From postmaster at longs.lance.colostate.edu Thu Apr 28 03:32:40 1994 Received: from longs.lance.colostate.edu by goodman.itn.med.umich.edu with SMTP id AA08932 (5.65b/IDA-1.4.3 for spencer at hendrix.itn.med.umich.edu); Thu, 28 Apr 94 03:32:34 -0400 Received: from localhost (daemon at localhost) by longs.lance.colostate.edu (8.6.5/8.6.5a (LANCE 1.01)) id AAA03321 for reallambic at longs.lance.colostate.edu; Thu, 28 Apr 1994 00:30:08 -0600 Message-Id: <199404280630.AAA03321 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: lambic at longs.lance.colostate.edu Subject: Lambic Digest #329 (April 28, 1994) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 1994 00:30:08 -0600 Lambic Digest #329 Thu 28 April 1994 Forum on Lambic Beers (and other Belgian beer styles) Mike Sharp, Digest Coordinator Contents: strange starter/Verachtert paper (ROB THOMAS) Hooegarden Recipe (Spencer.W.Thomas) 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 (to netlib at longs.lance.colostate.edu). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 1994 11:53:00 +0200 From: thomasr at ezrz1.vmsmail.ethz.ch (ROB THOMAS) Subject: strange starter/Verachtert paper Hello all, A couple of points. I've already pestered Dan M on the first one, but impetuous as ever, and slightly worried about what I'll find when I get home tonight, I thought I'd ask the group as a whole: I made up a starter from a Mort Subite Gueze on saturday. Last night I sniffed the still clear but slightly bubbling liquid. To me it smelled lactic, but since I've got a cold, I defered to my wife, who without prompting said it smelled Belgian. Since I was hoping for a more specific description I prompted with acidic? The answer: yes, maybe vinegary. I'm not convinced, but I may be hoping. However, I got up this morning to find the bottle full of what can only be described as trub. It was at the bottom and top, though when I picked up the bottle a fair amount sank to the bottom. The now not insubstantial bubbling seems to bouy the stuff. It is sort of cotton woolly, but finer (like a cold break). Any ideas as to what this may be? Is this a very fast pellicle or is it an unwanted guest? It doesn't look like any yeast I've ever fermented with. Oh, we've had a warm spell over the last couple of days. I'm extremely reluctant to taste this stuff due to its unattractive appearance. I suppose the first thing I should do is plate it. What then? What kind of magnification do I need on a microscope to see the cell shapes? Will I get home tonight to find my kitchen oozing with frothy bugs? On a second note, I was reading a couple of papers by Prof. Verachtert on bugs during lambic fermentation. The newer (1990?) review type artical lead me back to an older paper from 1977. In this I found a number of points that peeked my interest: Firstly that "the very fast growth of enterobacteriaceae and of Kl. apiculata results in a decrease of the pH from 5.1 to 4.6. This coincides with the synthesis of amounts of acetic acid of the same order of magnitude as found in the final product." Thus my question: in for instance Cantillon, are these enteros and Kl. apiculata more prevelent than in lambics with lower acetic flavour? Another note: he describes the brett flavour in the earlier paper as mousy? So which furry animal/farmyard setting best describes it? Third note: pedd infection coincided with the summer months. Does thisindicate when we should do it? Final point: the samples taken were from the fermenting lambic, drawn from the central end apperture only. Does anyone have data to compare microbiological profiles at this part of the barrel to particularly the top, where the pelicle etc forms? Presumable there could be massive differences in a 650 litre barrel. On a last point, my wife's taking me to Brussels for the weekend on the 20 May (isn't she a dear?). Since we will be flying through, first where should we go (Cantillon and where else), and secondly, I guess I'll be able to plate some bugs. How amenable are the brewers to giving VERY young samples? Well, this was a massive post for so typing-challenged, so I'll stop (was that a sigh of relief?). Rob Thomas. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Apr 94 12:02:54 EDT From: Spencer.W.Thomas at med.umich.edu Subject: Hooegarden Recipe Here's a recipe Dan McConnell & I made recently that turned out (in our opinion) very well: 45% UNMALTED wheat (soft organic wheat from the local food coop, crushed together with the barley malt in a MaltMill. Unmalted wheat will be a bit lighter in color than malted wheat, and will contribute a different flavor than malted wheat) 5% flaked oats 50% PILSENER malt (both for the increased protein content & the light color. We used Durst brand, others are probably fine.) Total grain bill: 7.33 lbs/5 gal. Mash-in at 40C, 10 min (beta-glucan rest) Raise to 50C, 30 min (protein rest) Decoct about 1/3, raise to 65C, hold 20 min, then to boiling, mix back with main mash, raise to 65C, hold 45min. Raise to 70C, hold 15 min. Raise to 82C for mash-out (you WANT starch haze!) A note: we had to acidify the mash with a bit of lactic acid to get the pH down. I assume this is because of the high proportion of wheat not contributing enough phytic acid. Hopping/spicing: about 20IBUs of bittering hops, NO finishing hops 11g/5gal bitter orange, pulverized, 30 min 11g/5gal coriander, crushed, 15 min We made 15 gallons, and pitched this with 5 different yeasts: Dentergem, Bruges, Steendonk, Hoegaarden, and Brewtek CL-90. Of the ones I've tasted, the Hoegaarden yeast gave a very fruity character; the CL-90 was bready/spicy/phenolic; the Dentergem was phenolic/spicy. Dan says he liked the Blanc de Bruges sample the best, and that the Steendonk was very phenolic (but expected to age into more balance). We did not add lactic acid to the beer, nor did we attempt to infect it with any lactic bacteria. The Hoegaarden would probably be improved by a little acid, as it's a bit too soft/fruity right now. ------------------------------ End of Lambic Digest ************************ -------