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 - anthony

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 18
166
Going Pro / Re: OK, we DID it!
« on: August 01, 2012, 12:53:51 PM »
I got a hold of our assigned specialist's contact info and dropped her an email. We'll see what happens next.

167
Going Pro / Re: OK, we DID it!
« on: August 01, 2012, 10:23:01 AM »
Our specialist review was due on 7/14 and nothing happened. I finally called today to see what is up. It seems processing times really vary wildly by region.

168
Going Pro / Re: OK, we're doing it
« on: July 18, 2012, 08:40:00 AM »
In Illinois, the Dram Shop act is particularly problematic with regards to that scenario.

169
Going Pro / Re: OK, we're doing it
« on: July 17, 2012, 08:07:11 PM »
Yeah, we're an LLC and we keep our money in a corporate trust. If you break the corporate veil (for instance by using corporate money as personal money) then even if you're set up as an LLC, you can still be held personally liable.

Be careful here. Breaking the corporate veil is a legal term set aside for when a judgement or a preceding pierces the veil. Like most legal things, there is a factor test involved that guides a judge into actually deciding whether or not to do it. Using the corporate bank account as your personal bank account is certainly a factor that will be counted against you but I've never heard of any case law, at least in my state, where it was the only factor. There are something like 10-12 other factors.

This also really depends on your state. In Illinois for instance, our LLCs are seen as pretty strong and it is very rare for liability to pass through unless the managers were already doing something illegal. But your state may very.

I'm not a lawyer but I'm married to one. And a different lawyer is one our founding partners (and a manager of our LLC). And as alluded to in the other posts, starting an LLC for a business dealing in the alcohol industry is a very good idea.

170
Yeast and Fermentation / Re: very high attenuation with US05
« on: June 14, 2012, 12:01:43 PM »
I saw a thread on tastybrew where you also posted this same issue. I think your best option is to a) get another thermometer as backup and b) keep increasing your mash temperature until you get an attenuation you want.

80% attenuation with US-05 with a mash in the low 150s or high 140s isn't uncommon. If you want to keep using dry yeast, then recipe modifications might be in order, but the modification wouldn't be less grain. The thing you would want to do is sub out some base malt for something less fermentable and with more dextrins. One easy way to do this is blend some of your base malt with one of the many "Mild" malts available.

If you truly want to find the cause, then you need the manipulate just one of these variables until you fix the issue. I would probably choose the mash temperature (with new thermometer).

171
All Grain Brewing / Re: RO water adjustments for Special Bitter
« on: June 14, 2012, 11:44:02 AM »
You shouldn't need much... Bru'n Water says something like 4.5 grams gypsum to mash, 1.5 grams epsom salt to mash, and then depending on sparge volume, 3ish grams gypsum to kettle, 1ish gram epsom salt to kettle.

That will bring mash ph to 5.3 and water profile to:

47ca 7mg 8na 137so4 4cl 16hco3

That is what I would do anyways... some others might want to bump up bicarb more and try to make the water more "English" but I like a crisper profile.

172
All Grain Brewing / Re: Second attempt at decoction...
« on: June 14, 2012, 09:36:58 AM »
I like to mash really thin with my decoction mashes, starting around 2qt/lb. This is a little more traditional with German brewing. I do this because it feels a little more comfortable and seems like I get a nice buffer since many of the mash's enzymes will be in suspension in that liquid part after I draw off a thicker part for the pulls.

I also like to make my pulls thin enough so that they can boil without needing constant direct stirring. You're not trying to caramelize the grain when you're boiling a decoction. You just want to rupture the grain and concentrate the flavors.

Something to keep in mind is that on professional systems that utilize decoction (like in the big factory brewery in Aying, Germany), they are moving around the grist with pumps. If you're making a decoction pull so thick that it looks like it couldn't be pumped through hoses/etc, it is probably too thick; you're making more work for yourself and greatly increasing the risk of scorching the mash which usually ruins the beer (depending on the style).

Also, I always pull more than my software (Promash) tells me I need. Then I add it back to the main mash in a staggered manner. Then if I am below my step temperature, I just add a little more; if I am above, I just keep the rest in the decoction pot until it cools enough to add back to the mash.

173
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: 100% Brett
« on: June 14, 2012, 09:27:03 AM »
I believe Dekkera which is the spore forming form of Brett is exceedingly rare in brewing/wine making/etc.

174
I think that the modifications we made to the law a couple years ago should allow you to pour.  Lemme look into it and get back to you.

As came up in another thread in the GoingPro section, this could very well be related to liability reasons (i.e. their event insurance only covers their employees serving, etc.)

175
Going Pro / Re: insurance types
« on: June 12, 2012, 11:52:06 AM »
... Along those lines; we are expressly forbidden to pour any beer at festivals. We can be there and talk but we must have volunteers who pour the beer and the volunteers are signed on with the company who runs the festival.

You nailed it there. The company who runs the festival is taking care of the insurance at that point. There are a lot of festivals around here where brewers or a brewery's employees are doing the pouring at their own booths.

And wiley hit on the subtle differences between the insurance types. In our area, the dram shop insurance is to specifically cover serving folks alcohol in the tasting room and any sort of liabilities that may arise from that (they run over someone in the parking lot and are underinsured, etc.) Product liability insurance covers the instance that someone takes one of our bottles home and something bad happens. In our case since we (will) have a tasting room and a retail sales operation, we need to cover both contingencies.

Distributing or self-distributing won't determine if you need those types of insurance; it depends on what your setup is (can people have samples at the brewery?) and if you have direct-to-public sales. You could self-distribute only kegs to bars and not need any sort of product liability or dram shop insurance, at least in our state.

176
Going Pro / Re: insurance types
« on: June 11, 2012, 08:26:34 PM »
If you have a tasting room or you start to go to certain festivals, you also will need some sort of liquor indemnification policy, sometimes referred to as dram-shop insurance. The festivals want it in the $1M range.

Whether you strictly require it for a tasting room will be determined by state liquor laws regarding imposed liability, etc.

177
Yeast and Fermentation / Re: Pitching dry yeast without rehydrating
« on: May 25, 2012, 09:14:22 AM »
I would be curious to see if you rehydrated in even warmer water than your first experiment, more on the order of 90-100F, would you improve your viability even further.

In my experience, temperature doesn't have a statistically significant effect.

Interesting, because there is a fair amount of research out there that says otherwise... for example: http://www.sasev.org/journal-sajev/sajev-articles/volume-7-2/art3%20rehydration%20temperature%20of%20dried%20yeast.pdf

Here is another one from DCL: http://www.fermentis.com/shared/Doc_60698.pdf which interestingly found no significant difference between rehydrating in wort or water, but still finds a difference with temperature.

In any event, I strongly suspect that the differences in pitching rate that are happening from the differences in protocols (some folks sprinkle, some rehydrate) aren't detected on the homebrew scale for a number of reasons related to the longer timeline most of us use for production, batch variation, etc.

178
Yeast and Fermentation / Re: Pitching dry yeast without rehydrating
« on: May 25, 2012, 09:04:36 AM »
I would be curious to see if you rehydrated in even warmer water than your first experiment, more on the order of 90-100F, would you improve your viability even further.

In my experience, temperature doesn't have a statistically significant effect.

Interesting, because there is a fair amount of research out there that says otherwise... for example: http://www.sasev.org/journal-sajev/sajev-articles/volume-7-2/art3%20rehydration%20temperature%20of%20dried%20yeast.pdf


179
Yeast and Fermentation / Re: Pitching dry yeast without rehydrating
« on: May 24, 2012, 10:24:07 PM »
I've done several methylene blue viability studies on yeast rehydrated in wort and in water, and I'm confident that there is in fact a substantial reduction in viability after rehydrating in wort. So if you accept that a reduction in pitching rate promotes off-flavors, then there you have it.

On the other hand, I've only conducted one (blind) tasting of beers that were actually fermented using yeast rehydrated in water vs. those rehydrated in wort. http://seanterrill.com/2011/07/29/dry-yeast-viability-take-two/

The results are not exactly unambiguous, but for what it's worth, I was the only one who tasted them*.


*That's not true. My non-beer-drinking roommate, who randomized the samples for me, described the rehydrated yeast beer as being the "fluffiest".

I would be curious to see if you rehydrated in even warmer water than your first experiment, more on the order of 90-100F, would you improve your viability even further.

180
All Grain Brewing / Re: Phosphoric Acid amounts?
« on: May 24, 2012, 10:15:57 PM »
I must agree with Jeff et al.  We have used it and it does well at reducing pH, especially in sparge water, with no added effect on flavor.

Conversely, what substance would have an effect on flavor that phosphoric acid does not?

Lactic acid adds lactates... in large enough amounts it will contribute a sour flavor. Sulfuric acid adds sulfates.

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 18