HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: slk6p@cc.usu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing
Subject: Re: priming Cornelius kegs
Date: 21 Aug 92 08:38:41 MDT
Organization: Utah State University

In article <BtAw4w.CCx@acsu.buffalo.edu>, comfrank@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Frank Tutzauer) writes:
> So what's the deal on natural carbonation of Cornelius kegs.  Every-
> thing I've read says to use about 1/3 c. corn sugar to prime rather
> than the 3/4 c. normally used (for a five-gallon batch).  Why?  I
> figure keg or bottle, five gallons of beer is five gallons of beer.
> Ok, I know you lay about 5-6 psi on it to seal the seals and for 
> dispensing, but that can't make that much of a difference, can it?  
> Anyway, all of my books use the 1/3 c. figure, but no one explains
> it.  So, I turn to the net...
> --frank
*Question for any of you keggers.  
	What advantage is there in "naturally" carbonating a keg?
It seems that  	1) you're adding sugra (first minus)
		2) It takes longer
		3) You just wanna get it ready for quaffage,
		   and I'll bet CO2 is cheeper than corn sugar!
I was told to add a little sugar, AND put it under 20 psi.
That's the routing I've gone with, leaving it for 1 day at rt, then 
popping it into the beer fridge and hooking up the tap.  After a day
more op the pressure to 10, then 7, then 5, and happy hour(s) begin.

I recently popped a couple of holes in the fridge and ran the picnic taps
out one side, and put the CO2 tank on the other.

I just got a catalog from a bar supply place in CA.  They have got all
the REAL bar equipment, and all the little bits and parts you could possibly
imagine.  I think the prices are cheeper than the brewsupply places I've 
seen some of this stuff (e.g.  the picnic taps are $2.50 rather than $5)
If anyone want they're address-  drop an e-mail.
	One day- when I have lots of money/space and a nice basement, I'll
set up my beer room.  walk in cold area/ taps running to the bar with real
brass and steel/oak...etc.

				Anyway- brew on   J. Wyllie (the coyote)
  
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing
From: hersh@expo.lcs.mit.edu (Jay Hersh)
Subject: Re: Federal law on green glass (was Re: Source of Bottles)
Organization: X Consortium, MIT Laboratory for Computer Science
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 19:43:09 GMT

comfrank@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Frank Tutzauer) writes:

>In article <1992Aug12.144938.3776@nntpd.lkg.dec.com>, 
>klett@ghill.enet.dec.com (Michael Klett) writes...
>> 
>>As an aside...
>>someone mentioned an interesting Federal law.
>>It seems that imported beers in standard shaped bottles must be green glass.
>>It seems that the Domestic Beer Industry convinced Congress that the American
>>consumer was so stupid that they needed a simple way to distinguish between
>>domestic and imported brew.  It seems to me that they lobbied for this just
>>so that imported beer would light struck on the shelf causing the Domestic
>>beer to taste better and hence, purchased more often.  Does anyone know
>>more about this?


this is pap to be polite....
What about all those wheat beers from Germany, or beers like Young's
from England, or Old Nick's or tons of other brown bottle beers in
non-standard shapes and sizes.

If you're gonna blow it out yer ass, at least TRY to make it seem
like you have even the smallest clue that you know what you're talking 
about...


--
Hopfen und Malz, Gott erhalts
There is nothing open about OpenGL
From: dougd@uts.amdahl.com (Douglas DeMers)
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing
Subject: Re: yeast culturing
Date: 14 Aug 92 17:23:47 GMT
Distribution: rec
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

In <1992Aug14.224.4787@dosgate> glenn.anderson@canrem.com (glenn anderson) writes:

>[...]
>By the way, is there a "copyright" on yeast strains? Sounds silly but
>what prevents me from recultivating my favorite Wyeast and selling
>gobs of it to everyone I know up here in Canada, at half the price??

Interesting question.  In the area of _plants_, home gardeners are well
aware of the seed industry's ability to _patent_ a variety (the cute
little VP insignia on the packet).  Unauthorized propagation of a VP
variety is illegal (in the US, at least) and such a commercial venture
as you suggest would bring the legal-beagles to your door.

I'm not sure if _animals_ can be patented in a similar manner.

If a major lab thought there was enough of a market for specialty yeast
production, and went after the market, I'd expect them to push to have
yeast classified under the Patented Variety definition.  It would have
to be a new strain, though.

Wyeast is able to thrive selling "public domain" yeast partially on
their reputation of providing high quality, pure yeast.  The track
record of the "glenn anderson yeast co" has yet to be proven.  :-)
-- 
Douglas DeMers,      | (408-746-8546) | dougd@uts.amdahl.com
Amdahl Corporation   |                | {sun,uunet}!amdahl!dougd
  [It should be obvious that the opinions above are mine, not Amdahl's.]
  [               Amdahl makes computers, not beer.                    ]
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing
From: osicoop@bwdls138 (Doug Gould)
Subject: Re: Head Space, etc . . .
Organization: Bell Northern Research, Ottawa, Canada
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 18:44:26 GMT

arf@ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) writes:
:In article <1992Aug14.164947.9286@progress.com> rich@progress.COM (Rich Lenihan) writes:
:>homebrew@lupulus.ssc.gov writes:
:>
:>
:>As for why the pro's leave an inch or more of headspace, I don't know.  Since 
:>most of them force-carbonate, I don't think carbonation is the reason.
: 
:I  doubt that carbonation has anything to do with it.  As I pointed out in
:HBD and answered my own question, I suspect the reason is to guard agains
:accedential freezing.  The head space allows a reasonable amout of
:expansion before bursting the bottles.
:
:js

I'd think a well carbonated beer filled within a fraction of a inch of the top
would be much more prone to foaming over, especially if it's not chilled
to near-freezing temperatures.  I find that my homebrews are a tad foamier
than commercial products ( I like 'em that way ) - even so I've had 
brewery made beer foam over upon opening in the past...  I think it would
be a little messier for me if I filled them up that much.  As it is, I don't 
think an inch of head space contributes all that much oxygen to beer in the 
bottle.  I'll just have to live with it...


--
Doug Gould
From: ciaran@county.lmt.mn.org (Ciaran Benson)
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing
Subject: Re: Full Moon on the 13th. Howlin' Good!
Date: 11 Aug 92 19:04:55 GMT
Reply-To: ciaran@county.lmt.mn.org (Ciaran Benson)
Organization: LaserMaster Technologies, Minneapolis, MN

J. Wyllie (The Coyote) writes;
                                
>"Finally-  An occassion like the full moon is more likely to
>have a big effect on the name of your brew, but little effect on
>the flavor."

  I tried "brewing with the moon" like the old guides for planting
with the moon, and have noticed that batches which I start one
week before the full moon tend to ferment quicker and more
robustly (lots more turnin' and churnin' in the carboy) than
batches started, say, one week before the new moon.

  Full moon batches seem to take forever to finish out in the
bottle (maybe because of the waning moon?) and new moon batches
seem to finish out much more quickly and more satisfactorily
(maybe because of the waxing moon?)  Brewing only once or twice
a month, I rarely get a batch that survives more than 2 months,
so I don't have any long-term data.

  This all may be skewed because I've only been brewing for about
a year, and am still experimenting with liquid versus dry yeast
and stuff like that.

  Still, I'm superstitious enough that I'll keep experimenting
with it and probably add the phase of the moon to my recipies.

  Has anyone else noticed similar results?

  Ciaran.
From: stefank@math.chalmers.se (Stefan Karlsson)
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing
Subject: Re: Stout kits
Date: 12 Aug 92 14:02:53 GMT

esharp@npal.rn.com writes:

>I have already brewed several batches of ales and weissbier from kits, and
>would like to try my hand at stouts.  How difficult are they, any hints, who
>has a good kit, and any other tidbits you could share will be greatly
>appriciated (sp?)
>Thanks,
>Edwin  Esharp@npal.rn.com

I tried a Munton Irish Stout kit some weeks ago. To get a
more substantial beer and to get it fit into a 10L bucket
I, instead of adding sugar as the instructions told
(where I guess I anyway had added malt extract instead),
just took half the water. I tried it at some friends
just one week after bottling and they liked it.

Stefan
-
stefank@math.chalmers.se
From: jj@alice.att.com (jj, curmudgeon and clueless old white boy)
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing
Subject: Re: aeration - when?
Date: 20 Aug 92 16:57:38 GMT
Article-I.D.: alice.23502
Reply-To: jj@alice.UUCP (jj, curmudgeon and clueless old white boy)
Distribution: rec
Organization: NJ State Home for Bewildered Terminals

In article <1992Aug19.201448.6334@news.nd.edu> ulick@angelico.helios.nd.edu (Ulick Stafford) writes:

>Chemical reactions are much faster at higher temperatures.  This is
>to do with laws of kinetics and thermodynamics.  So much so that wort
>oxidation is significent at 100 C and insig at pitching temp.
Typically by a factor of two per 10 degrees Farenheit.  Say, that's
2**14 difference between 80 and 210 or so.

>Also gases disolve in cold liquid, but not at all in boiling liquid.
Depends on the gas, but true in general.
-- 
 Bush    *Copyright alice!jj 1992, all rights reserved, except transmission
   vs       *by USENET and like facilities granted.      Said permission is
 Clinton  --    *granted only for complete copies that include this notice.
 Just Say !NO!       *Use on pay-for-read services specifically disallowed.
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing,news.answers
From: jtb@philabs.philips.com (Joseph Burke)
Subject: Re: rec.crafts.brewing.forsale? Handling sales on the net.
Organization: Philips Laboratories, Briarcliff Manor, NY.
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 15:13:38 GMT

In article <1992Aug11.151404.23680@ddsw1.mcs.com> arf@ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) writes:
> 
> Article 4851 (36 more) in rec.crafts.brewing:
> From: baughmankr@stat.appstate.edu
> 
> > At the same time, a simple list of all homebrew suppliers 
> whether on the net or not might be a worthy addition to the 
> FAQ list.
> 
> >I have been thinking of visiting our library where they 
> have the phone book on compact disk.  This could be searched 
> for brew supply places nationwide.
> 
> I am not sure what "phone book" you are talking about that 
> would be nationwide but the problem is that many (if not 
> most) home brew retailers are running it out of some other 
> business.  Liquor stores and here in Chicago for example, we 
> have the Indoor Garden Supply as the best in the area.

I know for a fact that McGonigle's Homebrew Supply is not in the phone book
yet as it is a reletivly new store, opened since the last books were
published.  By the way, they are at (914) 496 8112,  15 Emerson Drive in
Washingtonville, N.Y. 10992

> 
> When I first released my video, I purchased two mailing 
> lists that seem to include everyone in the US including the 
> ones with stealth names.
> 
> There were 573 lables on the list at the time.  Unlike other 
> list vendors I have dealt with, they did not ask or demand 
> anything regarding reusing the list.  I still have a hard 
> copy if anyone is interested in typing it up or using it and 
> returning a copy at your expense, I will be happy to pass it 
> on.
> 
> js
> 
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing
From: harlan@bnr.ca (Bruce Harlan)
Subject: Re: Removing labels from commercial bottles
Followup-To: Removing labels from commercial bottles 
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Richardson, Tx
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 21:02:13 GMT

I've been successful with the dishwasher-detergent-soak method. Overnite
usually loosens the foil labels sufficiently to get all the foil and goo
off. It also loosens any accumulated crud in the bottom of the bottle.	
Additionally, I use my own empties- or my friends', but I tell them the
rules first:  Rinse it and don't put your smokes out in it. They don't
save very many that way.

BTW- be sure to rinse all the soap residue from the bottle. YUK.
From: zen@hophead (Nick Zentena)
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing
Subject: Re: esters, banana
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 92 15:22:13 EDT
Reply-To: zen%hophead@canrem.com (Nick Zentena)
Organization: The Hop Head Saloon

arf@ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) writes:

> In article <1992Aug6.183648.1734@techbook.com> gummitch@techbook.com (Jeff Fr
> >arf@ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) writes:
> >As usual, Mr Schmidling is way ahead of everybody else on the "real
> >information" curve.  Rather than spout off on the failings of popular
> >opinion, Jack, perhaps you would like to provide some evidence of Wyeast
> >contamination: for example, how about an objective test of randomly
> >selected Wyeast packages containing identifiable contamination.

        Are we talking about ALE yeast or Not? Since when
        are ale yeast not supposed to contribute esters? My
        only problem with Wyeast is that it doesn't make
        ENOUGH esters!

        No one making REAL Ales would want to produce
        something without esters! IMHO it is a defining
        diference between Ales and lagers. Neutral yeasts
        are boring and belong in factories not fermenters!
        Nick

*****************************************************************************
I drink Beer I don't collect cute bottles!
zen%hophead@canrem.com
*****************************************************************************
Xref: sparky rec.crafts.brewing:4533 alt.beer:4772
From: zen@hophead (Nick Zentena)
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing,alt.beer
Subject: Re: r.c.b.CLASSIFIED SECTION
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 92 09:32:42 EDT
Reply-To: zen%hophead@canrem.com (Nick Zentena)
Organization: The Hop Head Saloon

arf@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Jack Schmidling) writes:

>    
>  I would put no restriction on whether it is commercial, 
>  private or third party as long as the above limitations are 
>  complied with.
>  
>  I do not believe this would violate net.etiquette nor do I 
>  think any vote or consensus is required because I have to do 
>  all the work.

        I don't think commerical adverts should be allowed.
        Outside of that I don't see any real problems.
        Nick

*****************************************************************************
I drink Beer I don't collect cute bottles!
zen%hophead@canrem.com
*****************************************************************************
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing
From: ulick@chopin.helios.nd.edu (Ulick Stafford)
Subject: Re: To skim or not to skim, that is the question (was 1v2 stage ferment)
Organization: University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1992 19:37:00 GMT

In article <1992Aug10.192202.11118@ddsw1.mcs.com> arf@ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) writes:
>In article <1992Aug7.110724.2568@stat.appstate.edu> baughmankr@stat.appstate.edu writes:
>>In article <1992Aug6.160159.28493@news.nd.edu>, ulick@angelico.helios.nd.edu (Ulick Stafford) writes:
>>The issue is whether to let the brown scum fall into the beer.  The skim or
>>not to skim debate is usually carried on by those who have never tasted the
>>brown stuff that forms on the kraeusen head.  If you're unsure about where you
>>stand here, try tasting some.  You'll be tasting the most bitterly astringent
>>substance of your life.  Green persimmons aren't any more bitter!  I've always
>
>I suggest you try to round up enough lupulins to equal the amount of "brown
>stuff" that is such a turnoff to you to realize the weakness of your 
>argument.  There has got to be a better argument than that.  The dilution
>rate has got to be parts per hundred thousand and I would be very surprised
>if you could taste it in the beer and so what anyway?  Being bitter and
>astringent hardly condems it if in the right proportions.

Another point in this brown scum question is that I made the mistake of 
tasting one of the 14.1% Nugget hop pellets I brewed my last batch with.  I
did pay for these and wished I was eating all the brown scum of all my
batches instead.  I did end up fermenting the batch with a blow off tube
for the first time, but this was because I decided to rack 12 hours after
pitching while still in the lag phase into my only available vessel,
a 5 gallon carboy.  I guess
there are 4 - 4.5 gallons of beer left and its fermenting goodo now.
Most of the scum seems to stick to the top of the carboy anyway, and would 
do this in a 7gallon one, I guess.  My only worry now is the high temps of
the last few days.  How will 74 F effect a dry stout?  My next few batches
will be Belgian ales and Weizens while the summer (pathetic as it has been)
lingers.

 
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 
+ 'There was a  master come unto the earth, + Ulick Stafford, PP-ASEL       +
+    born in the holy land of Indiana,      + Dept of Chemical Engineering, +
+ in the mystical hills east of Fort Wayne'.+ Notre Dame, IN 46556          +
+      B'fhearr liom bheith ag eitilt.      +    ulick@bach.helios.nd.edu   +
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing
From: binkley@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Jon Binkley)
Subject: Wyeast and contamination (Re: esters, banana)
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: 17 Aug 92 17:01:29 GMT

>  = Jack Schmidling (arf@ddsw1.mcs.com)
>> = Jeff Frane (gummitch@techbook.com)
  
>>Imprimis: no one ever contended that "Wyeast has never had a
>>contaminated batch" -- but I in fact responded to your comment that
>>"contrary to public opinion contaminated Wyeast supplies are not
>>uncommon".  These, as anyone can see, are very different statements.  I
>>asked you to please supply some data to substantiate your statement.
  
> Bad choice of words because "not uncommon" is rather flakey term.  However, I 
> will direct you (in private), to a source that was the reason I selected the 
> expression.  You can draw your own conclusion.

Why keep such vital information private?  Keeping it anonymous is
one thing, but why don't you post it with the caveat that it's secondhand,
anonymous information?  

>>Secundus: As Glenn Tinseth is pointing out, it's in fact very difficult
>>to isolate the point of contamination, and blaming it on your yeast
>>supply is the easy way out.

> It is also just as easy to exonerate the yeast simply on reputation.  
> Difficulty of isolating the contamination works both ways.

As I've reported here before, I had one contaminated batch of beer
using Wyeast and about fifty clean ones.  I can think of at least 8
different possible sources of contamination for that one batch, all
equally likely: 

1) transfer of wort from kettle to primary fermenter
2) something nasty in primary fermenter
3) something nasty in yeast starter culture
4) contaminated Wyeast
5) transfer of beer from primary to secondary fermenter
6) something nasty in secondary fermenter
7) transfer of beer from secondary to botteling vessel
8) addition of priming sugar to botteling vessel

(Given the laxness with which I perform most of the above
processes I'm amazed more of my beers are not contaminated!)

Again, assuming these are all equally likely, the statement 
"It was the Wyeast" has a 1/8 probablilty of being correct.
The statement "It was not the Wyeast" has a 7/8 probability
of being correct.  Yes, Jack, it could have been the Wyeast,
but unless I heard of other people having problems with
Wyeast English Ale yeast in July of 1991 I would conclude that
it PROBABLY was not the Wyeast.

Jon Binkley

Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing
From: hasn@midway.uchicago.edu (Sheheryar Hasnain)
Subject: Brewing Supplies in Chicago
Organization: University of Chicago
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 21:41:48 GMT

Any one know of any stores in Chicago other than Brewin Beer and Indoor Garden.
The Yellow Pages had "Brew for less" but when I called, the number had been
disconnected (hint!).  Since I dont have a car, a store closer to me would
help (plus I cant believe that Chicago could have only 2 stores!).
Thanks
From: jdg00@ccc.amdahl.com (Josh Grosse)
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing
Subject: Re: SURVEY: homebrew helper
Date: 19 Aug 92 14:52:53 GMT
Reply-To: jdg00@amail.amdahl.com (Josh Grosse)
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

I tried to reply via e-mail, but "fbruno@shrimp" is not a valid internet
domain address.
------
To: fbruno@shrimp
Subject: HB Software Market Research
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing
Reply-To: jdg00@amail.amdahl.com

Once you begin all-grain brewing, you will suddenly see a need for
recipe formulation software.  There are no books just chock full of
all-grain recipes, as there are for extracts.  The reason?  No two
brewers will have the same degree of extract from their grain.  And
each brewer is trying to get the correct balance of bitterness to
malt flavor, as well.

When I brew, I use Darryl Richman's old spreadsheet, which he wrote in
Excel, someone else converted to 1-2-3, and I obtained from the old HBD
archive site at the University of Miami.  I work on a recipe for
a while, and figure out my grain bill and hopping schedule.  Then, of
course, on brewing day, I'll take an SG measurement as I'm heating up
the boil, run over to the PC and recalculate my hopping schedule, which
may need to change if I was over or under my expected SG (taking temp and
pre-boil wort amount into my calculations).

I've tried the "BRFWARE" that was published a few months ago.  It's
got one convenience that Darryl's old spreadsheet doesn't -- it has the
AHA styleguide online.  But, it can't save recipies and it has some
bugs that make it unusable for me.

Darryl went on to upgrade his spreadsheet and build in mashing tables,
charts, and other ease-of-brewing additions.  He sells his product via
display ads in Zymurgy.  I haven't seen it, so I can't comment on its
facilities and quality.  However, I do enjoy his old freeware spreadsheet.
It includes grain extraction, color, leaf vs pellet hops isomerization,
and ion balance.  I made some changes to it to meet my needs; I fixed
bugs in the printing macros, added a place to make brewer's notes, and
added tsp to gram conversions for minerals.

I'd use a Windows application rather than a lotus spreadsheet in an
instant.  But, its primary purpose must be recipe formulation.  Anything
that improves and speeds recipe creation (like having the AHA style guide
built-in) would be an asset.

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Josh Grosse                                jdg00@amail.amdahl.com
Amdahl Corp.                               313-358-4440
Southfield, Michigan
From: mal@genrad.com (Mike A. Long)
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing
Subject: blueberries in my blowoff
Keywords: fruit blueberries
Date: 18 Aug 92 14:32:37 GMT
Organization: GenRad, Inc.

This is a warning to those of you who may try to brew with blueberries
(since they are in season!).  Use a 1" blowoff, rather than the 1/4",
as the blueberries can jam (excuse the pun) the blowoff, and your wall
will be covered w/a sticky mess when the pressure builds.  I now know,
from personal experience (last nite).

Next question - how do I rack the beer?   In other words, I want to siphon
it off the blueberries in a few days, but truly believe it will clog my
siphon tube - since it is the same tube I used for my blowoff.

I suppose I could just put some cheesecloth over the mouth of the carboy
and pour slowly down the side of my bucket, but I was hoping for a
"quieter" way to siphon it.

Thanx in advance,

Mikey
==========================================================================
Mike (Mikey) Long				mit-eddie!genrad.com!mal
GenRad						mal@genrad.com
==========================================================================
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing