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 - a10t2

Pages: 1 ... 203 204 [205] 206 207 ... 233
3061
The Pub / Re: Lent
« on: February 16, 2010, 11:40:42 AM »
I'm surprised it took that long.

3062
The Pub / Re: Lent
« on: February 16, 2010, 10:58:30 AM »
I am a devout pastafarian and therefore have no need to give things up during lent. 

I'm just looking forward to that beer volcano.

3063
Beer Recipes / Re: Amarillo Pale Ale (Late hopped)
« on: February 15, 2010, 11:21:50 PM »
Question. How would you recommend converting  this recipe to a partial boil/extract?

This isn't an easy recipe to convert, so if you're willing to do a partial mash then follow Fred's advice. For a full extract recipe, replace the MO with 4 lb of pilsner DME, or 5 lb of pilsner LME. Replace the Munich with 2 lb of Munich LME, and eliminate the flaked barley. Steep the rest of the aromatic and crystal malts. For a partial boil, I'd use the Munich at the beginning and add the pilsner late.

3064
Kegging and Bottling / Re: How much slurry for bottle conditioning
« on: February 15, 2010, 10:17:23 PM »
S-04 makes a better bottling yeast anyway; it's more flocculent. Rehydrate about a quarter of the pack and you won't have to worry about the alcohol.

3065
Equipment and Software / Re: Propane Burners
« on: February 15, 2010, 11:06:26 AM »
There is a review on this burner that states that kettles made out of kegs do not sit properly on it.  Has anyone had this difficulty?

I used a half-barrel keg on mine once but didn't feel comfortable with it. The keg base is just barely larger in diameter than the burner ring, so it's precarious and has to be kept perfectly centered.

3066
Ingredients / Re: Unmalted spelt
« on: February 15, 2010, 11:00:42 AM »
I am not very handy with plato and unsure of what pppg stands for.  Something parts per gallon?

ppppg = points per pound per gallon = point-gal/lb

The quick and dirty Plato to SG conversion is to multiply by four. (Here's the more accurate formula.) So 8°P is about 1.032. One pound of *whatever*, into one gallon of wort, will give a gravity of 1.032. This is the most common way for homebrewers to express extract potential; see for example this chart. That chart puts the potential extract of wheat around 1.039, by the way.

I think beertracker is saying that his yield at 74% efficiency is 32 point-gal/lb, which would make the actual potential 1.043. I think that's a little high.

3067
Yeast and Fermentation / Re: Kraeusen removal, what difference does it make
« on: February 14, 2010, 09:58:58 AM »
It's interesting that you mention that several people couldn't differentiate the samples. I tried this with a split batch of hefeweizen a couple years ago and couldn't tell the difference at all. I wonder if, whatever the bitter compound is, it's one of those flavors that's right around the taste threshold and only detectable by some people.

3068
Kegging and Bottling / Re: Do I have a kegging issue?
« on: February 14, 2010, 09:54:33 AM »
Or just wait to tighten down the gas post until it's full.

3069
Yeast and Fermentation / Re: Stepping up a Starter
« on: February 13, 2010, 01:49:36 PM »
Yeah, in that case I would just go with 3 L or 3.5 L, whatever you can fit in the jug. I think that's a better option than assuming you'll get substantial growth from two same-size stages. None of us can tell you how many cells you're *actually* pitching anyway.

3070
Ingredients / Re: Unmalted spelt
« on: February 13, 2010, 11:48:49 AM »
The only way I could think of would be to do a small test mash, 50/50 spelt and two-row. You would need to do a 100% two-row mash with the same equipment first, to determine what your expected efficiency would be.

In this particular case, I bet you could get really close by assuming it's the same as raw wheat.

3071
Yeast and Fermentation / Re: Stepping up a Starter
« on: February 13, 2010, 11:40:06 AM »
I love the MrMalty calculator, but doing two-stage starters with it can be frustrating.

One simple alternative is to use the Wyeast calculator (http://www.wyeastlab.com/hb_pitchrate.cfm). It does have some limitations: works only in gallons, no adjustment for viability, and gives results as pitching rate rather than cell count, without allowing for decanting the starter.

BTW: I'm assuming you can't get a stir bar to turn in your gallon jug, so I'm using "intermittent shaking".

Anyway, here's how to spoof MrMalty:
1. Set your production date, then play with the gravity and/or volume fields to get the volume of your first stage (I'll use 1 L).
2. Note the number of cells that grows (178B).
3. Turn off the automatic viability calculation and enter that number for the viability.
4. Enter your real gravity and volume, and the calculator will tell you the volume of the second stage (2.24 L).
5. Verify that the volumes are realistic and adjust the first-stage volume if needed. Ideally, you want to at least double the volume at each step.

When making the starter(s), be sure to allow enough time to chill and decant at each stage before stepping up.

3072
Ingredients / Re: Cardamom?
« on: February 12, 2010, 10:43:16 PM »
Thanks to everyone for the feedback. I'll be brewing this in the next week or two and will probably use 5 g to start, and add more in the fermenter if needed.

3073
Yeast and Fermentation / Re: Yeast for a chocolate stout?
« on: February 12, 2010, 10:19:37 AM »
I wonder if having some esters from the S-04 or 1272 might improve the perception of chocolate. I'm just guessing though.

3074
Yeast and Fermentation / Re: A "modified" starter
« on: February 11, 2010, 10:15:17 PM »
Keep in mind that I expect the actual pitching rate to have an error of +/- 15% anyway. And I doubt that it matters to be more precise than that.

Frankly I'd be surprised to find out that homebrewers are getting even that kind of precision. Is that something you're keeping track of with your new toy?

3075
Yeast and Fermentation / Re: A "modified" starter
« on: February 11, 2010, 08:29:43 PM »
I realize the discussion has moved on, but I'd just make the 4.7 L starter. You're more or less guessing at the starter size anyway, so being off by 6% isn't going to make much difference.

Pages: 1 ... 203 204 [205] 206 207 ... 233