Getting Started....Again
Roy
After about a 14 year lay-off, I'm getting back into home brewing again, at least for long enough to
get my older son and his friends through their first few batches.
I expect we will get a batch started sometime in December, probably a brown ale, but definitely an
ale. I have a few questions about what has changed in the homebrew scene over the last 10-15 years.
I was an all grain brewer with a 7.5 glass primary, 5 - 5 gal secondaries, a couple 3 gal
secondaries, and my brewpot was made from an old beer keg. I probably had brewed 30-35 batches
about the time I quit brewing.
I plan on replacing all the various rubber stoppers, at least some of the plastic airlocks, all of
the various hoses and the plastic hydrometer bottles, funnels and various bags.
I'm in the Houston area, so will be making ales, at least until the kids get their keggerator
running. I have a kegging system, purchased used about 3 years ago that gave me 2 big CO2 bottles,
an octopus and 5 corny kegs. The system hasn't been used except for shield gas during welding. I
need to clean and rebuild all the kegs of course. How long do the hoses last in these systems? I
have no idea how old it was when I bought it. Regulators seem to work ok. Do they make rebuild
kits or need special service? Back in my working life we just tossed them and got a replacement.
I was planning to go all extract, with maybe some specialty grains steeped for the introductory
batch. I was planning on going to all grain recipes after that. I have a 10 gallon Gott for the
mash tun/sparge vessel, and 2 5-gallon Gotts for hot water supply.
I have discarded all chemicals, additives, etc from my ancient stock, and will buy fresh from the
local HBS. I dug out Papazian's book last night, but have not begun to reread it. Used to be my
homebrew bible. Also found my old brewing log, and will review that.
Questions:
What are the best yeasts currently available for ales (and lagers come to think of it) nowadays. I
used to swear by the smack packs introduced into a quart or so of starter and bubbling like mad in
the starter before beginning the brewing session. The liquid yeasts back then were a big
improvement over the dry yeasts. Is this still true? I understand there are some pretty good dry
yeasts now available.
Has the hops shortage been resolved? I expect we will need English hops for the first ale,
depending on the recipe they pick.
Am I missing anything else? I have not kept up with the homebrewing movement, and will be reading
some of the messages posted here on RCB in an effort to get back up to speed. Suggested reading
materials for those new to brewing? I kind of hate to give up my copy of Charlie's book, even to my
own kid.
Thanks for any help,
Roy
Scott
Here is my personal favoite "modern" book....
I use Wyeast smack packs exclusively. Probably my favorite "English"
yeast is Wyeast 1968 ESB for bitters (standard/ordinary/extra special).
1056 American Ale works nice for American IPA...
Steve Bonine
> What are the best yeasts currently available for ales (and lagers come to think of it) nowadays. I
> used to swear by the smack packs introduced into a quart or so of starter and bubbling like mad in
> the starter before beginning the brewing session. The liquid yeasts back then were a big
> improvement over the dry yeasts. Is this still true? I understand there are some pretty good dry
> yeasts now available.
This, of course, a religious issue. There are people who prefer dry
yeasts and those who prefer smack packs. My personal preference is
Safale dry yeast but I used smack packs exclusively for years.
> Has the hops shortage been resolved? I expect we will need English hops for the first ale,
> depending on the recipe they pick.
You will likely experience some sticker stock when you go shopping for
hops, but the selection is much better than it was a year ago and prices
have come down significantly. Check out online sources from the comfort
of your home to get an idea of what's available. One suggestion is
Northern Brewer at www.northernbrewer.com.
> Am I missing anything else? I have not kept up with the homebrewing movement, and will be reading
> some of the messages posted here on RCB in an effort to get back up to speed. Suggested reading
> materials for those new to brewing? I kind of hate to give up my copy of Charlie's book, even to my
> own kid.
I think that the biggest change in the last 14 years has been the growth
in importance of online sources, both for ingredients and information.
Being in the Houston area, you'll be able to visit local
brick-and-mortar stores, but for those of us in rural areas it's nice to
order online rather than having to drive hundreds of miles.
Good reference books are still important, but there's a wealth of
information available online. There are a number of web forms, some of
them on specialized topics like growing hops. There are also a lot of
sites where you can find huge collections of recipes.
Finally, you might want to investigate homebrewing clubs or
organizations in the Houston area. I suspect someone here will have
specific suggestions.
Have fun, and enjoy a homebrew.
Ecnerwal
Roy <NOSPAM...@comcast.net> wrote:
> What are the best yeasts currently available for ales (and lagers come to
> think of it) nowadays. I
> used to swear by the smack packs introduced into a quart or so of starter and
> bubbling like mad in
> the starter before beginning the brewing session. The liquid yeasts back
> then were a big
> improvement over the dry yeasts. Is this still true? I understand there are
> some pretty good dry
> yeasts now available.
Religious. No doubt there. Dry has made a few converts - one posted
semi-recently something to the effect of the equipment he could have
bought with the money he spent on smack packs over the years.
I use dry quite happily. Inexpensive, stores very well, works reliably.
Safale and Danstar, mostly. The "must have max attenuation" folks are
attached to S05 and Nottingham for those two brands - I'm not one of
those folks, myself - I like a beer with a bit of body, so I get along
fine with Windsor or Whitbread and S33 or S04, but like pretty much
everything from color to hop level, it's personal taste more than
anything else - the whole point of brewing your beer is to make beer you
like, and the whole point of brewing my beer is to make beer I like.
--
Cats, coffee, chocolate...vices to live by
Steve Bonine
> . . . it's personal taste more than
> anything else - the whole point of brewing your beer is to make beer you
> like, and the whole point of brewing my beer is to make beer I like.
Which means that the OP is faced with the terrible prospect of brewing
lots of beer to discover which ingredients produce the product that
matches his tastes the best. Somebody's got to do it . . .
Christopher Helms
White Labs California Ale Yeast is a good liquid one. Lately I'm happy
with the results I'm getting from 7 gram packs of regular old dry
Coopers Ale Yeast.
alebrewer
You got out about the time I started. Yeah, a lot of things have
changed, but it is basically the same.
On yeasts, my advice is, if you are brewing an ale and aren't trying
for something unique, say a saison or lambic, find a dry yeast that
will do. They really have gotten that much better, and you can't beat
the convenience. I like Nottingham or Safeale 05, but if you like a
little more English style, you can use Windsor. There are others, I
just haven't tried them. For lagers, I haven't heard of any decent
dried yeasts, so going with a liquid one would be my choice. I don't
brew lagers much. I have found that re-hydrating the dry yeast per
the directions is beneficial, but others say it doesn't make any
difference.
You are lucky to be in Houston as there are several homebrew stores in
the area. The ones I have been to are run by friendly, knowledgeable
folks. Easy access to ingredients is important. I don't know how it
was like when you stopped, but most of them will now sell liquid
extract by the pound (in your own bucket) at a much lower cost than
the cans.
On hops, the shorage is over, but I wouldn't say there is an
oversupply. Again, having a local hb store will make this easy as the
owner should know what is fresh and available.
The biggest improvement is the past decade or so has been in wort
chillers. You can now get affordable counterflow chillers for about
$100. Shirron makes a plate chiller that sells for $100 that I'd
recommend for the Houston area. You would need a prechiller in the
summer, when tap water temps go above 75F, but during the winter, you
should be able to get 5 gallons to below 80F in under 10 minutes.
Welcome back.
ab
Steve Bonine
> I have found that re-hydrating the dry yeast per
> the directions is beneficial, but others say it doesn't make any
> difference.
My limited experience is that it depends on the yeast. I routinely use
Safale without rehydrating it, but when I tried the same technique with
Nottingham the results were disappointing.
Dan Logcher
Same here.. Safale S-05 right into the fermenter. Stir well, shake some
and let it go. Hasn't failed me yet. I see activity in 12 hours or less.
--
Dan
John Bleichert
I use their S-04 all the time and pitch it right into the
fermenter. Works like a charm. Same with their WB-06 (which freakin'
rocks, by the way - I've abandoned WLP300 as a result).
--
-----------------------------------------------
The heat from below can burn your eyes out!!
frater mus
> Religious. No doubt there. Dry has made a few converts - one posted
> semi-recently something to the effect of the equipment he could have
> bought with the money he spent on smack packs over the years.
Dry is much, much better than it was 20yrs ago IMO. Still, I generally
use liquid cultures and ranch them to contain costs (and have fun).
--
brother mouse
composed offline and synced later.
http://www.mousetrap.net/mouse/offline.html
cpw
Welcome back Roy!
I haven't been into the home brewing game for very long. But wish I
had started YEARS ago.
Yeast is, without a doubt, personal preference. I tend to go with the
White Labs liquid yeast. It's a little easier than dry yeast (in that,
I don't have to go through the steps of rehydrating it ... which, is
one less step to take). It's more expensive than the dry. But, as a
father of twin pre-schoolers with limited time to brew, I'm willing to
spend the extra ca$h to save 30+ minutes. And the number of liquid
yeasts available give you a tremendous variety of flavors and styles
to "experiment" with (for lack of a better term).
Roy
>
>After about a 14 year lay-off, I'm getting back into home brewing again, at least for long enough to
>get my older son and his friends through their first few batches.
Thanks to everybody for the comments. I will probably go with a smack pack Wyeast. I will buy a
couple packets of the recommended dry yeasts just as backup. I guess the Wyeast packets are big
enough now to just pitch and go, but I'd feel better pitching a couple pints of active starter.
The shopping list for replacement hardware is getting longer and longer. The folks at the LHBS will
be happy to see me walk into the shop with my list.
Regards,
Roy
Scott
>
> The shopping list for replacement hardware is getting longer and longer. The folks at the LHBS will
> be happy to see me walk into the shop with my list.
>
>
> Regards,
> Roy
Look at it as your own stimulus package where YOU get to decide where
the money goes!
As you know, you don't need to go crazy with new stuff...you can get a
barebones system to get by and then add stuff incrementally to make
something better or easier...then, everytime you get a new piece, it's
like Christmas all over again :)
Have fun! Brew up some tasty ales :)
Scott
Steve Bonine
> Thanks to everybody for the comments. I will probably go with a smack pack Wyeast. I will buy a
> couple packets of the recommended dry yeasts just as backup. I guess the Wyeast packets are big
> enough now to just pitch and go, but I'd feel better pitching a couple pints of active starter.
The issue of bothering with a starter for liquid yeast is also a
religious issue . . . enough of one that a few months ago I decided to
prove to myself that I was "right" and the folks who pitched doing a
starter [pun intended] were "wrong". So I brewed two identical batches
of an American Ale, one using a smack pack pitched directly into the
carboy, and the other using the same yeast but with a hefty starter.
The unscientific results of this one-time experiment indicated that
although there was not a significant taste difference in the two beers,
the one with the starter had a noticeably better head. Not that you
would have said that the one done without a starter was under-carbonated
or had a problem, but when compared side by side there was an obvious
difference. Whether this was enough to justify the hassle of preparing
the starter is left as a personal decision for the reader.
The result for me of this little game and some unrelated subsequent
experiments was to shift from smack packs to dry yeast. We all have our
decision parameters related to choice of yeast, but one of mine is
having an order shipped during the winter in Minnesota. Dry yeast
doesn't freeze. It's easier to store, and I really like the results
that I'm getting from Safale SA-4 and SA-5. At some point I'd suggest
that you give dry yeast a try. One of the reasons I enjoy homebrewing
is exactly this kind of experimenting.
I suppose that I should re-do my starter experiment using dry yeast.
> The shopping list for replacement hardware is getting longer and longer. The folks at the LHBS will
> be happy to see me walk into the shop with my list.
Thank you for doing your part to put the economy back on its feet.
John Bleichert
<snip>
> Yeast is, without a doubt, personal preference. I tend to go with the
> White Labs liquid yeast. It's a little easier than dry yeast (in that,
> I don't have to go through the steps of rehydrating it ... which, is
> one less step to take). It's more expensive than the dry. But, as a
> father of twin pre-schoolers with limited time to brew, I'm willing to
> spend the extra ca$h to save 30+ minutes. And the number of liquid
> yeasts available give you a tremendous variety of flavors and styles
> to "experiment" with (for lack of a better term).
You're doing yourself (and your brew) a disservice by not making
starters for your liquid yeast. Making starters allows you to get
multiple batches from one vial, and the increased cell count pitched
gives a better chance of not working the yeast too hard and kicking
out unwanted flavor components, in addition to ensuring they'll finish
the job at the correct specific gravity.
No need to re-hydrate most dry yeast. Definite need to make starters
for all liquid yeasts, unless you're making 2 gallon batches. I have
friends that pitch vials w/o starters, but these are the same folks
who don't take finish gravity readings either so have no idea whether
the yeast "finished" their beer or not, and also have a hard time
achieving flavor consistency across batches.....
Given the "not much time to brew cuz I have kids" argument above
(which I can totally empathize with) dry yeast should be your friend.
Good luck!
JB
PS: I'm not bashing liquid yeast at all, I use it for my porter,
lagers and Belgian/farmhouse style brews.
John Bleichert
> On Sat, 28 Nov 2009 14:28:23 -0600, Roy <NOSPAM...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>After about a 14 year lay-off, I'm getting back into home brewing again, at least for long enough to
>>get my older son and his friends through their first few batches.
>
>
> Thanks to everybody for the comments. I will probably go with
> a smack pack Wyeast. I will buy a couple packets of the
> recommended dry yeasts just as backup. I guess the Wyeast packets
> are big enough now to just pitch and go, but I'd feel better pitching
> a couple pints of active starter.
Not necessarily. The lower-cost "Activator" packs from Wyeast are
designed specifically to be used in a starter. The other packs and WL
vials, well, that could be argued indefinitely as some people seem to
have an infinite capacity for being wrong ;-)
JB
PS: it's a joke - laugh!
Roy
>
>Given the "not much time to brew cuz I have kids" argument above
>(which I can totally empathize with) dry yeast should be your friend.
>
When I quit brewing many years ago, my older son (the one who has requested me to brew a couple
'instructional' batches for he and his friends) was my chief assistant. I started with all extract
on the kitchen range using a canning cooker to boil about 3.5 gallons, then added the rest of the
water later. Anyway, he helped stir, measure, clean, etc and we had a great time working together.
He was about 10 at the time. Much younger than that could require a lot more supervision. As it
was, he started the dishwasher for me one time, and used dish soap instead of dishwasher soap.
Brewing was delayed while we cleaned up Moby (the great white whale of dish suds) before the ex got
home. Neither of us noticed it until the suds were higher than the island hiding the dishwasher.
Anyway, my message is to let the kids help as much as you can stand it. Years from now you'll have
some good stories to remember together. Moby gets bigger every year, much like a large bass caught
on a special fishing trip.
Regards,
Roy
alebrewer
> > Yeast is, without a doubt, personal preference. I tend to go with the
> > White Labs liquid yeast. It's a little easier than dry yeast (in that,
> > I don't have to go through the steps of rehydrating it ...
<snip>
I'm not sure what you are doing, but reyhdrating is not a complicated
nor time consuming activity. I take a clean glass, rinse it out with
sanitizer, fill it with about a cup of warm (~90F) water and pour in
the dry yeast. Let it sit covered with a bit of tin foil for the few
minutes it takes to get the fermenter ready and pour it in. I find it
hard to believe that this is too much trouble for someone who thinks
brewing his own beer isn't.
> No need to re-hydrate most dry yeast. Definite need to make starters
> for all liquid yeasts, unless you're making 2 gallon batches.
Sure, you don't have to rehydrate dry yeast.
You don't have to make a starter with liquid yeast. But, the benefit
to effort ratio is so large it doesn't make sense not to. The benefit
to effort ratio is even larger for rehydrating dry yeast, not because
the benefit is greater, but the effort is much smaller. Even if it was
a "I don't know if it really does any good, but it can't hurt" kind of
thing it would make sense to do it. When you consider my own trials
that indicate that it really does improve the fermentation, maybe you
can understand why I tend to rant on a bit.
ab
Bob F
Don't replace things that don't need it. You mentioned stoppers, I believe.
Unless they are visably shot, I doubt if you need to.
Roy
>Roy wrote:
>
>>
>> The shopping list for replacement hardware is getting longer and longer. The folks at the LHBS will
>> be happy to see me walk into the shop with my list.
>>
>
>Look at it as your own stimulus package where YOU get to decide where
>the money goes!
>
>As you know, you don't need to go crazy with new stuff...you can get a
>barebones system to get by and then add stuff incrementally to make
>something better or easier...then, everytime you get a new piece, it's
>like Christmas all over again :)
I'm mainly replacing all the rubber and plastic stuff that I boxed up and put in the garage. All
those airlocks, bottle caps, rubber stoppers, gaskets, siphon tubes, bottle fillers, tubing and any
polystyrene and most nylon based plastics are completely shot due to the heat over the years. I'm
also replacing all test kits, chemicals, additives, sanitizer etc.
I apparently stored all my funnels, bottle brushes, stirring paddles, carboy brushes etc in a
separate location, which currently escapes my memory, and if I don't find them soon, I get to buy
them again.
I did some online browsing for replacement costs at my LHBS website. My biggest sticker shock was
for glass carboys and plastic primary fermentors/bottling buckets. Wow, have they gone up. I was
pleasantly surprised by the low rise in cost of most grains since the mid-90's.
frater mus
> Not necessarily. The lower-cost "Activator" packs from Wyeast are
> designed specifically to be used in a starter. The other packs and WL
I think you mean "propagator". The Activators are the ones with the
internal smack pack doohickey.
alebrewer
<snip>
>
> I did some online browsing for replacement costs at my LHBS website. My biggest sticker shock was
> for glass carboys and plastic primary fermentors/bottling buckets. Wow, have they gone up. I was
> pleasantly surprised by the low rise in cost of most grains since the mid-90's.
Yeah, the carboys, particularly the glass ones, have gone up. The
plant in Mexico that made them closed down and they come from Italy
now, I think. They do sell the plastic water bottles in the grocery
store now, though, for less than the glass carboys were in the '90s.
I haven't used them, yet, as I have 4 glass carboys, but I had a rash
of breakage, I think I might consider going that route. You can buy
the buckets from plastics suppliers, but it ends up you have to buy
something like 6 of them to break even on shipping. I did that
several years ago (and the distributor was in Clear Lake or Kemah or
someplace like that, but they wouldn't let me pick them up, they had
to ship them). I didn't really save any money, but I have more than
enough buckets, now.
The soda kegs have also gone up. Fifteen years ago, I could pick up
as many as I wanted from my LHBS for $15 each, and even less on-line.
Now, you're lucky to find them under $45 (200% increase).
ab
Scott
>
> I did some online browsing for replacement costs at my LHBS website. My biggest sticker shock was
> for glass carboys and plastic primary fermentors/bottling buckets. Wow, have they gone up. I was
> pleasantly surprised by the low rise in cost of most grains since the mid-90's.
>
>
If I recall, either nobody is making glass carboys anymore or maybe just
one manufacturer is, so the prices have gone way up!
For plastic fermenters/bottling buckets, you might check at a bakery.
They get things like glazing/frosting, etc. in 5 or 6 gallon buckets. I
got a couple of them for free. They even come with a lid and all you
have to do is drill a hole in it and add an appropriate rubber grommet
that will let an airlock fit tightly. LHBSs sell plastic spigots and
you can drill a hole in the side of the bucket near the bottom to make a
bottling bucket.
Steve Bonine
> I was
> pleasantly surprised by the low rise in cost of most grains since the mid-90's.
Actually, since the mid 1950s. Think about this for a moment from the
farmer's perspective.
Scott
>
> Actually, since the mid 1950s. Think about this for a moment from the
> farmer's perspective.
That's probably why 40 acre farms of the 50s are now 4000 acre farms ;)
Will Trice
> No need to re-hydrate most dry yeast. Definite need to make starters
> for all liquid yeasts, unless you're making 2 gallon batches. I have
> friends that pitch vials w/o starters, but these are the same folks
> who don't take finish gravity readings either so have no idea whether
> the yeast "finished" their beer or not
I'm still trying to get my sea-feet back after a brewing hiatus, so this
is probably a dumb question, but why is a starter so necessary with a
smack pack, but less so with a dry yeast? I would have thought the
opposite, i.e. a starter would be more beneficial with a dry yeast than
with a liquid yeast.
-Will
will dot trice at comcast dot net
wwlighting
I think Jamil Zainasheff gives all you need to know about yeast
starters here http://www.mrmalty.com/
He is one super bad ass brewer. I have never tasted his beer but
talking to those who have I can tell you that he knows what he is
talking about.
Steve Bonine
> I'm still trying to get my sea-feet back after a brewing hiatus, so this
> is probably a dumb question, but why is a starter so necessary with a
> smack pack, but less so with a dry yeast? I would have thought the
> opposite, i.e. a starter would be more beneficial with a dry yeast than
> with a liquid yeast.
The short answer is that, in spite of obvious appearances, there are
more yeast cells in the little packet of dry yeast than in the bigger
smack pack. I agree that this is very counter-intuitive.
John Bleichert
> John Bleichert wrote:
>
>> Not necessarily. The lower-cost "Activator" packs from Wyeast are
>> designed specifically to be used in a starter. The other packs and WL
>
> I think you mean "propagator". The Activators are the ones with the
> internal smack pack doohickey.
>
Whoops! You're right. Thanks for clearing that up for the OP!
JB
John Bleichert
Also, it's been my experience that dry yeast kept in the fridge has a
loooooong life span, while liquid yeast's viability is often tied
directly to the expiration date on the package. That expiration date
is important. My LHBS gives me $2 off the vial if the purchase is near
or after the expiry date for yeast still hanging around in his
fridge. I grab a couple packs of S-04 any time I'm at the LHBS just to
have some in the fridge...
Luckily, a simple 2L starter proves (or disproves) the viability of
the yeast vial/pack...
Again, I'm not beating up on liquid yeast at all, but one must be
careful when purchasing and using it.
Good luck!
JB
Scott Sellers
>On 2009-12-03, cpw <cpwo...@gmail.com> wrote:
><snip>
>> Yeast is, without a doubt, personal preference. I tend to go with the
>> White Labs liquid yeast. It's a little easier than dry yeast (in that,
>> I don't have to go through the steps of rehydrating it ... which, is
>> one less step to take). It's more expensive than the dry. But, as a
>> father of twin pre-schoolers with limited time to brew, I'm willing to
>> spend the extra ca$h to save 30+ minutes. And the number of liquid
>> yeasts available give you a tremendous variety of flavors and styles
>> to "experiment" with (for lack of a better term).
>You're doing yourself (and your brew) a disservice by not making
>starters for your liquid yeast. Making starters allows you to
>get multiple batches from one vial, and the increased cell count
>pitched gives a better chance of not working the yeast too hard
>and kicking out unwanted flavor components, in addition to
>ensuring they'll finish the job at the correct specific gravity.
Yes. It's not just that the beer ferments, but that it ferments
well.
>No need to re-hydrate most dry yeast. Definite need to make
>starters for all liquid yeasts, unless you're making 2 gallon
>batches. I have friends that pitch vials w/o starters, but these
>are the same folks who don't take finish gravity readings either
>so have no idea whether the yeast "finished" their beer or not,
>and also have a hard time achieving flavor consistency across
>batches.....
[...]
I re-hydrate when the package calls for it. It's easy (much
easier, by an order of magnitude, than making a starter) so why
not. IIRC, danstar has a different method/rationale than the
safale products -- it's been awhile since I brewed, so don't
recall off the top of my head.
>PS: I'm not bashing liquid yeast at all, I use it for my porter,
> lagers and Belgian/farmhouse style brews.
OTOH, if a style-appropriate dry yeast from a quality vendor is
available, it makes the yeast part so much easier.
cheers,
Scott S
--
Scott Sellers |
scotts...@mindspring.com |
Chris
> ...
> Questions:
>
> What are the best yeasts currently available for ales (and lagers come to think of it) nowadays. I
> used to swear by the smack packs introduced into a quart or so of starter and bubbling like mad in
> the starter before beginning the brewing session. The liquid yeasts back then were a big
> improvement over the dry yeasts. Is this still true? I understand there are some pretty good dry
> yeasts now available.
>
character that comes from the yeast, Scotch ales, etc. Otherwise I
generally use Nottingham. Recently these was a problem with a batch of
Nottingham where the equipment that stamped the date/lot number on the
packs actually pierced the packages and caused contamination. I have
used some Nottingham since the problem was corrected without any issues.
> Has the hops shortage been resolved? I expect we will need English hops for the first ale,
> depending on the recipe they pick.
Mostly, although not all of the wholesalers that many LHBS order from
have in turn lowered their prices. Shop around. hopsdirect.com if your
buying in bulk (1 pound packages)
> Am I missing anything else? I have not kept up with the homebrewing movement, and will be reading
> some of the messages posted here on RCB in an effort to get back up to speed. Suggested reading
> materials for those new to brewing? I kind of hate to give up my copy of Charlie's book, even to my
> own kid.
I'll second what someone else said, howtobrew.com is the entire first
edition of John Palmer's book online for free. The book is in it's
third edition now and once you get into more technical brewing it is a
good investment. Also, Designing Great Beers by Ray Daniels. Then
there is "Brewing: Science and Practice" if you don't mind dropping in
excess of $300 for a book. Too rich for my blood!
There are also a lot of recipe books out there.
And don't forget, your public library is likely to have several books on
brewing in the cooking section.
Steve Bonine
> Recently these was a problem with a batch of
> Nottingham where the equipment that stamped the date/lot number on the
> packs actually pierced the packages and caused contamination.
Just curious as to where you got this information.
Chris
A couple of sources. First this thread at homebrewtalk.com (with 300+
posts) http://www.homebrewtalk.com/f163/nottingham-yeast-128940/ On that
thread, if you read far enough you will find a few posts by klemcke,
which I have posted below. The other source is that I work part time at
my LHBS and this eventually filtered down from one of the wholesale
distributers we buy most our supplies through.
>klemcke wrote:
>>We have done some internal quality checks that have shown that a
>>higher than normal percentage of Nottingham yeast in 11 gram sachet
>>packs from batch #1081140118V (expiration date of Jan. 2011) exhibit
>>slow fermentation characteristics. While this is not affecting the
>>majority of packages from this batch, as a safeguard we would like to
>>replace sachets of this batch of Nottingham with new inventory from a
>>different batch. If you have any Nottingham yeast with this batch
>>number, please return it by mail to:
>>
>>Lallemand Inc.
>>Attn: Marie Coppet
>>6100 Royalmount
>>Montreal, QC, Canada
>>H4P 2R2
>>
>>We will replace each sachet sent along with extra sachets to
>>compensate you for postage costs. We apologize for any inconvenience
>>and thank you for your support. Should you have any questions, please
>>contact our Montreal order desk by e-mail at homeb...@lallemand.com
>>
>>Keith Lemcke
>>Danstar Yeast Sales
And
>>Thanks for the frank comments on this forum, and to alerting us to
the >>fermentation problems of this batch of Nottingham several weeks
ago. >>Just a bit more on the cause of the problem in case some of you
>>haven't seen this posted elsewhere.
>>
>>Our subsequent investigations have shown that in the packaging
process >>of Nottingham batch #1081140118V, the device used to imprint
the lot >>number and expiration date caused tiny punctures in the sachet
>>packaging material, allowing air to get into the package. Prolonged
>>contact with air will affect the performance of the yeast, resulting
>>in changes in fermentation performance over time. This has affected a
>>minority of the yeast sachets in this batch but as a precaution we
>>have decided to replace the entire batch of Nottingham sachets. This
>>was an isolated incident and prior and subsequent batches were not
>>affected. The printing device has been upgraded with a different type
>>of printing ribbon to prevent a reoccurrence.
>>
>>We again apologize to those who have been affected by this problem
and >>hope you will continue to use Danstar yeast in the future.
>>
>>Keith Lemcke
>>Danstar & Lalvin Yeast
Chris
> John Bleichert wrote:
>
>> Not necessarily. The lower-cost "Activator" packs from Wyeast are
>> designed specifically to be used in a starter. The other packs and WL
>
> I think you mean "propagator". The Activators are the ones with the
> internal smack pack doohickey.
>
the other is 125 ml. The propagator is the smaller of the two and
should use a starter. The activator is supposed to be a pitchable
amount but only if it is fresh, and you making a regular strength beer.
If the pack is more that a couple months old or your making a higher
gravity beer you really should do a starter for the activator.