From: homebrew@lupulus.ssc.gov
Subject: HOMEBREW Digest #1013
Organization: The Internet
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 08:45:00 GMT


HOMEBREW Digest #1013                        Mon 16 November 1992


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


Contents:
  Demise of Whitbred???? (whg)
  traquair left overs (card)
  Sierra Nevada = Narraganset? (Russ Gelinas)
  worthington's white shield (Tony Babinec)
  Smithwicks  (R.B.) Buckingham" <brettb@bnr.ca>
  Re: Wyeast purity (korz)
  Pumps and other gadgets (hjl)
  Stout recipe (korz)
  molasses/whitbread/kegging (Brian Bliss)
  Re:corn sugar (Jack Thompson)
  *** Signoff *** (Jim Standen)
  First batch - boil/water questions (Bill A. Danforth)


Send articles for __publication__ to homebrew@hpfcmi.fc.hp.com
  (Articles are published in the order they are received.)
Send UNSUBSCRIBE and all other requests, ie, address change, etc.,
  to homebrew-request@hpfcmi.fc.hp.com
Archives are available via anonymous ftp from sierra.stanford.edu.
    (Those without ftp access may retrieve files via mail from
    listserv@sierra.stanford.edu. Send HELP as the body of a
    message to that address to receive listserver instructions.)
**Please do not send me requests for back issues!**
*********(They will be silenty discarded!)*********
**For Cat's Meow information, send mail to lutzen@novell.physics.umr.edu**

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

Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 17:35:51 CST
From: whg@tellabs.com
Subject: Demise of Whitbred????


    Can someone comment on the alledged demise of Whitbred ale yeast? I
continually here about how it is no longer available yet still buy it
everytime I stop into Chicago Indoor Garden Supply.  When I ask the owner
about it he looks at me like I've taken his advise to "brew your own and
grow your own" a little too much to heart.  According to him Whitbred has
changed form a 14g to a 12g package but is still producing away.  What's
the story here?

Walter




Walter Gude    ||   whg@tellabs.com

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

Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 09:16:46 EST
From: card@apollo.hp.com
Subject: traquair left overs


  re: high gravity beers

  When doing a high gravity beer like traquair, one can continue
  to sparge for a second, lower gravity, beer. But 2 boils in a
  day is a definite detriment. How about simply storing the sparge'd
  wort in a carboy to boil another day. It would be subject to infection
  but after all, you will eventually boil it.


  re: mashing specialty grains

  notice some do NOT mash these, but steep separately in the water being
  heated  for mash-out temperature elevation. Are there negative implications
  to mashing chocolate/roasted, etc.


  /Mal Card

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

Date:    Fri, 13 Nov 1992 10:47:34 -0500 (EST)
From: R_GELINAS@UNHH.UNH.EDU (Russ Gelinas)
Subject: Sierra Nevada = Narraganset?

  Someone mentioned "Sierra Nevada/Narragansett" yeast.  Is the yeast that
Sierra Nevada uses now originally from the Narragansett brewery in
Rhode Island?  Hard to believe, since Narragansett's are often referred
to as Nasty-gansetts, with good reason.  Although I did once have a few
'Gansetts at a bar in RI, near the brewery, and they tasted surprisingly
good, a lot like Bass ale.

Russ

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

Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 10:02:04 CST
From: tony@spss.com (Tony Babinec)
Subject: worthington's white shield

Some English colleagues of mine recently sent me a bottle of
Worthington's White Shield, a bottle-conditioned ale being
relaunched by Bass.  Note that this is a 4-star beer in Jackson's
Pocket Guide.

The beer comes with pouring instructions attached to the neck of
the bottle.  I thought HBD readers would be interested.  Here they
are:

Storage.

The ideal storage temperature is 60F or a little over.  To this end
storage in a cool cupboard will suffice.  The bottle should be
allowed to stand for at least 24 hours to allow the sediment to
settle and the beer to condition before serving.

Step By Step Pouring Instructions.

1. Select a clean glass (ideally a 12 oz Worthington glass).

2. Hold the bottle firmly and remove the crown cork using a hand
opener.

3. Raise both the glass and the bottle to eye level and preferably
to a light source--you have to watch for the sediment.

4. Keeping the bottle off the rim of the glass, gently pour the
beer along the glass very slowly.  Remember that once you start to
pour, you cannot stop!

5. Gradually straighten the glass as it fills--avoiding any violent
movement of the bottle which may disturb the sediment.

6. As the bottle is gently tipped, watch that the sediment is
trapped in the shoulder of the bottle.  Ideally you should leave a
tablespoon of beer in the bottle with the sediment.

7. This should leave you with a clear, sparkling, delicious glass
of Worthington's White Shield.

On The Other Hand...

There are two other schools of thought to the pouring of a White
Shield.  One is practised by the White Shield brewers.  That is to
pour it in the approved manner leaving the sediment in the bottle--
Drink the beer and then knock back the sediment at the end.  The
other is to pour in the approved manner, but then tip the natural
sediment in and watch the goodness start to sink to the bottom!

History.

Originally known as Worthington's India Pale Ale, Worthington's
White Shield was first brewed in the early 19th Century.  The name
White Shield is taken from the Worthington's original trademark, a
dagger in a white shield.  White Shield is a unique real ale that
matures in the bottle just as cask beer matures in the cask.  The
natural fermentation of the product, which continues in the bottle
after packaging, causes a small amount of yeast sediment to form in
the bottom of the bottle.  Herein lies the secret of White Shield
because the continuing fermentation helps to develop the
distinctive, smooth, nutty flavour of the ale.  The sediment in the
beer means that the bottles should not be shaken before opening so
that the sediment sinks to the bottom, for this reason White Shield
requires careful pouring--Knowing when to stop is the key.

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

Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 11:45:00 +0000
From: "Brett (R.B.) Buckingham" <brettb@bnr.ca>
Subject: Smithwicks

Smithwicks (pronounced smith icks, no w, and a 'leathery' kind of
th sound) is indeed available in Canada, specifically Ottawa.  Most
of the pseudo-English type pubs have it on tap, and it is also
available in the LCBO (liquor store) for about CDN$7 / 4 (ouch).  It
is my favorite English (oh, OK, I know it's Irish) beer.  The color
is rather dark, kind of amber-brown, with a really impressive malt
character.  I can't really identify the type of hops used, but will
keep on quaffing so I can try to identify them.  My recent attempts
at a clone were good, but not really close.

IMHO, the bottled version is better, as I suspect some bars water the
draught beers down.

If anyone has an all-grain clone, I'd like to hear of it.

R. Brett Buckingham    HPSOS development group       Any opinions expressed
brettb@bnr.ca          Bell-Northern Research Ltd.   are my own.
(613)763-7273          P.O. Box 3511, Station "C"
                       Ottawa, Ontario K1Y 4H7

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

Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 12:42 CST
From: korz@iepubj.att.com
Subject: Re: Wyeast purity

James writes:
>About yeast:  I've been brewing with Edme for a couple of years now with
>no infections.  So of course, the first time I try Wyeast, I get little
>white rings in all my bottles.  Bleah.  I'm going back to Edme; I couldn't
>taste any difference before the rings appeared, either.  I don't know where
>this "switching to liquid yeast improved my beer 100%" business came from
>but it sure didn't do much for me....

When you say "white rings" I assume you mean "ring around the collar" the
ring of stuff that forms on the inside of the neck of the bottle at the
level of the beer.  This is always caused by an *aerobic* biota, my guess
would be either acetobacter, sherry flor or mold.  There is absolutely
no question in my mind that liquid yeasts produce better tasting beers than
dry yeasts -- if your sanitation is good.  One source of problems that many
who switch from dry to liquid yeast is that good sanitation is more
important when using Wyeast especially without a starter.  1. Dry yeast is
super-oxygenated before drying and is READY TO GO as soon as it hits the
wort -- 2 hour lag times are not uncommon.  2. Dry yeasts have a tendancy
to be quite voracious eaters.  3. Dry yeasts tend (in my experience) to be
more attenuative (leave less sugars behind).

Okay.  1. Longer lag times mean that molds, bacteria and wild yeasts
have much more time to get into your fermenter and take hold.  2. Slower
ferments mean that your cultured yeast is less of a competitor.  3. Less
attenuative yeasts leave more sugars for bacteria, wild yeasts and molds
to eat.

Given this, you can see that switching to Wyeast can be a test of your
sanitation and how many airbourne nasties there are living in your house.
To get the full benefits of Wyeast you should use a starter and be very
cautious of your sanitation procedures.

I've used Wyeast exclusively (except for a test batch made with M&F yeast
that was so clovey it was undrinkable and, of course, my pseudo-lambiks)
for the last three brewing seasons and have never had an infection.
Year-old beers are still carbonated properly (albeit a bit oxidized).

If you need proof as to the quality of Wyeast, I suggest that you check
the dry/liquid yeast statistics of the AHA National Competition prize winners.

Al.

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

Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 14:55 EST
From: hjl@gummo.att.com
Subject: Pumps and other gadgets

There's been some conversation about brew pumps in the digest
lately. IMHO the only type of pump which could be adequately
sanitized is the peristaltic type wherin boluses (lumps) of
the pumped liquid are captivated between pinched constrictions
in a hose and are driven along by moving the constrictions in
the desired direction of flow. This is a little like manually
milking a cow. The ones I've seen (pumps, that is) accomplish
this by means of a pair of rollers affixed to opposite ends
of a bar which is attached at its center to a driven shaft.
This assembly is axially mounted in a cylinder whose inside
diameter is just large enough to accomodate the bar with its
rollers and four thicknesses of the hose (two pinches). The
hose is arrayed a little more than halfway around the inside
of the cylinder and axially restrained to stay between the
rollers and the cylinder wall. Rotation of the shaft pinches
the hose, captures the liquid and moves it along. Nothing
touches the liquid except the inside of the hose, which is
easy to clean. If memory serves, the first application of
this technique was to pump blood in heart-lung machines but
it now has wide industrial application. Tha pumps are available
in many sizes and aren't all that expensive.

Another sanitization subject...

Measuring specific gravity with a hydrometer to ascertain the
completion of fermentation always exposes the beer to possible
contamination. Sterilizing the sampling hose isn't a big problem
but nicks and scratches can harbor the nasties. And then you
have to throw away all that beer (or drink it). But then you
have to top off the secondary to keep it full (you do use
sterile water, don't you). An alternate is to use a refractometer.
This is a gadget which determines the concentration of a sugar
solution by measuring its refractive index. The attraction is
that the required sample size is only one drop. The absolute
accuracy is quite good for sugar solutions but not after alcohol
has begun to form during fermentation. Day to day _changes_ are
readily observable and accuratly indicate activity or lack
therof. I take samples with a sterilized glass rod (passed
slowly through a gas flame) exposing the beer to air for only
a few seconds. Downside? Best current price is $200. It's also
great for OG's though.

Hank Luer

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

Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 15:21 CST
From: korz@iepubj.att.com
Subject: Stout recipe

I got a couple of requests for my stout recipe, based upon my claim
that it was a "dead ringer for Guinness."  Well, first off, I'd like
to submit a disclaimer -- since this was three seasons ago, and my
memory of that beer has faded quite a bit, I cannot guarantee that
it will taste anything like the bottled version of Guinness Extra
Stout -- I can guarantee it will be a tasty stout, though!

Here goes:

Al's Medium-dry Stout
5 gallons

6.6 lbs John Bull Unhopped Dark Malt Extract
0.5 lb  Roasted Un-malted Barley
0.5 lb  Black Patent Malt
1/3 oz  Wines Inc. Burton Water Salts
3   oz  Cluster Pellets (60 min boil)
6   gal Soft Tapwater in brewkettle
1   pkg Wyeast #1084 Irish Ale yeast
1/2 cup Corn Sugar for priming

OG/FG unknown

Brewer's specifics:  I just strongly suggest using the blowoff method,
because if you don't I feel this beer will be much too astringent.

Comments: There was a time that I thought this was a dead-ringer for
Guinness, but that was a long time ago and I've switched to brewing
sweet stouts since then.

Al.

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

Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 17:29:12 CST
From: bliss@csrd.uiuc.edu (Brian Bliss)
Subject: molasses/whitbread/kegging

>New topic: I've been using Edme dried yeast ever since Whitbred quit
>making dried yeast a few months back.  For my last few batches, I've
>been hydrating the yeast prior to pitching, but haven't tried making a
>starter.  Perhaps it works "too well" without one: I'm looking for
>opinions.

Kent dropped whitbread ale yeast; whitbread is now distributed
by Crosby & Baker.  I should already be avaiable in the new packaging.
the good news is 1) its available, and 2) it still comes in a foil
pouch.  the bad news is: they're reduced the size of each packet from
14 gr. to 10 or 12 gr.

- ---------

>I just thought that Papazian says to be careful with using too much molasses.
>Comments or experiences?

beware of sulfured molasses.

- ---------

>I have some soda kegs that I'm trying to get cleaned up so I can use
>them, and I ran into a problem last night.  I was trying to get the fittings
>off of the keg and was unable to.  I thought that these things came apart
>so that you could remove the stem, but after cranking down on it pretty hard
>I still couldn't get it to budge.  These things do come apart don't they? Do
>you turn them counter-clockwise to loosen?  Should I use something like
>WD-40 or Liquid Wrench on these things to help break them loose?

They've got thread sealant on them - it takes a lot to break them loose,
but once you do, they will screw off easily.  WD-40 and what-not won't
help - it won't penetrate the sealant.  Someone out there is HBD-land
took a socket and put a few slices in it where the pins go (for pin-lock
kegs) and said that worked fine.

>I guess the larger question is whether I need to do this at all, or will
>running some sanitizing solution through be ok?

sanitizing solution works fine - boiling water is fine too.
(and you don't need to rinse if you're bleach-paranoid)

bb

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

Date: 12 Nov 92 06:02:57 EST
From: Jack Thompson <76520.3531@compuserve.com>
Subject: Re:corn sugar

Martin Noble asks about corn derivatives.  First off, corn starch is not
corn flour; lack the protein, etc. that comes from flour.  Good starch (i.e.
not the chemically derived stuff) can be manufactured at home by adding an
excess of water to flour; when it begins to ferment, pour off the water and
add fresh. When it stops fermenting, what is left at the bottom of the
bucket/barrel/container is starch. Of course, if you leave starch in water
long enough, it will go off.

Corn sugar is dry, granular stuff; corn syrup is corn sugar with water
added, more or less.
Jack C. Thompson  >76520.3531@compuserve.com<


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

Date:   Fri, 13 Nov 1992 14:00:13 -0500
From: Jim Standen <626021@ucdasvm1.admin.ucalgary.ca>
Subject:      *** Signoff ***

FROM: Jim Standen
      Manager, General Applications
      Administrative Systems, University of Calgary

   Could you please sign me off this list server.  all other attempts have
failed.


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

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 20:48:01 PST
From: danforth@wattsbar.llnl.gov (Bill A. Danforth)
Subject: First batch - boil/water questions


Hello all,

I am getting ready to brew my first batch, and I would like some clarification
on boiling, and I have a question on water.  First, I have a 5 1/4 Gallon pot
that I will be using for my boiling.  I have read that all I need to boil is
1 1/2 or 3 gallons.  Will I be alright just using three gallons in the boil?

And second, I have a water softener installed at my house.  I also have an RO
(Reverse Osmosis) unit installed in my kitchen.  I was going to use the water
from the RO unit for my beer.  This is basically the same water you get at a
water store.  Can I use it, or do I have to boil it before using?
 - Our water before getting the softener had a hardness of 23 (Extremely hard).

Thanks in advance,
Bill Danforth
danforth2@llnl.gov

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


End of HOMEBREW Digest #1013, 11/16/92
*************************************
-------

Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing