted document. The compilation is copyright HBD.ORG. Individual postings are copyright by their authors. ASK before reproducing and you'll rarely have trouble. Digest content cannot be reproduced by any means for sale or profit. More information is available by sending the word "info" to req@hbd.org or read the HBD FAQ at http://hbd.org. JANITORs on duty: Pat Babcock (pbabcock at hbd dot org), Jason Henning, and Spencer Thomas
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 15:53:02 +1100 From: "Williams, Rowan" <Rowan.Williams at ag.gov.au> Subject: RE: Reuse dry yeast cake... [Sec: Unclassified] Mike asks about repitching on US-56... Mate, I repitch onto US-56 all the time and have not had any problems. In fact, I'm currently enjoying a keg of dry stout that was pitched onto the yeast cake of a pale ale and both are in good shape. Just keep things clean and sterile and you should be fine. I must admit, however, that I don't re-pitch more than twice - why? Well, its all about risk management! Dry yeast is cheap. I prefer to buy another satchet to mitigate against any risk of a strain mutation affecting the wort that I've spent many hours preparing. Cheers, Rowan Williams Canberra Brewers Club [9588.6, 261.5] AR (statute miles) - ----------------------------------------------------------------- If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately by return e-mail and delete all copies. If this e-mail or any attachments have been sent to you in error, that error does not constitute waiver of any confidentiality, privilege or copyright in respect of information in the e-mail or attachments. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 01:12:06 -0500 From: "steve.alexander" <-s at adelphia.net> Subject: re: Lagers made from ale malt Rowan Williams asks, >[...] so is there a problem with me using the > ale malt as the base? Ale malt is kilned a bit differently than pils/lager malt so yes there is a fair bit more toasty flavor in ale malt. Ale malts have a fair bit less enzymatic power so that can't convert as much non-enzymatic adjunct (like corn) as pils malt. These days there is virtually no difference in degree of modification, so don't overmash the ale malt (and certainly don't decoct it). For the 'other' malts, I think there is wide agreement that UK crystal malts tastes a bit different than German caramels, and of course vienna/munich/melanoidin malts hail from the lager tradition and make a unique flavor impact. If you are making a light colored style (pils, helles) then base malt and maybe some carapils is all that's called for and you'll find that the ale base malt will give considerably darker color and more toasted flavor - a very nice flavor, but not exactly to style. Just an opinion, but lager brewing is a bit more finicky and requires better control than ale brewing so there is no downside to making a lager from ale base malt just for the experience. Just realize that the result will probably taste great and certainly lager-like, but won't win any award for matching a traditional style. -S Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 01:57:20 -0500 From: "steve.alexander" <-s at adelphia.net> Subject: re: reuse dry yeast cake... Michael Eyre says, >I have a 1.045 stout in primary now... I am planning an imperial stout >at the end of the week and will have the option of pitching onto the >yeast cake of the Safale US-56 that I used for the small stout. >Considering that this is dry yeast, and I'm mostly heard to *not* reuse >the yeast from a dry yeast pitch, what're your thoughts on this, I don't see why you shouldn't reuse it. Any dry yeast has low viability (maybe only 50%), but you've performed a normal 11P ferment so 80-90% of the cells are newborns and have never been abused (hi-grav). I think another reason you used to hear this advise has to do with infection. Years ago dry yeast had a bad rap for carrying infection at low levels. Perhaps contamination from the drying process. I find it hard to believe commercial guys are using dry lager yeast with infection issues. My hunch is that that yeast cake is about as viable and clean as you'd typically see in an HB operation. If the low-grav stout ferment was clean and rapid and you don't suspect problems I'd re-use the cake. >I suppose the $3.50 for the two packets of dry I'd use for the >Imp. Stout is a small price, but hey... If your ImpStout is anything like I'd expect (say 25 Plato) then two packet won't do the job and this is a situation which really calls out for a nice big viable yeast cake to power through the hi-grav wort. -S Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 12:45:59 +0000 From: "A.J deLange" <ajdel at cox.net> Subject: Rice Hulls/Lager from Ale Malt RE: "I know that rice hulls would help. Do they get mixed with the mash, or do they go into the bottom of the lauter tun to act as a filter?" I've always mixed them in with the mash as it is transferred to the lauter tun. In this way the rice hulls are distributed throughout the mash and hold its particles apart thus improving flow. If you kept the hulls at the bottom I'd expect the mash to pack down on top of them with pretty much the same result as if they weren't there. I have never tried it that way so I'm guessing here. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Lager from ale malt? Sure, why not? You won't be able to do the palest pils because the ale malt will be a little darker and the protein/sugar balance may be a little off but if fermented at the proper temperature with the proper yeast the result should be quite pleasing. A.J. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 05:08:29 -0800 (PST) From: jeff at henze.us Subject: RE: Reuse dry yeast cake... Mike is asking about reusing his yeast for an Imperial Stout: Mike: I don't know how it'll work in the end, but I just did the same thing with some Nottingham yeast. I'm normally a liquid yeast user, and was really impressed with how easy and fast the dry Nottingham took off in a batch of wheat ale I did. Then as I racked the wheat to secondary a week later (it was down to 1.014 from 1.040) I whipped up another batch of wheat ale and racked it onto the cake along with about .5 gal of wort that didn't fit in the secondary. It took off faster than any batch I've done in the past - showed good activity after 2 hours, and was blowing off in 3 or 4 hours. I lost quite a bit of beer due to blow off, but it was interesting to see. The beer inside smells good (it's almost a week old now) and I'll rack it to secondary this weekend and give it a taste on the way. I've never heard of not reusing dry yeast, but it is cheap, so if it's problematic, you might want to skip it on an expensive batch like an Imperial Stout. My wheat ales were just done with extra ingredients lying around the house and a few pounds of malt from the LHBS. I'll let you know how Wheat Ale 2 tasts after I try it. Good luck. FWIW on the Nottingham yeast in the first batch of Wheat ale - after racking in secondary, it had absolutely no activity. Normally I would just leave it be and eventually it'd drop; but I tried some yeast energizer for the first time. Activity started almost immediately (no other changes, just the energizer) and have continued slowly (but visable) ever since (5 days now). I'll definately use the energizer again in the future for stuck/slow fermentations. - --Jeff Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 09:54:10 -0500 From: leavitdg at plattsburgh.edu Subject: floating grains while sparging ? I have brewed over 400 batches in the last 8-9 years or so, and have only recently had this happen, twice: as I get 20 minutes into the runoff, the grains in the tun float to the top! Perhaps I am sparging too fast? It generally takes me 1 hour to collect about 7 gallons. I am using a polarware tun. Perhaps I have run the hot liquor in too fast, ie like a batch sparge? Any thoughts would be appreciated. Darrell Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 08:56:27 -0800 From: "Michael Eyre" <meyre at sbcglobal.net> Subject: Water results? Hey all! With the post I just saw on the HBD, I got curious and dragged out my "Home Stuff" folder from when we bought this house a few years ago. Inside, I found the water analysis thing from the testing we had performed on the well water here. I was hoping to get a little help from the collective on it's meanings. I'm try to double check the results and decipher what it all means from a pretty helpful book here, but thought I'd throw it out to you all as well for a second guess. What the form indicates is as follows: Stuff Results Units - ------------------------------------ PH 7.78 Turbidity 1.7 NTU's Chlorine Residual ND Nitrite N <.05 Mg/l as N Nitrate N .42 Mg/l as N Iron .05 Mg/l Manganese ND Sulfate 5 Mg/l Sodium 13 Mg/l Hardness 44 Mg/l Chloride 2 Mg/l What I'm wondering, mostly, is how this applies to me as a brewer, of course, and what types of beer this stuff is best suited for, untouched, and what types of additions of chemicals and such I'd need to add to really get the most out of other styles. Basically, I mean. I have never added anything from a bottle with a funny chemical label into my brewing water at all, ever. I know nothing about it. I've just been going on the "f it tastes good, brew with it" guideline and it's served me pretty well so far. But now me and my brew partner are looking for the next leg up and would like to delve into this part of brewing a bit more. Any suggestions or info? Thanks! Mike Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 09:07:51 -0800 From: "Peed, John" <jpeed at elotouch.com> Subject: Fred's big chill Fred, I would think you'd get much quicker chilling by whirlpooling through your CFC than you would by using an immersion chiller, because the wort will be moving through the chiller rather than having an immersion chiller just sitting stationary in the wort. John Peed Oak Ridge, TN Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 12:02:21 -0600 From: Trevor LaRene <larene4 at tds.net> Subject: Re-using Dry yeast cakes Michael Eyre asks: "the option of pitching onto the yeast cake of the Safale US-56 that I used for the small stout. Considering that this is dry yeast, and I'm mostly heard to *not* reuse the yeast from a dry yeast pitch, what're your thoughts on this, HBD collective?" Sure, why not? I reuse my "general-purpose" dry yeasts (Nottingham, etc) for 2-4 generations, depending on how freqently I'm brewing, and if I have compatable styles. (For example, I won't rack a light cream ale onto a yeast cake that just produced a porter.) Otherwise, as long as you are using good sanitary procedures, go for it! Trevor LaRene Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 10:17:01 -0500 From: "Pete Calinski" <pjcalinski at adelphia.net> Subject: Another Stuck Fermantation Well, this one has me against the wall. Back in December I brewed a clone of Sierra Nevada Big Foot. A high gravity ale. The grain bill was: 12.5 lbs Pale Malt 3 lbs various adjunct grains. 3 lbs Laaglander Dark DME (Added during the boil). I transferred this into the fermenter on top of a 1" layer of active yeast from a pale ale batch brewed 10 days earlier. The OG was 1.095. The pale ale batch used a fresh smack pack of 1056 yeast. It had fermented down to 1.012. After 5 days at 64 degrees, this batch was down to 1.048 and stalled. I aerated for a few minutes with an air stone and added 1/4 pint of yeast that I had saved from the pale ale and brought it up to 74 degrees. Nothing. (My apologies to Pete Ensminger but I like my house warm enough to walk around nude if I want to.) After 3 days, I rehydrated a pack of Coopers ale yeast and added that. Nothing. After 5 days, I rehydrated a pack of champagne yeast and added that. Nothing. So, I still had 1/4 pint of yeast slurry from that pale ale batch. I decided to see if it was alive so I made a starter, ~1.040 with DME and stepped up the slurry. I got a very strong ferment for a day or so; it was down to 1.010. I decided, given all the problems I was having, maybe I needed a real big starter to finish this batch but I didn't have any more DME. Well, what the hey. I have 5 gallons of 1.048 wort that I am trying to get to ferment, let's see what this starter can do to that. So, I drew off the spent solution and added 4 cups of the wort I was trying to get restarted. Nothing. Nada. After 5 days, still 1.04x. This stuff is really sweet and heavy. I don't know what else to try. Maybe I'll just bottle it and sell it for patching blacktop driveways. Pete Calinski East Amherst NY Near Buffalo NY http://hbd.org/pcalinsk *********************************************************** *My goal: * Go through life and never drink the same beer twice. * (As long as it doesn't mean I have to skip a beer.) *********************************************************** Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 13:16:05 -0800 From: RiedelD at pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca Subject: RE: hopbacking Fred discusses his hopback experiences with a split batch of bitter: "The five gallons hopped with Northdown in the hopback is very bitter relative to the five gallons hopped with Goldings in the hopback. I have not measured the IBUs, but there is clearly a difference in the bitterness level and it is not a subtle difference. The Northdown comes across like an IPA. I am considering abandoning the use of a hop back, going back to my original method of adding late hop in the kettle" Fred, What you don't mention was how the late hop character was? Did you get a nice, clear aroma from the hopback addition? I have found it difficult to get a really full hop aroma from additions at knockout. Dry-hopping seems to be the only way, but it has a different effect than kettle additions. I'm curious how the hopback aroma was. Would you consider adjusting your bittering additions to allow for the late contribution from the hopback addition? Or, was there something else you didn't like about the hopbacked beers. cheers, Dave Riedel Victoria, BC, Can. Return to table of contents
Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 19:45:05 -0500 From: "Steve A. Smith" <sasmith11 at verizon.net> Subject: WLP 565 Saison Yeast Question Last Saturday (six days ago) I brewed +7 gallons of Saison, about 1.064 OG, using White Labs 565 Saison yeast for the first time. Per some of the threads I followed from the HBD archives, I have been fermenting in primary a little hot, at about 78 F, even though the WLP web site recommends an optimal fermentation temp range of 68 - 75 F. It was a simple matter for me to place my two primary fermenters close to a basement furnace where the heat remains quite constant at the mentioned 78 F (air temp). The yeast was very active when I checked 12 hours after pitching, and died down a lot about a day later, although even tonight it still bubbles once every couple minutes or so. Per the posts I read, some people ferment this yeast at 80 - 95 F, and that the book Farmhouse Ales, which I do not yet own, recommends fermentation temps somewhere in the vicinity of that range for this strain. I'm planning to rack to secondary tomorrow or Super Bowl Sunday, and will be unable to check the beer for a week after that. My question to those with experience with this yeast is would you recommend that, after racking to secondary, I move the fermenters to a slightly cooler area, say 70 F, so that the yeast will not break down during secondary fermentation? I understand that this strain takes its time and secondary might take at least 2 to 3 weeks to clear and finish somewhere around 1.010 - 1.014. My normal inclination would be to go cooler and longer in secondary, but I know that Belgian style beer-making can call for new ways of thinking. thanks, Steve Smith transplanted from the Rocky Mountain West to the DC Metro Area Return to table of contents
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 02/04/06, by HBD2HTML v1.2 by KFL
webmaster@hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96