From: homebrew@lupulus.ssc.gov
Subject: HOMEBREW Digest #1017
Organization: The Internet
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 09:03:35 GMT


HOMEBREW Digest #1017                        Fri 20 November 1992


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


Contents:
  Candy sugar continued (Phillip Seitz)
  Brew Clubs (SynCAccT)
  Homebrew Digest #1016 (November 19, 1992) ("JSDAWS1@PROFSSR")
  beer & ale (G.A.Cooper)
  Re: Kitchen-aid Grain Mill (Bill Szymczak)
  1992 Anchor Xmas (Richard Stueven)
  Thermometer question (GCoon.LAX1B)
  "Lambik"/Hunter/oxidation (korz)
  SS Air "Stone" Source (Alan Gerhardt)
  fermentation/inconsistent carbonation (korz)
  Jackson's Belgian Book (C.R. Saikley)
  RE: inconsistant carbonation (Paul dArmond)
  Fwd: PA Beer Festival (Stephen Brent Peters)
  Re: Aging Beer (Stephen Brent Peters)
  West Virginia Brew (Bill Ridgely FTS 402-1336)
  Goudenband (Ed Kesicki)
  San Diego Mill Help! (Ed Kesicki)
  Corn Syrup, Oxidation etc. (BMOORE)
  Closure on smoked beer (Frank Tutzauer)


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, 19 Nov 92 14:43 GMT
From: Phillip Seitz <0004531571@mcimail.com>
Subject: Candy sugar continued

Hmm.  Have I just been flamed?

In Thursday's HBD Alan Edwards launched a diatribe concerning the alleged
snobism of people who'd like to use candy sugar in Belgian style beers.  He
wondered if there really was any difference between this and standard sugars
such as glucose.

While it is not the point I want to make here, he may be right.  Having hauled
plenty of this stuff back from Belgium (using valuable space I usually reserve
for chocolate!), I have to say that the value of candy sugar in comparison
with other types is not immediately apparent.  While it does offer some color
and melts slowly, it tastes pretty much like. . . sugar.  It seems to me that
what's important is what it contributes to the final fermented product, but
I've yet to see or taste any good side-by-side comparisons (my own
experimental plans notwithstanding).  Herein lies the point.

Many contributors to HBD (and myself certainly among them) have a
tendency to pontificate on matters they don't fully understand.  This isn't as
reprehensible as it might seem, because any scientist will tell you that
understanding (and the proofs it must be built on) can be quite difficult to
come by.  Most of us (again, myself included) are too lazy, unskilled, or
downright impatient to actually test our claims and assumptions.  So we swap
folklore and half-understood wisdom instead.

I totally agree with Al concerning his skepticism, and suspect that his ideas
concerning glucose and candy sugar may be correct.  But I suspect that he,
like many of us, is expressing an opinion and does not have any more solid
ground to stand on than the rest of us.  How many of us have the patience and
discipline to prove what we're saying, anyway?

I do recall reading good, solid reports on HBD.  A number of homebrewing
clubs have undertaken interesting experiments from time to time, and I've
appreciated their reports.  (My club, sadly, is less disciplined.)  As another
example, I think most of us appreciate George Fix's comments because he
seems to be one of the few who really know what they're talking about.

How can we tighten this up?  Can we?  Should we?

As for candy sugar, some Belgian brewers certainly use it, and it's not the
cheapest stuff you can get.  Does this mean they know something we don't?
The truth is: I don't know (yet).



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

Date: 19 Nov 92 15:14:09 GMT
From: SynCAccT@slims.attmail.com
Subject: Brew Clubs

A friend and I are thinking of starting a brew club in our area,
since there are none to be found and join today. Is there a FAQ or a
file on a listserver or archive (I can't FTP) that outlines what one
would do to start and run a brew club. I'm interested in things like
the clubs mandate and mission, what kinds of activities the club
organizes and sponsors, if and what kinds of events clubs organize
etc....

Thanks
+----------------------------------+
| Internet: gande@slims.attmail.com|
| Glenn Anderson                   |
| Manager, Telecom. Facilities     |
| Sun Life of Canada               |
+----------------------------------+












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

Date: 19 Nov 92 08:01:17 PST
From: "JSDAWS1@PROFSSR" <JSDAWS1@PB1.PacBell.COM>
Subject: Homebrew Digest #1016 (November 19, 1992)


*** Reply to note of 11/19/92 00:39
I am currently getting two copies of the homebrew digest daily.  Please check
youir mailing list for duplicates of JSDAWS!@PB1.PACBELL.COM
Also, a freind is interested in recieving it:  JEMORSE@PB1.PACBELL.COM
thx

|             There's a light at the end of the tunnel..            |
|            If it gets any brighter, get off the tracks.           |
|____________   JSDAWS1  -  JACK DAWSON  -  545-0299   _____________|

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

Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 16:21:58 +0000
From: G.A.Cooper@qmw.ac.uk
Subject: beer & ale

>Lt. Col. Robert Gayre, who wrote the book "Wassail! In Mazers of
>Mead," makes the distinction thusly: beer is a strong (in alcohol),
>hopped fermented beverage, while ale is weaker and *not hopped*.  In
>his opinion, both terms originally applied to a honey-based beverage,
>but came to refer to malt-based beverages as mead-brewing declined
>from the Middle Ages (and before) to the present.  His view would seem
>to be in a distinct minority, at least in this country.  Any British
>readers care to comment?

Certainly. Your interpretation of Lt. Col. Robert Gayre was quite right
(although I'm not sure about the mead bit, nor the weak/strong link).
At the time that hops started to be used the unhopped fermented malt
beverage (usually with other herb instead of hops) was called ale. The
hopped drink was referred to as beer. Once hops became universal the two
words became (almost) synonymous. Now we have ales being different from
lagers but both being beers.

Geoff
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Geoff Cooper                   Phone:  +44 71 975 5178
Computing Services             Fax:    +44 71 975 5500
QMW                            e-mail: G.A.Cooper@uk.ac.qmw
Mile End Road
London, E1 4NS


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

Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 12:01:28 EST
From: bszymcz%ulysses@relay.nswc.navy.mil (Bill Szymczak)
Subject: Re: Kitchen-aid Grain Mill

In HBD 1015 Connell writes:
> Does anyone have any experience using a KitchenAid mixer with a grain mill
> attachment to crush malt?  I'm not sure it would be appropriate since

and in HBD1016 Daniel Roman responded:

>Forget about it, it's not suitable for the coarse grinding (cracking
>really) needed for beer making.  I've considered heavily modifying one
>but it does not look to be worth the expense or effort if it can even be
>done.  For what it costs you are better off getting the Marcato or
>something (unless you got one as a gift already and don't mind hacking
>it up).

Well, I got one as a gift and its been working great for crushing
grain.  There is a dial on the front of the mill which allows you
to adjust the distance between the plates.  I've found that loosening
the dial about 30 clicks (depending on the size of the grain) works
fine.  No hacking is necessary.

Bill Szymczak  -  bszymcz@ulysses.nswc.navy.mil


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

Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 09:36:39 PST
From: gak@wrs.com (Richard Stueven)
Subject: 1992 Anchor Xmas

In HBD# 1015, Stephen Hansen writes:
>
> [On another note.  They were brewing this year's Christmas Ale when we
> were there.  Tim, the head brewer, said that it will be similar to last
> years but lighter on the spices.

As I remember, last year's was lighter on the spices than the 1990
version.  If this is true, this is not an encouraging trend...

> Their plan was to have it hit the
> stores the day after Thanksgiving, November 27.]

Thanks for the tip!

gak
107/H/3&4

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

Date:   Thu, 19 Nov 1992 09:49:50 PST
From: GCoon.LAX1B@xerox.com
Subject: Thermometer question

I am planning to do my first full mash soon and I was wondering if anyone has
used digital thermometers in their process.  Seems like you would want
something that you could get a quick reading on.  Anyone have any type / brand
recommendations?  Any good mail order places for thermometers?

 - Gary Coon
GCoon.LAX1B@Xerox.com
Xerox Printing Systems Division
(310) 333 - 3621

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

Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 11:48 CST
From: korz@iepubj.att.com
Subject: "Lambik"/Hunter/oxidation

Jake writes:
>To whomever warned us about Sam Adams Cranberry Lambic:
>
>Did you check if it was an old batch? There's a sale going on at a
        [stuff deleted]
>My roommate and I ended up buying a six of Cranberry Lambic for $4. By
>the way, it was packaged just like the assortment packs they sold last
>Xmas. One Cranberry per six. Hint, hint. The stuff was more sour than
>bitter or malty, and tasted nothing like cranberries. It was bad, old
>beer. I don't think Smadams has even released this year's Xmas brew
>yet. At least not in Chicago.

I didn't write the warning, but I think the point of the original poster
was that the BBC was being picky about naming of beers and then was
incorrectly naming their beer a "Lambic."  My point is, that even if
the Sam Adams Cranberry Lambic [sic] tasted great, and even if it tasted
like a lambik, it would still be only a pseudo-lambik.  It's just the
same as the appelations "Cognac," "Bordeaux" or "Champagne" (the latter
which has lost it's exclusivity).  It's like a trademark.  Lambik is more
of a process than a style since even within the handful of Belgian breweries
that still follow the time-honored traditional method, there is much
variation in flavors.  In short: "You can't brew Lambik without Belgian
air!"

Sorry -- we all have our causes -- I know one of yours and now you know
one of mine.

*************

John asks:
>   Is there a "Hunter Air Stat" thermostat which has a different range
>of temperature control?  I know the Hunter model is from 40 to 90 degrees
>farenheit.  Is there any that go from 30 degrees to 60 or something like
>that?

Nope.  Just talked to the Hunter Sales Rep monday.  They only make one
model which has the remote sensor and has the 117V outlet on the front.
It was originally made for window air conditioners.

**************

John writes:
>    I have a paradoxical question for the digest.  I have a very experienced
>brewing friend (12+ years) who is a self-proclaimed hophead.  He uses
>a hopback during his brewing procedures.  His setup is such that after the
>boil is over he has a pump which moves his hot wort into a strainer
>containing an ounce or two of fresh leaf hops.  As the hot wort filters
>through the hops (picking up valuable aroma) it falls about a foot into
>his hopback (a 5-gallon soda keg with the top cut off).  The bottom of
>the hopback has a valve which is attached to a counter-flow wort
>chiller.  He has won numerous AHA awards over the years for outstanding
>pale ales and many other fine beers.
>
>So the now the question:  Everything I've ever read says aerating *hot*
>wort is very bad, but aerating cool wort before yeast pitching is good.
>So how come his hopback doesn't introduce massive oxidation since the wort
>is still hot as it falls into the hopback and then cooled very quickly
>as it falls into the fermenter (aerating again)?

It sure does, but a lot of the hot-side aeration smell undoubtedly gets
covered-up by the wonderful hop nose your friend gets.  I'll bet that
if he cooled before aeration and then dryhopped in the fermenter, his
beers would be even better and would taste good much longer (if they
don't get consumed first).

Al.

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

Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 9:06:25 CDT
From: agerhardt@ttsi.lonestar.org (Alan Gerhardt)
Subject: SS Air "Stone" Source

I recently found what looks to be an ideal wort aeration "Stone".

It is made of stainless steel and looks just like an aquarium air
stone, only a little coarser.  I have not used it in a batch yet,
because I haven't found any air filters, but I tried it in a pan
of water and it worked very well.

I got it at:      American Science & Surplus
                  601 Linden Place
                  Evanston, IL  60202
                  (708) 475-8440

      Stock number: 21096, Description: Sintered Diffuser
      price: $2.25 for package of 2

The catch?  They have a minumum $10 order, but they do have lots
of other toys of interest.  I have no connection with them except
as a satisfied customer.

Note:  As was published in an earlier digest, they also have the
       Hunter airstat for $24.xx including shipping.

Cheers,
Alan


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

Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 11:49 CST
From: korz@iepubj.att.com
Subject: fermentation/inconsistent carbonation

Taylor:
>    Now, my question / story for the day:
>
>    I am an extreme novice.

Not for long.

>    I am following the directions that I have been
>    given, and what is written in Papazian's book.  However, my
>    fermentation times are only about 1/2 of what they say I should be
>    getting.  On the batch that I am fermenting now, I started it late
>    Sunday, and it has almost completely subsided bubbling by this morning.
>    Also, contrary to opinion, my massive activity does not start in 24/48
>    hours, but in a matter of 2 or 3 hours.

Dry yeasts tend to start much faster than liquid yeasts.  Liquid yeasts
are dormant until you give them food (i.e., pop the wort buldge in the
case of Wyeast).  Dry yeasts are fed lots of oxygen before dehydration
and are ready to go when they hit your wort.  Liquid yeasts need to
respire and build-up their numbers before switching to fermentation.

Also, fermentation time is highly dependent on temperature and the
yeast strain.  The yeast strain I cultured from Orval dregs is VERY
slow (3 weeks), whereas some dry yeasts I used in the past would
ferment-out in 3 days.
>
>    What am I doing wrong?  The instructions that I have been following say
>    to hydrate the yeast, and then pitch into the carboy.  I have also seen
>    that I should wait until the solution in the carboy has cooled.
>    Which is correct?  (I would suspect since the way I did it (hydrate &
>    pitch) is not working, the other way must be better).  If I should
>    wait, what temperature should I wait for?

Dry yeasts can handle slightly higher pitching temperatures.  I've read
that they should be rehydrated in 100F water, which would imply that you
could pitch them in 100F wort, but you don't want to aerate your wort
when it is that hot.  Liquid yeasts are much more picky when it comes
to temperatures -- you don't want the wort temp to be far away from the
starter temperature.  I use liquid yeasts and an immersion wort chiller
to bring the wort to 70F.  I then aerate the wort and pitch the yeast.

When using dry yeasts, I recommend that you rehydrate in 100F water before
starting brewing.  By the time you've completed the boil and cooled the
wort to 80F, the yeast will probably hav cooled down to about 80F also.
Aerate the wort and pitch the yeast.
>
>    Could someone please describe the event steps (and length of
>    time) between the time you turn off your burner and put the blowoff
>    tube onto the carboy?

I use a wort chiller, and with Chicago tapwater my chilling time is
about 20 minutes for a 5 gallon (full batch) boil.  Add to that carrying
and handling time and we're talking about 30 minutes from end of boil to
ready-to-pitch.  However, I've been waiting 1 hour after cooling to
allow the cold break to settle, but I think I'll drop this procedure
(it seems to take much longer than 1 hour and I don't think my 1 hour
wait makes much of a difference).  Therefore, my next batch (Sat) will
be about 30 minutes from end-of-boil to blowoff-tube-on.
>
>    Finally, I local distributor gave me a taste of his India Pale Ale, and
>    I _really_ would like to make this.  Any suggestions on a recipe (other
>    than Papazian's)
This one works for me, but is a bit underhopped, I think:

IRS IPA `92

6.6 lbs Northwestern Gold Extract
1 lb Laaglander Light Dried Malt Extract
1.1 lb Roger's (Canadian) Demerara-Style Brown Sugar
2 oz Bullion Pellets (%AA unknown) -- (90 min boil)
1/2 oz East Kent Goldings Whole (4%AA) (15 min boil)
1 oz East Kent Goldings Whole (4%AA) (dryhop - last 7 days before bottling)
1/3 oz Wines Inc. Burton Water Salts
1/2 lb 6 row Crystal Malt (40L)
5 gallons distilled water
1 gallon Chicago (soft) tapwater
yeast recultured from 3 bottles of Sierra Nevada Pale Ale

OG: 1071, FG: 1020

Procedure:
Nothing special -- crush the crystal (actually, I used a rolling pin and
a ziplock bag) and put the crystal into a mesh grain bag.  Suspend the
bag in the pot from the spoon as the water and Burton Water Salts go
from cool to 165F.  Remove and let drain.  Bring to boil, add malt extracts
and hops in hop bags at the proper times.  Chill as quickly as possible.
Aerate and pitch.  Use blowoff method.

*****************

Dave writes:
>A little over a month ago I bottled a dark ale.  I used a scant 3/4 c.
>of corn sugar to prime after dissolving the sugar in 2 c. boiling
>water.  I'm pretty sure that I mixed in the priming sugar well enough.
>I capped with a Brev wing capper after boiling the caps for about 10
>minutes.  Since bottling the bottles have been stored at about 65-70 deg F.
>
>The problem is that about half of the bottles have good carbonation and
>great head retention while the other half are more-or-less flat.  (The
>"flat" half do have a little carbonation, but they form only a very
>weak head when decanted.  The head quickly disappears and the beer
>tastes flat when drinking it.)

Sounds okay except for the boiling of the caps.  I suggest that a minute
in boiling water is more than enough.  I use simple 200ppm Chlorine
Bleach solution.  Boiling will ruin SmartCaps(tm) and will soften the
seals on regular caps.  I've never had inconsistent carbonation and
have been pretty relaxed about mixing in the priming sugar.

>       - I capped some of the bottles wrong.

Could be another problem.  Does your capper adjust to different
bottles well?  Mine is a bench capper and adjusts very easily.
I had problems with my Jet capper in that it only accepted one
type of bottle neck (it relied on the ring of glass at the top
to be a particular width).

Al.

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

Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 10:25:34 PST
From: grumpy!cr@uunet.UU.NET (C.R. Saikley)
Subject: Jackson's Belgian Book

From: rpeck@pure.com  (Ray Peck)

>I posted a few months ago about "The Great Beers of Belgium" by MJ,
>which I picked up in Brussels.  Not surprisingly, many people were
>interested.

>Flipping through "All ABout Beer" (the magazine) at a bookstore last
>night, I spotted a 1/4 page ad for the book, "Available for the first
>time in the U.S.".  $29.95, or $24,95 pre-publication price.  This was
>named a "second edition", so I guess I'll have to buy it. . .

I have both versions, and they are essentially the same. I wouldn't
recommend getting both. (I wouldn't have both myself, except the second
copy was a freebie!). The biggest difference is that the US release is
of the "quality paperback" variety. $24.95 may seem like alot for a
paperback, but then I paid US $42 in Brussels for the hardcover edition.

I wrote a short review of this book for the WORLD'S GREATEST BREWSPAPER,
which I'll include here.

CR

==========================================================================


Given the growing fascination for Belgian beers in this country, the
introduction of Michael Jackson's The Great Beers of Belgium couldn't come at
a more appropriate time. This is a definitive work, and a must have for
any fan of Belgian beers.

Jackson has long had a passion for this tiny country's beers, and his passion
shows in this well researched text. He begins by discussing the unique beer
culture that exists in Belgium, and the relationship between food and drink
there. There is a description of the ingredients typically used in Belgian
beers, and then the bulk of the book focuses the widely varying beer styles
that are uniquely Belgian.

Jackson proceeds to unravel the mysteries surrounding the major styles as only
he can. Lambics, White Beers, Brown Beers, Red Beers, Saisons, Belgian Ales,
Abbey Beers, Golden Strong Beers, and Regional Specialties are all included in
this unprecedented work. There are stylistic descritions as well as highlights
of individual breweries, including all five operating monastery breweries. If
you don't know your Faros from your Flanders Browns, this book will definitely
set you straight.

Finally, Jackson rounds out the book with a discussion of Belgian Cafes. He
describes some of the more famous cafes of Brussels, and then lists a few
specialty beer cafes around the country. There is even a brief listing of
establishments specializing in Belgian beers in other parts of the world,
including San Francisco.

This masterfully written, 271 page work is filled with over 250 full color
photographs. It is sure to occupy a place of pride in the library of any
serious beer afficionado.



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

Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 10:27:55 -0800 (PST)
From: Paul dArmond <paulf@henson.cc.wwu.edu>
Subject: RE: inconsistant carbonation

Dave Shaver writes that he is having trouble with his bottles not
conditioning.  I had similar problems until I:

1) Added a small amount of fresh yeast at bottling.

2) Stirred the priming in with a *sanitized* spoon.

3) Kept the bottles above 65F for the first five days.

4) Shook the bottles twice during the first week to resuspend the yeast.

3 and 4 were based on advice from the Cellar in Seattle.  They also
advised storing the bottles on their sides to expose more surface area for
the yeast.  2 was recommended by my friend Perry (Rev. 10X) Mills.  He had
noticed that SG readings varied between the top and bottom of his
secondary.  1 was based on reading here in the digest that yeasts get
"tired" when fermenting high gravity beers (mine range from 1.060 to 1.075).

All of these trick yeilded small improvements, and I am now very pleased
with the results.  Previously, developing good condition took as long as
six weeks.  Now my beers are tasteable (for the impatient) in one week,
well conditioned in two.  I have noticed that the high gravity dark ales
improve with time.  js may have been a trifle unkind to describe this as
"hiding defects."  Back in George Washington's day, porter wasn't really
considered drinkable if it was less than a year old.

I don't know the reason for the conditioning hassles.  The above tricks
solved the problem and they may help you.

paul.


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

Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 14:59:46 -0500 (EST)
From: Stephen Brent Peters <sp2q+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Fwd: PA Beer Festival

For those of you who didn't know, or asked me for the information -
here's the message posted before about the Pocono Beer Fest!

Hope to see you there!


- ---------- Forwarded message begins here ----------
Subject: PA Beer Festival
Date: 21 Oct 92 14:05:16 GMT
Reply-To: weir@cbmvax.UUCP (Robert Weir - Manuals)
Organization: Commodore Technology, West Chester, PA


Great Brews of America Classic Beer Festival
Split Rock Resort, Lake Harmony, PA (in the Poconos)
21 and 22 November 1992
Tickets $10 ($12 at the gate)
Call 1-800-255-7625 for advanced sales/info.
Proceeds benefit National Multiple Sclerosis Society

Live and Dixieland, seminars in beer styles, history, and beer making,
homebrew demos.

Plenty of grilled/smoked meats (sounds scary!) to nosh on

40 different beers from over 20 different breweries and microbreweries,
including Dock Street, Sam Adams, Stoudt's, and Yuengling.


(info from the Ritz Theatre Guide Oct/Nov 92)


RSW


               Steve Peters =  sp2q@andrew.cmu.edu
                       Oxnar demands a *Sacrifice!*

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

Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 15:26:20 -0500 (EST)
From: Stephen Brent Peters <sp2q+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Aging Beer


>  The following is excerpted from THE NEW BREWER, May/Jun 1992.  The article is
>  by Fred Scheer, Frankenmuth Brewery.

>  ..................

>  "In my research of draft beer, I found that one of the biggest problems is
>  the age of the beer.  As with bottled beer, draft beer does not improve with
>  age!"

>  "Draft beer is at the peak of freshness and taste the day it is put into the
>  keg.  Ideally, a brewer would be able to fill his kegs in the morning and get
>  them back empty at night.  But because this is not the case, the beer loses
>  quality each day after it is kegged."
>  ...................

>  This view seems at odds with the conventional wisdom of hombrewers and I see
>  two possiblities:

>  1.  His "research" is seriously flawed.

>  2.  People who claim that their beer improves with age are
>      simply confused by the fact that the defects in their
     beer sometimes mellow out or become less obvious with time.


JS-

I think in this case the author was refering to kegging the light
american beers.  In my experience only the darker, heavier beers improve
with age.  I've had terrific american style ales really go down hill
after only a few weeks.  On the other hand, I've had some stouts aged up
to a year and they've only gotten better.

I don't know the Frankenmuth Brewery, but as Americans drink very little
dark beer on tap, I'd say the author just assumed that one only kegs
lighter beers.

 -Steve

               Steve Peters =  sp2q@andrew.cmu.edu
                       Oxnar demands a *Sacrifice!*

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

Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 15:13:00 EST
From: Bill Ridgely FTS 402-1336 <RIDGELY@A1.CBER.FDA.GOV>
Subject: West Virginia Brew

          Guy McConnell writes:

          >    I asked this on the Brewe... er, that "other" homebrewing
          >forum, and got exactly no response.  My brother's job is
          >relocating him from Tallahassee FL. to the Charleston West
          >Virginia area at the end of this month.  What is the
          >beer/brewing climate there?  Any micros, brewpubs, or places
          >with decent selections of good beer?  I gotta know this so that
          >I can properly prioritize a visit after he moves.  Thanks for
          >any info, posted or emailed!

          The reason no one responded is that your brother likely will be
          the first person in living memory actually moving to Charleston
          rather than away from it.

          As an ex-patriot Charleston home boy, I have the sad duty to
          inform you that this town gives the term "beer wasteland" a whole
          new meaning.

          I spent some time there recently because of a death in the
          family, and I found the situation worse than ever. Thank goodness
          I remembered to take along lots of homebrew.

          There are no brewpubs, mini, micro, or mega breweries within 200
          miles of Charleston (the nearest would be Cincinnati or
          Pittsburgh). The best beer store in town is the Cold Spot on
          Washington St West. It has a reasonable selection of imports.
          Next best is Campbell's Kwik Shop in Kanawha City. Last I
          remember, it actually carried Guinness and Bass Ale. One measure
          of the situation - There are exactly as many beer retailers
          listed in the phone book as there are bible retailers.

          Don't even bother with the bars or taverns - nothing served but
          Budmillob and, occasionally, Bass Ale.

          If you can get past all of that, Charleston does have a fairly
          good cultural and music scene. Check out Mountain Stage, recorded
          each Sunday at the WV Cultural Center at the Capitol. Also, spend
          some time at Trans Allegheny Books on Capitol St, one of my
          all-time favorite used book stores.



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

Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 13:24:54 -0800
From: ek@chem.UCSD.EDU (Ed Kesicki)
Subject: Goudenband


I have gotten a request from a friend of mine to find out if anyone
out there has tried to reproduce a beer called Goudenband (Belgian, O
I believe).  If so, or if anyone has any suggestions as to recipe
ideas, what yeast to use, etc, please let me know.

I have never tasted the beer so I really don't even know what style it
is.  He says you can't get it here in San Diego.  Thanks.

Ed Kesicki
ek@chem.ucsd.edu


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

Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 13:34:24 -0800
From: ek@chem.UCSD.EDU (Ed Kesicki)
Subject: San Diego Mill Help!


Help!  Anyone in San Diego with a grain mill willing to let me grind 8 lb
of malt on Friday or Saturday?  Please call me, I'm in kind of a bind--
I don't know anyone with a mill, I've just started all-grain, just bought
a sack of uncrushed malt, and don't yet have a mill, and...have yeast
getting ready to go. Reward offered.  Thanks.

Ed Kesicki
(619) 558-1123 home
      534-1893, 534-7936  work

ek@chem.ucsd.edu


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

Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 16:29
From: sherpa2!BMOORE.UNIX11%mailsrv2@sunup.West.Sun.COM (BMOORE)
Subject: Corn Syrup, Oxidation etc.

>Then as technology progressed they (corn syrup manufacturers) became
>able to use enzymes to break
>down the starch virtually 100% of the way to a simple (monomer) sugar.
>This became "dextrose" even though chemically dextrose and glucose
>are the same. Thus dextrose syrup and crystalline dextrose.

Agricultural product manufacturers offer a variety of "corn syrup" products
to commercial brewers.  They can control the types and quantities of sugars
to a remarkable degree, even approximating the sugar distribution in a
"typical" wort.  This development has been met with enthusiasm by many
commercial brewers.  One needs only to count the railroad tank cars bearing
the name of a midwest corn processor in front of the Rainier brewery here
in Seattle.

>The problem is that about half of the bottles have good carbonation and
>great head retention while the other half are more-or-less flat.  (The
>"flat" half do have a little carbonation, but they form only a very
>weak head when decanted.  The head quickly disappears and the beer
>tastes flat when drinking it.)

>I'm wondering if:
>- I need to relax and hope the batch carbonates more evenly.
>- I capped some of the bottles wrong.
>- I didn't mix in the priming sugar well enough.
>- I did something else wrong.

I had uneven carbonation problems for quite a while and finally traced it
to inadequate mixing of the beer and the priming sugar.  I was so afraid of
getting oxygen into the beer that it wasn't getting mixed.  I finally
started using a carboy for a priming vessel so I could throw a cork on top
and gently rouse the beer without splashing it.  The trick is to >quietly<
siphon the beer into the carboy with the priming solution already in it,
shake lightly to cause the beer to foam a bit, thus filling the airspace in
the carboy with CO2.  Warm priming solution in the bottom the the carboy
helps this process

A neat trick for underprimed beer is to pour 2 to 4 oz of "commercial" beer
(i.e. bland and overcarbonated) in the glass first.  There seems to be
enough carbonation to go around and the flavor change isn't too drastic.
Better than throwing flat homebrew away, anyhow

>I was wondering if anyone can recommend any commercial
>holiday brews that I should sample.

Jubelale from Deschutes brewery in Bend, Ore and (I forgot the name of the
beer) from Feinloffel (sp?)somewhere in California

>Are the copper wort chillers that many of us are using are in fact
>compromising the quality of our brews?

I Think the guy peddling stainless wort chillers is pulling your chain.

>  Everything I've ever read says aerating *hot*
>wort is very bad, but aerating cool wort before yeast pitching is good.
>So how come his hopback doesn't introduce massive oxidation since the
>wort is still hot as it falls into the hopback and then cooled very
quickly
>as it falls into the fermenter (aerating again)?

The key here is that the wort is cooled >immediately< after the oxygen is
introduced from aeration.  If the wort was splashed around and then let sit
around hot for a while , then trouble would occur.  My understanding is
that many commercial brewers introduce oxygen into the wort at the >HOT<
end of their wort chillers without problems!  Something about mixing in
better.  I imagine just as many introduce oxygen at the cold end too.





Hope this helps...
Cheers

Barry Moore                       "Umsonst ist alle Kunst,
ELDEC Corp                         Wenn ein Angel in den Zundloch prunst"
Bothell, Washington

(sherpa2!bmoore@sunup.west.sun.com)


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

Date: 19 Nov 1992 22:36:59 -0500 (EST)
From: Frank Tutzauer <COMFRANK@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu>
Subject: Closure on smoked beer

Hey, now.  Last summer, I asked for hints about making smoked beers.  The
published literature is pretty scanty, but the help from the HBD was great.
Thanks to everyone.

Here is what I did and how it turned out.  (I'm going to try to put the recipe
in the format used in the Cat's Meow.  If we all did that, maybe it'll save
Karl and Mark a little effort down the road.)

                             Mongrel Ale (Smoked)

Source:   Frank Tutzauer (comfrank@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu)
          Issue #????, 11/??/92

Ingredients:

          1 lb smoked crystal (60 L)
          1/2 lb smoked pale English 2-row
          1 lb Munich malt
          3 lbs amber M&F dried malt extract
          2 lbs light M&F dried malt extract
          1/2 oz. Galena pellets (alpha = 12.0; 60 min.)
          1/2 oz. Hallertauer pellets (alpha = 4.5; 15 min.)
          1/2 teaspoon, Irish Moss (15 min.)
          1/2 oz. Hallertauer pellets (alpha = 4.5; 1 min.)
          Wyeast 1007:  German Ale
          Heavy handed 3/4 cup corn sugar (priming)

Procedure:

Using a water smoker, I smoked the crystal and pale malt at about 170F over
hickory wood for 3-4 hours using heavy smoke.  When finished, the malt smelled
smokey, but didn't taste smokey, so I took half the crystal and gave it
another 3-4 hours.  This smelled REALLY smokey, but still didn't taste smokey.

On brew day, I cracked all grains and steeped them in 3 qts. of water for 45
minutes at 150-155F.  I sparged with 1 (US) gallon of 170F water,
recirculating twice (I wanted that smoke, and was willing to get a few more
tannins).  I added the runoff and extracts to the kettle, and topped up to 5
and 1/2 to 6 gallons of water.  I boiled 65 minutes adding the hops and Irish
Moss as shown.  I calculated the IBUs to be about 30, but the finished product
doesn't taste 30 IBUs worth of bitter (maybe my calculations were off; also my
crude measuring instruments mean that those quantities on the hops are, er,
approximate).  Cooled with an immersion chiller and pitched the yeast from a
starter.

Comments:

This beer was a big hit at my homebrew club.  It is a beautiful amber, but has
low head retention.  The first taste sensation is a light sweetness at the
front of the mouth; then a light bitterness, with a mild smokey finish at the
back sides of the tongue.  I personally think that it could use a little more
smoke, but my wife thinks it's perfect.  Also, I believe that the popularity
of it at my homebrew club is partly due to the fact that the smoke is not
overwhelming--most people just aren't used to heavily smoked foods.  (But I
am, which is why I think it can use more.)  The consensus at the homebrew club
was that if one did want to increase the smokiness, you should smoke more
grains, rather than apply more smoke to the original 1 and 1/2 pound quantity.

About the name--I know that smoked beer is a German tradition, so I threw in
some Munich and used German yeast.  But, geez, I had all this English malt and
extract laying around, hence "mongrel."  Also, I decided to make an ale
instead of a lager since it was the end of the summer and I hadn't yet gotten
a refridgerator.  Finally, I made a low gravity beer because I wanted to see
how the smoke played out, and therefore didn't want a lot of other flavors,
etc., to get in the way.

Specifics:

O.G.:  1.042

F.G.:  1.010

Primary Ferment:  13 days

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


End of HOMEBREW Digest #1017, 11/20/92
*************************************
-------