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 - morticaixavier

Pages: 1 ... 285 286 [287] 288 289 ... 517
4291
Well, a little googling and I get an opposing view on the whole issue.

http://www.artofdrink.com/archive/research/cyanide-in-apricot-cherries-pits/

That being said I would argue with his methodogy as he is essentially assuming that you would extract all the amygdalin from the cherry kernals, which seems unlikely if they are whole, and that it would all be converted to free HCN.

But certainly keep it in mind.

anyway, it seems it's moot in this context as we are not talking about cherries but about pomegranites which are free of amygdalin anyway.

4292
Not to be a worry wart, but cherry pits contain cyanide.  Not sure about pomegranate seeds and even if they do I'm still alive so at least in low concentrations no worries.

I don't know if the cyanide would leach out into the alcohol, but it seems a safe bet some amount would.

This has been covered. and while these things do contain cyanide compounds they are not in a toxic form. Cherry pits have been used as a spice for many centuries as have pomegranite seeds. Not something that one should worry about.

Five pounds of cherries contains far more pits than whatever amount you're using of whatever spice you're referring to.  I wouldn't do it.  Feel free to do so, if you are so inclined.

sure way more, the spice is mahleb or makleb or something like that by the way, but the spice is the toasted ground pits and the cherry pits in the beer are hardly consumed at all.

Let's also remember that traditional kriek is made by performing a secondary fermentation a-top HUGE amounts of whole fruit. The beer is left on the fruit for a very long time and nothing of the flesh is left when it's done. I have not seen any studies that quantify how much cyanic compounds are present in a traditional kriek but it would be interesting.

However what it comes down to is that the cyanide compounds found in cherry pits and other stone fruit stones are actually an important nutrient that we could not live well without. This doesn't mean that there is no danger in consuming it, just that in small amounts it is actually beneficial.

4293
Beer Recipes / Re: double batch
« on: January 14, 2013, 01:46:04 PM »
Not to be contrary in all threads today, Mort, but IME the incremental feeding is just a PITA and not necessary.  With a good pitch of yeast and good aeration I haven't had any issues fermenting big beers up to 1.10.  Above that, I've had some difficulty reaching a good terminal gravity but in the last attempt I think my aeration was insufficient (the tank ran out and I was lazy/hurried and did not switch to the aquarium pump).  Time, temp and rousing the yeast brought that beer to a reasonable terminal gravity but it was more hands-on than I had hoped for.

I know some people swear by the incremental feeding.  I suppose if it works for you, have at it.  I just haven't experienced any great benefit from it.

As far as the blending, it's a straight-forward as Mort lays out.

as you say, if it works for you...

I don't have an o2 system and have no plans for getting one, it's money I would rather spend on a sack of grain. Also as far as I have seen the common o2 systems come with disposable bottles and that is just more crap to get rid of for me.

I've only started experimenting with incremental feeding but it seemed to produce good results for me. I suspect it is not really necesary unless you are dealing with a real OG that is higher than the yeast can deal with at all (aiming for that giant 20%+ abv beast) but particularly with simple sugar additions it's just not that much work IMO and if it can get me a big 12% that I can drink right away without months in the bottle then I am cool with that.

4294
Beer Recipes / Re: double batch
« on: January 14, 2013, 12:52:26 PM »
If you're going to brew this in two separate batches, you may consider taking a few pounds of grain from the first batch and adding them to the second batch instead. This way your initial batch is a bit easier on the yeast. then once they're roaring away you can hit them with the higher gravity wort (which would end up getting diluted by the initial 3 gallons).

Oooh, I like that idea.  Make the first 3-gallons lower gravity than the target for you barleywine (and by the way, more appropriate for a starter "step").  And make the second higher than target so it all comes out right in the end.

Be interesting to play with the numbers.  For something as big as a barleywine, could you get the first batch gravity low enough to not overly stress the yeast, and could you get the second batch gravity high enough to make the end result come out where you want?

Guess that could also make hop utilization calculations pretty hairy but, then again, a barleywine isn't really all that much about the hops.

If your first batch is around 1.070 and your second batch is around 1.140 that works out to 3@70 = 210 + 3 @ 140 = 420 (hurray!) = 630/6 = 6 @ 105. pretty good for a barley wine. and while 1.070 is a bit high for a starter it should be okay in terms of growing up some good yeast. but the same math would work with 3 @ 1.050 = 150 + 3 @ 1.17 = 660.

The other benefit of doing incremental feeding is that the initial 1.050 wort will have dropped to say 1.025 so the actual gravity after the second addition is only 3 * 25 = 75 + 3 * 170 = 585 = 1.097 so you have never exposed your yeast to a gravity higher that that AND the ethanol level stays quite low till the end of the fermentation.

4295
Not to be a worry wart, but cherry pits contain cyanide.  Not sure about pomegranate seeds and even if they do I'm still alive so at least in low concentrations no worries.

I don't know if the cyanide would leach out into the alcohol, but it seems a safe bet some amount would.

This has been covered. and while these things do contain cyanide compounds they are not in a toxic form. Cherry pits have been used as a spice for many centuries as have pomegranite seeds. Not something that one should worry about.

4296
Beer Recipes / Re: double batch
« on: January 14, 2013, 11:14:22 AM »
But to answer your original question, if you're planning on doing them a little bit apart, I would pitch the correct amount of yeast for the whole batch into the first one.

Curious why you'd suggest this.

Like you said, a barleywine is going to require a huge amount of yeast, and given the higher OG it's not the most favorable environment for yeast growth.  My thinking is that I'd rather pitch the right amount for the whole batch to make sure I had a good population of healthy yeast in there to get the job done.

If you're going to brew this in two separate batches, you may consider taking a few pounds of grain from the first batch and adding them to the second batch instead. This way your initial batch is a bit easier on the yeast. then once they're roaring away you can hit them with the higher gravity wort (which would end up getting diluted by the initial 3 gallons).

I'll give a big +1 to incremental feeding. I just did a barley wine that had about 3 lbs of maple syrup as a big chunk of the fermentables so I brewed a 1.086 beer and about three or four days into the fermentation hit it with the syrup. It took off again and the final result, even though it's ~13% abv, is quite drinkable.

4297
I think it would be an interesting experiment. Dried pomegranite seeds are used as a souring agent in some Indian cooking. I think it's even used as the acidifying agent in making paneer (cheese) sometimes.

So I think the whole kernals/seed things, frozen and thawed and added to secondary would be really interesting. I would think you would want to go with near 1 lb per gallon as you would with any other fruit.

The pom juice would be a good shortcut but I would be interested to know if the hard seed part itself would bring anything to the party. I am thinking of how whole cherries with pits adds another level of complexity to sour cherry beers.

4298
Yeast and Fermentation / Re: Berliner Weisse fermentation help
« on: January 14, 2013, 11:03:05 AM »
How do you know you are not getting action?

have you taken gravity readings?

+1.  Also, I'd bet that it is actually done.   Either fermentation occured and you didn't notice (it would have occurred quickly in a low OG beer) or it fully fermented during the 4-day sour mash (maybe some yeast got in there). So the big question is - What is the current gravity?
 
How does it taste?

If that was the case, then the alcohol might all be gone after that 20 minute boil. It would explain why the US-05 didn't seem to do anything.

not all gone but mostly for sure, if it was really done which it might well have been.

4299
Yeast and Fermentation / Re: Berliner Weisse fermentation help
« on: January 14, 2013, 08:58:58 AM »
How do you know you are not getting action?

have you taken gravity readings?

4300
Yeast and Fermentation / Re: Fermenting a Barleywine
« on: January 14, 2013, 08:42:23 AM »
So I have this 1.100 Barleywine fermenting at 61F.  It's steady but not going crazy.  The plan is to leave it here until the activity slows dramatically, then raise to 65F and burn it out at 68F.  Good plan?

Dave

sounds good!

4301
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: What were your gateway beers?
« on: January 14, 2013, 08:41:49 AM »
[...]Hiney Wine[...]

you can find it in the finer stores, right between the buns!

I used to hear those hiney wine commercials driving to school in the morning.

4302
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: What were your gateway beers?
« on: January 11, 2013, 04:44:07 PM »
Long Trail 'Dubble Bag' and otter creek. When I was in highschool we went on a field trip to the otter creek brewery when they were still renting space in a big industrial bulding in middlebury. I didn't drink back then (really I didn't, not even being ironic) but I remember thinking it must be cool to be able to have a beer FOR work.

4303
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Hop production in North Carolina
« on: January 11, 2013, 04:40:24 PM »
At roughly 35* N. latitude they are significantly out of the band of 45-55 degrees which will result in poor hop cone maturation.  Obviously that would effect flavor, but I doubt that it would ever become in vogue.  Or commercially profitable for that matter.

But maybe they are experimenting with varieties that are modified to develop normally outside the prefered band - who knows?

Steve

You do know that commercial hops were grown in SF at one time, Sacramento, and Sonoma county? These are in the 37-38 parallel range. The reason they are not grown now is real estate in SF and Sacramento, and wine growing in Sonoma. CA is covered at some length in the Hop Atlas.

They stopped growing hops in Sonoma County around 1960 or a little before due to downy mildew and the other agronomic pressures.  For proof there is this place.

http://www.hopkilnwinery.com/home/

Hey, I made a detour to that winery just because of its name.  They had some hop bines growing outside with fresh (not wet) hops when we were there in October a couple years ago.  Beautiful building.

pretty good wine as well. They have an un-oaked chardonnay that may be the only chardonnay that I really like.

4304
I've made Brett beers, from cultures. I've never used wild, accidental Brett. This mead has considerably more "funk" than I care for. Not like, clostridium dirty sock / puke funk, but closer to that end of the spectrum than the sweaty horse / fancy cheese end.

I don't mean to be critical in anyway but can I say that I think it is kind of hilarious that someone can say essentially, "at least it's not gross like dirty socks, instead it's nice! like sweaty horse!"

I actually really really like lambics and funky beers in general so

4305
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Hop production in North Carolina
« on: January 11, 2013, 11:51:49 AM »
At roughly 35* N. latitude they are significantly out of the band of 45-55 degrees which will result in poor hop cone maturation.  Obviously that would effect flavor, but I doubt that it would ever become in vogue.  Or commercially profitable for that matter.

But maybe they are experimenting with varieties that are modified to develop normally outside the prefered band - who knows?

Steve

You do know that commercial hops were grown in SF at one time, Sacramento, and Sonoma county? These are in the 37-38 parallel range. The reason they are not grown now is real estate in SF and Sacramento, and wine growing in Sonoma. CA is covered at some length in the Hop Atlas.

They stopped growing hops in Sonoma County around 1960 or a little before due to downy mildew and the other agronomic pressures.  For proof there is this place.

http://www.hopkilnwinery.com/home/

hop kilns and oasts are everywhere here in northern california. I see them at so many old farms that are now growing grapes. road names including 'hop' also abound. we are very close to being part of the PNW even down here as far south as sacramento, allthough folks up Eureka way would have us beleive that we are solidly in southern california.

Pages: 1 ... 285 286 [287] 288 289 ... 517