From postmaster at longs.lance.colostate.edu Fri Mar 4 03:06:53 1994 Received: from longs.lance.colostate.edu by goodman.itn.med.umich.edu with SMTP id AA05905 (5.65b/IDA-1.4.3 for spencer at hendrix.itn.med.umich.edu); Fri, 4 Mar 94 03:06:50 -0500 Received: from localhost (daemon at localhost) by longs.lance.colostate.edu (8.6.5/8.6.5a (LANCE 1.01)) id AAA11064 for reallambic at longs.lance.colostate.edu; Fri, 4 Mar 1994 00:30:09 -0700 Message-Id: <199403040730.AAA11064 at longs.lance.colostate.edu> Reply-To: lambic at longs.lance.colostate.edu (postings only - do not send subscription requests here) Errors-To: lambic-request at longs.lance.colostate.edu From: lambic-request at longs.lance.colostate.edu (subscription requests only - do not post here) To: reallambic at longs.lance.colostate.edu (subscriber distribution list) Subject: Lambic Digest #292 (March 04, 1994) Date: Fri, 4 Mar 1994 00:30:09 -0700 Lambic Digest #292 Fri 04 March 1994 Forum on Lambic Beers (and other Belgian beer styles) Mike Sharp, Digest Coordinator Contents: Use of oak substitutes ("Kieran O'Connor") living on the edge (Marc de Jonge) another nit speaks ("Daniel F McConnell") another nit speaks Westmalle Yeast ("Norman Dickenson") Still on Candi (Jeff Frane) Send article submissions only to: lambic at longs.lance.colostate.edu Send all other administrative requests (subscribe/unsubscribe/change) to: lambic-request at longs.lance.colostate.edu Back issues are available by mail; send empty message with subject 'HELP' to: netlib at longs.lance.colostate.edu A FAQ is also available by netlib; say 'send faq from lambic' as the subject or body of your message. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 3 Mar 1994 06:30:07 -0500 (EST) From: "Kieran O'Connor" Subject: Use of oak substitutes Hi Im a reader of the digest--but not a lambic brewer. I noted an article in the NY Times regarding the use of Oak and oak substitutes for wine making in an article--and thought some of you folks might be interesed. it was in Wednesday, March 2, 1994's NY Times. Section "C", the living Section, page C10 under the banner "Wine Talk." FWIW Kieran O'Connor E-Mail Address: koconnor at mailbox.syr.edu Syracuse, N.Y. USA ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Mar 94 13:21:42 +0100 From: dejonge at tekserv.geof.ruu.nl (Marc de Jonge) Subject: living on the edge In the last digest Jim Liddil wrote: > Has anyone out there ever cooled the wort overnight and > then tasted it at 2-3 months Yes, and at 6 months. Fermentation took about 5 days to get really going. It started to develop slimy strands of bacteria after two months, which dissapeared at 4-5 months, leaving a clear beer. The end result was not as bad as I had been led to believe (I'm not saying it was particularly good either): Sour, estery, not extremely dry (OG 1055 FG 1011), a bit like an old Orval or Vieille Provision by Dupont, with an additional moldy (blue cheese like) flavour in the finish. This was an small accidental batch (I had about 4 litres of wort left, after breaking the large bottle...). The end result was both good and bad enough I decided to try making lambics. > and gotten sick? No, I've always been like this. > Enquring minds want to know? do they? (EMWTN...) > And aren't E. coli relatively intolerant to low pH and alcohol over 2%? Either that, or I'm relatively tolerant to E. Coli. _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ Marc de Jonge dejonge at geof.ruu.nl Utrecht University, Geophysics dept, Utrecht, the Netherlands -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- ------------------------------ Date: 3 Mar 1994 11:11:25 -0500 From: "Daniel F McConnell" Subject: another nit speaks Subject: another nit speaks Fellow Wit watchers: Watching with interest the discussion, now I feel compelled to add my $.04 (that's two data points at $.02 each). >% cause serious illness if a sample is taken at say, 2-3 months. There are a >% gazillion strains of E. coli, and some are very unpleasant indeed. >An excellent point. I would plan to micorscopically test the wort first prior >to tasting I think. Has anyone out there ever cooled the wort overnight and >then tasted it at 2-3 months and gotten sick? Enquring minds want to know? I have been doing some spontaneous fermentation experiments. These two batches were left to cool uncovered overnight in my garage (The Huron River Valley Appellation of Michigan) and allowed to ferment with no additional cultures. The latest was last October. It fermented after a 10 day lag. The last time I tasted it was february, but I tried it in Jan. too (3 months). Each time I pulled out about 4 oz and drank the whole sample. They are not very pleasant, not sour (yet), but similar to beer that *I* made in 1980 and not dissimilar to beers (actually better) that I have sampled in competitions! It just tastes like infected homebrew. I did not get sick, maybe I'm lucky, maybe my wife is correct when she claims that I can eat anything. DanMcC ------------------------------ Date: 3 Mar 1994 09:08:41 -0500 From: "Norman Dickenson" Subject: Westmalle Yeast REGARDING Westmalle Yeast Al writes: Very perceptive reading retention! I wish I had read that before I used the Westmalle yeast. Jackson, in his Belgian book states that the brewery uses the same yeast for primary fermentation and for bottling leading me to believe that it would fully attenuate. I pitched a very liberal amount of actively working culture and had a vigorous fermentation 18 hours later in two very high gravity subsets (1.099 and 1.077). Both vigorously fermented for three days, then abruptly lost their karusen head and slowed down to one airlock tick every 10 seconds. I took gravity readings and each had dropped only about 25 gravity points!!!!! This experience might support the idea that it is a very unattenuative bottling yeast. I am not too keen on the idea of ending up with 10 gal of pancake syrup and will be culturing up some Chimay yeast to pitch in an attempt to salvage the situation. Anybody out there have any good ideas? I obtained the yeast as an encapsulated pure culture purchased from a small yeast firm in a Southern state. It was represented as being cultured from a bottle. -Norman- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Mar 1994 09:18:38 -0800 (PST) From: gummitch at teleport.com (Jeff Frane) Subject: Still on Candi > From: dejonge at tekserv.geof.ruu.nl (Marc de Jonge) > Subject: Candi sugar again > > There is a flavour effect but that's not the only reason to add Candi. > The amounts found in some Belgian beers have a strong effect on final > gravity, body and mouthfeel: I expect an all-malt version of say Rochefort 10, > coloured with only caramel malts, would serve better as pancake syrup. > > > I think that > > sensitive, judicious use of Belgian caramel malts (and especially > > Special B) is far more critical. > For the flavour I agree, but not for the overall character of the beer. > Lest I be thought a complete buffoon, I want to acknowledge Marc's comments about utilizing sugar -- I had no intention of suggesting that the sought-after character could be achieved without using sugar. I was simply dealing with some of the specific assertions made about color and flavor contributions that I viewed as disinformation. Having brewed several high-gravity beers that utilized a substantial fraction of non-malt sugars, I *know* that this is essential. Maybe not pancake syrup, but certainly you'd end up with barleywine. I've also come to the conclusion that Jackson(?) is correct in asserting that the sugar has an effect on the sort of head that is formed, and that it is clearly different from the head thrown by an all-malt beer. - --Jeff ------------------------------ End of Lambic Digest ************************ -------