Author Topic: The AHA in the NYT  (Read 3169 times)

Offline bluesman

  • Global Moderator
  • I must live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 8808
  • Delaware
    • View Profile
Re: The AHA in the NYT
« Reply #15 on: June 23, 2011, 10:03:54 AM »
I wish I had more space to talk with more homebrewers.  But, that's one of the limitations of print.

Clearly this article was not aimed at the experienced homebrewers - those with years of experience and a proven track record of producing award winning beers. No, this was aimed to the general reader, the people who don't know much or anything about homebrewing. I wanted to give these people a chance to learn about the process and options and hopefully inspire them to join your ranks and become as passionate and knowledgable as the people on these forums.

Also, there was really no implication (on my part) that a Frankenstein system is not as good as an expensive SABCO. As someone said earlier in this thread, it's the talent of the brewer that makes good beer. I believe that.

Happy brewing, everyone.

Cheers,

John Holl
beerbriefing.com

Agreed.

We are artisans of a craft. The equipment is the tools of the trade utilized by artisans. Skilled artisans can produce great beer on just about any system whether it's a SABCO or a pot on a stove.

The magic in the beer is created by the artisan.  :)
Ron Price

Offline garyg

  • Administrator
  • Brewer
  • *****
  • Posts: 354
    • View Profile
    • American Homebrewers Association
Re: The AHA in the NYT
« Reply #16 on: June 23, 2011, 10:08:19 AM »
How cool is that, the author of the article chimes in on the AHA Forum!

John, you weren't supposed to print that I only brew 6 times a year!   ;D  If you add in the mead I make, it is much more frequent, but due to the nature of the job, I find myself working a lot of weekends that I'd otherwise be brewing on.  I'm also hoping that once my daughter is old enough to be trained as an assistant brewer, I'll be brewing more frequently again.

Cheers!
Gary
Gary Glass
American Homebrewers Association Director
Boulder, Colorado

Offline denny

  • Administrator
  • Retired with too much time on my hands
  • *****
  • Posts: 14112
  • Noti OR [1991.4, 287.6deg] AR
    • View Profile
    • Dennybrew
Re: The AHA in the NYT
« Reply #17 on: June 23, 2011, 10:11:48 AM »
I wish I had more space to talk with more homebrewers.  But, that's one of the limitations of print.

Clearly this article was not aimed at the experienced homebrewers - those with years of experience and a proven track record of producing award winning beers. No, this was aimed to the general reader, the people who don't know much or anything about homebrewing. I wanted to give these people a chance to learn about the process and options and hopefully inspire them to join your ranks and become as passionate and knowledgable as the people on these forums.

Also, there was really no implication (on my part) that a Frankenstein system is not as good as an expensive SABCO. As someone said earlier in this thread, it's the talent of the brewer that makes good beer. I believe that.

Happy brewing, everyone.

Cheers,

John Holl
beerbriefing.com

Hi John,

Thanks for joining the discussion.  Since your article was aimed at new brewers, I'm even more mystified why you chose to focus so much on multi thousand dollar brewing systems instead of the more typical setup a new brewer might use.  I have a hard time imagining that anyone who has never brewed before would drop that kind of money on a system, not to mention the fact that without some experience those systems can be baffling to a brewer.

I truly appreciate the fact that you brought homebrewing to people who may never have considered it before and you mentioned the AHA, but I hope that if you have a chance to do another article in the future that it can be a bit more realistic.  I've done seminars about equipment and techniques for new brewers, so if you should ever need any information I'd be more than happy to help out.
Life begins at 60.....1.060, that is!

www.dennybrew.com

The best, sharpest, funniest, weirdest and most knowledgable minds in home brewing contribute on the AHA forum. - Alewyfe

Offline johnholl

  • 1st Kit
  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: The AHA in the NYT
« Reply #18 on: June 23, 2011, 10:18:48 AM »
Denny,
I focused on the higher-end stuff given the nature of the NYT home and garden section.
Just the way that section works.

But, I appreciate your offer for help. I'll add you to my list and hope to have a writing assignment where you can lend your voice down the road.
Cheers!


Offline tschmidlin

  • I must live here
  • **********
  • Posts: 8197
  • Redmond, WA
    • View Profile
Re: The AHA in the NYT
« Reply #19 on: June 23, 2011, 10:21:49 AM »
I believe that "any equipment" is only as good as the operator at best.
Agreed.

Also, there was really no implication (on my part) that a Frankenstein system is not as good as an expensive SABCO. As someone said earlier in this thread, it's the talent of the brewer that makes good beer. I believe that.
I believe you believe that, but I have a hard time reading the Sulier quote any other way.  There just isn't a clear distinction in the article drawn between the quality of beer made with any of the systems, and it may leave people believing that really good beer requires dropping $6K on a Sabco to be "advanced".  Automated may have been a better choice of words, but I get that the article was not about the different ways that people brew.

I appreciate you commenting here though, and I hope we haven't offended you.  We're not angry, we're passionate. :)

I think the much bigger issue here is that Gary only brews six times a year. :o
Clearly :)
Tom Schmidlin

Offline denny

  • Administrator
  • Retired with too much time on my hands
  • *****
  • Posts: 14112
  • Noti OR [1991.4, 287.6deg] AR
    • View Profile
    • Dennybrew
Re: The AHA in the NYT
« Reply #20 on: June 23, 2011, 10:23:00 AM »
Denny,
I focused on the higher-end stuff given the nature of the NYT home and garden section.
Just the way that section works.

I've written enough articles to know that you target your audience, and I assumed that this was what you were doing, too.  Still, it irks me a bit when beginning or non brewers are given the impression that you need that stuff.  But let me assure you that I do appreciate your article and that we all appreciate the publicity.  I hope that sometime you have a chance to give the other perspective.
Life begins at 60.....1.060, that is!

www.dennybrew.com

The best, sharpest, funniest, weirdest and most knowledgable minds in home brewing contribute on the AHA forum. - Alewyfe

Offline sailortodd

  • Cellarman
  • **
  • Posts: 31
    • View Profile
Re: The AHA in the NYT
« Reply #21 on: June 23, 2011, 10:26:28 AM »
Thanks for joining the discussion.  Since your article was aimed at new brewers, I'm even more mystified why you chose to focus so much on multi thousand dollar brewing systems instead of the more typical setup a new brewer might use.  I have a hard time imagining that anyone who has never brewed before would drop that kind of money on a system, not to mention the fact that without some experience those systems can be baffling to a brewer.
Meh, when the true beginner gets one of those systems, tries a batch, finds it overwhelming at his level, even with the multi-thousand dollar contraption, lets it collect dust for a while before realizing the space it's taking up would be better utilized with a table saw or tool chest, decides to sell it for a tenth of what it was originally worth, maybe I'll have enough to get the second hand gizmo. But I'm not holding my breath, and I'll continue to plan my "frankenstein" in the mean time.
Beer: so much more than just a breakfast drink.

Offline johnholl

  • 1st Kit
  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: The AHA in the NYT
« Reply #22 on: June 23, 2011, 10:29:35 AM »
Tom. Love the passion. That's one of the reasons I'm writing about beer these days.
And I appreciate that you guys let me crash the party and reply directly.
Looking forward to future discussions.

Cheers! 

Offline bluesman

  • Global Moderator
  • I must live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 8808
  • Delaware
    • View Profile
Re: The AHA in the NYT
« Reply #23 on: June 23, 2011, 10:30:58 AM »
Tom. Love the passion. That's one of the reasons I'm writing about beer these days.
And I appreciate that you guys let me crash the party and reply directly.
Looking forward to future discussions.

Cheers! 

Your welcome anytime.  :)
Ron Price

Offline tschmidlin

  • I must live here
  • **********
  • Posts: 8197
  • Redmond, WA
    • View Profile
Re: The AHA in the NYT
« Reply #24 on: June 23, 2011, 10:32:00 AM »
Tom. Love the passion. That's one of the reasons I'm writing about beer these days.
And I appreciate that you guys let me crash the party and reply directly.
Looking forward to future discussions.

Cheers! 
Your welcome anytime.  :)
Absolutely. :)  We can even edit your next article so it says what we want it to say. ;D
Tom Schmidlin

Offline dbeechum

  • Administrator
  • Brewmaster General
  • *****
  • Posts: 2450
  • Pasadena, CA
    • View Profile
    • Experimental Brewing
Re: The AHA in the NYT
« Reply #25 on: June 23, 2011, 10:34:23 AM »
Oh god, just what everyone needs, an editorial war over whether or not batch sparging sucks. :)
Drew Beechum - Maltosefalcons.com
- Vote in the AHA GC Election! - http://bit.ly/1aV9GVd  -
-----
Burbling:
Gnome is in the Details
*Experimental Brewing - The Book*
Tap:
Peanut Butter Jelly Time
Tupelo Mead
Farmhouse Brett Saison

Offline bluesman

  • Global Moderator
  • I must live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 8808
  • Delaware
    • View Profile
Re: The AHA in the NYT
« Reply #26 on: June 23, 2011, 10:39:53 AM »
Oh god, just what everyone needs, an editorial war over whether or not batch sparging sucks. :)

 :D

Who left the door open...Drew's here.  ;D
Ron Price

Offline denny

  • Administrator
  • Retired with too much time on my hands
  • *****
  • Posts: 14112
  • Noti OR [1991.4, 287.6deg] AR
    • View Profile
    • Dennybrew
Re: The AHA in the NYT
« Reply #27 on: June 23, 2011, 10:40:05 AM »
Oh god, just what everyone needs, an editorial war over whether or not batch sparging sucks. :)

I think the broader question is "why does fly sparging suck so much?".  ;)
Life begins at 60.....1.060, that is!

www.dennybrew.com

The best, sharpest, funniest, weirdest and most knowledgable minds in home brewing contribute on the AHA forum. - Alewyfe

Offline tschmidlin

  • I must live here
  • **********
  • Posts: 8197
  • Redmond, WA
    • View Profile
Re: The AHA in the NYT
« Reply #28 on: June 23, 2011, 10:43:38 AM »
Oh god, just what everyone needs, an editorial war over whether or not batch sparging sucks. :)
I thought that it was for suckers, not that it sucks. ;D
Tom Schmidlin

Offline hokerer

  • I spend way too much time on the AHA forum
  • ********
  • Posts: 2639
  • Manassas, VA
    • View Profile
Re: The AHA in the NYT
« Reply #29 on: June 23, 2011, 11:46:26 AM »
Oh god, just what everyone needs, an editorial war over whether or not batch sparging sucks. :)

It'll be fine as long as they don't diss the peat-smoked malt
Joe