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 - klickitat jim

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 371
All Grain Brewing / Re: Water additions
« on: October 08, 2015, 05:57:16 AM »
I use acid to adjust ph and measure it with a meter, this was just about whether or not to split the calcium between mash and sparge

How cool is that? Now I have to cut a half gallon from my sparge water and recalculate my acid additions lol

All Grain Brewing / Re: Water additions
« on: October 07, 2015, 07:19:17 PM »
Jim do you mean Gypsum? According to my brun'water, that amount would add 37ppm to 10gal.

Have you tried any of the spreadsheet apps that are available for android tablets?
That one was CaCl. 6 in mash and 6 in sparge showed 99ppm in the overall report
I then set it for 3 in mash, 3 in sparge and it showed about 50ppm overall report

My well water is 17ppm Ca and 0 SO4, 0 CaCl

I might try dividing it up and see it theres any difference.

All Grain Brewing / Re: Water additions
« on: October 07, 2015, 06:57:58 PM »
Never mind, I figured it out. I went in to a recipe and when I add another 6g to sparge it shows 99ppm in the total water.

So, should I be adding half to mash and half to sparge? Or all of it in the mash like I have been doing?

All Grain Brewing / Water additions
« on: October 07, 2015, 06:46:06 PM »
I use brewer's friend because brunwater isn't tablet friendly. I've been clicking the option to add to mash only. Anywho...

For the sake of my understanding, if my water was super low calcium and no SO4 or CaCl, if I wanted to get to 50ppm calcium, does 6g SO4, in the mash only, sound like enough? If my total water was 10 gallons, 5 in mash 5 in sparge? I've been pondering water today and it got me wondering if I ought to be adding to both mash and sparge water.

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: The Importance Of Being Same
« on: October 07, 2015, 06:30:32 PM »
It's pretty easy and way handy come brew day.

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: The Importance Of Being Same
« on: October 07, 2015, 06:13:48 PM »
Meanwhile, im canning up some starter wort for next month. Woo hoo!

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: The Importance Of Being Same
« on: October 07, 2015, 05:34:33 PM »
Not drinking Joe

But on that note, if the absolutist says a test is invalid due to the samples not being absolutely the same, how do they know they aren't?  Probably they are not, but its possible they are, until tests are done to prove otherwise. How fair is it to bunk findings based on a probable assumption? Especially when its not known that those microscopic differences would be perceptible.

Now... back to your game

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: The Importance Of Being Same
« on: October 07, 2015, 04:44:51 PM »
Hear hear

Yeast and Fermentation / Re: New starter procedure trial
« on: October 07, 2015, 03:09:46 PM »
Holy cow, are you saying that I just invented a new way of doing starters?

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: The Importance Of Being Same
« on: October 07, 2015, 03:04:09 PM »
I think we wonder about differences from ingredients and differences from process. For the sake of simplification, I'm narrowing it to just plain difference, regardless of cause. Its important to think about wether or not the difference is important before choosing a way to determine difference.

In a criminal trial, things must be proven beyond reasonable doubt. If there is no doubt for which there is a reason, the thing is considered proven. In a civil trial, the thing must only be proven by a preponderance of evidence. A weighing out of evidence showing that more likely than not, it happened. If there is 1 reason to doubt but 2 reasons not to doubt, then you have a preponderance of evidence it happened. Whereas in the criminal trial there must be evidence it happened and there can be no reasons to doubt.

So what? Well, sometimes we hold trial on presented ingredients issues or process issues. What level of proof do we require? Is that level of proof in line with how much difference is made and how important that difference actually is? If, for a home brewing process, we require greater level of proof than is needed to put a Murderer in prison... maybe that's going too far.

For a minute, imagine you're trying to repeat a beer. Make it the same as the last one. Is that possible? The person who would require absolute evidence would say No. Its impossible to rebrew a pefectly identical beer. I would say Yes. As far as it is only going to be tested in my mouth and compared to my memory, yes, I can rebrew beers that are the same according to my level of proof.

So, if I am looking to make a change, will that change be discernable in my mouth as compared to my memory? And is the discernible difference desirable? Then, is the ingredient or process change worth it to obtain the difference?

That thought process shows the importance of personally experiencing changes with home brewing, rather than putting too much weight on the credibility of the claims of others. Ultimately, beer is a personal experience. It doesn't matter that a scientific analysys proves a difference, or if some expert says so. If its not there, for you, its not there.

Case in point. I brewed a beer with US05 sprinkled dry. Then I read an expert who claimed that 50% of them die because of osmotic preasure. So I rehydrated. Then I read that liquid yeast was better so I bought Wy1056 and followed the instructions. Then I read that it wasn't enough yeast, so I made a starter. Then i read that repitching was way better, but i didnt repitch enough, then i was repitching way too much. Then I read that my starter needed to be on a stirplate. Then I read that it needed to not be on a stirplate, but shaken instead. Most recently, I chose to hit it with O2 because I'm too lazy to shake. And pitch at high krausen, whereas I used to chill and decant because I was told that the spent wort was bad. Now unspent high krausen wort seems to be the thing.

So in that last paragraph theres a lot about what I had read or been told but nothing about what I experienced from those different methods. All the expert stuff is just academic. A good starting point if you dont know what to do. The only thing that really matters is what you think of your results with your beer. And when comparing changes, memory is all that really matters, because its awfully hard to preserve a perfect sample from last year's beer in order to do a triangle test.

 Some times some of us need to prove things to others, but all of us need to prove it to ourselves.

Yeast and Fermentation / Re: New starter procedure trial
« on: October 07, 2015, 01:27:20 PM »
Mark, using o2 reduces the need for the extra space, right. My 1200ml in a 2L flask, oxygenated and lazy shook, sure seem to be doing the trick. Yesterday they were prepared at 0800 and pitched at 1600. 8 hrs and they had visible krausen, yeast accumulating in the bottom, and were volcanic when I swirled them to pitch. I checked the fermentors at 0800 this morning and they had two inches of krausen and were bubbling every couple seconds.  (30L Speidels with 6 gallons of beer /3 gallons of head space) thats pretty darn good in my opinion.

Kegging and Bottling / Re: Regulator Question
« on: October 07, 2015, 01:19:03 PM »
Pull the o2 line off the regulator and look. It it wet or gummy? Run a qtip in the fitting and see if its clean and dry. If so, you're fine.

The Pub / Re: German immigrants
« on: October 07, 2015, 12:32:11 PM »
Or Lothar the Barbarian

Kegging and Bottling / Re: Regulator Question
« on: October 07, 2015, 12:31:13 PM »
The co2 in tube has to be below the beer to do that, otherwise just gas backwashes. Hence one more reason not to overfill kegs.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 371