HOMEBREW Digest #496 Fri 14 September 1990

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

		Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator

  Brewing conference books (John DeCarlo)
  Re:  Sanitizing Bottles (John DeCarlo)
  questions (Russ Gelinas)
  Re: low-cal soda (Marty Albini)
  Beer Marketing (Slugs) (Forrest Cook)
  please add me to you august mailing list (Jeff La Coss)
  California beer tax proposal (Fred Condo)
  Re:  Homebrew Digest #495 (September 13, 1990) (Mark E. Freeman)
  Re: Baltimore Brewpubs (Chris Shenton)
  Re: Baltimore Brewpubs (Chris Shenton)
  New Amsterdam and F.X. Matt's Brewery (mark gryska)
  Balling Plato (R. Bradley)
  Re: Homebrew Digest #493 (September 11, 1990) (Jay Hersh)

Send submissions to homebrew%hpfcmr at hplabs.hp.com Send requests to homebrew-request%hpfcmr at hplabs.hp.com [Please do not send me requests for back issues] Archives are available from netlib at mthvax.cs.miami.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thursday, 13 Sep 1990 07:08:56 EST From: m14051 at mwvm.mitre.org (John DeCarlo) Subject: Brewing conference books >From: GARY 06-Sep-1990 2102 <mason at habs11.enet.dec.com> >Having just purchased what I thought to be all of the >transcripts from the AHA conferences, I discovered that there is >a hole in the offering. The "Best of" book is 1-5, and the >individuals start with 7 and go through 9. Does anyone know >what happened to 6? Just curious. I don't know, I assume it is out of print, maybe? I have it at home, but bought it from a local homebrew supply shop. It is an interesting volume. The "Volume 6" is hidden and not at all obvious compared to the other issues. I have a sneaking suspicion that it was published first, then demand cause them to come out with a "Best of" book and continue from there. Internet: jdecarlo at mitre.org Usenet: at ... at !uunet!hadron!blkcat!109!131!John_Decarlo Fidonet: 1:109/131 Return to table of contents
Date: Thursday, 13 Sep 1990 07:09:47 EST From: m14051 at mwvm.mitre.org (John DeCarlo) Subject: Re: Sanitizing Bottles >Date: Tue, 28 Aug 90 15:17 EDT >From: <BILODEAP%BCVMS.BITNET at mitvma.mit.edu> > >Sorry about this, bu tI need to ask: > >What is the best *NON-Toxic* method of sterilizing bottles? I prefer putting the bottles in dishwasher, no detergent, and using the "heated dry" option after a rinse. This may not actually *sterilize* the bottles, but should do at least as good a job of sanitizing them as a bleach solution. Internet: jdecarlo at mitre.org Usenet: at ... at !uunet!hadron!blkcat!109!131!John_Decarlo Fidonet: 1:109/131 Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 90 10:15 EST From: <R_GELINA%UNHH.BITNET at mitvma.mit.edu> (Russ Gelinas) Subject: questions Question time. Are we ready? Ok, let's go: I'm having an *interesting* time brewing a stout. Standard ingredients, with Wyeast Irish Ale yeast. The yeast package didn't swell very well, and I couldn't wait any longer, so I pitched it after it swelled to about 1.5". It fermented slowly, and had no blow-off. After a couple of days it was bubbling happily, so I let it go. After 3 weeks it was still bubbling every 18 seconds (still in primary). Last night I transferred it to a secondary, and the specific gravity was 1.040! I don't know the OG, but it would have been in the 1.060 range. It tasted good, albeit a little sweet. It even had some carbonation. It didn't seem to be bubbling very much in the secondary, so I loosened the cap to the water seal, and ZING! it starts bubbling away. AHA! That explains the slight carbonation; I've had my stout "bottled" in a carboy, and was forcing the CO2 back into solution. SO, the question(s) is(are): how has the increased CO2/increased pressure/other factors affected the yeast population? Should I pitch some more yeast? Or call it a sweet stout and smile? Hops - ---- I have a "new" (planted in April) Hallertaur hops plant. It grew very well, and produced some (less than 10) nice cones. I picked those and used them, but that was it, no more cones. The plant is still fine. What gives? I - I've got an infection in one of my batches (bacteria-I had some friends check it in a bio.lab). This is the batch with the white globules as a ring-around- the-bottle. It tastes OK (I think), and I hate to throw the whole batch away, since some bottles have very little sign of infection. So what I did is pour the beer through a coffee filter, to catch any good size critters. It seems to work; the beer comes out nice and clear, but also quite flat. The coffee filter has a nice head, though. Any ideas out there? (other than toss it or drink it the way it is) Russ Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 90 9:08:25 PDT From: Marty Albini <martya at sdd.hp.com> Subject: Re: low-cal soda > From: Dave Sheehy <dbs at hprnd> > > I have been interested in making a lower calorie soda pop especially after > making a few batches and seeing exactly how MUCH sugar there really is in > soda pop. Here is an idea I've come up with that I'm going to try on my next > batch. Fructose tastes 70% sweeter than sucrose (according to some nutrition > book I read) and they are nearly equal in caloric content. Therefore, if I > substitute fructose (available in bulk at my local Raley's) for the sucrose > and use 1/2 as much I should end up with about half the calories and a drink > that is a little less sweet than 'normal'. Ought to work. A lot of commercial sodas use fructose, and the only problem I could see is that the result will have less body. Ever notice how thin diet soda tastes compared to regular? > My main concern is the possibility > of exploding bottles. If the sugar density is acting as a preservative and > preventing the yeast from fermenting then I may be in trouble. On the other > hand if the lack of nutrients is the controlling factor in yeast activity then > I should be ok. I am less concerned with flavor differences due to the > fructose. Opinions? Yeast without nutrients can't reproduce--but they don't stop eating. They will slowly create more and more CO2 unless something stops them, like refrigeration, irradiation, chemical attack, or court order. ****WARNING****WARNING****WARNING****WARNING****WARNING**** I'm not a biologist. The above paragraph represents opinions based on experience and hearsay. The author reserves the right to be full of it. ****WARNING****WARNING****WARNING****WARNING****WARNING**** Here's what I do to make soda. I boil the water in my big brewpot, add sugar, stir, bring back to a boil, remove heat, add extract, and pour the whole mess immediately into a sanitized keg. I let it cool overnight, chill the next morning, and artificially carbonate. Result: four-five gallons of fizzy soda, no sediment, and no exploding bottles. All for about an hour's worth of effort. If kegging isn't an option, you might try bottling with a carefully weighed chunk of dry ice in each bottle. On the same note, I'm very interested in collecting recipes for root beer. The extracts I've tried have been really disappointing, and I'd like to find a "mashing" recipe. Even a pointer to good extracts would be appreciated. - -- ________________________________________________Marty Albini___________ "To enjoy the flavor of life, take big bites. Moderation is for monks." phone : (619) 592-4177 UUCP : {hplabs|nosc|hpfcla|ucsd}!hp-sdd!martya Internet : martya at sdd.hp.com CSNET : martya%hp-sdd at hplabs.csnet US mail : Hewlett-Packard Co., 16399 W. Bernardo Drive, San Diego CA 92127-1899 USA Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 90 10:46:37 -0600 From: cook at stout.atd.ucar.EDU (Forrest Cook) Subject: Beer Marketing (Slugs) Perhaps Budweiser should change their icon to SLUGS Mackenzie :-) I can see it now: "4 out of 5 slugs recommend BUD!" Forrest Cook cook at stout.atd.ucar.edu WB0RIO {husc6|rutgers|ames|gatech}!ncar!stout!cook Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 90 10:48:10 PDT From: Jeff La Coss <jlacoss at venera.isi.edu> Subject: please add me to you august mailing list Thanks, Jeff =============================================================== | USC/Information Sciences Institute | Office: | | 4676 Admiralty Way | 213-822-1511 x235 | | Suite 1000 | FAX: | | Marina Del Rey, CA 90292 | 213-823-6714 | =============================================================== Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 90 10:38:43 PDT From: fredc at pro-humanist.cts.com (Fred Condo) Subject: California beer tax proposal In-Reply-To: message from fredc gak at sun.com asks about the nickel a drink tax in California. Since the proposed tax you mentioned in HBD 495 is an initiative, you should be able to get the text from the Secretary of State's office in Sacramento. You would probably be able to get it from Anheuser Busch or some other beer industry source, as well, since they are in opposition and have proposed a competing, 2-cents-a-drink initiative to suck votes away from the nickel tax proposal. The nickel proposal is Proposition 134. *........... Fred Condo. Pro-Humanist BBS: 818/339-4704, 300/1200 bps INET: fredc at pro-humanist.cts.com BitNet: condof at clargrad matter: PO Box 2843, Covina, CA 91722 Amer. Online: FredJC Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 90 10:52:30 PDT From: freeman at idaho.Inference.Com (Mark E. Freeman) Subject: Re: Homebrew Digest #495 (September 13, 1990) If I remember correctly, a completely unsubstantiated rumor, the cost to produce a beer is only cents. I think it was less than 10. The rest of the costs are packaging, transportation, taxes and of course price mark-ups for every one who touches the product. With taxes being the biggest percent, and transportation next. And, as Mike said, packaging costs where more than the ingredient costs. Can anyone verify or disprove any parts of this rumor? Or was I just dreaming. It`s entirely believable. First of all, when you're buying ingredients wholesale by the ton, things get very inexpensive. And it`s not just the beer industry, most products cost *many* times the value of the raw materials. I guess alot of people don't realize how much money is spent on advertising and packaging so that that product looks Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 90 15:14:20 EDT From: Chris Shenton <chris at asylum.gsfc.nasa.gov> Subject: Re: Baltimore Brewpubs Tom Nolan writes: > BBC is a German-style Beergarden with a menu to > match. Both have good brewpub-style beer. Unfortunately, BBC has nixed their German food (in favor of the usual chicken wings and stuff -- why bother?). The beer is still excellent, however. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 90 15:20:51 EDT From: Chris Shenton <chris at asylum.gsfc.nasa.gov> Subject: Re: Baltimore Brewpubs Tom Nolan writes: > BBC is a German-style Beergarden with a menu to > match. Both have good brewpub-style beer. Unfortunately, BBC has nixed their German food (in favor of the usual chicken wings and stuff -- why bother?). The beer is still excellent, however. Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 90 15:36:30 EDT From: mark at zippy.cs.umass.edu (mark gryska) Subject: New Amsterdam and F.X. Matt's Brewery Regarding New Amsterdam, both the ale and the lager are brewed in Utica, NY by the F.X. Matt's Brewing Company. New Amsterdam started its life in 1982 as a contract brew by F.X. Matt's for the Old New York Brewing Company founded by Matthew Reich. When he had raised enough capital he opened his Manhattan brewery in 1985. However, this turned out to be a very expensive operation and he closed his brewery in the fall of 1987 and New Amsterdam was contract brewed by F.X. Matt's once again. The last news I heard was that F.X. Matt's had purchased New Amsterdam from Matthew Reich. F.X. Matt's contracts a number of different beers, about a dozen or so, which are sold all over this country. Last month our club, the Valley Fermenters, conducted a tasting of some of these beers along with their brand "Matt's Premium" - an American Pilsner Lager. We wanted to determine whether their beer had a characteristic "house flavor" (as some people thought it did) and if so, what was it? It turned out that most of these beers were very similar not only in flavor but also in color. The most prominent differences were in the hops; some had strong hops aroma and flavor while others were less assertive, there was also variance in the type of hops used although continental varieties were most common. The color of these beers ranged from copper to golden, the flavors could be described as clean, an emphasis toward maltiness and perhaps a bit on the grainy side. The hops were balanced nicely against the maltiness making for a very drinkable beer. As a criticism, I would say that all of these beers lacked some character, I felt that there was very little that stood out to make them unique. It seemed that all these beers were produced in a very similar manner. To their credit this brewery was one of the first in the country to produce contract brews. As a side note: I had been on a tour of the brewery just a week or so before our tasting. They have a nice tour with lots of antiques and beer memorabilia, it is a family run business and has that feel to it. The tour guides are high school kids so don't expect to engage in a lot of technical beer talk, you may be able to arrange a special tour if that is what you are looking for. The brewery also produces "Sparkling Ale" as well as "Old English Ale" which are very delicious as I recall. These products are sold only in kegs, when in Utica you might find them at Tiny's Grill on the corner of Mandeville and State. - mg Our tasting consisted of: Matt's Premium Lager Manhattan Gold Brooklyn Lager New Amsterdam Ale Portland Lager Dock Street Amber Harpoon Golden Lager Harpoon Ale Saranac 1888 Season's Best 1988, 1989 Note that we did not sample some of the beers that were more likely to be on the outside of the spectrum - for instance, Newman's Albany Amber or Brooklyn Brown. gryska at cs.umass.edu mark at zippy.cs.umass.edu Return to table of contents
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 90 16:22:38 CDT From: bradley at dehn.math.nwu.edu (R. Bradley) Subject: Balling Plato First of all, apologies for forgetting to sign my "vexing vortices" in #494. And many thanks to Ed Falk for the Douglas Adams reference in #495. Dare I venture to suggest that if it takes on the order of 24 hours for the Coriolus effect to overcome the inertia of spinning water in a tub, then it won't make much of a difference to the industrious homebrewer rinsing her bottles? The real reason for this note is give the formula for mash efficiency. Most of you probably have 3-scale hydrometers. We all know what the specific gravity scale measure (no? Weight of one litre of wort in kilograms. Careful, though, it's 1.043 kg., NOT a metric ton and change.) The potential accohol is just SG re-scaled by about 7.5, for those of us without calculators. The (relatively) unknown third scale is degrees Plato (or Balling or Brix). Quite simply, it measures the percentage, by weight, of dissolved solids. However, since it assumes that the solvent is pure water, it can only really measure this before fermentation. This is quite neat, since if you multiply the volume (in litres) of the wort by the SG, you know how much your batch weighs. Then Mr. Plato tells you how much is solid stuff. That's virtually all sugar... hops don't amount to much. Therefore, (grain brewers particularly take note) you can compute how much of the stuff you started with actually got in to the beer. You should expect 60 to 80% of the grist, by weight, to end up in the wort. Husk and such accounts for most of what doesn't go through. The proportion of such insoluble mattrr varies among types of malt and adjunct. You can also use the figure to get an idea of how efficient your sparge is...could be handy, for example, if you're experimenting with a new sparging technique. Here goes. Let: S = original gravity, specific gravity scale, P = original gravity, degrees Plato, V = volume of wort, litres, and W = weight of grist in kilograms. Then S V P efficiency = --------- . 100 W Suppose a 5 U. S. gallon (18.9 litre) batch used 8 lb. of malt (3.6 kilos) and had an original gravity of 1.043 (which corresponds to about 11 degrees Plato). There's about 2.17 kg. of solids in the wort (a shade less than 5 lb.) and the efficiency is 60%. If you insist on pounds and gallons, replace the constant in the denominator by 11.96 (OK, round to 12). Remember, British and old- fashioned Canadian subscribers, that's a 3.8 litre U. S. gallon. The computation of the constant for 4.4 litre imperial gallons is left to the reader as an exercise . That, and a 1000-word essay on "Why Canada adopted the metric system and why America should do the same". Happy calculating, but even happier brewing, Rob (bradley at math.nwu.edu) Return to table of contents
Date: 13 Sep 90 16:25:28 EDT From: Jay Hersh <75140.350 at compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Homebrew Digest #493 (September 11, 1990) Some comments folks. New Amsterdam isn't New to us in the Northeast. Its brewed at Matts in Utica who contract brew a number of beers including Newmans Albany Amber, Philadelphias Dock Street, One of the maine beers I think Portland Lager, Commonwealth brewing Co bottled products and a few others. I had an opportunity to speak with one of the Matt Brothers. He said that contract brewing has been a godsend to their brewery which had been shrinking the amount of output (leading to available excess capacity) through the late 70s and early 80s. Matts is known for some of Upstate NY's true swill beers like Utica Club, and Matts Beer Balls. The Saranac 1888 is OK, and their XMAS beers are respectable amber lagers. Their best brewing is done to someone elses recipe. Glad to hear the oatmeal stout is going well for patrick. He mentioned blueberry beers. I had tried a commercial golden colored beer by Thomas Kemper of Oregon I believe that had a distinct blueberry flavor imparted by a strain of yeast that created the right ester. Anyone else ever tried this and have they seen this yeast strain out and about?? Rick Z (and others) beer is taxed almost everywhere in the world by % alcohol (the reason why Irish Guiness is the world's weakest Guinness as Ireland has one of the highest alcohol taxes). Tellnig the tax amount would also tip off the strength, and we can't allow that eh?? With regard to external fridge controls I know lots of people who use them and none have reported any problems. - Jay H Return to table of contents
End of HOMEBREW Digest #496, 09/14/90 ************************************* -------
[Prev HBD] [Index] [Next HBD] [Back]
HTML-ized on 06/29/00, by HBD2HTML version 1.2 by K.F.L.
webmaster at hbd.org, KFL, 10/9/96