HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: slndw@cc.usu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing,alt.beer
Subject: Re: Beer dispute?
Date: 13 Aug 92 13:00:54 MDT
Organization: Utah State University

In article <ccHC03yH5aEz00@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com>, dougd@uts.amdahl.com (Douglas DeMers) writes:
> In <1992Aug13.000917.5788@golem.uucp> davidf@golem.uucp (David J. Fiander) writes:
> 
> [...]
>>My wife always get the Stout and the Coke confused.  [...]
> 
> Uh, some homebrewers take advantage of this fact and bottle their
> darker beers in the plastic 2 liter Coke or Pepsi bottles for taking to
> the ballpark...  Not that _I'd_ ever do anything like that...  :-)
> (Actually, I haven't, yet... :-) ) 
> 
> I've considered using a couple of plastic Ginger Ale bottles for my
> wheat beer - the color should be about right...
> 
> Cheers!
> -- 
> 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.                    ]


yeah...and returnable coke bottles (glass, pint) work well for darker beers
too.


-toot

Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing
From: mrbill@leland.Stanford.EDU (William Bowen)
Subject: Re: Looking for good non-all grain recipes!
Keywords: beer,recipes,non-all grain
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 92 22:08:40 GMT

In article <1992Aug14.123836.19052@walter.cray.com> albrcp@cray.com (Albrecht Craig P) writes:
>I am looking for some new and exciting beer recipes using malt, hops 
>and adjuncts.   These should be tried and proven recipes.
>
>Types that am lookinf for:
>- export (DAB)
>- porter 
>- stout (like guiness, samual smiths, ...)
>- ...
>
>We need more recipes in the NEWS group...
>
>Thanks
>
>Craig P. Albrecht  Cray Research, Inc. Dept:CIC  612-683-7281
>                   Technical Systems/Specialist  albrcp@brewery.cray.com

O.K. Craig, here's a dry Irish Stout that turned out well:

INGREDIENTS: (5 gallons)

6lbs Dark Malt Extract
1/2 lb 80L Crystal Malt
1/2 lb 120L Crystal Malt
1/2 lb Roasted Barley
1/4 lb Chocolate Malt
1/4 lb Black Patent
1 oz Bullion (Boil) 
1 oz Fuggles (Finish)
WYeast #1084
1 tsp gypsum

PROCEDURE:

1. Bring 1.5 gal water to boil while steeping the crystal malts. Boil for 5 
   minutes, remove the grains.
2. Add the bullion hops and gypsum, boil for 50 minutes.
3. Add the fuggles, turn off the heat, put the lid on the brewpot.
4. Sparge the wort into enough water to make 5 gallons.

COMMENTS:

This beer is similar in alcohol and body to draft Guinness, but it's slighty
more bitter, has some hop aroma and a hint of coffee (from the chocolate
malt, I think).
From: dprcta@inetg1.ARCO.COM (Craig Artley)
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing
Subject: Salvator (pronunciation)
Date: 20 Aug 92 15:05:52 GMT
Organization: ARCO Oil and Gas Company

In article <3385@bcstec.ca.boeing.com>, warrenc@bcstec.ca.boeing.com
(Cherie Warren) writes:
> 
> Salvator - from Paulaner (the original Doppelbock)
> Maximator - Augustiner
> Optimator - Spaten
> Delikator - Hacker-Pschorr (If I remember correctly - corrections
> appreciated!)
> Triumphator - Lowenbrau (and therefore unavailable in the US :-()
> Fortunator - Ayinger (famous small brewer south of Munich); known as
> Celebrator
> 	     in the U.S.A.
> Operator - Odelzhausen (small "Schlossbrauerei" west of Munich); the name
> refers
> 	   to the Munich Opera, not to the telephone company :-)
> Bajuvator - Tucher (Nuernburg's well-known brewer); the old name for the
> > 	    Bavarian tribe is "Bajuvarii"
> 
Seeing this list makes me think that I've been pronouncing Salvator
incorrectly.  I've been rhyming it with El Salvador, the country.
Apparently it should rhyme with the other beers in this list.

The servers in the bars where I've ordered Salvator also rhyme it
El Salvador.  It must be a common mispronunciation. Or the exception
that proves the rule....
-- 
Craig Artley           dprcta@er.arco.com          (214) 754-6145
From: slk6p@cc.usu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing
Subject: Re: Liquid Yeast Problems
Date: 21 Aug 92 08:57:00 MDT
Organization: Utah State University

In article <1992Aug20.193504.4888@mksol.dseg.ti.com>, carruth@mksol.dseg.ti.com (matthew carruth) writes:
> I decided to use liquid yeast on my 3rd batch.  Last night  I had everything ready
> for the yeast pitching.  At this point I took the package out of the fridge and 
> discovered that it is supposed to pre-ferment in the package for several days.  I 
> wasn't in a position to wait, so I burst the capsule and let it sit at
> room temp for a couple of hours.  I added the contents to the wort.  This morning
> I noticed no signs of fermentation.  How long is it safe to wait before adding more
> yeast?  Is there anything else I should do, other than never repeat this
> situation?
> Keywords: 
> 
> 
> -- 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> My views are my own and do not reflect those of my employeers....
*The real advantage/point in prefermenting the yeast is to increase the 
number and activity of cells so as to pitch a large quantity.  That
way they have a better chance of outcompeting any contaminants that might be
around.  
	I'd say- wait 2 days, and if NO activity is seen, repitch.  You
will have a longer lag phase than usual, the yeast need time to get activity
and numbers up before fermentation is visible.  
	?  What would you repitch with?  A dry yeast packet or another cold
liquid yeast?  If you want more liquid, you'll need to start it NOW, or 
you'll just add to the situation you have,  too few cells.  

LESSON:  Plan a day or two ahead, as you think about your brew  with
anticipation.  Pull out the yeast, I stick the packet in a bucket to keep dust
off, and in case it blows!  I smell the aroma percolating from the bucket
and It helps me get psyched!  Drinking a homebrew has this effect too.

	Relax,  the yeasties are tough buggers.	BRew on.	J.Wyllie
From: ulick@angelico.helios.nd.edu (Ulick Stafford)
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing
Subject: Re: aeration - when?
Date: 19 Aug 92 20:14:48 GMT
Distribution: rec
Organization: University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame

In article <1992Aug19.224.4989@dosgate> "glenn anderson" <glenn.anderson@canrem.com> writes:
>
>Now, acording to Millers TCHOHB this is the worst thing you can do to 
>hot wort. He says it will be "terribly oxygenated, with now way of 
>rectifying". I'm confused, don't we want oxygen in the wort prior to 
>pitching? Whats' the difference between oxygen in hot wort and oxygen
>in cold wort, if there is only a 35 minute differential? Is there some
>sort of O2/heat conversion process that creates unuseable oxygen?

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.

Also gases disolve in cold liquid, but not at all in boiling liquid.
For this reason beer gets gasier when warm (can hold less CO2), and
bubbles of dissolved gases form when water is heated and has a 
lower capacity for dissolved gases.

Therefore exposure of hot wort to air will cause only oxidation,
with no wanted oxygen disolution needed for yeast reproduction in
the lag (aerobic) phase of fermentation.

What Miller should have said was that the wort would become
terribly oxidised, not oxygenated, and oxidation is 
irreversable.  The 35 minutes has nothing to do with it, only
the ~75 C temperature difference.


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 
+ '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   +
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
From: jdg00@ccc.amdahl.com (Josh Grosse)
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing
Subject: Re: Yeast Culturing - No Dregs Here!
Date: 15 Aug 92 16:30:33 GMT
Reply-To: jdg00@amail.amdahl.com (Josh Grosse)
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

slk6p@cc.usu.edu writes:

>	It makes much more sense to me to culture from a pure culture 
>(namely store bought liquid yeast) and get several batches out of one
>envelope-  than to try reculturing yeast that has already been through 
>your carboy.
>	The thing to ask yourself is:  Are you sterile techniques applied
>during the course of your brewing as good as those of a company like Wyeast?
>
>	By the end of a fermentation there has been ample possibility for even
>a few contaminating bacteria of fungi cells to get a foothold.  By reculturing
>this you open up the opportunity for these contaminants to represent a larger
>chunk of the population of a new beer.

I'd like to second this.  I've made about 10-15 batches of beer with Wyeast
liquid cultures, and I've only had one infection during this period.  I'd
been using Dave Miller's TCHOHB recommendation to make your first batch
with a fresh culture and starter, then set aside a six pack to make starters
from, so you can get up to 7 batches with one lab culture.  Typically, I
could never keep a six pack around, and instead usually ended up with only
1 or 2 bottles so I'd get three batches with one culture.

My only infection during this use of Wyeast came from a 2nd generation batch.
The infection was Lactobacillus.

Since that time (earlier this year) I've purchased Lestrad's Yeast Culturing
handbook, and have been hunting for a new O-ring for my 22-quart canner.  In
the mean time, I've switched to one batch per lab culture.  Yes, it's
expensive, but it's less expensive than a bad batch.  Even though Miller
outlines a procedure, he says its still got some risk, and based on my
experience, I have to agree.
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Josh Grosse                                jdg00@amail.amdahl.com
Amdahl Corp.                               313-358-4440
Southfield, Michigan
Xref: sparky rec.crafts.brewing:4548 alt.beer:4787
From: brew@monster.umd.edu
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing,alt.beer
Subject: New BrewPub list
Keywords: compilation, BrewPubs
Date: 13 Aug 92 18:22:22 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland



Fellow Microbrew fans:

As there is and continues to be tremendous interest and requests for 
information about micro breweries across the US and abroad, fellow brewer 
Dale Cooper (cooper@seismo.css.gov) and your's truly, Garry Knox,
(knox@monster.umd.edu) are planning to compile a master list of micro 
breweries to be made accessible to all.  Exact details are to be determined 
such as how the data is to be housed (database, flat file, postscript file 
ala CMII) and how it is to be made accessible to all (anonymous FTP).  We
will entertain reasonable suggestions so here's your chance to be part of
something entirely cool and useful to brewers and beer afficionados from
Dead Horse, Alaska to Sydney, Australia.

Within the next week or so we will post a standard form to be filled out by
you the reader.  The form will ask for information such as the name of the 
micro brewery/brew pub, address, claim to fame (specialty type brews available),
motif of the place (sports, rock-n-roll, swillbelly sweathouse...), number of 
brews available...We will ask that you email the form back to us so that they 
can be considered for the master list.  This has the potential to be a very 
valuable tool for swillbellies around the world.  

We are trying to limit this list to micro breweries and TRUE brew pubs (those
who brew and serve on site).  As can be understood, we cannot entertain such
entries as Larry's Bar and Grill just because they serve some brew that is
brewed in Paducah, Ky.  So start digging, you'll hear from us soon.

Dale Cooper & Garry Knox    8/13/92
brew@monster.umd.edu
cooper@seismo.css.gov
knox@monster.umd.edu
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing
From: gak@wrs.com (Richard Stueven)
Subject: Re: EBEWS (Exploding Bottle Early Warning Syste
Reply-To: gak@wrs.com
Organization: Wind River Systems, Inc.
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 18:25:26 GMT

In article 11230@progress.com, rich@progress.COM (Rich Lenihan) writes:
>Most bottle cappers leave a dimple-like indentation on the
>bottle-cap (mine does).

Sort of related to this...I found that on certain bottles my capper
does not leave this indentation, and those bottles don't carbonate
properly.

The difference seems to be what I'll call the "collar" of the bottle.
It's where the neck of the bottle is wider just below the opening on
top.  Anchor bottles, for example, have a very short collar, and they
don't work well.  Most longnecks, for example, have good long collars,
and they work very well.  My bottle collection is large enough now that
I simply discard bottles with short collars.

I use the two-handle capper that came with my original kit.  It's of
Italian manufacture, but I don't know the brand name.  (I'm not even
sure what this kind of capper is properly called...anybody?)  BTW, if
you have one of these cappers, you'll find that it works MUCH better if
you put some machine oil, WD-40, or graphite on the hinges!

---
gak			Der Herr Buergermeister gibt bekannt, dass ab
gak@wrs.com		Donnerstag Bier gebraut wird und deshalb ab
attmail!gakhaus!gak	Mittwoch micht mehr in den Bach geschissen
107/H/3&4		werden darf.

Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing
From: rich@progress.COM (Rich Lenihan)
Subject: Re: Bleach sanitation
Organization: Progress Software Corp.
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 16:02:33 GMT

homebrew@lupulus.ssc.gov writes:

>>>>>> In HBD #945, JKL <JLAWRENCE@UH01.Colorado.EDU> writes:

>> In HB943, Jeff Frane writes:

>Jeff> Change them both, why don't you. If you're sanitizing with the right
>Jeff> concentration of chlorine you shouldn't have to rinse at all, and you're
>Jeff> pretty much defeating the purpose by throwing that water onto your
>Jeff> sanitized surfaces -- try using boiled water if you feel a need to
>Jeff> rinse.

>Jane>    OK, I'll bite.  What's the "right" concentration of chlorine?  I
>Jane> thought you had to rinse until there wasn't any more smell.  Won't any
>Jane> chlorine left on the equipment kill all the good stuff?  (I'm currently
>Jane> using 1-2 Tbl. of chlorine bleach per 1 gal water.)


>This was covered a while ago on the HBD, I think Bob Jones and
>George Fix went back and forth on it a bit.  I seem to remember
>the final outcome being that 1/2 c. of grocery store bleach
>per 5 gallons of water was sufficient to get the chlorine level
>to the 200 ppm or whatever concentration it was that will
>sanitize.  

Depending on whom you listen to the appropriate amount is 50-200 ppm,
depending on contact time.  The catch is, household bleach loses
some of the chlorine-ness (technical term for chlorine pooping out or
escaping) with age.  I recently saw some chlorine test strips (I don't
remember where, exactly) that measured the actual amount of active
bug-killing chlorine in the range of (ta-da!) 50-200 ppm.  These sold
for about $6-7 per 100.  If anyone's interested I'll find the source.
Me, I use about 1 tbsp per gallon (with a splash more for good luck),
30 minutes contact, and I don't rinse.

-Rich



--
Rich Lenihan                 UUCP: mit-eddie!progress!rich
Progress Software Corp.      Internet: rich@progress.com
Xref: sparky rec.crafts.brewing:4708 alt.beer:4899
From: bruceh@fps.com (Bruce T. Hill)
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing,alt.beer
Subject: Beer Production Statistics for the year 1900
Date: 18 Aug 92 19:15:24 GMT
Followup-To: alt.beer
Organization: Cray Research Superservers Inc., San Diego CA, USA

Fellow brewers and beer lovers,

Here are some brewing statistics from the 1903 version of the
"Encyclopedia Americana".

I was very surprised to see that at the turn of the century the
U.S. had 2,108 breweries!  These breweries turned out almost as
much beer as Germany with one tenth the number of breweries.

Does anyone know how many breweries are currently producing beer
in the U.S. today and how much beer they produce?


                      BEER PRODUCTION, 1900
------------------------------------------------------------
|     COUNTRIES                 | No. of   |  Hectolitres  |
|                               | Breweries|               |
------------------------------------------------------------
| German Empire.................|  21,236  |   61,478,433  |
| Great Britain and Ireland.....|   8,196  |   57,825,095  |
| United States.................|   2,108  |   48,478,043  |
| Austria-Hungary...............|   1,662  |   20,823,353  |
| Canada, Australasia, Central  |          |               |
|   and South America and Mexico|  ------  |   14,278,239  |
| Belguim.......................|   3,057  |   10,364,816  |
| France........................|   2,546  |    9,248,814  |
| Russia........................|   1,136  |    4,862,726  |
| Denmark.......................|     324  |    1,854,948  |
| Switzerland...................|     304  |    1,802,961  |
| Sweden........................|     540  |    1,521,720  |
| Netherlands...................|     428  |    1,326,860  |
| Norway........................|      47  |      632,950  |
| British India.................|      39  |      411,260  |
| Luxembourg....................|      13  |      154,620  |
| Spain.........................|      36  |       85,865  |
| Greece........................|      12  |       81,715  |
| Italy.........................|      89  |       78,367  |
| Servia........................|      12  |       62,958  |
| Bulgaria......................|      21  |       57,867  |
| Roumania......................|      17  |      -------  |
------------------------------------------------------------

   The sales of beer in the principal cities of the 
   United States in 1900 were as follows:

   New York.......4,918,808 barrels
   Chicago........3,198,322
   Milwaukee......2,222,818
   Saint Louis....2,070,331
   Philadelphia...1,996,743
   Brooklyn.......1,926,828
   Cincinnati.....1,217,343
   Newark.........1,227,506
   Boston.........1,224,524

-- 
Bruce T. Hill @ Cray Research Superservers, Inc., San Diego, CA, USA
Email: bruceh@cray.com  Phone: (619) 625-3746  FAX: (619) 625-0641
Humorous quotation:  Nobody looks good wearing _brown_lipstick_. --Frank Zappa
From: copeland@lamar.ColoState.EDU (Jeffrey Copeland)
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing
Subject: Re: You Think "Salvator" is Hard? [Re: Salvator (pronunciation)]
Date: 21 Aug 92 15:47:25 GMT
Organization: Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO  80523

In article <01050166.bjqc0b@joebloe.maple-shade.nj.us> joseph@joebloe.maple-shade.nj.us writes:
>
>But I have yet to guess at ANY suitable pronunciation of
>
>	g u e u z e
>
>OK, so I guess it's time for me to go watch that copy of "The Beer
>Hunter" that my friend Nick loaned me ....
>
I believe its pronounced the same as gauze, as in the bandage.
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing
From: arf@ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling)
Subject: Re: Yeast Culturing - No Dregs Here!
Organization: ddsw1.MCS.COM Contributor, Chicago, IL
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 03:11:10 GMT
X-Disclaimer:  Material posted in this article is the sole responsibility of
                the poster and does not represent MCSNet or the system owners.

In article <1992Aug15.011150.58174@cc.usu.edu> slk6p@cc.usu.edu writes:
>Some of this discussion of yeast culturing bothers me.
>
>If you think about it in terms or a race to maintain the most of the 
>microbes that you want    . . . . to keep in your beer:
>
>	It makes much more sense to me to culture from a pure culture 
>(namely store bought liquid yeast) and get several batches out of one
>envelope-  than to try reculturing yeast that has already been through 
>your carboy.

You got it right.  The risk with the second approach depends on the care taken
and many other variables and get progressively worse with each generation.

It is far better to make a bunch of cultures from a single new and presumed to
be pure one.  Futrhermore, if it is not, it becomes so by the process of 
pure culturing.  There is no way we can become totally independent of
commercial yeast suppliers, the best we can do is cut our costs to the
minimum.

I make up 10 slants from every culture I start with.  However, I start with
a single granule of dry Edme so my costs approach the vanishing point.

Even if you buy Wyeast, dividing the price by ten, puts it in the same range
as dry yeast.

js
From: rich@progress.COM (Rich Lenihan)
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing
Subject: EBEWS (Exploding Bottle Early Warning System)
Keywords: bottles explode
Date: 14 Aug 92 16:59:29 GMT
Article-I.D.: progress.1992Aug14.165929.11230
Organization: Progress Software Corp.

I've seen a few posts recently about bottles exploding or people
who were worried that their bottles were thinking about exploding
so I thought I'd pass along this bit of wisdom I learned from the
net.  Most bottle cappers leave a dimple-like indentation on the
bottle-cap (mine does).  Too much pressure inside the bottle will 
the indention to "pop out".  So, if your "inny" becomes an "outty",
it's time to drink.

-Rich

--
Rich Lenihan                 UUCP: mit-eddie!progress!rich
Progress Software Corp.      Internet: rich@progress.com
From: walker@main.mndly.umn.edu (TIM WALKER)
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing
Subject: Re: Awful beer, bottles (Salvator?  Say it ain't so...)
Date: 18 Aug 92 16:49:09 GMT
Organization: the Minnesota Daily (U of MN Student Newspaper)

In article <1992Aug14.211235.9643@intellistor.com> pyle@intellistor.com (Norm Pyle) writes:


  Beer names which end in -ator are often Dopplebocks (although not all, 
such as Terminator Stout) so if you see>another unrecognized -ator name you 
might not want to try it.  Some people>think Salvator is the beer to end all 
beers  (I have a friend who drinks it>like water).

>I would describe it thus:  Dark red heavy lager.  Very sweet with very little
>hops for balance.  Strong (I think) roasted barley flavor.  High alcohol.
>Smooth.  Not a beer for thirst quenching - much better to sip by a fire in
>January  (unfortunately they are traditionally brewed in the Spring).

>To each his own (that's why we brew!),
>Norm


I too will sing the praises of Dopplebocks. The best commercial beer I have 
ever sampled was two summers ago in a beer garden in Munich. A friendy 
Munchiner started a conversation with me and my wife (although he knew 
little English, and we knew even less German) and in the course of our
conversation he recommended ordering a beer called "Delikator." I did, and 
ever since, I've been trying my best to get back to Germany to get some 
more of that heavenly brew (and maybe even find a better Dopplebock).

Tim

P.S. If anyone knows of an importer carrying Delikator, please let me know!
From: daveb@greenman.sybase.com (David Birkhead)
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.brewing
Subject: Re: Lehman's Address (oak kegs)
Date: 21 Aug 92 21:41:28 GMT

In article <1992Aug14.223550.1809@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu>, GRIGG@dirac.physics.jmu.edu (Steve Grigg) writes:
|> In <1992Aug13.001450.2117@lmt.mn.org> ciaran@county.lmt.mn.org writes:
|> 
|> [stuff deleted]
|> >   Ciaran. <ciaran@county.lmt.mn.org>
|> 
|> How do you use an oak keg? I've seen them used but at the time was not brewing
|> and didn't ask. I figured it was magic. Do you carbonate? more? less? Any other
|> answers? Any side-by-side taste tests with same beer from cornelius and oak?
|> 
|> Steve

I age in oak casks.

For porter and other dark beers I swear by them.

The casks do take some prep.  I soaked them in water rinsing every day for 
about 2 weeks then I in a barrel prep solution(e-mail me for details I don't
remember of the top of my head). and then rinsed for another couple of days.

I sterilize using a quart of vodka.

I do the first fermentation in glass then I add priming sugar and age for
about 2 weeks in oak.

I did do a side by side taste test using the same wart. 
The beer in the oak was sweeter and less carbonated.  The oak gave the beer 
a smokey apple taste and a body you would not beleave.  

Every one that has tried it wants more.

daveb