From postmaster at longs.lance.colostate.edu Sat May 21 03:15:48 1994 Received: from longs.lance.colostate.edu by goodman.itn.med.umich.edu with SMTP id AA04566 (5.65b/IDA-1.4.3 for spencer at hendrix.itn.med.umich.edu); Sat, 21 May 94 03:15:41 -0400 Received: from localhost (daemon at localhost) by longs.lance.colostate.edu (8.6.5/8.6.5a (LANCE 1.01)) id AAA01150 for reallambic at longs.lance.colostate.edu; Sat, 21 May 1994 00:30:08 -0600 Message-Id: <199405210630.AAA01150 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 #349 (May 21, 1994) Date: Sat, 21 May 1994 00:30:08 -0600 Lambic Digest #349 Sat 21 May 1994 Forum on Lambic Beers (and other Belgian beer styles) Mike Sharp, Digest Coordinator Contents: Re:Drie Fonteinen (Norman Farrell) Thar she forms: I have a pellicle! (Todd Gierman) Corking champagne bottles (STROUD) Re: Lambic Digest #348 (May 19, 1994) (John Lenz)jel3 at cornell.edu 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: Thu, 19 May 1994 07:33:43 -0500 From: nfarrell at ppco.com (Norman Farrell) Subject: Re:Drie Fonteinen Sarah White writes: >This book must be the same I have seen on display for sale >at Drie Fonteinen, Place Herman Teirlinck 3, 1650 Beersel. >Exit 14 (Beersel) off of the E19 (Ring 0 toward Charleroi >from Zaventem); it is the second Exit 14. >Armand DeBelder, the chef and blender (one of two remaining >blenders in the world) is a charming guy who speaks excellent >English. His Gueuze has just been given the appelation >controlee by the ECBU. I was lucky to make a stop at the "Three Fountains" in Beersel, My wife and I tried both the Gueuze and Kriek. Both were intensley sour; as sour as any lambic I have tried. Both beers were served in tall flared glasses. Two good sized sugar cubes and a long metal rid with a waffle surfaced plate (on one end) came along with the beers. The purpose of the accessories became clear after one taste: put the sugar cubes in the beer and mash them up with the rod. I'm not sure it sweetened the beer very much. I have since gathered that the rod is called a "stomper" (sp). Can others shed light on this practice? Also, as I recall, there was a choice of beer from the cask or from a bottle. We chose the cask. Any ideas as to the difference? Best Regards, Norman (nfarrell at ppco.com) May your last beer be your best! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 09:03:16 -0500 From: tmgierma at acpub.duke.edu (Todd Gierman) Subject: Thar she forms: I have a pellicle! Just wanted to report on another milestone recently reached with my first p-lambic. Yes a pellicle has finally formed! This is nearly as exciting as baby's first bowel movement - a sign that all is well and a relief to anxious parents everywhere. Let me back up. I posted on this "baby" shortly after conception back in December - well, actually, I think that it might have been entering its formative months at that time. This was a fairly standard grain bill and mash procedure so I won't go through it again. Besides, the fermentation part is the most interesting part, IMHO. I pitched with, I think, 300 ml Hoegaarden yeast, 50 ml Boon Gueuze dregs starter (that was the "old" Gueuze, using a different method of blending as compared to the "new" Gueuze, or so I am told - plenty of Brett and bugs in the "old") and a 5 ml pedio starter (which may have been too little). I believe that this "primary" fermentation lasted roughly 3-4 weeks (slowed down by cooler temperatures in the winter) and ended at a gravity of 1016. There was quite abit of Brett character at that point but no souring. However, in subsequent months and tastings I noticed that the Brett character had diminished in intensity (surprisingly so) coinciding with a drop in gravity to 1010. Between then and now, I received a sample of homebrewed p-lambic which was quite tart and reasonably horsey/goaty (well balanced overall). Having realized that I had meant to save the dregs, but forgot and dumped them, I poured several ounces into my fermenter from the glass I was drinking from (couldn't hurt, right?). Also, several months ago, I obtained some Cantillon Rose de Gambrinus and poured the dregs into the fermenter. So, back to the pellicle. This appears to be a yeast pellicle, rather than a bacterial one, formed by oxidative yeasts spreading out their pseudomycelia across the surface of the p-lambic - probably Brett. The pellicle is white and finely wooly, for lack of a better description, not slimy or waxy. I believe that my P. damnosus is not one of those slime forming strains (ick!). The pellicle formed from small islands of yeasts that gradually grew together. I was planning to pitch some Candida yeasts to form the oxidative mat before this pellicle appeared. Now I am not sure. Oh, okay, twist my arm...I'll pitch them. I am now reluctant to break the pellicle to gain access to a sample for tasting. I suspect that the presence of a pellicle may now encourage the pedio to go to work. _The Turbid Masher (TM)_ : Somebody better jump on this quick before a certain HBD gadfly gets a patent on it. I haven't attempted to deconstruct the turbid mash outlined in previous LD's. Just wanted to point out that some people augment their "standard" mashes by high mash out temps and very hot sparges to pull out any remaining starches - not necessarily a superior approach but a potentially easier one. Adding malto-dextrin to the boil would be even easier (if you could bring yourself to break with tradition). _Saccharomyces delbrueckii_ Okay, not to nitpick, but to add a little bit of info: S. delbrueckii has been reclassified in the last 10-20 years to fall into the genus Torulaspora (many Saccharomyces species have been bumped around over the years). The good news is that Torulaspora species yeasts often turn up in the primary ferment of lambics. So, everyone says that the Weihenstephan yeasts #66 and #68 are single species S. cerevisiae. Previous claims about the old WYeast 3056 (?) were that it was a mixed culture containing a S. cerevisiae and a S. delbrueckii (aka Torulaspora delbrueckii). So, if previous claims are accurate, then it would not be unreasonable to use the old Wyeast 3056 as a primary fermenter of a p-lambic - is anything unreasonable in a p-lambic? How about some E. coli K-12? Having grown cultures of #66, #68, Torulaspora fermentati and two strains of Torulaspora delbrueckii, I will say that I have found nothing remarkable about Torulaspora in terms of Weizen-like qualities. However, different strains have different attributes. Todd ------------------------------ Date: 18 May 1994 11:04:42 -0500 (EST) From: STROUD%GAIA at leia.polaroid.com Subject: Corking champagne bottles There was recently a discussion in this forum about corking champagne bottles. It seems that it is impossible to come across real champagne corks. The options are 1) to use plastic ones, or 2) use normal corks, push them in only about half way, and use the normal champagne wires to hold them in place. I'd like to offer another option. Use normal corks (the right size to fit your bottles!!) and go through the normal procedure of filling the bottles, softening the corks, and _fully_ inserting them into the neck of the bottle. [please make sure that you only use champagne bottles for safety reasons]. Here is the key to keeping the cork in place, from an article on making hard sparkling cider by Jacques Pepin: 1 - To hold the cork inside the bottle during the secondary fermentation, you must secure it with wire. Use a soft, pliable piece of wire about 15 inches long. Seven inches from one end, twist a small loop; twist another loop 1 inch further along, facing in the same direction. One inch from the second loop, make a third facing in the opposite direction. 2 - Insert the long end of the wire into the single loop and pull. You now have a large sliding loop to go around the neck of the bottle. 3 - Insert the large, sliding loop on the neck on the bottle, just under the ridged rim. Tighten it. Holding it tight with your thumb, bring the wire over the top of the cork and down the other side of the neck. 4 - Making sure that the wire is tight, secure it by twisting it around the nearest loop. 5 - Repeat with the remaining loose end of wire, bringing it across the top of the cork at right angles to the first and twisting it around the adjacent loop. The bottle should now be fastened and secure with wire. Leave the bottles standing up right for a day or two to settle, then store them on their sides to keep the cork wet. When secondary fernmentation has occurred, you should see that the corks have pushed out slightly. A nice touch is to reuse the metal shields from bottles like Chimay or some of the French biere de gardes. The shields should be placed over the cork before the wire is crossed over the bottle. Steve Stroud ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 May 1994 06:13:05 -0400 From: (John Lenz)jel3 at cornell.edu Subject: Re: Lambic Digest #348 (May 19, 1994) Hey Phil, in #348 did you really mean to say > . . . that most of Liefman's beers are blended, filtered, and > sweetened, . . . Unfortunately, I've yet to visit the brewery, or Belgium for that matter, but from the reading, and drinking, I've done I think you should have said Rodenbach here. According to Jackson (I'm working from memory here) Goudenband is Liefman's well aged beer bottled straight, bottle conditioned, and then (for the U.S. market at least) pasteurized (anyone know if it is alive in Belgium?). Isn't it also the case that the Rodenbach Grand Cru is the aged Rodenbach pasteurized and sweetened but not blended with the young Rodenbach? Has anyone out there had a chance to compare the import Rodenbach Grand Cru side-by-side with the Belgian version? I'd like to, because the one bottle I've had that was brought back from Belgium was an incredibly complex, rich beer. While the import is a fine beer in its own right, I don't think it is nearly the beer that the Belgian version is. When I discussed this briefly with Michael Jackson, at one of his beer dinners here in Ithaca, he was also of the opinion that the two versions were different, but he didn't seem to have any solid information in that regard, or if he did he wasn't sharing it. Dan, have you used the Oerbier dregs more than that one time? I'm planning to experiment with this yeast if any of the bottles I brought back from Washington (Cairo Liquors, 1618 17th St. N.W.) has a viable sediment. Op uw gezondheid, John ------------------------------ End of Lambic Digest ************************ -------