Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - ynotbrusum

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 187
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: New info on sanitizers
« on: Today at 11:12:22 AM »
I remember when I first started homebrewing and my LHBS guy told me that when you want to be absolutely sure you are killing microbes, use boiling water.  Maybe that needs to be part of the regimen for parts that can take the heat (I’m thinking kegs and stainless fermenters ever few batches).

Kegging and Bottling / Re: Lubricant noob
« on: July 16, 2018, 01:37:34 AM »
Let me put it this way - I just lost 3.5 gallons of Golden Ale to a post o-ring leak.  I would lube it all, if I were you.  I’m changing out the liquid o-ring, too after this and I will be watching like a hawk for any issues on this keg.  Good luck!

Go for it - you can brew ales and use a laundry tub with coll water and ice bottle swapping for temp control, if you have a basement.  At least for now...Cheers!

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Brew Systems RO water treatment
« on: July 15, 2018, 11:08:14 PM »
If you intend to brew large batches on a regular basis and you want household RO water use as well, the RO system pays for itself over a couple years time.  Plus you can attach a TDS meter to verify the water filtration extent.

Walmart and grocery stores have pretty wide swings on their conditioned RO water or at least that is what a local water engineer expressed to me back when I was getting water from a heavily used commercial unit at a local store.

YMMV, of course.

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: NHC Scoresheets
« on: July 15, 2018, 10:55:40 PM »
Packaging and handling issues are usually the culprit when a disparate result is received among competitions closely spaced in time, for sure.  But again, my friend happened to have the exact bottle that was judged (he was judging other styles and asked the steward to save the bottles that were judged, so he could try his entry).

He is a highly award winning homebrewer and I trust his palate.  He chalked it up to experience and human perception differences.  Setting aside the score, stated “flaws” that are not present is particularly annoying.  I have taken issue with a judging partner when the flaw found by the other judge is simply not present.  Thankfully, it is usually resolved by bringing in another judge to get his or her take on the matter.  Finally, I appreciate that a younger palate is likely more able to perceive things more sensitively than an old dog like me, but when it’s not there, it’s not there and it is okay to admit that judges, like umpires in baseball, sometimes miss the call.

Best of luck to the OP with his Brown Ale rebrew.

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: NHC Scoresheets
« on: July 15, 2018, 12:46:14 PM »
Thanks for your feedback.  I entered an American Brown Ale. I did not rebrew, but will in the future. I honestly did not expect to make it past the first round and was pleasantly surprised when I received the score i did.Unfortunately I did not have time to brew another batch for the final round.
Some of the comments did not seem age related but seemed to vary by things that wouldn't change with time. (Carbonation, body)
The feedback was still good, it just didn't provide quite the direction i was hoping for.

Inconsistent or incorrect feedback happens.  I am used to getting it with pale lagers in competitions.   A judge might detect diacetyl in a beer when there clearly is none, simply because of a process or ingredient that they are not familiar with.  That is frustrating, so I feel your pain. 

I am a BJCP judge and I judge several competitions per year and I know that some judges are hypercritical and narrow in their judging to the point that they really don’t know a whole lot about newer techniques and ingredients and will attribute a non existent flaw to a beer as a result of their limitations. I don’t hold it against them, I just don’t put much weight in their comments, however well intentioned they may be.

Here is an example:  a friend of mine got an 11 on a Pilsner in a competition.  The following week that same Beer took Best of Show at a larger competition.  It was not a case of a flawed bottle, because he was judging at the same competitions and drank from the low-scored bottle after the judging was completed, because he wanted to taste what flaws the judge had found - none were present.

Equipment and Software / Re: Newest Toy
« on: July 12, 2018, 07:22:49 PM »
I'm pretty sure brewers knew about yeast well before 1800. They might not have know the nature of yeast and it wouldn't be until the 1830's that anyone knew yeast was a living organism but they were certainly aware of it's existence and it's importance in fermenting their beer.

I haven't read anything to support that.  They knew something was happening, but I don't believe they knew it was yeast.  I'm happy to be proven wrong.

I recall references made from the pre-microscope era of the ingredient called "God is Good".
From an All About Beer article on history of brewing:   

Little wonder that the foamy evidence of yeast in action was known to brewers in the Dark Ages as “Godisgood.” They couldn’t see where it came from, they couldn’t explain it, but they knew it turned mundane ingredients into something inspirational.

All Grain Brewing / Re: Sours
« on: July 11, 2018, 11:35:42 AM »
Maybe try a simple kettle soured beer first?  That can be as sour as you like it and yet will finish as quickly as a regular ale...not as complex, of course.

Yeast and Fermentation / Re: New Fermentis strains
« on: July 10, 2018, 06:31:03 PM »
This is a WAG, admittedly, but I wonder if the HA-18 is for Hornindal - of the Kviek strain family?

The Voss Kviek is popular and I think Omega's Hot Head may be from that strain.  In any event, it is great to hear that a heat and alcohol tolerant clean ale strain is out there.

All Grain Brewing / Re: efficiency
« on: July 08, 2018, 11:55:47 AM »
Doing a modified no sparge has given me better tasting wort, but lower efficiency. I can use a little more grain to make up for that.

Exactly my thoughts. I do step mash BIAB with HERMS.

All Grain Brewing / Re: efficiency
« on: July 07, 2018, 10:56:45 AM »
I make homebrew, so efficiency was left in the computer a few hundred batches ago...but if you like numbers, calculate away!  I just wouldn’t get terribly hung up on or terribly prideful about efficiency at the homebrew level.  It is somewhat interesting, but once you have your system dialed in, you can concentrate on flavor profile as the ultimate factor.  Cheers to you engineers, though!

Yeast and Fermentation / Re: Has dry yeast improved?
« on: July 06, 2018, 07:07:49 PM »
I never rush the S-189 (fermented typically at 47-49F), but it can be ready to rack to a serving keg in 14 days; just that it will need some additional time in the keg to clarify on its own.  It is drinkable in 21 days, if fermented cold and enough yeast is pitched (I usually pitch 3 sachets in 10.5 gallon batches).  It definitely seems better when I rack at 21 days and serve two weeks later or beyond.  It can be re-pitched with success, but I rarely do that anymore, since I am letting it sit in primary for a while longer than I used to do, based on keeping "reserves" in line at all times.  When a couple kegs open up in the rotation, then I look to rack in keeping with that availability.

Ingredients / Re: GW Idaho Pilsner malt
« on: July 05, 2018, 03:05:24 PM »
Thumbs up here, too.  I just tapped a mid-May brewed (LODO) Idaho Pure Pilsner, fermented with S-189.  My palate says it has a slightly sweeter profile than Weyermann, but not offensively sweet or anything nearing cloying.  I did not do head to head blind triangle testing, so take this as purely anecdotal comments.

These specialty malts are going to catch on, I believe.

Yeast and Fermentation / Re: Has dry yeast improved?
« on: July 03, 2018, 11:14:24 AM »
I brew a lot of German styles and haven't yet found a dry yeast I like much for those.  I've tried 34/70 several times with mixed results, but my go-to for lagers is a healthy pitch from a starter made with FRESH WLP830.

Same experience here UNTIL.... I tried S-189.  The S-189 is a very good dry lager yeast.  Finally my lager actually tastes "German"!  W-34/70 is a terrible yeast in comparison, terrible stuff, I won't use it again.

Agreed on S-189. 34-70 is no match, but not terrible - some get lemon notes from it.  US - 05 is clovey to me when used cool. S-23 is a bit too fruity.  MJ Bohemian was way too sulfury and MJ Bavarian was basically 34-70 as far as I could tell, again, not terrible.  2206 is not dry, but I like it in my German lagers

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Looking for input from homebrewers
« on: June 29, 2018, 09:32:15 PM »
I can’t help but say, simply read the posts on this and other fora and you will easily glean all of that information, other than each person’s specific process.  That likely can only be generalized based on equipment implemented, anyway....but I wish you the best in your research.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 187