FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
		Rob Gardner, Digest Coordinator


Contents:
  Hazel Nuts in Bottles (slezakl)
  Keg modifications for brewpot - Request for info (John S. Link)
  Subscription (Christophe Legasse)
  B-Brite longevity (Curt Freeman)
  re:  homebrew club responsibility question (Brew Free or Die!  11-Feb-1992 1115)
  Re:  Homebrew Digest #821 (February 11, 1992) (Joe Gabriel)
  Freezing hops (Jacob Galley)
  Recession Era Beer Sales ("Dan Barkey, Libraries of the Claremont Colleges")
  Measuring Levels from Micah Millspaw (Bob Jones)
  re cheap liquid yeast (Chip Hitchcock)
  2row VS 6row (korz)
  beginner's help ("ROBERT W. HOSTETLER")
  Re: Homebrew Digest #820 (February 10, 1992)  (Mr. Tom Denny)" <dennyt at prism.CS.ORST.EDU>
  Grain Storage (C.R. Saikley)
  Marcon Filter ("John Cotterill")
  Extract Efficiency ("John Cotterill")
  Re: new staling-inhibiting bottle caps (John Polstra)
  We can't believe it worked ;^) (Patrick J. Volkerding)
  Hooray for Free Enterprise (Jeff Frane)
  Trying again and again (Jeff Frane)
  Re: new stalling-inhibiting bottle caps (Carlo Milono)


Send submissions to homebrew at hpfcmi.fc.hp.com
Send requests to homebrew-request@ hpfcmi.fc.hp.com
[Please do not send me requests for back issues!]
Archives are available from netlib at mthvax.cs.miami.edu


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 Feb 92 00:44:44 -0800
From: slezakl at atlantis.CS.ORST.EDU
Subject: Hazel Nuts in Bottles

Hello All:

I just racked a batch of Hazel-Nut Brown Ale into my carboy and I got a crazy
idea.  What would happen if I put a hazel-nut in each bottle as a form of
"dry-hopping" (actually "dry-nutting" in this case)?  I have been reading the
HBD and rec.crafts.brewing for sometime now and have not seen this question
asked, so I dont think it is a FAQ but if it is I apologize.  Anyway would
this add to the nut flavor of my ale?  Or would it add some possible 
contamination of some kind?  I dont know, I was at a micro-brew festival and
they had a special edition of Rogue Red where they had dry-hopped the keg,
so would this work with the nuts.  Or is this just a nutty idea?  I might
add that I added some crushed roasted hazel nuts to the boil for 25 minutes,
I dont know if that makes any differnce to this situation or if will effect
the brew in anyway whatsoever, good or bad.  Well let me know what you
people think...  Thanks!

Lee J. Slezak


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 11 Feb 92 9:00:08 EST
From: John S. Link <link at prcrs.prc.com>
Subject: Keg modifications for brewpot - Request for info

Based on discussions on the digest, I've obtained a keg which I intend
to modify to use as a brewpot. (I've also ordered a propane King
Kooker, can't wait for my 'toy' to arrive).

I've read different opinions on how to modify these from DIY with a
metal cutting blade and circular saw to take it to a welding shop and
have them cut it with a plasma cutter.  I tend to do things myself, but
would hate to ruin the keg.

I've also read that it should be cut at the weld running around the
keg at the top.  Has anyone ever considered cutting through the top,
keeping the existing handles in place?

What does one use as a lid?  If I decide to take it to a welder, what
costs should I expect?  Should I have a tap installed at the bottom?

Please respond via email and I will summarize if there is interest.

Thanks,
John Link

Return to table of contents


Date:    Tue, 11 Feb 1992 8:29:03 -0500 (EST)
From: 1170012 at SAPHIR.ULAVAL.CA (Christophe Legasse)
Subject: Subscription


Hello,

I'd like to add my name to the Homebrew mailing list.


Christophe Legasse

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 11 Feb 92 9:49:58 EST
From: Curt Freeman <curtf at hpwart.wal.hp.com>
Subject: B-Brite longevity
Full-Name: Curt Freeman

Anne (anelliga at hamlet.Prime.COM) writes:

> I use B-Brite to sanitize my bottles.  I mix it up by the gallon
> and use and re-use and re-use it. ... So far I haven't had any problems.

I too re-used B-Brite, until my supplier told me that B-Brite solutions are
only effective sanitizers when fresh, and should not be kept around for
re-use as one might do with a metabisulfite solution. I asked this digest
for opinions, and was ignored. So I'll try again with a currently topical
twist...  Assuming B-brite solutions lose their sanitizing ability over
time, would it not be a septic-tank-friendly method of cleaning/sanitizing
equipment if one waits a day or two before disposing of "spent" B-Brite?

- --
Curt Freeman             curtf at hpwala.wal.hp.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 11 Feb 92 08:18:32 PST
From: Brew Free or Die! 11-Feb-1992 1115 <hall at buffa.enet.dec.com>
Subject: re:  homebrew club responsibility question

A. Dietz writes:

>How do you handle, ummm, "release of responsibility" in your club?  
>Namely, if someone gets into trouble after a meeting, you don't want 
>the club to be held responsible.  

Great subject, thanks for bringing it up.  Unfortunately, I can't add
anything to what you wrote, because we function the same way as you do,
i.e. we all have an understanding that "you're on your own".  Basically,
I think members who host meetings in their homes are covered under their
homeowners or renters policies, and members going to and from those meetings
are covered by their car insurance policies.  If someone "gets into trouble
after a meeting", they'd have to be a real sh*t to go after the club or the
meeting host.  Perhaps we ought to draft a release and get members to sign
it.

Which brings up my own question on this subject.  Our club is planning a
bus trip to four Vermont breweries in March.  We expect several non-club
members to attend.  Anyone know what our liability is?  There's no autos
involved during the trip, but there will be before and after, since we'll
be meeting at a central location.  I imagine the hotel's policies provide
some coverage while we are there, and the same for the breweries.  And I'm
guessing the bus company has some liability converage.  Just wondering.

If any armchair lawyers care to reply to me via mail with comments or
suggestions for a release statement, I'd appreciate it.

 Dan Hall   Digital Equipment Corporation   MKO1-2/H10   Merrimack, NH   03054
 hall at buffa.enet.dec.com		        ....!decwrl!buffa.dec.com!hall
  
  "Persons intoxicated with wine pass out lying on their faces, while those
          drunk with beer invariably lie on their backs" --Aristotle

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 11 Feb 92 09:16 EST
From: jgg at pdn.paradyne.com (Joe Gabriel)
Subject: Re:  Homebrew Digest #821 (February 11, 1992)


Please take  me off the HomeBrew mailing list

Thank You,
Joe


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 11 Feb 92 11:54:04 CST
From: Jacob Galley <gal2 at midway.uchicago.edu>
Subject: Freezing hops

Does anyone out there blanch at the thought? When I stocked up on hops
pellets out at the Chicago Indoor Gardening Supply, I noticed that the
guy pulled them out of what looked like a freezer. (I guess it could
have been set at a higher temp though.) But I've never seen
any mention of freezing hops on the Digest, just refridgerating them.

So? Anyone have any comments about freezing hops during long term
storage?

Jake.

Reinheitsgebot <-- "Keep your laws off my beer!" <-- gal2 at midway.uchicago.edu

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1992 10:03 PDT
From: "Dan Barkey, Libraries of the Claremont Colleges"
Subject: Recession Era Beer Sales

Thanks for the great post for relating last year's beer sales!  The
alcoholic beverage industry has seen declining unit sales as a result
of less consumption per capita.  This is hardly surprising considering
our national hypochondria despite great gains in health and fitness.
As a result the beer industry is in a pickle because consumption equals
unhealthy behavior. It would have been interesting to see figures for
"light" beer sales.  It is the only segment keeping the beer industry
healthy.  Recent ads suggest that you can guzzle beer yet keep that
firm chisled look--well, maybe.  The industry is becoming increasingly
fragmented, which means that brewers can't simply push and rely upon
one brand to support the firm.  AB's declining Budweiser sales reflect this
trend.  The industry is changing into many different niches, with each
group representing different consumption patterns and lifestyles.

On a different note, the unit sales figures are also interesting because
recessionary times usually brought spurts of growth in the beer industry.
You know, down on your luck, out of job, stressed about the economy--
go drink more beer.  Maybe it was because the recession didn't really
hit home until the latter half of 1991.  Any decline in sales for any
fully American firm such as AB is indeed distressing.  Less sales means
less employment--and that is not encouraging.


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1992 10:08 PDT
From: Bob Jones <BJONES at NOVA.llnl.gov>
Subject: Measuring Levels from Micah Millspaw


        There is a rather simple solution to the problem of
determining the amount of wort in your kettle. Instead of mugging
the wall of your kettle and then still not be able to see the
markings. Why not calibrate the side of your brew spoon or paddle or
whatever else you stir the wort with. Measure the inside diameter of
the kettle and the depth of the kettle, use this to find the volume.
There are 231 cubic inches per gallon, use this to determine how far
apart to place your graduation marks.
        My brew spoon is a large oak paddle it is graduated from 5 to
20 gallons, the division lines were filed in then I stamped the
numbers above them. I just dip it in touch bottom the pull it out to
see the wet line. Works great, no head burns.
                                          Micah Millspaw 2/7/91








Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 11 Feb 92 13:57:57 EST
From: cjh at vallance.HQ.Ileaf.COM (Chip Hitchcock)
Subject: re cheap liquid yeast

from NCDSTEST at NSSDCA.GSFC.NASA.GOV (re Wyeast):
>Jeff is right, Dave and Jenny have done well.  The problem is they charge
>an outrageous amount for thier product and they wont sell direct to YOU
>the homebrewer (I know, cause I tried hard).  

   There are very few manufacturers of anything who will sell directly to
an end user. (I've tried for a lot of different items where I was buying so
much it should have worked, e.g. $1-2k of electrical conduit.) There are a
lot of reasons for this; probably some B-school theories, the differences
between a cash-register operation and a billed account, the desire of one's
retailers not to lose business (some won't carry any products from a
manufacturer who also retails). I don't know the specifics of Wyeast, but I
don't think it's reasonable to slam them for not doing retail even if
they're not a corporate giant. (Look at how many ads in ZYMURGY say
 -"dealers only"-!)
   As to cost---see if you can find out how much your shop pays for Wyeast.
Consider that books, which don't spoil, are wholesaled for AT LEAST 40% off
cover price (the big chain stores sometimes squeeze out the jobbers and
deal directly with publishers for something like 60% off). The marginal
cost of manufacturing a product is a tiny fraction of what it has to be
sold for to be worth the stages of getting it to the user, especially when
the product is sold a long way from where it's made. (Think what you'd pay
for soda if it weren't packaged nearby.)
   My personal slant (sorry...) is that I would have to put a very low
value on my time to get an economic justification for homebrewing. This
doesn't mean throwing away money, but it does mean that ~$4 to virtually
guarantee the quality of a critical element in brewing can be reasonable.
If I ever get time and space I may try culturing my own yeast---but more
because I miss lab work than for the $/time tradeoff.

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 11 Feb 92 13:28 CST
From: korz at ihlpl.att.com
Subject: 2row VS 6row

Tony asks about 2row and 6row malt.  Here's something Bob Devine posted
a while ago:

>Now, through the miracle of ASCII terminal graphics, here's the
>difference between 2-row and 6-row barley:
>
>2-row (viewed from the end)
>	   O
>	 . * .
>	 . * .
>	   O
>6-row (viewed from the end)
>	   O
>	 O * O
>	 O * O
>	   O
>
>* = the stalk (it's supposed to be round...)
>O = the mature kernels
>. = the IM-mature kernels (they never really grow)
>
>6-row has more husk material per kernel than 2-row (2-row is plumper)
>and the current 6-row varieties have proportionally more protein.
>
>Bob "now raising computer programs, not cows" Devine
>

I'd like to add that whether it's 2-row or 6-row, it could be undermodified
or well-modified.  We can get Pale Malt here in the states and if you
post a recipe in which you describe an (single-step) infusion mash, we will
interpret it as requiring well-modified (Pale) Malt.  Lager Malt is what we
generally call undermodified malt (i.e. requiring either step infusion or
decoction, with a protein rest).

Al.

Return to table of contents


Date: 11 Feb 92 14:40:00 CST
From: "ROBERT W. HOSTETLER" <8220rwh at INDINPLS.NAVY.MIL>
Subject: beginner's help


I'm extremely new to homebrewing; so new that I don't know what I need yet
for equipment, recipes, and ingredients.

Could someone recommend basic equipment and an easy recipe for a beginner to
try?


Bob Hostetler					8220rwh at indy.navy.mil



Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 11 Feb 92 12:24:34 PST
From: "(Mr. Tom Denny)" <dennyt at prism.CS.ORST.EDU>
Subject: Re: Homebrew Digest #820 (February 10, 1992) 



  |Here is my list of Bay Area brewpubs, broken down by mass transit transfer
  |point.  Most of the directional information is pretty general (I don't have
  |street addresses), but should get you there.  I make no claims of completene
  ||ss;
  |this is off the top of my head, and the top of my head is pretty weak when i
  ||t
  |comes to the San Jose area (I know that there is a Gordon Biersch and a Tied
  |House there, as well as a third brewpub downtown; I just don't know where th
  ||ey
  |are located).


Thanks for your message about brewpub locations!  I was amazed at how many
people responded so quickly!

I was able to obtain a database someone previously made that contains over
1000 locations.  It's out dated, and I will be slowly updating this database
and possibly in the future will send it back to the author.

Thanks again for your quick reply!

							 O_o
Tom Denny	dennyt at prism.CS.ORST.EDU		#( )#
CIS: 		73737, 624	      			  U   - ack, thptt

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 11 Feb 92 13:31:33 PST
From: grumpy!cr at uunet.UU.NET (C.R. Saikley)
Subject: Grain Storage

From: hartman at varian.varian.com (John Hartman)

>In HBD #819 Walter Gude asks for feedback on long term storage of
>crushed grain.  I asked the same question around Christmas time and got
>no response--not even private e-mail.  My conclusion is that no one has
>experienced any problems with crushed grain going bad.  My supplier,
>Brewmaster in San Leandro, CA, told me it would be fine for six months.
>I suspect that if kept clean, cool and dry it will last closer to a year.

OK, here's a data point. I stored about 20 lbs. of *uncracked* grain for
three months. It was in a paper grain sack, which was placed in two plastic
trash bags that were sealed by tying knots in their open ends. It was kept
in my basement (which is dry) at about 60 degrees. 

Upon opening, I was struck by a distinct lack of malt aroma. The grain was
a bit soft, and the flavor was less malty than before. It tasted somewhat
"stale". Being suspicious of the grain's freshness, I got a new bag (both
came from Brewmaster in SL) and compared them side-by-side. The old grain 
seemed even worse next to a fresh bag.

I decided to go ahead and brew with a 50/50 mixture of old and new malt.
The resulting brew tasted fine (pale ale) but the extract was lower than
I usually get. I attribute this to the grain. The brew did not feature
malt as its primary flavor component, so it's possible that defects were
masked - don't know.

As others have pointed out, the ability of grains to keep is highly dependent
on storage conditions, and this was by no means a contolled experiment.
However, it is reasonable to assume that cracked malt would stale more
quickly than whole, whatever the storage conditions. I can't store whole
grain for three months, so I wouldn't try it with cracked.

Another data point:

Three years ago or so, I was visiting the old Devil Mtn Brewery in Walnut
Creek. They had cracked their grain that morning in preparation for the
day's brewing. Subsequently, a valve failed that prevented them from
brewing, and they were unable to brew till the following day. They deemed 
it necessary to compensate for this delay by adding 10% more grain to get 
the same yields. Your mileage will definitely vary!

CR

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 11 Feb 92 14:54:55 PST
From: "John Cotterill" <johnc at hprpcd.rose.hp.com>
Subject: Marcon Filter
Full-Name: "John Cotterill"

I finally broke down and bought a filter system for my beer.  I know this
is extravagant, but what can I say?  I just like gadgets!  Anyhow, I 
pumped my first batch through it over the weekend and thought the gang
might want to hear how it went.  BTW this was a timely purchase as I am
doing a blind tasting of commercial beers at a party next weekend.  I intend
to slip one of my beers in to see where it gets rated.  The haze would have
given it away for sure.

I purchsed the five plate version and used two #00 and two #4 filters in
it.  My first concern was sanitation.  The unit could be sanitized without
any troubles, but the filter pads were another story.  The guy at Marcon
said to just use them out of the pouch.  He did not recommend any pressure
cooking either (they destroy the filter).  I decided to soak them in Iodophor
for a minute.  Then I put the filter together and pumped 3 gals of hot boiling
water through it.  The filter leaked quite a bit around the pads but the
amount was acceptable.  I then hooked up my keg of beer it pumped it through.
The keg was set to 15 psi, and the beer temperature was about 36 Deg F.
The transfer took about 15 minutes for 5 gals.  Cleanup was a snap, and the leak
rate became slower during the transfer.  I think the beer crud plugged the
leaks.

Observations and comments:  The beer came out crystal clear (e.g. free of
haze/particles - the malty color was still there!).  I was very impressed.
Before filtering, I poured a sample glass.  The color was identical between
pre and post filtering.  The only thing missing was the cloudiness.  I did
a side by side tasting, and noticed that the filtered beer did taste different.
It seemed a little less hoppy, and bit weaker in body.  The taste was not
objectionable at all, but I think that I would take this into account during
recipe formulation.

I also pounded the beer (and hot H2O) through the filter.  I had my beer system
already at 15psi and just made the connection to the filter.  I think that
this pressure shock broke small pieces of filter pad off into the brew.
Next time, I will hook it up with no pressure, and slowly increase to 15psi.
I also changed the nylon hose barbs (come with system) to stainless flare
fitting for compatibility.

All in all, I am satisfied.  I will have to do a few more batches before I
can really recommend the expense to anyone.  I'll pass on data once I get
a few more batches with the filter under my belt.

Does anyone have any suggestions on better ways to sanitize the filter pads,
and how to was the taste of the pads, and the cleaner out before forcing
beer through it?

JC
johnc at hprpcd.rose.hp.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 11 Feb 92 15:14:25 PST
From: "John Cotterill" <johnc at hprpcd.rose.hp.com>
Subject: Extract Efficiency
Full-Name: "John Cotterill"

How do you calculate the extract effeciency when doing full mash batches?
I have been using the following method, but I think that it may be
incorrect.  I take the total weight (lb) of grain, and divide it by the
batch size (gal).  I then mutliply this number, by the theoretical amount
of S.G. expected for 1 lb of grain in 1 gal H2O (e.g. for barley this is
around 1.028 - I would strip off the 1.0 and use the number 28 as the
multiplier).  I then compare this result to the original gravity of my
brew.  Comment?
JC
johnc at hprpcd.rose.hp.com

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 11 Feb 92 15:32:22 PST
From: polstra!jdp at uunet.UU.NET (John Polstra)
Subject: Re: new staling-inhibiting bottle caps

In HBD #821, tony at spss.com (Tony Babinec) writes:
> The anti-oxidant-capped beer was in no uncertain terms more hop- and
> spice-aromatic and hop-flavored than the regular capped beer.  Note
> that the tasting was not done blindly, but instead side-by-side, but
       ^^^ ^^^^^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^^^^
> there was no doubt regarding differences between the beers.

Look, I hate to say it, but IMHO the fact that a *blind* tasting was not
used invalidates your results.  The placebo effect is extremely
powerful, and it operates at the sub-conscious level.  I.e., the placebo
effect can easily make one have "no doubt" about something that's
absolutely false.  Even when you are tuned in to the possibility of
being fooled by the placebo effect ... you can be fooled by the placebo
effect.  There's really no way around this except by using a blind
study.  It's regrettable, but that's just the way our minds are
constructed.

Mind you, the special caps may in fact really help.  For all I know,
they do help dramatically.  We'll never know for sure until a blind
study is performed.

   John Polstra               polstra!jdp at uunet.uu.net
   Polstra & Co., Inc.           ...!uunet!polstra!jdp
   Seattle, Washington USA              (206) 932-6482
   "Self-knowledge is always bad news."  -- John Barth

Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 11 Feb 92 19:29:23 -0500
From: bf703 at cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Patrick J. Volkerding)
Subject: We can't believe it worked ;^)


Hey now :^)

We're down to the last six pack of batch #1, a brown ale made
from extract. Bottled it just a week and a half ago -- turned out
pretty tasty! We have no books on brewing, and had never seen anyone
brew beer before, so the HBD was pretty much our only source of info.
We really want to thank whoever suggested using IBC root beer bottles
(they work great) and especially whoever mentioned the cold-water trick
for stopping a boilover. That saved us from a nasty, gooey mess ;^)

Well, thanks everyone. It's great to be able to RDWHAHB :^)

Pat and Snake (the evil brewing assistant)


Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 11 Feb 92 10:52:08 PST
From: gummitch at techbook.com (Jeff Frane)
Subject: Hooray for Free Enterprise

Jim Busch:
> 
> In the HBD of 2/7/92, Jeff Frane notes the fine work that Wyeast has
> provided the brewing community.
> 
> Jeff is right, Dave and Jenny have done well.  The problem is they charge
> an outrageous amount for thier product and they wont sell direct to YOU
> the homebrewer (I know, cause I tried hard).

I have no quarrel with Jim's posting of information about an alternative
to WYeast, and he's correct: that's how capitalism is supposed to work.
I do not think, however, that WYeast's prices are outrageous, given the
reality of marketing homebrew supplies.  The production and packaging of
yeast is very labor intensive, and you must take into consideration the
fact that WYeast themselves, get only about half the package price; the
rest is mark-up at the retail level. (Incidentally, here in Portland the
price is $3.50.) I've also never considered that price to be for one
batch of beer; personally, I've always re-used my yeast and figure I get
ten to twenty gallons for a single packet. Not such a bad deal,
considering the quality of the resulting beer.

It's also a mistake, I think, to get chuffed at them for not dealing
with homebrewers directly. Having been involved in direct mailing work
myself, I understand what an enormous pain in the ass it is. This is
particularly true with a perishable product like the yeast, which is
shipped cold. Imagine yourself trying to fill orders for one or two
packets of yeast, hundreds a day, all over the country. You've got to
deal with UPS, get labels on everything, get it all shipped out and deal
with all the returns, all the complaints, etc etc etc.

Sound like fun?

If someone else once to do all that work, and deal with individual
homebrewers, I wish him/her luck, honestly. I think it's a great idea.
I'm just glad it isn't me.


- --Jeff Frane





Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 11 Feb 92 10:56:53 PST
From: gummitch at techbook.com (Jeff Frane)
Subject: Trying again and again



This is an attempt at remailing something that got bounced on the first
attempt. Some mis-information about the nature of malt and moisture that
I wanted to correct, got junked, so this looks a little out of context:

Malt is dried to protect it from the environment.  When the moisture
content rises about 4.5-5%--which it is prone to do after being
cracked--the malt is much more vulnerable to mold, and becomes
attractive to insects and rodents.  This is neither supposition nor
m****y, but information from the horse's mouth: a presentation at Great
Western Malting given to microbrewers.  I've got the pictures of bugs,
etc. at home.  The best solution for malt storage, according to the
people who ought to know, is to keep it tightly closed in a dry area,
and keep it whole.

> Subject: Wyeast starter?
> 
> Just bought my first packages of liquid yeast this morning and am anxious to
> try them out (london ale, and american ale). The package mentions making a
> starter only if the yeast is old, or if brewing more than five gallons of
> beer. I remember reading several times on the digest that a starter is
> necessary. However, I also remember reading that others say it is not. Should
> I make starter, and if I should, what is the best way to make one? Thanks.
> 
> Caitrin
> 
Caitrin, I think the intent of the label copy is that a starter is only
*necessary* with older yeast or greater volume.  If at all possible, you
should always make a starter to build up the yeast cell count.  I make
my starters up in volume and can them in a pressure cooker. Then
whenever I need one, I just pop open a jar.

> 
> From: Jon Binkley <binkley at beagle.Colorado.EDU>
> Subject: Wyeast Belgian Ale Yeast
> 
> 
> I tried the Wyeast Belgian Ale strain for the first time last week.
> Today I racked to secondary.  It seems to have fermented very
> quickly- 1.055 to 1.010 already. 

(snip)


> It reminded me a lot of the smell of wheat beers I've made using
> Wyeast's Bavarian Wheat strain.  This leads me to wonder if some
> of the character I'd been attributing solely to the S. delbrukei
> was really coming from the wheat malt.  Any comments?
> 
> I've read (here?) that to avoid the overproduction of esters by cultured
> Chimay yeast (allegedly the forebears of Wyeast's strain) one
> should ferment relatively cold.  For my batch, we kept it
> around 70 deg. the first night to get things rolling, then
> moved it to a room that stays pretty consistantly 55-60 deg.
> Today, after racking, we moved it to the "lager room," which
> stays at 45-50 deg.  Could this temperature profile be responsible
> for the banana esters?
> 
I did a beta-test on the Belgian ale yeast a couple of months ago, and
made a high-gravity beer that differed greatly from yours in
composition. I fermented at 65F (got similar fermentation: 1072 to 1012
in less than a week), and got big banana nose. Martin Lodahl tells me
that Chimay yeast should be used at 60F or lower and I'm sure he's
right. I will be doing that as soon as possible, brewing another batch.
When I first tasted the bottled beer, the banana ester was overwhelming;
it dropped considerably after the yeast had completely cleared out, and
has continued to recede as the bottles age.

(This yeast and temperature would be a good way to replicate the old Red
Hook--if anyone wanted to!)

> Subject: More Wyeast Woes
> 
> Add two more data points to the chart of burst Wyeast packages.
> The victims this time were a package of the #1056 Chico ale yeast,
> and an emergency backup package of the new "Steam" lager yeast.
> These were the first duds in about 30 packages we've bought in
> the past year.  Luckily my friend is on good terms with the guys
> at the brew supply shop, so he'll probably get his money back.
> Unluckily, we were both itching to brew today, and instead spent
> the day racking and tinkering with equipment.
> 
> Grrr... When are they going to fix these damned things?!?
> 
This has been a real headache for Dave, as I know the new packaging was
supposed to resolve burst seams.  Dave has been hassling with the
production firm, but in the meantime the solution is probably to try
starting them while the homebrew shop is open, and well before you
actually need to brew with the yeast.  *All* retailers should refund on
a burst package, or provide a replacement, and certainly any outfit
interested in return business will do that.


- --Jeff Frane





Return to table of contents


Date: Tue, 11 Feb 92 21:57:20 PST
From: cmilono at netcom.netcom.com (Carlo Milono)
Subject: Re: new stalling-inhibiting bottle caps



As tony at spss.com (Tony Babinec) put it...

>The AHA has distributed some anti-oxidation bottlecaps to homebrew clubs
>and encouraged their trial use.  Recently, I witnessed a comparison
>taste test.  Steve Kemp, of Brewers of the South Suburbs (of
>Chicago), brewed and bottled a hoppy spiced beer in December and randomly 
>capped his bottles with either regular bottle caps or the anti-oxidation
>caps.  Last Friday, this split batch was distributed at the B.O.S.S.
>meeting for side-by-side tasting.  The anti-oxidant-capped beer was in
>no uncertain terms more hop- and spice-aromatic and hop-flavored than
>the regular capped beer.  Note that the tasting was not done blindly,
>but instead side-by-side, but there was no doubt regarding differences
>between the beers.
>
>I have no other information on the bottle caps.  I am a member of AHA,
>but have no affiliation with the manufacturer of the caps.

  I recently visited Great Fermentations in Santa Rosa, CA (very impressive),
where I saw SmartCaps(tm) and Super SmartCaps(tm).  SmartCaps are supposed
to be O2 barriers, superior to standard caps, while the *Super* caps contain
a substance in the plastic seal much like silica gel, and will actually
absorb O2 from your precious neck-space.  

To activate this 'wonder of modern science', you simply moisten the cap.  This
can be done with beer or during sterilization by boiling...cap your brews and
all the residual O2 in the bottle will be bound within the cap.

I posted a query to 'rec.crafts.brewing' and recently got an email from a
fellow that worked for a brewery (name deleted to protect the holy).  He
stated that the manuf. of this product was named Zapata, and that his (ex?)
company used the SmartCaps for their premium lager; the next product was
called SorbCap (for absorbtion), and his company was in a trial with it.

I believe that SorbCap and Super SmartCap are one and the same, based on
my discussions with those at G.F. and the product label <include std.discl>.

One hint:  my package didn't come with any O2 absorbing material for storage,
though they were in a sealed bag with little air space.  He suggested that
I store them in a bag with silica gel to keep their effectiveness.

I paid $3.95 for 144 ($0.0273 each).  If they work as well as I have heard,
they are well worth the extra $0.02 (just *my* $0.02 worth!).

Return to table of contents



End of HOMEBREW Digest #822, 02/12/92