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 - nateo

Pages: 1 ... 139 140 [141] 142 143 ... 148
2101
Ingredients / Re: What is candi sugar?
« on: July 04, 2011, 03:02:17 PM »
Corn sugar is just D-glucose, or dextrose. Table sugar is sucrose, which is 50%/50% levulose/D-glucose. Glucose is the right-hand molecule, and levulose is the left-hand molecule. Beet sugar is also just sucrose.

During sugar refining, the manufacturer removes sugar from the plant material (sugar cane, beets, dates, etc.), and then removes the remaining plant material from the sugar. Plain white sugar is basically only sucrose. Sucrose is sucrose, no matter where it came from. Chemically, white sugar from beets is identical to white sugar from canes.

Yeast have enzymes that break sucrose into dextrose/levulose, so they have no problem eating sucrose, levulose, or dextrose. How they metabolize each sugar is pretty much the same. I've read that some breweries that make weizens will add dextrose to their wort because it encourages yeast to make either 4VG or isoamyl acetate, I can't remember which one.

Candi syrup is made from sucrose that has been cooked into a dark syrup by a bit of caramelization, and a lot of Maillard reactions.

2102
3787 seems like a strange choice for a wit.  At any rate, it and T-58 are nothing alike.

I think 3787 would probably taste good in a wit recipe, thought probably not exactly to style. It would probably taste more like a German wheat. It has some nice phenols. I taste a lot of spiciness (clove) with that strain.

I think it's interesting that so many people sub 3787 for T-58 when cloning de Struise beers. Maybe 3787 just makes better BDSs than T-58.

2103
I've heard de Struise uses T-58 as their house strain. This is according to someone from the brewery:
http://www.thebrewingnetwork.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=8801&sid=bb85ae98136fd5687e0152c32f3cc313

I've also heard it compared to 3787. It definitely makes a good wit, but I've never tried something like a dubbel with it, or a wit with 3787, so I can't say how they compare directly in the same style.

2104
Yeast and Fermentation / Re: stoping yeast from refermenting
« on: July 02, 2011, 04:56:20 AM »
This is intended for cider, but I think it'd work the same in your case:

http://www.homebrewtalk.com/f32/easy-stove-top-pasteurizing-pics-193295/

oops, just noticed the bit about kegging. the above link is just for bottling.

2105
Yeast and Fermentation / Re: Such a thing as over-pitching?
« on: July 02, 2011, 04:53:43 AM »
From my experience, pitching on a yeast cake = more yeast = faster ferment = more heat. If you have good fermentation temp control, I think it's less of a problem to pitch on a yeast cake. I've gotten some fusel/hot alcohol flavor from the times I've pitched onto a whole yeast cake, but I think that's more to do with my cooling and less to do with the pitching rate, per se.

2106
I've never heard of fruit flies getting past the rubber seal on bucket lids. Is there something about that rubber that is different than the rubber used to stop up a glass carboy?

The O2 permeability claim got me researching a bit, and I came up with this:
http://www2.parc.com/emdl/members/apte/flemishredale.shtml

So, a glass carboy with a rubber stopper isn't really sealed. The glass carboy will admit 17cc of O2 in a year. An HDPE bucket will admit 220cc of O2 in a year. Obviously 220cc is a lot more than 17cc, but how many people are leaving their beer in their bucket for a whole year? 220/12 = 18.33cc. So in one month in a plastic bucket, your beer will oxidize about as much as one year in a glass carboy. Now, whether or not this is "too much" oxidation is a question each brewer has to ask himself. I'll continue using my buckets because they're easier to clean, and I'm not concerned with such a small level of oxidation.

2107
Equipment and Software / Re: what mill would you recommend?
« on: June 29, 2011, 05:06:26 PM »
I have the MM 2 with the 1.5" rollers. It works well and the hopper and base they make for it work fine. I have a Dewalt drill with just a hand-tightened chuck, not the kind of chuck with a key, and sometimes I'll get some slipping on the driveshaft. That's just an FYI, it's in no way a knock on the mill itself. I seriously considered the MM2-2.0 but I couldn't justify the price to myself at the time, though that's the one I'd probably buy if I were to buy another one.

2108
All Grain Brewing / Re: Tell me about Kolsch please
« on: June 28, 2011, 12:28:40 PM »
I've heard some people add a very small late addition or flameout addition, like 10-20g / 5gal. Any opinions on late hop addition, or just go with a bittering addition? I was also planning on a mix of Rahr pils and Colorado pale malt, but should I just go all pils?

2109
All Grain Brewing / Re: Tell me about Kolsch please
« on: June 28, 2011, 05:10:46 AM »
Al Haunold ran the OSU hop development program (or something like that) in the 80s and 90s. He released all four of the Hallertau Mf mimics: Ultra, Liberty, Crystal, and Mt. Hood. He liked Mt. Hood the best, fwiw. Ultra seems harder to find than the others, but Crystal and Mt. Hood shouldn't be too hard to find.

Vanguard is another good noble-ish hop, as hopfen pointed out.

2110
Yeast and Fermentation / Re: UNDERPITCHING, Could it be desirable
« on: June 25, 2011, 06:34:30 AM »
Underpitching may or may not be a way of developing flavors.  There are conflicting opinions and no hard evidence that I'm aware of.
One of the talks I went to at NHC said that basically there is strain dependency in this, so one strain may develop more yeast character when underpitched, and another when overpitched.  Sounds like testing and personal experience are the way to go.

"Standard" pitching rates seem like such a WAG to me that there's no way they're the "best" pitching rate for every yeast and every style. Wyeast says <1.060 and you need 6m cells/ml, while over 1.061 you need 12m/ml. If you go by the (0.75m)x(degrees plato)x(ml), then a 1.061 beer would need 11.25m/ml. I doubt Wyeast would publish that pitching rate for their products if it didn't give acceptable results most of the time for most brewers.

A lot of people talk about "overpitching" and "underpitching" and some people claim success and others failure with either. I suspect there are a dozen reasons for the differing outcomes, like the brewer's fermentation controls, yeast health, oxygenation levels, brew process, etc. I'd say any amount of yeast you pitch to get the flavors you want is the "correct" amount to pitch, and any rule-of-thumb on pitching rates is just that, a rule-of-thumb.

2111
Yeast and Fermentation / Re: Wyeast 2565 Kolsch
« on: June 18, 2011, 04:39:06 PM »
IIRC it took like 6 weeks for the kraeusen to fall the last time I used 2565. I didn't cold crash it, but it did linger around for a long time.

2112
Ingredients / Re: Post your water report
« on: June 16, 2011, 06:20:11 PM »
This is from a well. I live in the Ozarks next door to Bennett Spring State Park in MO.

Sodium, Na 2
Potassium, K < 1
Calcium, Ca 74
Magnesium, Mg 47
Total Hardness, CaCO3 381
Nitrate, NO3-N 0.5 (SAFE)
Sulfate, SO4-S 2 (6ppm)
Chloride, Cl 4
Carbonate, CO3 < 1
Bicarbonate, HCO3 440
Total Alkalinity, CaCO3 360

2113
All Grain Brewing / Re: Sugar to lighten body
« on: June 06, 2011, 06:56:45 AM »
The OP is concerned that mashing higher than intended means he'll have more a "thicker" body. On one of those brewstrong interviews with Charlie Bamforth, they talk about how it really takes a ton of dextrin, all other things being equal, to increase the "body" of the beer. So mashing a bit hotter than you wanted, by itself, will have a small-to-negligible effect on the "thickness" of your beer.

From that, and my experience, I'd say the difference between actual attenuation and potential attenuation has a bigger effect on the perceived body than any of the absolute numbers. I've had a Belgian pale ferment down to 1.010 and a Saison ferment to 1.004, with almost the same OG. The pale seemed drier and thinner than the saison.

Doing a forced ferment test gives you a number to "shoot" for. You can still mess it up, like when I overshot my pale, and undershot my saison, but at least you're not flying blind.

So back to the OP's concerns, here's what I'd do. Pull off some wort and do a forced ferment test. See how your wort ferments out as-is. If you're off your mark, rouse and warm the yeast until you get the FG where you want it to be.

2114
Ingredients / Re: Unusual Wood Alternatives to Oak
« on: June 05, 2011, 05:53:39 AM »
http://tapirtantrum.com/2009/04/12/testing-exotic-woods-whiskey/

The dude didn't post a follow-up, but the taste test was interesting. I probably would've used a more neutral spirit like vodka.

2115
Ingredients / Re: Advanced Software for Brewing Water Analysis
« on: June 01, 2011, 08:03:27 PM »
Martin:

Is there any chance the estimated pH on the mash acidification sheet could include hundredths too?  The reason I ask is because when adding salts in g/gal on the water adjustment sheet, there can be quite a significant rate range between a pH of, say, 5.3 and 5.4 on the mash acidification sheet (forgive me if I'm not articulating this well).  E.g., for one of my recipes, adding Ca(OH)2 at a rate of .15 g/gal will yield an estimated pH of 5.3.  But to hit an estimated pH of 5.4, Bru'n Water tells me to more than double that addition rate.  It would be helpful to be able to see just how various rate points in between affect the estimated pH.

I think the issue is the significant digits (maybe I'm wrong). If the calculation formula is based on one decimal place, you can't accurately estimate to two decimals. The formula, as is, is making a guess. It's a pretty good guess, from my experience, but still just a guess. The spreadsheet is like a map, you still have to use your experience to drive to your destination. It won't drive the car for you.

Pages: 1 ... 139 140 [141] 142 143 ... 148