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 - The Professor

Pages: 1 ... 43 44 [45] 46 47 ... 55
661
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Beer staling prematurely?
« on: July 27, 2010, 09:07:34 PM »
IMO kegging will definitely help. The whole "bottle bucket" bottling method is not a very good way to bo9ttle beer. Ironically, having a kegging system is a far better way to bottle beers with nat. carb because you can purge the bottle with Co2.

Another thing I would recommend (though I didn't see it mentioned) is skip secondary.

I agree...set up a kegging system and you have the best of both worlds.  I have bottled some strong beers from keg and they taste fine years down the line (as long as your sanitation is good).
I do secondary all of my beers, but that's a matter of personal choice (and reflecting confidence in my procedures in that I am not introducing o2 or other contaminants o my beers during secondary and/or bulk aging.

But yes...by all means set up to keg.  You won't regret it, and you and bottle fully conditioned beer from the kegs.

662
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Congrats, Majorvices!
« on: July 24, 2010, 03:53:14 PM »
A little late, but I wanted to add my heartfelt congrats on your new endeavor, Keith. Glad yo hear your up and running at last.
I'm sure you've got a winner on your hands.
Shine on, brightly, Major!

663
Ingredients / Re: Carabrown
« on: July 22, 2010, 10:13:18 PM »
I just picked some up this week and am looking forward to test-driving it this weekend.  I was told to expect a "biscuity, almost graham cracker quality".
Should be interesting...

664
Kegging and Bottling / Re: Filtration Systems
« on: July 20, 2010, 09:03:01 PM »

...How many people utilize filtration in their brewing process? Are you happy with the results?...

I filtered a couple of batches some years ago.  It was a hassle. 
If you're worried about starbright, clear beer, cold temperature and patience clears the beer just as well and tastes better (to me anyway).

But you should give it a spin and see if you have a different result than I did. 
Lots of folks filter their brews and love the end results. 
It just wasn't for me though.

665
The Pub / Re: Martini's
« on: July 20, 2010, 08:56:55 PM »
e'n majd furdeni benne

nevetett hangosan!   (LOL)

666
professor and major, can you expand on what you do? when you go back and forth are you rinsing the yeast and then creating a new starter everytime? to me, it sounds like the OP was just going to toss a batch on top of an existing yeast cake, i'm assuming you guys aren't doing that.

After primary fermentation, I save the yeast in a flask which is then simply covered with foil and stored in the back of my beer fridge.  I don't wash the yeast...I've tried it and it's a pain and makes no difference in the results, so I don't bother. 

When reusing yeast, the only time I do a starter is if the yeast has been in storage for more than 4 weeks.  Other than that, 1/3 to 1/2 of the stored slurry is all that's needed for the next batch. 
I totally agree with other observers that the flavor improves considerably after the yeast has gone through a few re-uses. 

My house yeast is like tubercle's "Frankenyeast"...I've kept it going for 20 years and counting and it's used for 90% of the brews I make.

667
Kegging and Bottling / Re: Clarifying a cloudy IPA
« on: July 16, 2010, 10:27:53 PM »
Just get it really cold and leave it alone for a bit and it will clear. 
I would disagree with previous post saying  that forced carbonation gives an inferior result to a slower method...my experiments  and experiences indicate exactly the opposite.
 
But I would agree that if the beer tastes the way you like, drink up.  The chill haze is just a visual aesthetic issue that has little or no bearing on flavor.  But with cold temps and some patience, the beer will clear up. 

668
I brew my own recipes exclusively now and, especially now, I am basically only brewing about 4 recipes over and over and over again - <snip>
...Those Papazian book (TCJ and HBC) were great inspiration design books, though.

That's pretty much my story too...when I started brewing there really were no kits per se (in 1971 I bought my malt syrup...Blue Ribbon hopped... in an Iowa supermarket...right there on the shelf with baking goods) and flew from there  with the help of my biology major friend who insisted on overseeing the yeast health, as well as insisting on using 2 cans of extract for the batch. 
He was fairly prescient, I guess...the common wisdom at the time was to use nearly 50% table sugar). 
I'm guessing that if it weren't for that surprisingly decent first batch, I would have lost interest and moved on.

For years after that  it was combinations of different malt syrups (as I discovered them...John Bull, Edme,  and especially M&F "Old Ale") and hop additions, then finally all grain.  Charlie's book set me on the right path as far as the grain handling goes and after doing it for so many years, I pretty much know what to expect, even given the margin of error from swapping grain brands and sources.

Right now there are probably 5 or 6 beers  all formulas of my own making, that I make on a regular basis and and which are pretty consistent from batch to batch with  excellent repeatability.
.
As a side note (and I know it goes against the common wisdom of the boards) , I've found that freely substituting malts and in most cases, even hop varieties for the beers I make seems to make little difference in the end results if the right adjustments are made. 
That said, I do have my favorites among the hop varieties though (they are mostly old time, traditional varieties like CLuster, Bullion, and Brewer's Gold) and try to keep enough on hand at all times and sub out only when I need .  But I don't fret about substitutions...with very few subtle exceptions it almost always makes the same recognizable beers.

669
The Pub / Re: Martini's
« on: July 13, 2010, 09:14:20 PM »
Normally I'd think this would qualify as a gross idea, but I have to give the benefit of the doubt...if any drink would strike me as working well with a carnivore's garnish, the savory flavors of juniper and herbal vermouth would seem like the ideal place for it.

That dried sausage looks similar to some sremska kobasice I had recently...almost a beef jerky like flavor in a dried cured Serbian sausage.  Too bad I ate it all, it would do nicely as a garnish!  Probably would color the gin though.

Yeah, the paprika would probably leech. But who cares!

RIGHT!
Paprika essence is a good thing.
"...nincs olyan, hogy túl sok paprika...."

670
1.070 is pretty high.  Personally, I wouldn't reuse a yeast from a beer that high...others may disagree.

I am definitely one who disagrees.
I've been reusing yeasts and going from average to strong and back to average (and back again several times over) for nearly  20 years.  I  stope these days after 7 or 8 repitches, but overall have not detected any performance issues, or off flavors.

Best thing to do is just try it and see how it works for you.

671
The Pub / Re: Martini's
« on: July 05, 2010, 07:03:09 AM »
I'm right behind him.. Vodka Martini's barely qualify as any such thing - tito's not withstanding.

I'm still a Plymouth and Hendricks man.

I agree, it looks tasty enough... but without gin, it's just not really a martini.

672
The Pub / Re: What does “craft beer” mean to you?
« on: July 04, 2010, 09:38:27 PM »

Quote
A craft beer is a beer created for the love of the product, not for the love of the profit it might make.
Any brewery who doesn't intend to make a profit will not be around for very long, whether they make each barrel of beer by hand or with a fully automated brew-factory.
That's for sure.  
I'll go a step further and say that anyone who goes into any business not intending to make a profit is just plain dumb.  
The only exception might be someone who is so financially independent that a business is more of a sandbox to play in than a real business.  Other than that, profit is needed (at the very least) to sustain the business.  Going into business with no eye towards profit is just bad business.

I find it pretty hard to believe that anyone would start up a brewery without the intention of making money...especially given that brewing for retail sale is quite a jungle, one that's getting more and more crowded by a glut of product, some of which actually does more harm to the cause than good.

673
The Pub / Re: Happy 4th of July!
« on: July 04, 2010, 09:20:14 PM »
Thanks man...hope you (and all) had a great one.
And I share the same hope as brewballs

In line with the holiday celebrations, the following is so weird I have to share it:
On the way to a party I was listening to the radio (a NYC all news station) and they were featuring 4th related stories all day.

The most incredible one was describing a recent national poll (either Marist or AP...I forget which)  where respondents were asked to complete the following:
"On July 4, 1776, we declared our independence from________"

Incredibly, 25% of those polled evidently answered incorrectly (with "Mexico" , "Japan", "France", and "China" as frequent wrong answers).
I wonder what history teachers are covering these days instead of the American Revolution?

674
The Pub / Re: What does “craft beer” mean to you?
« on: June 30, 2010, 08:36:07 PM »
... IMO the beer determines whether it's a craft beer or not, not the brewery.

I agree 1000%
The size of the company / brewery has nothing to do with whether a beer is a "craft" product.  I have always felt this way.

Both the artisan brewers and the big brewers  can and do make products that are a cut above  'average' beer.  The main difference is that the bigger brewers are still devoting much of their production to making the kind of beer that the vast majority of beer drinkers still want,  alongside efforts to make more products of real distinction than in the past. 
We used to complain when they didn't make that effort.  But now they are making that effort, and in some cases doing it very well.  Just because they use bigger kettles doesn't negate the craft of it.

675
All Things Food / Re: Bioengineered Salmon?
« on: June 29, 2010, 01:38:19 PM »
If it's not wild Chinook, it's not salmon!


AMEN to that!
Farm raised salmon is bad enough...now bioengineered too?  And like bioengineered vegetables, they will likely not be required to identify it as such?

I envy you west-coasters...here in the east farm raised Atlantic salmon is prevalent (and tasteless, and nutritionally deficient besides) and wild Atlantic salmon is all but extinct.

Love that Chinook or Sockeye when I can get it!!!. 

Pages: 1 ... 43 44 [45] 46 47 ... 55