Black Box 4/BlackBox.cdr/textinfo/hbd85-.arj/HBD850.TXT

Text File | 1992-04-02 | 37.4 KB | 934 lines

HOMEBREW Digest #850                    Thu 26 March 1992


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


Contents:
  Calling the Valley Fermenters of Greenfield MA (Greg_Habel)
  Re: Yeast propogation, culture maintenance, etc (Mike Sharp)
  O-ring sanitation (joshua.grosse)
  Re: New Belgium Brewing Co (Jason Goldman)
  HBD Input (SCHOENBERG)
  boil,hops (Russ Gelinas)
  Wort Chiller, blending, going commercial (Aaron Birenboim)
  Leistag / Yeast Culturing (John L. Isenhour)
  HBD (SCHOENBERG)
  Wyeast (Again!) (Scott Bickham)
  Haze (Donald P Perley)
  Gelatin Finings... (stevie)
  ale vs. lager (Jay Hersh)
  Re: clarity (Brian Bliss)
  More Mash Mumblings (Norm Pyle)
  apricot beer (Scott Murphy)
  Amusing article (ingr!b11!mspe5!guy)
  Bottles (Eric Mintz)
  All-grain with bags?  (Eric Mintz)
  Haze (Eric Mintz)
  Our New Book ( George and Laurie Fix )
  England bound (Luigi Colaianni)
  Cat's meow 2 redux ("Spencer W. Thomas")
  Mashing, Break, Blending (Jack Schmidling)


Send submissions to [e-mail]
Send requests to [e-mail]
[Please do not send me requests for back issues!]
Archives are available from [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 25 Mar 92 07:59:40 edt
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Calling the Valley Fermenters of Greenfield MA


Is there anyone on HBD who belongs to the Valley Fermenters of
Greenfield MA?  As a member of the Trubadours of the Springfield MA
area, I am interested in having a joint club meeting sometime this
year.  I think such a meeting would be very beneficial to both
groups.  Please reply to me directly if possible.  Thanks.  Greg.




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

Date: Wed, 25 Mar 92 8:15:41 EST
From: Mike Sharp <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Yeast propogation, culture maintenance, etc

Conn Copas <[e-mail]> writes:
>I read with interest the description of Leistad's book. Could someone give
>me a better idea of how technical it is before I order it ?

This is a _very_ basic book on culturing.  In fact, 90-100% of it can be found
by looking through the old HBDs.  (not the actual text, rather the technique)
Essentially it covers making media from DME, sterile transfer techniques,
growth on slants/dishes, and the like.  All of this one could pick up
in about 15 minutes by asking a friendly bio-lab worker.

> I'm basically
>looking for something which goes beyond the Zymurgy yeast issue and discussions
>of how to streak out cultures. For example, use of diagnostic media to assess
>the identity of contaminants. Microscopy. Media for maintenance as opposed to
>growth. etc.

This is a much more difficult book to find.  In fact, I've never found one
that covers everything.  For identification you'll probably want to look
at _The_Yeast_ by Lodder & <mumble> Van Rij.  Don't expect a little book
though.  I also hope you have a professional lab to back you up on this.
(If you need to identify bacteria you should look at _Bergies_(sp?)_
Bacteriology_)  As for Microscopy, I was just looking at a book published
by Cambridge Press in 1990 called somthing like _Yeasts:Identification_
and_Classification_ that had photos of what various yeast look like.  It
also has information for identification using selective media.  Finally,
as far as media descriptions go, the Diffco catalog (Diffco, Detriot, MI)
is about 1000+ pages and lists more than a few differential and general
media, their uses, their component parts, etc.

Good luck.  You may quickly find yourself developing a background in
microbiology -- I did.

 --Mike

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

Date: Wednesday, 25 March 1992 8:27am ET
From: [e-mail]
Subject: O-ring sanitation


I've just obtained a keg (plastic, for bitters) and have a general
question about sanitation of O-rings.  If you've coated an O-ring
with silicone grease or some other sealing lubricant:

How do you sanitize it?

(or, do you not sanitize, and pray you don't infect the beer?)


- -----------------------------------------------------------------
Josh Grosse                                [e-mail]
Amdahl Corp.                               313-358-4440
Southfield, Michigan

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

Date: Wed, 25 Mar 92 08:00:35 -0700
From: Jason Goldman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: New Belgium Brewing Co

I think that people might be somewhat misled by the posting on the
New Belgium Brewing Co.  Jack's posting picked up on this, too.  Jeff
Leibesch (the spelling is almost certainly wrong) *is* brewing in his
basement, but not on a homebrew scale.  Legally, he is a microbrewery.
There were a number of issues he had to resolve to make both the
health department and the BATF happy.

If you get a chance to try Jeff's beer, take at advantage of it.  It's
very good stuff.

Jason
[e-mail]

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

Date:    Wed, 25 Mar 1992 9:16:13 CST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: HBD Input

In HBD #849,  [e-mail] (Bryan Gros) writes:

>I just bought 50 feet of 3/8 in O.D. copper tubing at the hardware
>store for $20.  I plan to coil it for a wort chiller, but what do I
>do with the ends?  Right now I think I'll put the coil in a bucket of
>ice water and run the hot wort through it into another bucket.

>So what do I do?  do I just get some 3/8 in I.D. plastic tubing to put
>on both ends?  If so, how do I start the siphon?  If I attached some
>sort of mini-funnel to the start of the chiller, I could fill the
>plastic tube with water and stick one end in the boiling wort and one
>end in the funnel.

My brew buddy and I did the exact same thing for a wort chiller.
However, we put the copper coil into the hot wort (after sterilizing
of course) and run cold water through the inside of the coil.  This
way the tough to clean part (i.e. the inside) never touches the wort.
We bought some clear plastic tubing and attached it to the copper
coil at both ends with small hose clamps.  We bought a fitting from the
hardware store that fits into the kitchen spigot one one end and into
a standard garden hose connection on the other.  The hose side fits
into a garden hose-to-plastic tubing adapter we got from a garden store.
We also took about two feet of coil off from the main coil and made a
small pre-chiller that we submerge in ice water to get the temperature
of the water below tap temperature.  We connected the pre-chiller to
the main coil in the same manner using plastic tubing and hose clamps.
You have to be a little careful turning on the faucet so that the pressure
doesn't buildup too fast and blow the tubing off!

We have had absolutely incredibly good success with this design.  We
can usually cool down 5 gallons of hot wort in less than 1/2 hour.
Hope this helps!

 -rich schoenberg

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

Date:    Wed, 25 Mar 1992 10:36:47 -0500 (EST)
From: [e-mail] (Russ Gelinas)
Subject: boil,hops

  Shreeful with the haze problem: you problem may be the 30 minute boil. A
60-90 minute boil is the "standard".  I think it would help coagulate more
of the haze-causing proteins.  You are using a wort chiller, too?

  Re. growing hops:  I've got a "Hops Growing Primer" that I can dish out to
anyone who's interested.  It's well-written and informative (I didn't write
it....).  Also, fwiw, I've got hops shoots already, about 5 of them.  3rd
year, should be productive.

Russ   [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 25 Mar 92 08:38:42 MST
From: [e-mail] (Aaron Birenboim)
Subject: Wort Chiller, blending, going commercial


Bryan Gross bought 50' of 3/8" copper tubing for $20, and was thinking
of making a wort chiller.  Well, for 5 gallon batches, 50' is awful long,
I might save 10 or 15' for other purposes.  I use copper for racking
tubes which can be used in boiling wort for a counterflow chiller.

  My first chiller was like Bryan suggested.  Rack through a coil
immersed in cold water.  I would advise running cold tap water into a bucket
with a hole in the bottom.  This way there is a flow over the coil keeping it at a more constant tempreature.

  I would also put hose barbs on the ends secured by compression fittings.
Remember to use teflon tape!

  My first chiller was 1/4", which is way too small.  It took like
an hour to chill with it, and it kept getting clogged.  For my second
chiller i made a double coil of 3/8" where the ends come out of the kettle.
Attach hose barbs, and you have a nice immersion chiller.

  I do not think i am experienced enough (yet!) to say how my beer
has changed with the new chiller.  Other factors out weigh this now.
(I still have trouble getting the mash to the temp I want)
However, in reading Fix, I am now a proponent of getting trub out.
Counterflow chilling will make a better cold break, and hence better
trub removal, but with risks.  To remove the trub, you must chill,
wait for trub to settle, then rack to fermenter and pitch.  Too
much worry.  With immersion chilling, just chill in kettle and
rack off trub.  You do not want trub around while yeast is in
the lag phase.  It will eat the trub to re-produce and create
compounds which may have off flavors.  In retrospect, i think
my extrack beers were inferior to my all grain beers because
of this trub problem.  When i went all grain, i started using
a wort chiller, and i think it was just the trub removal which
made the beer better.... not the all-grain process at all.

BLENDING:

   [e-mail] was intrigued by my mension of blending.
For the New Belgium Breweries trappist, jeff uses several yeast
strains.  A measured amount of wort is fermented by each yeast,
and blended at bottling.  This is done for consistency.  Jeff
did not mention his yeast types, but I'd immagine that most of
the wort might be his S. Cerevescae (sp?), some with other strain(s)
of S. cerevescae, and one or two with some Brett. yeasts.  By
blending these "pure" brews he si assured that 1 yeast strain
will not overwelm another.  It is also easier for him to keep
several pure cultures than one mixed culture due to the
yeast domination phenomenon.  In wine and lambic old and newer
batches are blended to mix the flavor benefits in each.  I know
little of wine, but geueze lambic mixes old lambic for sourness
and smoothness, newer lambic for its sharp tang, and fresh
lambic (possibly at high krauesen) for carbonation.

GOING COMMERCIAL:

   Jack S. was intrigued by going commercial in ones own basement.
Well... you need an awful big basement like New Belgium's.  I think
he has built a 4 barrel brewery, with several fermenters, and bottling
equipment.  He is still most likeley about the smallest micro
in the us.  Yes, he had to jump through many hoops.  Liquor liscenses,
health inspection, zoning ordinances.  Going commercial is more
than just a career move, its a lifestyle.  It takes a lot of
capitol, skill, time and energy.  I'll probobally make much more
money as a computer weenie, so going commercial has never entered
my mind.  Besides... I have a long way to go just in gaining
brewing skill and technique.

  aaron

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

Date:    Wed, 25 Mar 1992 9:48:14 -0600 (CST)
From: [e-mail] (John L. Isenhour)
Subject: Leistag / Yeast Culturing


Conn Copas <[e-mail]> asks about yeast culturing.

>I read with interest the description of Leistad's book. Could someone give
>me a better idea of how technical it is before I order it ? I'm basically
>looking for something which goes beyond the Zymurgy yeast issue and discussions
>of how to streak out cultures.

Leistad's book was very good when it was written, and is still useful for
introducing a beginning brewer to the basics (canning, starters, etc.).  The
Zymurgy Yeast Issue goes way beyond the techniques involved in Rodgers book.
A good microbiology book is the way to go.  Another good source of technique
and recipes I have found is commercial and home texts on mushroom cultivation,
they tend to be easier to understand from a laypersons point of view, stress
sanitation and have practical suggestions (for very expensive lab
counterparts).

John L. Isenhour - The HopDevil

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

Date:    Wed, 25 Mar 1992 10:24:55 CST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: HBD

I screwed up!!! I sent in a reply to a message from HBD #849 but
I didn't put in all of the information I meant to.  Please, Please, Please
do not post my last message onto HBD.  I sent it out earlier this morning.

Thanks so very, very much!

 -rich schoenberg

p.s. i'll probably clean up my response and resubmit.

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

Date: Wed, 25 Mar 92 11:44:22 EST
From: [e-mail] (Scott Bickham)
Subject: Wyeast (Again!)

I just successfully started my 5th Wyeast packet out of five.  Here's my
method:

1.  Lay the packet flat on a table.
2.  Cup the inner packet between your thumb and index finger.
3.  Pop with the fist of your other hand.

This keeps the pressure off of the top of the packet where the seal has
been known to break (the top seal was in noticably bad shape on this
particular package).

Good Luck!
   Scott

=========================================================================
   Internet: bickham@.msc.cornell.edu
   Bitnet:   [e-mail]
=========================================================================

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

Date: Wed, 25 Mar 92 11:25:25 EST
From: [e-mail] (Donald P Perley)
Subject: Haze


>   SO, I plan to try geletin in my next batch, which is new for my beer.
>What I don't understand though, is if I add it before botteling, and if it
>removes yeast and other heavy organic types, will there be enough yeast left
>around for bottle conditioning? Has anyong tried this before, and how has it
>worked for them?

I have only used it on wine, so I can't say from experience if you have to
repitch.

One thing to remember is that gelatin takes out some tannin, which is good
if you have an excess.  If you don't have enough, however, the gelatin
itself won't settle out, and will contribute to the haze.  I think the
stochiometric mix is about half as much tannin powder as gelatin (by
volume).

 -don perley

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

Date: Wed, 25 Mar 92 11:43:14 CST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Gelatin Finings...

David Klein <[e-mail]> writes:

>  In my last two batches (pale ales) I have had a problem with a haze in
>the bottle that takes up to 2 months to settle out. This is a recent
>problem and in the past my beers have become clear within a couple of weeks.
>The haze does taste like yeast, and thus gives an off flavor 'til its gone.

>   SO, I plan to try geletin in my next batch, which is new for my beer.
>What I don't understand though, is if I add it before botteling, and if it
>removes yeast and other heavy organic types, will there be enough yeast left
>around for bottle conditioning? Has anyong tried this before, and how has it
>worked for them?

If you're going to use gelatin finings, use them in secondary fermentation
prior to bottling.  For a five gallon batch, dissolve a teaspoon of finings
into 10-12 ounces of cool water (dissolves in about 20-30 minutes), then
heat the mixture to about 180F (don't boil) before adding to your secondary.
Then rack out of secondary to your priming vessel per usual.  I have routinely
used finings for ales in secondary and never had any problems with bottle
conditioning.

Frankly, many argue that the value of finings may be marginal, and that improved
clarity may be simply due to the use of a secondary fermenter.  If you are not
racking to a secondary fermenter after your week or so of primary, I can't
recommend it enough.  If you are, perhaps your racking technique needs a minor
adjustment.  Make sure that your racking tube is elevated off the bottom of
your primary fermenter so you don't carry the trub, etc. with you to the next
container.  There's still enough yeast, etc. in suspension that will fall out
during secondary.  Granted, many homebrewers are afraid of multiple transfers
because of the increased risk of infection, but if your sanitation techniques
are sound you'll get a much better beer.

There are many reasons why a beer can be hazy.  Given your description of a
temporary condition that clears with no off-flavors, however, I'll stick with
the above recommendation.  If your racking technique is sound and you are
already using a secondary fermenter, then other possibilities can be examined.

Cheers.

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

Steve Hamburg        Internet:  [e-mail]
SPSS Inc             Voice:     312/329-3445
Chicago, IL 60611    Fax:       [phone]

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

Date: Wed, 25 Mar 92 13:40:24 EST
From: Jay Hersh <[e-mail]>
Subject: ale vs. lager


jack said:
  >>It is obvious from reading the many and varied responses to my question,
 that the tastes are highly variable, to the point that ale can be made to
 taste like lager and vice versa.

i replied
 >I think I'm missing something, please explain...

and jack responded:

> I don't know what you are missing other than the rest of the thread and the
 email I received but someone made the claim that to find out the difference
 between ale and lager, one should go out an d buy a few bottles of each to
 taste the difference.


I *have* been following this thread. It seemed to me you were implying
(still) that there is no difference between an ale and a lager. While
you can use lager at Ale temperatures to say that ale can be made to
taste like lager is a confusing and meaningless statement, which is why
I called for clarification. Rather than receive that I got your typical
chastising response.

Do you mean to say that trying to tell the difference between ale
characteristics and lager characteristics based on tasting commercial beers
is pointless because of stylistic differences (ie the recipes are so
different that you won't be able to isolate taste differences due to the
yeast)?? If that is what you mean, yes it is difficult, but I could suggest you
try a Molson Export (aka Red) which is an Ale, versus a Molson Beer which is
a lager. They're very similar recipes. As a matter of fact I believe many of
the Canadian breweries brew both Ales and Lagers to similar recipes.

If you are looking for a single recipe isolation of this variable, yes you'll
have a hard time, but it seems to me as if you're still using this as a cover
to refute the differences in character between Ale and Lager yeasts. And while
I agree that you can often not tell, even in a given recipe, I have brewed many
a lager beer where the smoothness of the flavor was something that could not be
acheived with an Ale yeast.

 -JaH

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

Date: Wed, 25 Mar 92 14:01:13 CST
From: [e-mail] (Brian Bliss)
Subject: Re: clarity


>    1) The mashing process 1-5 hrs. at 68 C almost never (except for the
>            very first time) has gone to complete conversion. i have to
>            usually give up out of sheer exhasution (from drinking too
>            much Homebrew waiting for conversion). ...

Are you using the iodine test?  Even after complete conversion, the
idoine will still react with husks in the wort and turn dark, but
not as much as before conversion.  don't worry about it.

>
>    2) My beer is often very cloudy untiul bottling and only clears up
>            in the bottle. Bubbling has usually ceased (almost) before
>            bottling.
>            After mashing i sparge (2 gallons for 6-8 lbs grain) at about 70
>            -80 C, rerunning the sparge water over the bed 5-6 times..

The clarity of the runoff, and your extraction rate are the quality
indicators of your sparging method.  If you're having trouble, try
letting the runoff settle, and rack off of the precipitate.  everyone
should try this at least once after they think they've got their
sparging method down, just to see how much husk material actually
remains in the wort.

>            After 30 mins of boiling i cool and pitch. Fermentation is
>            quite standard, but tends to proceed slowly for a long time
>            (which is not unusual, i think). But even when fermentation is
>            complete (SG 1.01-1.02) the beer does not clear.
>
>    3) Thought i could slip in a third one since you are this far...
>            WHat exactly is the hot break and the cold break. i mean,
>            physically what do you see?

30 minutes is not a long enough boil.  try at least 2 hours, add
irish moss, force cool, and you will immediately see a spectacular
amount of precipitate - typically 1" in the bottom of a 5 gal carboy,
more if hop pellets are used.  this is the hot break, and you should
definitely rack the wort off of it.

bb


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

Date: Wed, 25 Mar 92 12:46:11 MST
From: [e-mail] (Norm Pyle)
Subject: More Mash Mumblings

I was reading Dave Line's "Big Book of Brewing" last night and
it brought up more mashing questions.  He says that the mash is
by no means complete when you reach the "Starch End Point", i.e.
where the iodine test shows no more starch.  He says that, at
this point, there are more dextrins than maltose (I believe these
terms are correct) and that mashing must continue to convert
more of these dextrins to maltose.  Dextrins are supposedly less
fermentable than maltose, which I suppose is fully fermentable.
Anyway, he doesn't offer a way to measure the dextrin/maltose
ratio, but he gives some guidelines as to times/temps.

I'm guessing now, but it seems to me that dextrin to maltose
conversion continues right up through sparging, at least,
judging by the temperatures measured by some of you HBDers out
there.  This implies that the sparging technique has a real
effect on the final product, for this reason, as well as probably
many others.  What effect?  You tell me; I'm the beginner at this
mashing thingy.

BTW, Line also mentions mashing overnight while he sleeps.  An
interesting concept, but if this dextrin/maltose conversion
occurs over time, you could end up with a mighty fermentable
yet bodyless brew.

I'd appreciate any comments you net.brewing.wizards have on this
subject.

Norm

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

Date: Wed, 25 Mar 92 11:13:30 PST
From: [e-mail] (Scott Murphy)
Subject: apricot beer

I just recently kegged my second batch of beer, and I have noticed
a pattern that seems to be kegging related (small sample size.)

the first batch, a lager, tasted and smelled of apricots.  I tasted
it before I kegged it and don't remember it being apricot beer.

My second batch a bitter definitely did not have any apricot smell
or taste watsoever before kegging.  AFter kegging, however, it
both smelled and tasted of apricots.  In this case the apricots
disappeared after a few minutes.

I don't have anything against apricots, in fact, apricot stout
sounds very good, but in this case I am concerned.  Could there be
something in my keggin procedures that cause this?

For the last batch, I dumped the sterilant ( I don't know what brand)
out of the keg and added  a couple quarts of boiling H20, sealed the
keg and shook it up.  After a couple of minutes, I dumped out the
water and siphoned (carefully) the beer into it, sealed it, and
carbonated.

Any hints?

thanks
scott

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

Date: Wed, 25 Mar 92 14:32:56 CST
From: ingr!ingr!b11!mspe5![e-mail]
Subject: Amusing article

    Attention homebrewers!  I ran across this article in the March 16 edition
of EE Times magazine:

"Silicon structures too small?  Add yeast...

London -  Researchers at the Advanced Centre for Biochemical Engineering at
University College, London, have found a novel method for producing quantum
semiconductor structures using a yeast, called schizosaccharomyces pombe.
Mixing the yeast with cadmium sulphate, the researchers were able to produce
crystalline structures 1.8nm in diameter.  Developed as part of (a) project to
produce biosensors, the process can yield uniform structures, making their
electrical properties more predictable.
    The quantum structures have already demonstrated luminescent properties
that do not exist in bulk cadmium sulphide, a potential applications are now
being considered, including quantum wires."

Quantum hombrew, what a concept!

- --
Guy McConnell
"All I need is a pint a day"


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

Date: Wed, 25 Mar 92 16:28:35 MST
From: Eric Mintz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Bottles


>From: [e-mail]

>        I have a question that is burning....

>        I have some srew on bottles.  A few are the Ballantine Pale Ale
>bottles.  Can I use these to bottle when I brew my first batch?  Or is
>bottling screw on bottles very iffy?  Has anyone done this successfully??

>Ted

People recommend using returnable bottles because the glass is thicker
and more suitable for withstanding the stress of reuse.  Have you ever
bent a wire back and forth until it breaks?  That's what happens to
bottles (sort of) when you pressurize and depressurize several times: it
weakens the structure of the glass.

You might get away with using disposables a few times but sooner or
later: kaBlewey!!

- --Eric

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

Date: Wed, 25 Mar 92 17:13:47 MST
From: Eric Mintz <[e-mail]>
Subject: All-grain with bags?


Eric Rose <[e-mail]> writes:

> > It seems to me that a lot of the complication of all-grain brewing, namely
> > complicated lautering procedures, could be avoided by simply putting the
> > milled grains in grain bags during mashing.  After completion of mashing,
> > the bags could simply be lifted out of the mash-tun (which could just be your

I tried this on my first all-grain batch; I burned a whole in the grain
bag.

Another problem you risk is getting dry pockets of grain that could
release non-converted starches during the sparge.

- --Eric

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

Date: Wed, 25 Mar 92 17:21:33 MST
From: Eric Mintz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Haze


DAVID KLEIN <[e-mail]> writes:

   Also, if anyone has any other ideas for the source of the haze your
   input is welcome. For what it matters, the yeast for the cloudy beers
   has been london ale (wyeast) and I don't recall the other. Both have
   been all grain, though I have brewed all grain without this haze
   before. The only conditioning has been a bit 'o irish moss in the
   boiler. The cloudiness has a combo yeasty, baking soda taste to it.

I've never heard of yeast as the source for haze in beer (other than
while it is active -- before it drops out of solution).  According to
Noonen (if memory serves), haze is the result of large proteins in
suspension.  It comes from under-modified malt that has not undergone
sufficient protein rest.

- --Eric

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

Date: Wed, 25 Mar 92 19:10:02 CST
From: [e-mail] (George J Fix)

Subject: Our New Book ( George and Laurie Fix )

We want to thank  Tony Babinec for his kind comments about our
book. We also welcome any input from other HBDers about any
other aspect of it. They say that critiques from friends is
worth its weight in gold!

We did not publish lovibond data on the light and dark crystal
malts because we were unable to get hard data. Cosby and Baker
was absolutely no help in this regard. We contacted them and
their "expert" in this area started by saying that he was a winemaker
who did not particularly like beer. Things went downhill from there.

After the book was off to Brewers Publ., Darryl Richman sent me
a remarkable new formula for the a priori prediction of wort
color. We did some test brews, and directly measured the color
with the procedure described in our appendix. Darryl's formula
was then used to back out the effective lovibond of the crystal
malts. We got the following results.


                                       100mg/l      200mg/l
 mash water         distilled        alkalinity    alkalinity
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
H+B light             12.2             14.4           15.1
(Great Western)

Irek light             11.9             13.6           14.7
(Cosby+Baker)

Irek dark              59.2              65.4           76.2
(Cosby+Baker)

We sure hope Darryl makes his new software available (it includes
a new hop bitter estimation scheme as well). We certainly would
promply place an order.

Recently an outstanding article has appeared on color malts by Peter
Blenkinsop, an well known expert from England. It was published in the
MBAA Tech. Qr. (Vol.28, No.4, 1991, pages 145-149). It includes details
on how they are made (those that make color malts at home will love this
section), color variability (the rather large variations may possibly
supprise you), and related info.

Finally, Siebels is now importing malt from Belgium and will sell to
all including homebrewers (which we conjecture may be their biggest market).
We hinted at this possibility in our book. Since then we have gotten some,
and have made some actual brews. Their Pils malt is absolutely terrific,
and so is their color malts. Two row barley from Belgium has historically
been rated along with Moravians as the top malting varities for lager beer.
A point of great significance is the color malts are from the noble Belgium
barley. Ale brewers will be happy to know that they are also importing Belguim
ale malt, and it has a very good reputation. Finally, they are also
importing some way out types of malt ( would you believe malted oats!). Jay
Hersh recently visited us and sampled some of the speciality malts Siebels
imported from Belgium. Any comments Jay?




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

Date: Wed, 25 Mar 1992 23:43 EST
From: Luigi Colaianni <[e-mail]>
Subject: England bound


Hey,
 I recently got an offer to work in England for a few years and I'll
be going over in about two weeks to check the place out.  So much for
background information.  My two questions:

 1)  What is the NEAREST place to the airport (Heathrow) where I can
FINALLY sample good English beer?

 2)  Any places in either Cambridge or Norwich which I simply HAVE
to see while I'm there?

Please respond by E-mail unless you believe your response to be of general
interest.

Many thanks.
Luigi

[e-mail]


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

Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1992 00:06:46 -0500 (EST)
From: "Spencer W. Thomas" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cat's meow 2 redux

Not wanting to waste paper, I figured out how to print my Cat's Meow 2 on
both sides.  The procedure I followed was this:

1. Add page numbers to the original .ps file.  It needs a line
%%Page: # #
   added before the beginning of each page. I.e., before the line
%%PageBoundingBox: (atend)
   The token # is replaced with 1, 2, 3, 4, ... for each page in sequence.
   (I did this with an emacs macro.)  There are 160 pages, so the last
   page starts with
%%Page 160 160

2. Use the 'psrev' program (part of Adobe's Transcript package) to select
   the odd pages.  Due to limitations in the program, I did this in 4
   passes, selecting 20 pages at a time (first 1,3,5,...,39, then
   41,...,79, and so on).  Specify the -R flag so the pages come out in
   the correct order.

3. Merge the 4 odd files into one using a text editor: Take the common
   prefix (setup) information, followed by all the pages, followed by the
   common trailer information.

4. Use the psrev program to select the even pages in reverse order (don't
   specify -R).  Again, do this in 4 passes (first 122,124,...,160, then
   82,84,...,120, and so on).

5. As above, merge the 4 even files into one.  Note that the even numbered
   pages are in reverse order (start with 160, end with 2).

6. Print the odd pages.  My printer feeds out the printed pages face down,
   in order, so if you take out the stack of paper and turn it face up,
   the first page printed is on top, followed by the second page, etc.

7. Take out the stack of pages, turn it so that (for most printers, at
   least) the top edge of the page is pointing "into" the printer,
   and put the whole stack back into the paper tray (make sure to
   carefully even up the edges all around and "fluff" the stack so that
   the pages don't stick together).

   Usually, the printed side should be down.  You may want to experiment by
   printing a single page, putting it back in, and printing it again,
   until you get it on both sides, both oriented correctly.

8. If the first page is not at the bottom of the stack, you lose, unless
   you have psrev (if the first page is at the top of the stack, you want
   to print the even pages in forward order, but step 4 generated them in
   reverse order).  Print the even pages.

You should now have a nice copy of Cat's Meow 2 printed on both sides,
with no wasted paper.

To save you steps 1-5, I have placed my doctored files in the anonymous
FTP directory on hendrix.itn.med.umich.edu (141.214.252.146) in /pub,
cat2-odd.ps.Z and cat2-even.ps.Z.

Happy printing.

=Spencer W. Thomas             HSITN, U of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109
[e-mail]     313-747-2778

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

Date: Wed, 25 Mar 92 21:00 CST
From: [e-mail] (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: Mashing, Break, Blending


 To: Homebrew Digest
 Fm: Jack Schmidling

 >From: [e-mail]

 >       1) The mashing process 1-5 hrs. at 68 C almost never (except for the
                 very first time) has gone to complete conversion. i have to
                 usually give up out of sheer exhasution (from drinking too
                 much Homebrew waiting for conversion). i stir every 5-10
                 minutes and have at least 5 lbs. 2-row Klages with the
                 other grains (Black, Roasted, Crystal, flaked etc..) to
                 ensure a good amount of enzymes. Some times i even ended up
                 adding 2 spoons of amylase, with no effect. i use about 1
                 quart of water per lb. of grain.


 As a recently born-again all grain brewer, I suggest that you keep it simple
 till you get the process under control.  If you use 8 lbs of Klages and leave
 all the other crap out, you will get complete conversion in about 15 minutes.
 Once you have a process that works you can add new ingredients (one at a
 time) and recognize the effect each one has on the beer.

 I have found that when using adjuncts such as roasted barley or roasted malt,
 a complete coversion takes longer and the indication turns negative after
 mashout, no matter what I try.

 The clearing characteristis are totally different from extract beer but then
 so is the taste and overall quality.   It will eventually clear all by itself
 but if you are in a hurry, a half teaspoon a gelatin in the usual fashion
 will clear it in 24 hours.

 >After mashing i sparge (2 gallons for 6-8 lbs grain) at about 70  -80 C,
 rerunning the sparge water over the bed 5-6 times..

 I can not begin to imagine what that means.   First of all, even assuming
 that you have several gallons in the mash, you need at least 6 more to end up
 with enough to boil down to 5 gallons.

 The sparge water passes through the bed, taking the sugar with it and becomes
 sweet wort when it runs out.   There is no "rerunning the sparge water"
 involved in the process aside from the first cup or so that runs cloudy.

 >               After 30 mins of boiling i cool and pitch.

 Your boiling time is far too short.  You need a minimum of 60 min with hops
 and two hours is more typical.

 BTW, I am mailing to you an unsolicited copy of EASYMASH which should help
 you understand the process.


 >        3) Thought i could slip in a third one since you are this far...
                 WHat exactly is the hot break and the cold break. i mean,
                physically what do you see?

 Interesting question and I think one that has no rational answer that I have
 found yet.  My brain finds it most convenient to ignore all comments on the
 subject and directs me to do the following:

  A.   Boil for at least 90 min.

  B.   Allow the beer to settle for at least 30 min AFTER immersing the wort
       chiller and BEFORE turning on the water.

 The two inches of fluffy glop that ends up on the bottom has something to do
 with your question.  So does an in-line wort chiller and that is where my
 brain disconnects.

 >From: [e-mail]

 >I've heard that this blending technique is used for most really good
 wines; this is the first time I've ever heard of beer being blended,
 however.

 This has little to do with your question but since I switched to kegging, I
 always end up with a gallon or two left over from each batch.  This goes into
 a carboy until I have 5 gallons and then this gets kegged as a "free" one.

 It has produced some of my best beers.

 js


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


End of HOMEBREW Digest #850, 03/26/92
*************************************
-------

---
 * PCB/UseNet Gateway from Sparkware #1