# Brewing Myths Caused By Chinese Whispers



## PistolPatch (10/2/08)

Uh oh! Here we go with what I'm sure will be a controversial thread if people don't stop and think for a minute before replying.

I've whacked it in the all-grain section because it is the most advanced forum available and if there is any debate, I cannot see it as being of help to new brewers. Hopefully the outcome of any debate will be though.

*How Much Knowledge Do We Pass On Without Really Knowing it For a Fact Ourselves?*

I've certainly done it. Have you? I hear from someone who I know or respect that a certain thing is a fact. Therefore I pass it on. The more though that I brew and taste other brewer's beers, the more I suspect that some of these, 'facts,' are just hand me downs like I think I have been guilty of.

I'm going to put two examples at the end of this post but I can think of many more. Are there any things that you would like to question?

In the past I have started or been involved in some threads to encourage the testing of some basic brewing practices or even some advanced ones. These threads never really took off. Why is it that only a few people were keen to really test out large or small changes in a brewing procedure especially when we see so many advanced topics being discussed with huge authority on AHB?

Here are two things I suspect could be myths. One of these I am not sure of but have seen no proof. The other one, I think I'm pretty right...

*Kit Brewers Should Ferment Ales at 18 Degrees:* This is gospel but the best kit brews I have ever had were all done in uncontrolled fermentation conditions and these were usually quite hot. These beers had no kit twang at all which is something I never came close to in my kit days which were ultra-clean and controlled!!! InCider brewed his beers in a tin shed in QLD. Katie and Lloyd were under similiar conditions. Two other brewers (not on the forum) also fermented at higher and uncontrolled conditions.

So, should we really be emphasising to kit brewers to brew at 18? Maybe the kit yeast doesn't like 18? I don't know the answer here because I have never brewed at the high temps. (Well once I did and that banana beer was the best kit I brewed - lol!) Brewing a kit without twang is certainly one of the biggest brewing mysteries to me.

*John Palmer's How to Brew is A Great Book for New Brewers:* Maybe there are some new brewers out there that found JP a brilliant text. But for me, and I have been brewing for a little while now, I find most of it way too advanced. Take this section on pH. I mean really <_< How can that be useful to any beginner? I can give heaps of other links as examples. Other favourites recommended to beginners are Noonan's lager. OMG!

I really hate the way that Papazzian writes but it is a hell of a lot easier to understand than the above for a beginner.

*Finally*

So I have told many a kit brewer to brew at 18 but I don't personally know if this is really good advice - I've never done a side by side brew or multiple alternate brews at 18 and 25 which I think should be the bare minimum before I go sprouting off! And, if I went back to my first 100 posts, I'd probably find that I recommended How to Brew to some total newbie like myself at the time - lol!!!

Anyway, I'll put my flame suit on. The more advanced the forum, the more illogical the threads can often get so I'm fully expecting that this thread will get very quickly off-topic and out of control. But I really think that the above thoughts are worth considering before they are flamed down.

While we could quickly get side-tracked on defending certain ideas, the main question in this thread is pretty simple really. t is,

"Do you feel totally confident in all the advice you pass on?


----------



## Pumpy (10/2/08)

Using the' No chill method' grows Botulisms in your beer !!!


----------



## Whistlingjack (10/2/08)

Yes, I have my periods of self-doubt, too...  

I'll just evoke the old adage...

"Ask two brewers the same question, and you'll get three different answers"

WJ


----------



## Pumpy (10/2/08)

Pumpy said:


> Using the' No chill method' grows Botulisms in your beer !!!



have I got the right idea PP or should i say it is infected by the 'Darrenlism virus '  !!


----------



## kook (10/2/08)

PistolPatch said:


> *Kit Brewers Should Ferment Ales at 18 Degrees:* This is gospel but the best kit brews I have ever had were all done in uncontrolled fermentation conditions and these were usually quite hot. These beers had no kit twang at all which is something I never came close to in my kit days which were ultra-clean and controlled!!! InCider brewed his beers in a tin shed in QLD. Katie and Lloyd were under similiar conditions. Two other brewers (not on the forum) also fermented at higher and uncontrolled conditions.
> 
> So, should we really be emphasising to kit brewers to brew at 18? Maybe the kit yeast doesn't like 18? I don't know the answer here because I have never brewed at the high temps. (Well once I did and that banana beer was the best kit I brewed - lol!) Brewing a kit without twang is certainly one of the biggest brewing mysteries to me.



I personally think we should be advising kit brewers to throw that crap out! Any yeast that has been sitting under the lid of a can, exposed to ridiculous elements shouldn't really be used for brewing. Save it and make some bread with it! It once again goes back to the old saying "brewers make wort, yeast makes beer".



PistolPatch said:


> *John Palmer's How to Brew is A Great Book for New Brewers:* Maybe there are some new brewers out there that found JP a brilliant text. But for me, and I have been brewing for a little while now, I find most of it way too advanced. Take this section on pH. I mean really <_< How can that be useful to any beginner? I can give heaps of other links as examples. Other favourites recommended to beginners are Noonan's lager. OMG!



I'm guilty of this, as I have found his book incredibly helpful along the way. If all you want to do is make an all-grain beer, Chapter 1 and 19 (3rd edition) explain this in very simple, step by step terms with pictures. If you want to know the theory behind all this, the other chapters explain quite detailed subjects in simple terms. I haven't found a better (print) resource out there for beginners, but I'd love to see it if there is one.



PistolPatch said:


> "Do you feel totally confident in all the advice you pass on?"



At the end of the day I doubt someone is going to come and lynch me for it. You take this a little too seriously sometimes Pat


----------



## InCider (10/2/08)

...that you need a 'thingy'*

InCider.


*Hydrometer


----------



## Stuster (10/2/08)

PistolPatch said:


> "Do you feel totally confident in all the advice you pass on?



No, of course some of the advice I give will be wrong. But I hope that more of it is useful than not. And that the stuff that's not will hopefully be picked up by other posters or ignored by the OP.  

I disagree with you about Palmer. It was something I read when I was a new brewer. Palmer worked for me and I was really happy to have read it not long after I started brewing. I do have a science background so it wasn't that hard for me to understand. And that's the thing - we'll recommend things that work for us. They may not know if they'll work for everybody else, but the great thing about forums like this is that posters will get different opinions, different ways to do it and can make up their own mind on which things work for them.


----------



## schooey (10/2/08)

Interesting point you pose Pat. I guess I have always considered myself a mug brewer, and I will listen to just about anyone's opinion on anything brewing. I'm sure I still do some things that would make other brewers cringe, but I brew a few good beers that I more than enjoy drinking, and so do a lot of my friends and family.

I've been really lucky to meet a few like minded brewers who are happy to share what they have learned, right or wrong it seems to work for me, and also to have a really good guy at the LHBS (Thanks again MHB) to offer a more expert opinion. All in all they have only improved my efforts, according to how much I enjoy my end product anyway

I like to get feedback from people who I think are more in the know than me, and I'm thankful for it. I usually take it all on board and then decide whether I want to/can afford/have the nouse/can be arsed making the changes for the benefit to be gained, Usually I will, unless its a lot of pain for really not that much gain in my book.

What I'm getting at, is sometimes the theory is black and white, sometimes it just comes down to personal taste. It's the old 80/20 rule at work again. 20 percent of your assets (time, knowledge, money etc) will cover off 80 percent of the process, then then getting the last 20 percent perfect will take upo 80 percent of your assets to the point where the last 5% of perfection will cost you a shitload of time, money and headhurt for what benefit?


----------



## goatherder (10/2/08)

Myth 1 - kit brewers should brew ales at 18 deg.

Yeast health and management is very important to brewing. Many ale yeasts will give you unpleasantness when fermented hot. I've experienced this first hand. The advice to new brewers is generally "buy a decent packet of yeast from your LHBS instead of using the stuff under the lid of the tin, take good care of it and don't ferment it too hot. 18 is a good place to start but feel free to experiment yourself" This has nothing to do with being a kit brewer, it applies to all forms of the art. I believe it's been established that "kit twang" is not a product of fermentation - it's from the malt extract and is related to how fresh the extract is. Anyway, I'll leave it to you to do a decent experiment - buy a couple of kits the same, ferment them at the same time with one at 18 and one at 25. Do a proper blind tasting and see which one you like best.

Myth 2 - John Palmer's How to Brew is A Great Book for New Brewers

I feel it is an excellent book for any brewer. If you are a new brewer and you are skipping straight to the mash pH topic then maybe your eyes will glaze over. Deal with it and learn about yeast and sanitation instead. Funnily enough, Palmer covers these subjects too. The mark of a good reference book is that you can keep picking it up and learning from again and again. Palmer's book hits this mark for me. As for Noonan, it's certainly not a beginners book in my opinion. I'm not sure if anyone disagrees with this, I'd be surprised if they did.

I don't see the need to dumb everything down for beginners. Everyone who brews will try to learn as much as they are prepared to in the quest for good beer. If they stop at brewing kits at 25 deg and that's what makes them happy then fine. If they want to go further then they might need to actually learn a bit about the process. Plenty of brewers do and find the learning part very fulfilling. The bottom line is that some bits of brewing are complex and if you want to understand them you'll need to learn a bit of chemistry and biology. 

And yes, I feel very confident in the advice I pass on.


----------



## Ross (10/2/08)

goatherder said:


> Myth 1 - kit brewers should brew ales at 18 deg.
> 
> Yeast health and management is very important to brewing. Many ale yeasts will give you unpleasantness when fermented hot. I've experienced this first hand. The advice to new brewers is generally "buy a decent packet of yeast from your LHBS instead of using the stuff under the lid of the tin, take good care of it and don't ferment it too hot. 18 is a good place to start but feel free to experiment yourself" This has nothing to do with being a kit brewer, it applies to all forms of the art. I believe it's been established that "kit twang" is not a product of fermentation - it's from the malt extract and is related to how fresh the extract is. Anyway, I'll leave it to you to do a decent experiment - buy a couple of kits the same, ferment them at the same time with one at 18 and one at 25. Do a proper blind tasting and see which one you like best.
> 
> ...



Couldn't have said it better... +1

cheers Ross


----------



## Simon W (10/2/08)

Palmer's book(the free online version - main reason I recommend it) is set out linearly, ie: start at the beginning.
If a beginner(likely to be Can or Partial) is reading the chapter on pH (chapter 15), then I think they're hopelessly lost. 
Palmer's book is not advanced, it's thorough, which is good for me because if I get into trouble somewhere, the information is there for me.

When I started I found the lack of how's and why's in the majority of books to be extremely frustrating.
When I found Palmer's book I was so chuffed I read it from cover to cover and still re-read whole sections every now and then.

Horses for courses I guess, If it's not for you, so be it, It's fine for me and I'll continue to recommend it to newbies and let them decide whether it's for them or not. 
If you can provide a link to a better _single source_ of free, easily navigable information, please post it.

Edit: I take too long to type, nice post goatherder.


----------



## Sammus (10/2/08)

goatherder said:


> Myth 1 - kit brewers should brew ales at 18 deg.
> 
> Yeast health and management is very important to brewing. Many ale yeasts will give you unpleasantness when fermented hot. I've experienced this first hand. The advice to new brewers is generally "buy a decent packet of yeast from your LHBS instead of using the stuff under the lid of the tin, take good care of it and don't ferment it too hot. 18 is a good place to start but feel free to experiment yourself" This has nothing to do with being a kit brewer, it applies to all forms of the art. I believe it's been established that "kit twang" is not a product of fermentation - it's from the malt extract and is related to how fresh the extract is. Anyway, I'll leave it to you to do a decent experiment - buy a couple of kits the same, ferment them at the same time with one at 18 and one at 25. Do a proper blind tasting and see which one you like best.
> 
> ...




Two thumbs up. I've always wanted to start a thread like this.



And as a reply to some other members, can this please not turn into a no chill debate. Theres no denying the possibilty of a Clostridium botulinum infection in a no chill brew which can eventually lead to botulism, even if that possibility is an extremely small one given the conditions. It's simply a fact that some people choose to take the risk and others don't.


----------



## roger mellie (10/2/08)

Chinese Whispers - mmm lemme think

I got told once that US56 was a crap yeast.

That must have been a chinese whisper. <_< 

RM


----------



## Kai (10/2/08)

Ross said:


> Couldn't have said it better... +1
> 
> cheers Ross



+2

18-22 for kit yeasts and here is always a great spot to start.


----------



## Online Brewing Supplies (11/2/08)

Personaly I have never read Palmers book so I cant comment on the content but I know its not a recommended text for brewing studies.Its a case of horses for courses.If a new brewer can work out whats going on from the text all well and good.We all learn at different levels so if it teaches you what you want to know then its valuable.From what I have seen on this thread it may be confusing to some.Another storm in a tea cup as far as I can see.Better to brew than to debate the worth of a book.In the end you are "all" right just depends on were your coming from.Oil on the water.
GB


----------



## PistolPatch (11/2/08)

ROFL! Haven't had a chance to read all the above fully but I have read a few over the phone to one person who I know, KNOWS about brewing. It ended up that we were both falling about!

This brewer has qualifications falling out their ears and the other brewers who have been through the same training refer to this brewer when they have a problem - something I only know about second-hand. So, I think I have proof that my original question wasn't too stupid. I can see that a few replies above also thankfully reflect this :icon_cheers: 

I can also see that several of the above answers are stupid if read in context to the original question as it is a question which begs proof.

As for Palmer and waiting until Chapter 15, I just looked up Chapter 1. People say I write long posts. Find one post I have written as long as this  and gives less practical, easy to read advice. And, that is just page 1 of Palmer!

[For all you Palmer enthusiuasts, I just had a flick through further into Palmer. Have just found one very good section for beginners I think on a quick read. Mind you, it is only one and to be fair, I think I should link it....

Sorry, got distracted but seriously just spent 10 minutes trying to find the one clear bit that I have seen Palmer write. Anyone else want to have a crack at linking it? It actually was very well-written.]

Anyway, work tomorrow so I'll leave you guys to this debate now and am unsure if I'll get back here soon. But, please bear in mind the original question/s. I can only see 3 or 4 good replies so far. There was one particularly good one and no one has backed him up - the only one so far since I started writing this to offer any proof!

Interesting stuff!
Pat

P.S. The main reason we fell about laughing tonight on the phone was that a guy that has heaps of articles written in the Australian brewing world, posted that he increased efficiency to (well, I can't even say the figure as it is so embarrassing.) It turned out that this guy measured all his grains equally and used a scoop to do his measuring - no scales!!!! Stories like this and personal experience make me question everything. Yesterday, I saw, not sure if on a search or in a recent thread that someone had posted a 5% increase in efficiency using a certain method and this was after just one brew! As a home brewer you are doing damn well to measure within 5% let alone over one brew!!!!


----------



## Online Brewing Supplies (11/2/08)

PistolPatch said:


> ROFL! Haven't had a chance to read all the above fully but I have read a few over the phone to one person who I know, KNOWS about brewing. It ended up that we were both falling about!
> 
> This brewer has qualifications falling out their ears and the other brewers who have been through the same training refer to this brewer when they have a problem - something I only know about second-hand. So, I think I have proof that my original question wasn't too stupid. I can see that a few replies above also thankfully reflect this :icon_cheers:
> 
> ...


Come on Pat .Can I increase my efficiency to 100% by add two more scoops? Tongue in the left side of cheek.There is a certian amount of urban myths out there.People getting better than lab stats? I wonder.Only the figures will tell.
GB


----------



## JasonY (11/2/08)

I always think of references like Palmer's as a solid foundation that is based on the fundamentals from which you can get a great understanding of brewing to quite a practical or detailed level. It provides a good basis to help you evaluate differing techniques such as no chill, rims, herms, BIAB, meditative brewing or whatever floats your boat. I will alwas recommend it, it is one of the best references out there. You don't have to read and understand everything in it thats for sure.

Some of the worst beers I have tasted were kit beers fermented >25degC, I don't care what you say I will tell them to stick <24degC. Not sure where 18degC came from I would always just say <24 and above 18degC. 

I feel happy when I pass on information, I can only pass on what I know and I try to understand things as much as I can. On the flip-side if I hear some crazy theory I am not going to take it as gospel unless I do some further research.


----------



## Kai (11/2/08)

PistolPatch said:


> This brewer has qualifications falling out their ears and the other brewers who have been through the same training refer to this brewer when they have a problem - something I only know about second-hand. So, I think I have proof that my original question wasn't too stupid. I can see that a few replies above also thankfully reflect this :icon_cheers:
> 
> I can also see that several of the above answers are stupid if read in context to the original question as it is a question which begs proof.



Where's the proof in your first post, pat? The best you can state is that you've tasted many good beers that have been fermented warm and that's great. I've tasted plenty of good ones done at 18C too, and 19, 20, 21, 22 and even higher! Regardless to say though, when you get up in the mid to high 20's you run the risk of less desirable fermentation products. As goatherder has already pointed out (and ross +1ed), "kit twang" is not a product of high temperature fermentations. It's a combination of things including oxidised LME and poor yeast health and as such definitely not limited to warm ferment temps. Warm temps are more likely to give you those lovely hot alcohols that taste like crap and leave you feeling crap in the morning. That doesn't mean you can't make a good beer at 25 or higher, it's just far less likely. There's not really much debating that.



> As for Palmer and waiting until Chapter 15, I just looked up Chapter 1. People say I write long posts. Find one post I have written as long as this  and gives less practical, easy to read advice. And, that is just page 1 of Palmer!
> 
> [For all you Palmer enthusiuasts, I just had a flick through further into Palmer. Have just found one very good section for beginners I think on a quick read. Mind you, it is only one and to be fair, I think I should link it....



So you have found a chapter that makes Palmer seem worthwhile, eh? It's a great resource for the new brewer because it's got material for beginning and more advanced brewers. That and the fact that it's freely available online means I disagree that it's a poor text to recommend. Despite it being free I bought a copy of it myself and then gave it away to a fellow brewer.


----------



## Thirsty Boy (11/2/08)

Perhaps people are getting too caught up in Pats examples... mind you, he asked for and got it when he posted them.

I think his actual question is a good one though. Witness the recent debate about whether you need to aerate worts into which you are going to pitch fresh dried yeast.

Or that HSA exists

or that a fine crush will result in Tannin extraction

or that extract twang is inherent to extract beers and cant be avoided

or... or ... or ...

Nothing wrong at all with occasionally looking at what we all "know" and seeing if the database needs a little tweaking...

PS - I believe that kit brews will turn out better, more often if the temperatures are kept lower than the instructions on the tin, but mainly I believe that the tin yeast should be tossed and better yeast used at it recommended range

I also believe that Palmer is a great resource for a brewer who is interested in getting into the hobby (and those of us who already are), I don't however think its a whole lot of use to hand to a potential brewer who is about to wield the tin opener on their first kit beer... once they start to love the hobby and want to do more and better... then Palmer.


----------



## warra48 (11/2/08)

Here's another one that's frequently trotted out as gospel:

Fly sparging will always give better efficiency than batch sparging.


----------



## gregb (11/2/08)

"Throw away the kit yeast"

This one probably has its roots in the Supermarket kits. It is no longer an absolute. Some kits (ESB 3kg, Coopers Premium etc to name a few) do in fact come with specially selected quality yeasts. So for me it is a 'sometimes' that it gets the flick. 

Cheers,
Greg


----------



## newguy (11/2/08)

PistolPatch said:


> I really hate the way that Papazzian writes but it is a hell of a lot easier to understand than the above for a beginner.



When I started brewing, there was no local club that I could consult. The only books I had were Papazian's first two, and that was it. Although Papazian has a style of writing that puts you at ease and gives you the confidence to try things for yourself, I really hate some of the (mis)information in his books.

Some examples:

1. Homebrewers can't use twist-off bottles. I'd like to kick him in the nuts for this one. I'm Canadian and the "normal" beer bottle here is a 341ml long neck brown twist-off. Unless I fork out $$$ for imports with pop tops, twist-offs are the only bottles available here. What *really* gets me is when Canadians send entries down to US competitions. The judges will often take one look at the bottle and mentally ask "why did this retard use a twist-off? Everyone knows they don't work." This equates to rather poor marks for the entry and some pretty snarky remarks regarding the bottle. Twist-offs have a flat mouth which means a rather large contact area with the cap = better seal. Pop tops have a curved mouth which means a rather small contact area with the cap = poorer seal.

2. Ol' Chuck's advice that you should just pour boiling hot wort into a glass carboy. What the hell was he thinking? Thermal shock anyone?

3. His "zapap" lauter tun design. It was my first lauter tun, and for the 15-20 batches I used it, I never had a runoff that didn't stick.

I think that for a beginner who has support from other experienced brewers, Papazian's books are fine. The experienced brewers can temper the contents of the book so that the newbie doesn't try dangerous things like dumping hot wort into a cold glass carboy. For inexperienced brewers without support, Papazian's books just aren't worth the risk.


----------



## matti (11/2/08)

PP.
the 2 examples you mentioned are not myths they are recommendations.......

Though HSA, No chill, and BIAB I will not give any advice on..... any more..... B) 

I am confident though that 95% of my advice will improve your final product.
Reason is-> it has improved my brewing.

Though I will not claim it is the only way.
Glad to see you back in full force, PAT.


----------



## PistolPatch (11/2/08)

matti. Only have time to watch here now while chewing on Fent's popcorn - lol! Great to see that you and a few others haven't missed the point though - donya!


----------



## Batz (11/2/08)

Sparging too hot will cause tannin extraction....BS


Batz


----------



## Screwtop (11/2/08)

warra48 said:


> Here's another one that's frequently trotted out as gospel:
> 
> Fly sparging will always give better efficiency than batch sparging.



Always - gives better efficiency on my kit, with all malts.

A lot of myths are perpetuated due to the fact that brewers make such blanket statements.



Gryphon Brewing said:


> Personaly I have never read Palmers book so I cant comment on the content but I know its not a recommended text for brewing studies.Its a case of horses for courses.If a new brewer can work out whats going on from the text all well and good.We all learn at different levels so if it teaches you what you want to know then its valuable.From what I have seen on this thread it may be confusing to some.Another storm in a tea cup as far as I can see.Better to brew than to debate the worth of a book.In the end you are "all" right just depends on were your coming from.Oil on the water.
> GB



I agree, doubt JP ever intended his book be used as a study text. Surely any reasonable home brewer would realise that technical content contained in books such as palmers and articles from Graham Saunders etc are only of benefit to those who can grasp/understand the processes. There would be a vast variation of experience within the homebrewing community, I believe that is a given. All study text is dependent upon the explanation/assistance of lecturers and practical experience. Fully understanding technical text is difficult unless one has some understanding of the process due to related study or training. Hopefully those finding the going difficult with texts such as Palmers etc would seek out some help from an experienced source. None of this stuff is rocket science, sure you would all agree, it's all a piece of cake - once you have done it, surely water treatment is the same. Also to be discussing water treatment and newcomers is a little futile.

Glad to see that Pat has found himself a guru. I've received a lot of help and information from this forum and from individuals and professionals, all have helped me in learning about brewing, and all the help has been equally valuable. 

Screwy


----------



## Fents (11/2/08)

PistolPatch said:


> matti. Only have time to watch here now while chewing on Fent's popcorn - lol! Great to see that you and a few others haven't missed the point though - donya!



oi we have discussed this! you can only eat popcorn if your watching from the sidelines and not in the actual making of the movie  

Throw the kit yeast away (unless the kit is supplied with "specialty" yeast) and dont ferment over 25c.

Sometimes shit happens, i've been brewing for close on 5 years now (3years kits/partials, 2 years AG) and in all that time i have not gotten of my lazy arse and purchased a ferm fridge or a fridgemate. Melb gets hot, my brew room gets hot sometimes i try and Kombat it (the heat) and sometimes i dont. Some of my beers turn out a little more fruity than others and sometimes they dont.

Best example i have is the kolsch i did for the last swap - very very unforgiving style of beer to brew in 25-30c temp's. But i've never poured someone a beer that was undrinkable - never...so thats good enough for me.

I also know someone else who ferments uncontrolled and he's yet to poor me an undrinkable beer. 

That said im purchasing a fridgemate soon.

As for palmers - who needs that when i have this place to ask questions.


----------



## warrenlw63 (11/2/08)

Big Myth;

Homebrewers are a humble lot.  

Warren -


----------



## braufrau (11/2/08)

PistolPatch said:


> *Kit Brewers Should Ferment Ales at 18 Degrees:* This is gospel but the best kit brews I have ever had were all done in uncontrolled fermentation conditions and these were usually quite hot. These beers had no kit twang at all which is something I never came close to in my kit days which were ultra-clean and controlled!!! InCider brewed his beers in a tin shed in QLD. Katie and Lloyd were under similiar conditions. Two other brewers (not on the forum) also fermented at higher and uncontrolled conditions.



Actually the advice should be the same for everyone ... brew at 18C if you want to miss out on a lot of the yeast flavour profile.


----------



## braufrau (11/2/08)

Stuster said:


> No, of course some of the advice I give will be wrong. But I hope that more of it is useful than not. And that the stuff that's not will hopefully be picked up by other posters or ignored by the OP.



Hey Stuster ... HWMBO is drinking the BPA you suggested I make with my westmalle yeast.
Now that was good advice. It turned out really well. Its a really nice style!

myth 1: no chill will kill you
It was no-chill! and HWMBO looks pretty healthy to me.

myth 2: pilsener based beers will stink of DMS if no-chilled
No smell of vegies in this beer!

myth 3: no chilling in the kettle will kill you even faster!
see myth 1.


----------



## justsomeguy (11/2/08)

Ok,

Here's my dodgy testing results related to temperature of kits.

Back when I was doing kit beers I brewed one kit which stayed below 20C for the whole time and another that went right up to 30c. Same kits, same yeast. The temp was the difference between the two, well, apart from the usual unknowns in some pretty dodgy experiments. They both tasted pretty similar. The hotter one was more fruity, more flavour to it. Even I could tell it and I hadn't been brewing for all that long so didn't know what to look for. The biggest difference between the two was the day after. The headache from the hotter batch was a shocker. It took me a while to finally understand what was happening. After a little research I discovered that yeast produces fusels at higher temps and these cause headaches. Well I had a perfect example of that !

How's that for an example of the 'pitch at 18' myth ? Maybe the recommendation is 18 so that you don't produce a headache beer.

I've also just finished brewing two batches of an english mild with the difference being the fermentation temperature. All the literature said the english yeasts need around 22c to produce the fruit flavours. One was brewed at 18 and the other 22 with a Wyeast Whitbread yeast. This wasn't a split batch unfortunately so the test parameters weren't identical for each batch. They were reasonably close though. The difference. Warmer batch is more flavourful with more fruitiness to it. I got SWMBO to compare the two and she reckoned the warmer batch tastes better. Can't argue with SWMBO. She knows nothing about beer. I simply asked her which one she preferred the taste of. Didn't tell her which was which though.

As PP originally indicated, try some experiments for yourself and see what results you get. If you get the same results as the books, well 'great', if not, then you have a question as to 'why'. Even if your results don't match the 'expected' results at least you have brewed and improved your knowledge/technique/etc, even just a tiny bit.

gary


----------



## Stuster (11/2/08)

braufrau said:


> Hey Stuster ... HWMBO is drinking the BPA you suggested I make with my westmalle yeast.
> Now that was good advice. It turned out really well. Its a really nice style!



 :beer:


----------



## Zizzle (11/2/08)

I think the biggest problem is that homebrewers often don't really follow the scientific method.

They change 12 things at once but claim to know the one thing that made this beer better than the others.

Taste can also be affected by what you know about the beer. Blind tasting is essential.


----------



## drag (11/2/08)

1.Since going to controlled ferment, I have had to replace the missing fruity flavours with hop additions.
2.All malt gets you a better tasting beer. Again having to add hops to balance to my taste liking.
So by telling every new person to ferment @ 18deg and only use all malt and no dextrose may not be to everyones liking.


----------



## newguy (11/2/08)

Zizzle said:


> I think the biggest problem is that homebrewers often don't really follow the scientific method.



Amen.

My most noticeable leap in quality came when I managed to sort out my astringency problem by adjusting the pH of my water. Once I sorted that out, I was able to concentrate on recipes - varying one ingredient from batch to batch to see its effect. Having my HERMS definitely helps too, as it eliminates quite a few variables because it is completely consistent time & time again.

At the moment I'm conducting an experiment regarding lagers & warm fermentation temperatures. I'm repeating the experiment 3x with 2 different yeasts to make sure that what I'm observing is true and not a fluke.


----------



## brettprevans (11/2/08)

Chuck Kit Yeast
Dont agree. I stash it away to make bread with! Unless its a top quality yeast (muntons etc) I wouldnt think about using kit yeast in my beer. Life is too short not to go out and use the best yeast available. and theres so many types to play with. 

Palmers a need to read for beginners
I got to say Im not wrapped with Palmers. Yeah its ok but as a real simpole beginners K&K book, the brewcraft book (ignore all the product placement) is quite good for a brand new brewer. Palmers should be read at some stage in the brewing process, but could be a little daunting for someone who wants to do K&K. I agree with Thirsty Boy. Actually AHB is better than most of the printed resources ive read. 

Temp doesnt matter
Crap! temp and better yeast are the 2 easiest and best tips you can give someone (and sanatisation, so 3). The K&K I brewed 10 years ago I now know why they tasted the way they did (bloody Coopers instructions). Even now I can tell the differance in my own beers if the temp hasnt been in the best range for that yeast. Note I say temp is yeast specific, obviously some beers require a higher temp (belgians etc) and yes some use sugar (another chinese whisper topic).

Extract Twang
I have never tasted extract twang in any of my extract beers. Kit yes but pure DME no. my extract beers are the cleanest tasting beers Ive made. I have also made a couple of cracking K&K with no twang or 'typical' kit flavours. It can be avoided.

Dont use sugar
Yes avoid table sugar as a fermentable unless you know what your doing with it. Even then it doesnt feature as the main fermentable (Im fairly sure). 

Pistol Patch just rants and raves  
Personally I find some of PP posts very informative and worth reading., yes they are long and sometimes I cant be arsed reading it, so I dont. if you dont like it dont read it! christ how many of you can tell me that your Uni text books werent long and sometimes boring or didnt interest you? you stil read them cause they were useful.

wow this is such a monday morning topic.


----------



## bconnery (11/2/08)

Well I would start by saying that it shouldn't be 18, I usually say 'as close to 20 as you can manage...', but of course it depends on the beer and the yeast...

Anyways, what I was really going to say was that I think the issue goes even wider. 
I don't think there is a single brewing 'fact' that I haven't heard or read of examples where someone is doing exactly not that and brewing ok. Maybe not as well they can or should, but producing drinkable beer. 
There are definitely things that I think are more definite or closer to true but there seem to be very very few absolutes in this game...

So maybe the phrase should be "All brewing myths are false, but some are more false than others"...

Something to think about anyways...


----------



## Wrenny (11/2/08)

Interesting topic. 

I think it's great that PP is asking the question. Are we passing on information that we know to be true, or just what we have been told which may be wrong?

The answer you give will depend on where you are at, how experienced you think you are. This is my view as a fairly inexperienced brewer. There are two opposing poles, and a range of possibilities in between. Believe what you are told or read - or ditch everything and set about proving everything yourself. 

Ideally, we would believe nothing, and set about proving it all ourselves. But this is a mountain of work, built up over thousands of years. The other end of the spectrum is just as impossible, because some of the information is so contradictory, that you cannot accept it all.


Somewhere in the middle then - pick your battles and prove or disproove certain aspects for yourself.

Unfortunatly, I am nowhere near a good enough brewer to be able to prove even the basic assumptions. I cannot get a consistent brew from one to the next. There are too many variables that I do not have sufficient control over yet. So maybe I should leave this debate to the more experienced brewers. But I'd even say that most brewers do not have the right equipment to get difinitive results

Which leaves me having to trust at least some of what I am told or read. Then, when my father in law says that he needs a heating pad to brew his beers when he lives in central queensland, do I correct him or not? In that case, I said that he may want to brew a bit cooler than 28 degrees, and referred him to Palmer.

As others have said, the best way for me or any other intermediate brewers, is to listen to everything the more experienced people have to say, read whatever I can, listen to the odd basic brewing podcast and use some of this information to make better beer.

When the information is contradictory, maybe this is the time for experimenting. But this leads me back to my problem of too many uncontrolled variables. I can still experiment, though, I just cannot be completely sure of the results.

Perhaps this is a best way of experimenting for me at the moment. Muddle through it, trying ideas and seeing what works and what doesn't. But in the end, all I'll be able to say is that some technique in the past may have made better beer for me. I still won't be able to tell someone "Do this because it always works and it is right."


As for Palmer, I'm a big fan. It's not a narrative that is supposed to be read from cover to cover (although many people, including myself have). It's a reference book that I can refer to about a specific aspect. It is also great to cross reference and confirm or debunk what someone may have told me.


So if I had to make one point in relation to PP's initial post it would be this. Don't be afraid to pass on information that you are fairly confident about, even if you don't know it to be absolute truth. I have only got to where I am today thanks to the wealth of information. Obvious misinformation is quickly shot down by the peer-review nature of this forum. Less clear cut information - well that's up to the user to decide. There is no perfect system in this imperfect world. For me, getting things right by slow degrees is all part of the process, and part of the fun.

But at the same time (okay, two points), I would encourage experienced brewers who can control all of the variables except the one that they are testing, to experiment away, and add their findings to the pool of information. Then I can try it, see if it works for me, see if it suits me and decided whether or not to add it to my process. Batch sparging in an esky and no chill (yes, I'm a fan) are two examples of this.


Cheers,
Wrenny


----------



## barry2 (11/2/08)

Myth ? Dont brew the kit can contents with sugar only.

I did this only once and didn't like the thin flavour and it was brewing sugar too.
Then I met someone at the Coles homebrew counter who has been brewing with just the kit and table sugar for years and has a stock of 300 longnecks of the stuff.

So I don't think I have busted that myth?

I have found Palmer's book very useful and on Wednesday will be brewing for the first time without using the can contents.Just a simple ale using -LDME,Dextrose,Maltodextrin,500g of a few grains ,hops and US05.However I have found AussieHomeBrewer even more helpful.

Myth ? Bottled brews improve with age.

I think this is true on my K&K brews up to six months.I left a few bottles for 10 months and they were past their best.

Myth not busted in all cases ?


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (11/2/08)

I heard that BIAB, No Chill with airlock method produces good beer.......


----------



## Darren (11/2/08)

Storing unfermented no-chill is a good idea  

cheers

Darren


----------



## Jye (11/2/08)

goatherder said:


> I don't see the need to dumb everything down for beginners.



+1, Brewers come here to *learn*!



PistolPatch said:


> ROFL! Haven't had a chance to *read all the above fully* but I have read a few over the phone to one person who I know, KNOWS about brewing. It ended up that we were both falling about!



Pat I think you need to do a bit more read and a little less posting before you start calling other brewers opinions stupid.


----------



## Bionikal (11/2/08)

Im a new brewer (3rd batch is going down today YAY!)

Im a stubborn guy

here's where it gets messy 


I don't have a fridge controller or decent temp control setup, I'm going on the "she'll be right" method. I DO wrap my brew in a wet towel and pour icy water over it but it has got pretty hot a few days, its averaging about 22degrees (low of 18 top of 26).

I'll be the first to admit that i don't know squat about brewing a decent beer, my first batch was pretty average, drinkable but nothing to write home about. The second batch (totally different style) tastes ridiculously similar out of the fermenter (still to be bottled) so i dont know weather my tastebuds are dead/numb or my method sucks.

Will I suddenly change my method and do everything by the books? HELL NO! Will i keep playing around and trying new things? Of course!

I think alot of you guys get caught up in the 'by the books' method and cling to the 'if it ain't broken don't fix it'. I'm the kind of person that will do it different every single time, write down what worked and what sucked and then change everything again. with my last brew i used honey as a priming sugar in some of the bottles and it was the best 3 beers of the batch by far.

I'm not saying throw out your yeasts and start brewing upside down, just mix things up a bit and do things a bit 'out there' or different every now and then.


** disclaimer, i am not responsible if your brews turn out like crap ( like mine) because of this.


----------



## KoNG (11/2/08)

I found Palmer quite helpful when learning _how to brew_, i cant say its better or worse than other books to introduce people to the craft, but it certainly helped me. So for that reason i would recommend it...
I cant really go recommending anything else, because i haven't read them. But like all things learning, take information on board and then form your own thoughts and opinions.


----------



## Sammus (11/2/08)

Myth: No-chill will kill you.

This is the biggest myth of all! The truth is that it CAN (not will) kill you, it's just such a small chance that it hasn't happened yet 

edit: haha I should practice what I preach.. no more no chill comments I promise


----------



## pint of lager (11/2/08)

Not too many years ago, most brewing information was disseminated via clubs and books.

Then along came the net. All of a sudden the information transfer exploded. We had sites like the American Homebrew Digest and our local craftbrewer.org Now we have forum based information. It is no longer a case of Chinese whispers. Any information is reviewed and commented upon by the brewing community.

The real answer to most brewing questions is, it depends. There are so many variables. Which is why ask 10 brewers a question and you get 20 answers.

Some people need their information in one syllable words. Others manage to make their search engine jump through hoops. So the answer to one person won't work for another. There are so many articles and sites on brewing on the web.

With new brewers, I always try and stick to KIS, answer what they are asking and then provide a little bit more information to lead them onwards.

This is a brewers' forum, sometimes people don't agree with the information posted, so the information ends up being peer reviewed.

In Graham Sanders defence, he was part of the founding trio of craftbrewer.org. His posts were usually very in depth and full of information. He freely admitted to his extraordinary extraction figures and the reason behind it. 

In defence of the humble zapap. I think most people didn't use a controllable tap, just an on/off snap tap, which will lead to stuck sparges. Also, the open space ratio was usually way too low, not enough holes.

Everyone needs to keep thinking and talking about why they should adopt some of the commercial brewing methods and what ones they can throw out. How to avoid HSA. When to filter and when to leave the beers alone. Why cold conditioning can be a very bad move. How to improve their next brew. Why it is, the process is usually more important than the recipe. Should they decoct. Should they worry about pH. What is the right grain:water ratio in the mash tun. What is the right temperature for a particular yeast.


----------



## Trough Lolly (11/2/08)

PistolPatch said:


> ROFL! Haven't had a chance to read all the above fully but I have read a few over the phone to one person who I know, KNOWS about brewing. It ended up that we were both falling about!
> 
> This brewer has qualifications falling out their ears and the other brewers who have been through the same training refer to this brewer when they have a problem - something I only know about second-hand. So, I think I have proof that my original question wasn't too stupid. I can see that a few replies above also thankfully reflect this :icon_cheers:
> 
> ...



<_< 

Perhaps it's because it's Monday, but I don't get you Pat? Any information, regardless of its supposed source or attribution, can be questioned - that's what Science and free thinking is all about... If you don't believe that brewing an ale at 18C is the best temp for a particular yeast, then don't do it. If you think that Palmer's online book is not worth reading, then don't do it. If any and all of the advice that most of us have given out freely and with good intention is allegedly shite or to quote you more accurately, _stupid_, then ignore it.

Nobody, including so-called self appointed brewing guru's know all there is to brewing - and those who say they do are simply talking crap and are unwittingly the worst offenders. Like other brewers, I learned the basics through trial and error and it wasn't until I realised that online resources existed and the local brewing club was an excellent source of practical knowledge and hands-on experience that my brewed beer actually improved. At one stage I stopped brewing for a couple of years thinking that it was all too hard to get something that tasted half decent - because I didn't bother to ask questions.

Sure, I've been as guilty as anyone that some of my thoughts and comments were inaccurate, flawed or just plain wrong - but I didn't kill anyone by having a go. I was trying to return the favour that many brewers freely gave me when I was "lost" in the brewing wilderness. The fact remains that information and resources such as this forum give you information en masse - what you do with that information is entirely up to you.

To in any way, shape or form criticise those who willingly pass on ideas whether based on their own experience or what they honestly believe to be true and of use to others, is in my opinion, less than gracious.

TL


----------



## KoNG (11/2/08)

Trough Lolly said:


> <_<
> 
> Perhaps it's because it's Monday, but I don't get you Pat?
> 
> TL



 ... maybe we could start a "register"...?


----------



## Simon W (11/2/08)

Sorry Pat, but you're most recent post in this thread has me scratching my head.... it's possible that it wasn't intentional but to me your post reads as condescending and elitist, it seems that this thread was created so you can sit back with your popcorn(?) and have a giggle about how 'stupid' some AHB members are? Rather childish don't you think?


----------



## sinkas (11/2/08)

What is Australian Brewing world?

I dont really see what was so funny about the first dozen or so posts.. maybe I should have a few beers then re-read them.

I think as long as the intention of the advice you are giving to a fellow brewer is in the spirit of them making better beer, then it doesnt really matter if there is any evidence to support it, its only a hobby.


----------



## Screwtop (11/2/08)

Trough Lolly said:


> <_<
> 
> Perhaps it's because it's Monday, but I don't get you Pat? Any information, regardless of its supposed source or attribution, can be questioned - that's what Science and free thinking is all about... If you don't believe that brewing an ale at 18C is the best temp for a particular yeast, then don't do it. If you think that Palmer's online book is not worth reading, then don't do it. If any and all of the advice that most of us have given out freely and with good intention is allegedly shite or to quote you more accurately, _stupid_, then ignore it.
> 
> ...



I know it's almost a PP length post - BUT.........+1


----------



## Zizzle (11/2/08)

Simon W said:


> Sorry Pat, but you're most recent post in this thread has me scratching my head.... it's possible that it wasn't intentional but to me your post reads as condescending and elitist, it seems that this thread was created so you can sit back with your popcorn(?) and have a giggle about how 'stupid' some AHB members are? Rather childish don't you think?



Well put. I had this feeling too but didn't know how to say it, or if it would be interpreted as a flame.

Looking at Pat's post again, he seems to take on some adversarial tones. Implying that there is one pure truth, that he knows, and that us poor dummies just need to see the light. That this is some sort of theatre and one provides proof to one-up his advesaries and be crowned "right".



PistolPatch said:


> I can also see that several of the above answers are stupid if read in context to the original question as it is a question which begs proof.



I myself didn't see any stupid posts. I don't think there are any stupid people here. Are the stupid ones the ones that don't agree with the original post?

In any case, calling people stupid on a public forum can only lower the tone of the debate, discourage disenting views, creating a community of "group think" or an ivory tower.



PistolPatch said:


> I can only see 3 or 4 good replies so far.



i.e. only 3 or 4 posts have agreed with the premise? The ones that don't are unenlightened crap?

I disagree. I think the disenting opinions are the worthwhile ones. The "me too"s are much less interesting.



PistolPatch said:


> There was one particularly good one and no one has backed him up



Why can't a post stand on it's own merits? Why do we need these tribes of people who engange in "group think" to go around backing each other up. 

I for one would hate for the mentality of AHB to go in that direction. I like that beer and good taste are completely subjective. I like it that you may call my beer crap, but if I like it, that is all that matters. I like being able to visit the forums, offer an opinion, offer what has worked for me, and not be attacked for being right or wrong. I like not needing to be backed up, not needing to one-up someone, not needing to provide proof. How do you prove that you like your own beer?


----------



## Batz (11/2/08)

Darren said:


> Storing unfermented no-chill is a good idea
> 
> cheers
> 
> Darren




:lol: :lol: :lol: 

Stirrer

Batz


----------



## PistolPatch (11/2/08)

Whoops! Knew I didn't do enough morning edits today  

I thought everyone here knew to ignore anything I write after 9pm! I apologise about the "stupid." comment which was over the top and purely due to me reading from a very narrow angle - probably slightly tilted as well 

Lots of interesting reading above so thanks for ignoring my stupid writing and the rather belligerent bits about Palmer - appreciated.

One thing I didn't explain properly was the Chinese whispers bit. I was wondering if Palmer's original text was a lot simpler and was read by most of the older brewers here? Has his more recent additions got more and more detailed?

It's good to see that a few new guys have found the text helpful. I do use sections of it myself and would recommend sections to beginners but not the whole book. Mind you, a great and not insignificant point mentioned here that I had forgotten is that it is free.

Anyway I'd be interested if anyone had an answer to my question above.

I thought I wrote the kit yeast question pretty clearly but apparently not. I'll have another crack...

"Assuming a new brewer wishes to use the yeast that comes with a kit, what temperature should they really brew it at?"

As I said, I'm unsure of the right answer as the few and only good kit beers I have tasted were brewed at higher temps. (One I think was done at 18 but still had a slight twang.)

I think that was why I was bit belligerent as no one last night had addressed that question and I was actually pretty keen for an answer.

Cheers from AHB's sometimes belligerent poster,
Pat

P.S. for Moderators: Temps here over 37 for the rest of the week so please delete all my posts after 9pm


----------



## Insight (11/2/08)

Trough Lolly said:


> <_<
> 
> Perhaps it's because it's Monday, but I don't get you Pat? Any information, regardless of its supposed source or attribution, can be questioned - that's what Science and free thinking is all about... If you don't believe that brewing an ale at 18C is the best temp for a particular yeast, then don't do it. If you think that Palmer's online book is not worth reading, then don't do it. If any and all of the advice that most of us have given out freely and with good intention is allegedly shite or to quote you more accurately, _stupid_, then ignore it.
> 
> ...



I thought the same when I read Pete's post this morning. Why would you invite people to post their opinions on a topic and then laugh at their "stupid" posts with your mentor who "KNOWS" brewing? 

Pete, people who know you personally may have taken this differently, but for those of us who don't you come across as an elitist, a troll, and kind of a twat. Good luck with your brewing.


----------



## wambesi (11/2/08)

PistolPatch said:


> I thought I wrote the kit yeast question pretty clearly but apparently not. I'll have another crack...
> 
> "Assuming a new brewer wishes to use the yeast that comes with a kit, what temperature should they really brew it at?"



When I started someone (can't for the life remember who) told me that it was not the fermentation temperature that was so important but, the stability of the temp I should keep steady.
I have seen my beers get better since getting temp control but I have also done the 12 other odd changes at the same time so hard to tell


----------



## Darren (11/2/08)

Temp control is the be-all and end-all of good final product. Yeast makes the beer not the mash (ducks for cover)

cheers

Darren


----------



## MHB (11/2/08)

> QUOTE (PistolPatch @ Feb 11 2008, 06:43 PM)
> I thought I wrote the kit yeast question pretty clearly but apparently not. I'll have another crack...
> 
> "Assuming a new brewer wishes to use the yeast that comes with a kit, what temperature should they really brew it at?"



View attachment 17683



17-30 C 

MHB


----------



## Batz (11/2/08)

You can brew half decent beer without a March Pump.

Carbonation caps work.

Boiling in aluminum can cause you to.....sorry can't remember how that one goes now.

Batz


----------



## Darren (11/2/08)

Batz said:


> Carbonation caps work.
> 
> Batz




Now that is a myth


----------



## haysie (11/2/08)

Insight said:


> I thought the same when I read Pete's post this morning. Why would you invite people to post their opinions on a topic and then laugh at their "stupid" posts with your mentor who "KNOWS" brewing?
> 
> Pete, people who know you personally may have taken this differently, but for those of us who don't you come across as an elitist, a troll, and kind of a twat. Good luck with your brewing.





:lol: 

so true

what forums are about?, having an opinion within reason, seeking help and advice, helping others and offering advice,
too many times some folk critisize for the sake of their own ego and forgetting the person whom may well be genuine in his her request for advice.
so many times i see 1st posters welcomed, applauded for the ventures into brewing, only the next day too see somebody ask a question and may only have a few a/g`s on his signature, and he gets torched..... never too return. Melodrama? not at all IMO, i think moderators should get tougher.
Now torch me :lol:


----------



## kook (12/2/08)

PistolPatch said:


> I can also see that several of the above answers are stupid if read in context to the original question as it is a question which begs proof.
> 
> As for Palmer and waiting until Chapter 15, I just looked up Chapter 1. People say I write long posts. Find one post I have written as long as this  and gives less practical, easy to read advice. And, that is just page 1 of Palmer!



Pat, I don't think you're looking at the same book as me. The introduction is just that, an introduction to the book and the author. Chapter 1 starts here in the book (3rd edition):

http://www.howtobrew.com/section1/chapter1.html

It may not read as easy on the internet, but in the book it flows well and has pictures to guide you along the way.

I don't know why I'm even bothering to reply to this thread if you feel that your fellow brewers input is "stupid" and good for a laugh.



Gryphon Brewing said:


> Personaly I have never read Palmers book so I cant comment on the content but I know its not a recommended text for brewing studies.



It's not intended that way Neville. But books like Technology Brewing and Malting and De Clerck's Textbook certainly aren't intended for new-intermediate homebrewers either.


----------



## mikelinz (12/2/08)

Yup, so can drinking tap water, it is just very, very, very unlikley.



Sammus said:


> Myth: No-chill will kill you.
> 
> This is the biggest myth of all! The truth is that it CAN (not will) kill you, it's just such a small chance that it hasn't happened yet
> 
> edit: haha I should practice what I preach.. no more no chill comments I promise


----------



## PistolPatch (12/2/08)

Looks like a few people missed my apology above.

There were a few replies that missed the point early in the thread. There were only a couple, not lots like I stated and I called them stupid. That was dumb. I am not calling brewers here stupid.

Why I was laughing on the phone that night was because we were chatting about stupid things that are handed on with authority. I gave some examples of things that I handed on in a similiar manner in my earlier brewing days. So I was laughing at myself as well. It was funny but wrote that post very badly.

My Fents popcorn post did not mean to imply that I was sitting here laughing at people's replies. I was trying to say in a funny way that I didn't have time to write.

Anyway, I stuffed up. Thanks to those of you who have seen that and then graciously continued to offer valuable stuff here. As for others who can't accept my apology, I know several of you guys enjoy these opportunities so please feel free to capitilise on my errors and have yourselves some fun eh?

The rest of you who can see the one or two valid questions I was trying to ask, I'll keep looking forward to *your* answers.

:icon_cheers: 
Pat


----------



## staggalee (12/2/08)

PistolPatch said:


> Looks like a few people missed my apology above.
> 
> There were a few replies that missed the point early in the thread. There were only a couple, not lots like I stated and I called them stupid. That was dumb. I am not calling brewers here stupid.
> 
> ...


With the upcoming Olympics,we should be trying to enter a new event-Backpedalling.
There could be a Gold on the horizon there.  

stagga.


----------



## Simon W (12/2/08)

staggalee said:


> With the upcoming Olympics,we should be trying to enter a new event-Backpedalling.
> There could be a Gold on the horizon there.
> 
> stagga.



ROFL, now _thats_ gold!


----------



## lucas (12/2/08)

PistolPatch said:


> Whoops! Knew I didn't do enough morning edits today
> 
> I thought everyone here knew to ignore anything I write after 9pm! I apologise about the "stupid." comment which was over the top and purely due to me reading from a very narrow angle - probably slightly tilted as well


I think the mods need to implement a system where posts by pat made between 9pm and 7am are not publicly viewable until he's made his edit... then again, perhaps he could start thinking before he posted and then wouldnt need to edit every post


----------



## PistolPatch (16/2/08)

OK I think that all of what I call, 'the pack,' has followed their leader now. TroughLolly is not part of the pack by the way and and was totally correct to pull me up on my very poorly written posts. TroughLolly is always correct in his posts. He is a great bloke though I have only talked to him on the phone - never met him unfortunately.

For those of you who know me and know that I am far from an elitist troll, you may find the following interesting. I would certainly advise you not to post back here though. (Seriously guys, this thread is shot. Just leave it for a while and then post a new topic or append to an existing thread.)

For the genuine AHBrs here is some interesting stuff...

On the brewing myths subject, tonight I found out by chatting on the phone to some brewers...

a) Ale Brewers in Perth or Anywhere in Aust Should Really Concentrate on pH: Perth water has a pH of around 8 I think. This brewer has multiple medals for ales and uses the same city water as I do. He has NEVER adjusted for pH. The best thing about this brewer is that he is not interested in the fact that he is a medal winner.

We always chat from the point of view that we know nothing. Wasn't going to say his name but, bugger it, RandyRob is the man. Sorry Randy, if I have set the pack on you too!

Mind you, when we start to crack lagers and pilseners then we wil be studying pH heavily!

B) Temperature Control Using A Kit Ale Yeast - Just thought I would try and slip this one in here as it was one of my original questions. MHB did us proud by actually posting the specs. Did anyone see that? A very On Topic and helpful post. My question for Mark now is, "Do you think fermenting that yeast at say 24-25 would assist in eating up any kit twang?" Love to know the answer.

c) Haze - A lot of people have been having problems with haze lately. One brewer who is a lot better than I in keeping brewing notes has absolutely no explanation for it. He always has brewed sensitive beers but lately they all have haze. The only explanation I have found is that recently, malsters have found it very hard to find good malt. They pay higher prices but the malted barley they get is far worse than they were able to get a year ago. I only heard this a few days ago but I think it is very important info. I'd really like to name and credit this person but whilst, 'the pack,' and their leader have me in their sights, this is not possible.

So, these are a few things I find interesting just today. Due to the pack though I can't really see me taking the risk of starting a new thread here on any of the above subjects. No matter the logic of what I post, recent history shows that the pack will attack as soon as given permission.

Take care,
Pat

P.S. Thank God I got home today to a nice PM (see below). The pack have taken this thread way outside it's purpose so let me post what I came home to tonight.

Here is the PM I got and I can't tell you how much it was appreciated by me. Can't give him any credit either for fear that he will get noted. Anyway, how nice a PM is the following when the leader and his pack are onto you such as in this thread?

_Patch, Wanted to drop you a line to tell you it's a shame you got hung out to dry in your "Chinese Whispers" post. Brilliant concept just a shame it became a slanging session where people could take you out of context and sensationalise on it. A real shame that this is happening on such a great forum, may be it's just a really grass roots example of social evolution. Once upon a time men went to the pub drank beer and discussed controversial issuesand on the odd occasion it ended up in a scrap now we drink beer get on forums and make nasty comments (maybe I am starting to take this forum to seriously).

Any way mate I wanted to find out about your BIAB'ing. I now have a few BIAB's under my belt and a few AG's with my Clayton's 3 vessel system. From the beer I have tasted (my own and other brewers), I can not fault BIAB. From what I have read you and many other brewers are producing high quality beer from this highly unconventional process. Has any body ever brewed a competition winning BIAB? The process is out there, the results speak for themselves. What are the major problems with BIAB?

I have just finished a 14 hour night shift and am well into a session on an Aussie IPA (40 ibu pure POR super.gif), so consider this one of those after 9pm messages. I would hate to be taken out of context.


Give it Large, XXXXX _


P.S. So there you go. Anyway, the first thing I did when I got home tonight was spent a lot of time writing to and thanking XXXX. He makes sense and it meant a hell of a lot to me. If he wants to post my reply, I would advise him to wait. (Of course, it's a very long one!) Anyway XXXX I'll leave it up to you old son but feel free to use it!

"The pack." has pretty unmercifully attacked and misrepresented me in this thread (with some reason - I admitted and explained my error) and in other threads with no reason at all where I actually did no wrong at all apart from challenging a brewing given or a given retailer.

Whilst I and my mates here on AHB have no chance against stupidity from a pack, I/we really appreciate it when someone like XXXX above writes. So please send us a PM!

As for, 'the pack', before you jump in and attack my post above, why not try and answer at least one of the simple questions I posed above? Why not try the one in B) above? No one else has really cracked that. Not one of you pack has done a thing so far to contribute.

Spot,
Pat

PS To the sincere guys on AHB, I apologise for my recent posts. I think I used to post really well a lot of the time here on AHB. Now I think it is a rare event. I now spend most of my time wondering whether to post or being defensive against the pack - a whole dozen people! I'm not sure how this all came about (I actually do know) but I wish things were like the old days where I could just post a new idea up and just be slightly fearful - lol!

Anyone know which sub-forum one can explain. 'the pack,' and name them? LOL! It's all way beyond me


----------



## Stuster (16/2/08)

a. I agree that it's not a vital first step and that you can certainly brew good (great?) beer without mucking about with water (brewing without water altogether is a different matter  ). It depends on what you're brewing and what water you have though. Personally, I've been mucking about with it and 'think' it's made a difference. But if it's not broken...

b. Sorry, Pat, but I have no idea about using kit yeasts. I just haven't used them since my first few batches so it'd just be a guess. I think that's probably true for a lot of people here and probably why you're getting no answers to your questions about them.

c. It might be due to the malts as you say. From what Wes has been posting, the protein contents are pretty high for many malts ATM. That's most likely the cause of the haze. I'm going to give step mashes a run partly to try to cure that (not that it's that important to me) but mainly just to do something different and so Tangent will stop looking down at me for being a simple single infusion duffer. :lol:


----------



## braufrau (16/2/08)

myth 23c) Kit twang is inevitable ... if you buy fresh extact there is no twang and if you don't believe me read Jamil' book.

Its such a shame that this thread has been hijacked by name callers. It could have been interesting.
I agree with haysie .. the moderators should get tougher. Calling people "twats" for asking a question is not on.

Why don't we try to remember three things ...
* at the end of every post is a human being with feelings.
* every post is open to interpretation; without the benefit of facial expresions its easy to misinterpret what people mean. You should give people the benefit of the doubt. 
* and remember what thumper's father said . "If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all".


----------



## PistolPatch (16/2/08)

Just got up to do my morning edits :blink: I reckon I'm just going to leave everything as it is (though my post above probably need a very heavy edit) and turn my computer off for a few days. Stuster and braufrau, thanks a heap for your posts above. You two always post really well. What's your secret? I desperately need some lessons! Thanks and a big :icon_cheers: to you.


----------



## hughman666 (16/2/08)

one myth that got me for a while was that you needed to have the ability to hold low temps (10-15c range) for lagers, meaning that if you had a 100 can cooler and lived in perth, brissy etc, your temp range was 18c-22c and as a result you were stuck with ales!

this has to be one of the widest spread chinese whispers in the brewing community and its funny because a number of people who have told me this have never actually attempted a higher temp lager.

there are a couple of ways around this, mainly to do with yeast selection.

first, if you're after a more traditional lager, you can use wyeast 2112 which does a great job at 18-20c.

second, you can go for a pseudo lager style. wyeast 2656 is a kolsch yeast, but with the right grain bill and hop choice you can "fool" people into thinking it's actually a lager (well, a few people have picked it for a lager and were quite surprised when i told them it was actually an ale).

so that's my contribution to the topic!


----------



## Screwtop (16/2/08)

PistolPatch said:


> Just got up to do my morning edits :blink: I reckon I'm just going to leave everything as it is (though my post above probably need a very heavy edit) and turn my computer off for a few days. Stuster and braufrau, thanks a heap for your posts above. You two always post really well. What's your secret? I desperately need some lessons! Thanks and a big :icon_cheers: to you.




Here goes again. I posted you a big serve Pat, but it was obviously pulled by a mod. Screamingly funny as it was in regard to my PM to you, might have appeared a bit abusive to those not in the know, you would have gotten a giggle from it, pity. :lol:


----------



## neonmeate (16/2/08)

braufrau said:


> myth 2: pilsener based beers will stink of DMS if no-chilled
> No smell of vegies in this beer!



braufrau which pilsener malt did you use? i abandoned nochilling cause i got particularly bad DMS from weyermann bohemian pilsener when i nochilled it, and also DMS from normal weyermann pilsener. havent had it in the year since (in which most of my brews have been weyermann pils based), so it is not a myth for me.

i would like to see some proper testing done on DMS levels of identical worts chilled and no-chilled.


----------



## Darren (16/2/08)

braufrau said:


> myth 23c) Kit twang is inevitable ... if you buy fresh extact there is no twang and if you don't believe me read Jamil' book.




Braufrau,

In my mind fresh extract is not a "kit".
Kit twang is associated with buying a can off the shelf and following the instructions to the letter. Fermented warm or cool the beer will always be average. Takes a hell lot of dark malt or hops to cover the twang but then the beer is usually out of balance.

cheers

Darren


----------



## MHB (16/2/08)

IMO - "Kit Twang" exists in the mind of elitist AG's and nowhere else.

There you go Pat - that might take some of the heat off you.

Kit twang is a funny one - even trained judges can't find it in blind tastings if they arent told it's there - or if they can it is so trivial that they routinely hand out first places to kit beers in comps.
I believe you can make world class beer from kits and extract; although there are some provisos and limitations that have to be considered.

The main point being; you can't make great beer from cheap/stale/old/damaged extract any more than you could from cheap/stale/old/damaged malt and hops.

There is a characteristic flavour that stale extract develops (I think it's largely from Milliard reactions that happen in the highly concentrated extract much faster than they would in a more dilute wort).
This flavour is distinctive and unpleasant - it isnt present in fresh extract, or fresh kits.
There is also a distinctive musky taint from slack/stale malt that is also unpleasant and like wise - isnt present in fresh malt.

It is as reasonable to say that AG beer tastes Musky because crap malt makes crap beer - as it is to say that the twang is characteristic of kits, because some people use stale extract.

So to answer your question Pat; twang comes from the extract being stale nothing you can do about it - except avoid retailers that sell inferior product.

Good brewers using good ingredients make good beer.
Poor brewing practices, and bad ingredients makes for bad beer.

MHB

I guess I better take out some flame insurance.
Yes an AG brewer can make better beer, because they have a richer more varied pallet to work with.
Having total control doesn't mean its automatic that you will make better beer - you still have to be able to brew.

M


----------



## Darren (16/2/08)

MHB,

I am up for the challenge: I bet I can tell a kit and kilo 9/10 times. I dont know any beer judges who can't so I am unsure where you got your info. Sounds like the sorta thing my HB shop owner told me many years ago. I only made two kits, ten years ago, and I knew if I could not improve the beer it was going to be a waste of time making it because I couldn't drink it.

About two years ago I was the lucky recipient of a "top-of-the-line can". I prepared the beer as per instructions and fermented it a temp controlled fridge. I fully expected to enjoy the beer but again I couldn't drink it and dumped the keg.

just my myth busting thoughts.

cheers

Darren


----------



## Guest Lurker (16/2/08)

No argument there (with MHB, obviously, I always argue with Darren), although I do think AG has an advantage for the palest beers, I could never hit what I was after using the lightest extracts I could find.


----------



## braufrau (16/2/08)

MHB said:


> IMO - "Kit Twang" exists in the mind of elitist AG's and nowhere else.



I used to think that too. I've never detected twang in my beers but a bloke I work with insists
on making beer with a supermarket kit and 1kg of sugar. Nice and strong!  

Anywy, I thought the nasty off flavour in his beer was due to all the sugar but now I read in
"brewing classic styles" that twang is licorice, molasses or ball point pen flavour and that's the 
taste. All three rolled into one!

So I think it occurs ... its just not inevitable.

Well ... it seems I'm just repeating what MHB said anyway.


----------



## braufrau (16/2/08)

neonmeate said:


> braufrau which pilsener malt did you use? i abandoned nochilling cause i got particularly bad DMS from weyermann bohemian pilsener when i nochilled it,



Joe White. I boiled for 90mins to drive off DMS. I wonder if that makes a difference?

I hope it wasn't because I forgot and only boiled my latest brew for 60mins. Fingers crossed.


----------



## Maxt (16/2/08)

It's a very very rare kit beer brought to meetings that I don't find to have the twang. My uncle brews kits but his don't. Not sure why, but probably that he uses very in date cans.

As for PP's edits. A wise friend of mine once told me to write posts/emails that are contentious or cranky, then leave them for a day. If they seem right the next day send them, but most times they were 'heat of the moment' and need to be toned down or just deleted. Very good advice...(which I will try to take myself more often) :lol:


----------



## neonmeate (16/2/08)

braufrau said:


> Joe White. I boiled for 90mins to drive off DMS. I wonder if that makes a difference?
> 
> I hope it wasn't because I forgot and only boiled my latest brew for 60mins. Fingers crossed.



JW pilsener is low in precursor for DMS anyway so the consensus seems to be around here that you can safely nochill with it. Same goes for ale malts as a base. However I have found that with the Euro pilsener malts (which I prefer to use) that DMS is an issue if it sits around after boiling. others on this forum have differed on this point, so i'd like to see some testing done - you could do it for us, you're a biochemist aren't you?


----------



## wessmith (16/2/08)

neonmeate said:


> JW pilsener is low in precursor for DMS anyway so the consensus seems to be around here that you can safely nochill with it. Same goes for ale malts as a base. However I have found that with the Euro pilsener malts (which I prefer to use) that DMS is an issue if it sits around after boiling. others on this forum have differed on this point, so i'd like to see some testing done - you could do it for us, you're a biochemist aren't you?



DMS is going to flash off in the first 20 mins of the (vigorous) boil - but we need to careful of how we define a "boil". Those first 20 to 30 mins should be a "jumping" boil with the wort looking to try and get out of the kettle. If you can only get to a strong simmer, then it will take much longer.

Wes


----------



## sah (16/2/08)

wessmith said:


> DMS is going to flash off in the first 20 mins of the (vigorous) boil - but we need to careful of how we define a "boil". Those first 20 to 30 mins should be a "jumping" boil with the wort looking to try and get out of the kettle. If you can only get to a strong simmer, then it will take much longer.
> 
> Wes



Hi Wes,

On your definition, what percentage boil off are you looking at over 1 hour?

Can you provide any references for DMS gone in 20 mins?

thanks,
Scott


----------



## wessmith (16/2/08)

SAH said:


> Hi Wes,
> 
> On your definition, what percentage boil off are you looking at over 1 hour?
> 
> ...



Yep, minimum 5% but 8-10% more preferable for boil off. As for DMS, try the resulting beer on initial serve - unless youve got some mates at Lidcome/Abbortsford/Yatala with access to the lab.

As another perspective on this DMS thing, most maltsters avoid it like the plague, however some do provide a special malt with the DMS precursors accentuated. A couple come top mind - Bairds and Durst

Wes


----------



## Gerard_M (16/2/08)

Quite a few thousand years ago the Ancient Egyptians built the Pyramids. They kept thousands of worker fed on a fermented beverage made from grain, pretty much an early version of what we call beer. They managed to achieve all of this without the use of the a temp controller, internet or Pro-Mash!

Cheers
Gerard


----------



## sah (16/2/08)

> DMS is going to flash off in the first 20 mins of the (vigorous) boil - but we need to careful of how we define a "boil". Those first 20 to 30 mins should be a "jumping" boil with the wort looking to try and get out of the kettle. If you can only get to a strong simmer, then it will take much longer.



[quote post='286858' date='Feb 16 2008, 06:57 PM']Yep, minimum 5% but 8-10% more preferable for boil off. As for DMS, try the resulting beer on initial serve - unless youve got some mates at Lidcome/Abbortsford/Yatala with access to the lab.

As another perspective on this DMS thing, most maltsters avoid it like the plague, however some do provide a special malt with the DMS precursors accentuated. A couple come top mind - Bairds and Durst[/quote]

Hi Wes, the reason I asked is because I've experimented with my boil vigor over a couple of years. As a base I've always used either JW pilsner, ale or bairds maris otter. I've always smelt DMS during the boil, but I've never tasted it (nor has it been picked up by others) in the finished beer. My kettle is 50L, my initial boil volume is generally between 38 and 41L. I started with about 15% boil off, which is vigorous, jumping and looking to get out of the kettle, and over time I've decreased to just over 5% which can hardly be described as vigorous in my system, in fact it's just breaking the surface.

regards,
Scott


----------



## Darren (16/2/08)

Gerard_M said:


> Quite a few thousand years ago the Ancient Egyptians built the Pyramids. They kept thousands of worker fed on a fermented beverage made from grain, pretty much an early version of what we call beer. They managed to achieve all of this without the use of the a temp controller, internet or Pro-Mash!
> 
> Cheers
> Gerard




After the Egyptians "naturally fermented beer" came the the microscope, scientific principle the industrial revolution, electricity and the internet. Then beer got better (except for those who had no taste buds  )

cheers

darren


----------



## Darren (16/2/08)

SAH,

I always start the boil with lid off (first 20 or so minutes). Never had DMS myself. I have tasted it in one brewers beers in particular. In fact I can identify his beer in a flight of 20 or more beers. Ruins my palette for any other beers I have for the next hour or so. (Its not anyone who posts here)

I wonder if it the result of a "house bug" in this case?

cheers

Darren


----------



## dr K (16/2/08)

What a strange series of posts!
And, what a Strange Name to give this thread.
As much as I would love to know who "the pack" are (and if there are six of them) I may have to live in wonder.
My understanding of the Term, "Chinese Whispers" is that a person will repeat what they thought they heard, and what they thought they heard may not be exactly what was spoken, a domino effect takes place and the final information, having being passed through a number of whisperers is quite different from the original.
In this situation I have no concrete record of what I heard and none either of what I passed on.
In a forum such as this though there is a record, if Joe writes that black is black I may think he said black is white, but a quick flick back will show that I mis read and indeed he did say black is black....UNLESS ...Joe goes back and changes it, the ability to edit your posts is there and I guess a lot of people do so for clarity but to have a serial editor/changer/cutter/slasher be concerned about disinformation via CW is surely the cauldron calling the bone china...you guessed it.
Of course there is a lot of bad advice given with the best intentions out there, forums such as this are a vehicle for such, but forums such as this are a filter for such as well, and might I add, a far better filter than vehicle for bad advice.
Back to initial post and the two great myths upon which homebrewing is based.
Ale Yeast: Brewing at 22 or 26 0r 30C is not going to hurt your yeast but it is going to hurt your beer, if you cannot tell the difference (in your set-up) between Ale brewed at 14C (ambient) and 24C then brew at 24C and enjoy the fruits of your labour. If you can tell the difference then you are well on way, if indeed you are not already there, to making good beer.
Palmer: Possibly the greatest resource known to home brewers worldwide..from your first extract beer on he explains everything carefully, succinctly and accurately from the homebrewers point, further he takes it beyond the basics and introduces some (optional) advanced notions. I have no idea whatsoever if Palmer has even heard of BIAB , let alone taken an interest in BIAB, I guess it would not take a lot find out, would it....

K


----------



## Darren (16/2/08)

dr K said:


> What a strange series of posts!
> And, what a Strange Name to give this thread.
> As much as I would love to know who "the pack" are (and if there are six of them) I may have to live in wonder.
> K




I suspect there are seven now 

cheers

darren


----------



## matti (16/2/08)

> What a strange series of posts!


 :lol: 

That's special drK.


----------



## TidalPete (16/2/08)

dr K said:


> As much as I would love to know who "the pack" are (and if there are six of them) I may have to live in wonder.



Dr K,

I would not know how many there are in the so-called "Pack" but I do know that my relevant post agreeing that there is a "Clique" out there has been pulled. 
How sad is that?  and I further expect this post to be pulled as well.
Democracy hey! :lol: Eat it up while you can.
For all off you who have missed out on my earlier post read my Profile for a good/sad laugh. What a shame that all brewers cannot get on.

TP :beer:


----------



## staggalee (16/2/08)

you can always pm the details of the pack- I`d like to know that myself, and that is a genuine post, not a stir.

stagga.


----------



## TidalPete (16/2/08)

staggalee said:


> you can always pm the details of the pack- I`d like to know that myself, and that is a genuine post, not a stir.
> 
> stagga.



No stirs here stagga.  What price democracy? My original (non-offensive?) post has *GONE*
Very, very, upset here.

TP :beer:


----------



## goomboogo (16/2/08)

I apologise for going off original topic but I'm seeking a clarification. Darren, you stated in an earlier post that you begin the boil with the lid off (first 20 or so minutes). Does this mean that at some other point in the boil you have the lid on?


----------



## TidalPete (17/2/08)

goomboogo said:


> I apologise for going off original topic but I'm seeking a clarification. Darren, you stated in an earlier post that you begin the boil with the lid off (first 20 or so minutes). Does this mean that at some other point in the boil you have the lid on?



goomboogo,

I asked the same question very early in my AG experience. I think that what Darren means is that if you wish to save gas or electricty, leave the lid on the kettle until the boil starts THEN keep it (the lid) off for the duration of the boil.  Is that what you are getting at Darren?


TP :beer:


----------



## Insight (17/2/08)

Whichever mod it is who is deleting posts, would you mind giving us some idea why? I count 7 different people whom you have censored today, most responding to Pat's last rant. Why is Pat's last post calling members of the forum "stupid" (for the second time in this thread) allowed to stand, while our mostly humourous responses are censored?

I respect your right to run the forum in the manner you see fit, but it seems you are playing favourites.


----------



## staggalee (17/2/08)

Insight said:


> Whichever mod it is who is deleting posts, would you mind giving us some idea why? I count 7 different people whom you have censored today, most responding to Pat's last rant. Why is Pat's last post calling members of the forum "stupid" (for the second time in this thread) allowed to stand, while our mostly humourous responses are censored?
> 
> I respect your right to run the forum in the manner you see fit, but it seems you are playing favourites.


Look-I`ve said it before and I`ll say it again {and it wil be deleted again}- just let the bloke from WA have his dummy and everythings jake

stagga.


----------



## goomboogo (17/2/08)

TidalPete,

I was thinking that this was what Darren meant. Early stages with lid on rather than off (not a process I practice). I couldn't see a reason for having a lid on for the majority of the boil - unless you like the possibilty of drinking creamed corn.


----------



## newguy (17/2/08)

wessmith said:


> DMS is going to flash off in the first 20 mins of the (vigorous) boil - but we need to careful of how we define a "boil". Those first 20 to 30 mins should be a "jumping" boil with the wort looking to try and get out of the kettle. If you can only get to a strong simmer, then it will take much longer.
> 
> Wes



I'll second that. Another thing about DMS is that if you cover or partially cover your kettle, the DMS will condense on the lid and fall right back into the wort. Commercial breweries with their fancy ducted kettles suffer from this. A local micro's wort always positively reeks of green vegetables when it goes into the fermenter, but within a day that smell is gone. A very vigourous fermentation (lots of yeast pitched) will scrub the DMS out of the beer.


----------



## Kai (17/2/08)

I used to boil with the lid partially covered but very vigorously. I figured that even if most of the vapour was condensing and falling back into the kettle, the turnover was so high that most of it was escaping. I also liked watching such a heavy rolling boil. Now I use an electric kettle that is very suited to a mild boil with no lid. I can't say I notice a difference in terms of DMS but then again I am also a rampantly unrepentant "no-chiller".

And right there is where I think the problem with this thread lies. The suggested "myths" are not absolutes but they are most definitely good recommendations; it's just you can make great beer without following what are considered optimum methods, and whatever works for you is great, just don't discredit someone who recommends different. I agree, accepting advice blindly is foolish, but so is rejecting it without establishing adequate reason to do so.

I'd rather rapidly cool my wort to sub-20's before pitching, but it's more convenient for me to just throw it in a jerry and then into the laundry sink. Just because I make the occasional good batch of beer using this method does not discredit the fact that rapidly chilling your wort is technically better, much like brewing a good batch of beer at 25 does not invalidate the importance of better temperature control.

But before you get excited, Daz, I'm not giving up on the botulinum method just yet


----------



## lowtech (17/2/08)

Sucrose needs to be inverted = Myth.


----------



## wessmith (17/2/08)

lowtech said:


> Sucrose needs to be inverted = Myth.



Nup, TRUE. Yeast cant ferment sucrose and has to invert it before fermentation can begin (on the sucrose). Yeast produces the enzyme invertase to do the job which splits glucose and fructose from sucrose. Dont forget though, there will also be other fermentables available in the brew like maltose as an example.

Wes


----------



## braufrau (17/2/08)

dr K said:


> What a strange series of posts!
> 
> My understanding of the Term, "Chinese Whispers" is that a person will repeat what they thought they heard, and what they thought they heard may not be exactly what was spoken, a domino effect takes place and the final information, having being passed through a number of whisperers is quite different from the original.
> In this situation I have no concrete record of what I heard and none either of what I passed on.



I think there is an element of chinese whispers. The whisper starts off "Don't ferment ale yeast at 24 unless you want lots of fruity esters" and then someone posts "and kit yeast is mostly ale yeast so until you've got some experience, ferment that at about 18C" and then on another thread someone who read the first thread posts "kit yeast should never be fermented above 18C". 

So that's how it becomes like a chinese whisper. A qualified statement about yeast becomes a bald statement about kit yeast.

Maybe we could start some new ones "Darren leaves the lid on his pot after the first 20 mins. of the boil" :lol:


----------



## Stuster (17/2/08)

So, Wes, do you see any need to specifically do anything to invert the sugar, or just leave it up to the yeast?


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (17/2/08)

Group Hug..... :icon_cheers:


----------



## wessmith (17/2/08)

Stuster said:


> So, Wes, do you see any need to specifically do anything to invert the sugar, or just leave it up to the yeast?



This is quite a contentious issue and occupied a lot of bandwidth on the HBD some years back. Some believe that you can taste the invertase in the finished beer, while others claim it makes no difference. In the end it is impractical to try and produce a fully inverted sucrose for brewing. The acid/heat method just doesnt make sense when you look at how much acid and neutralising base has to be added. More recent catalysed inversion methods or even the use of synthetic invertase are all too expensive, so in the end we leave it up to the yeast.

Now, is there any flavour difference between Aussie cane sucrose crystals and Belgian beet sucrose crytals? - my answer is yes. Beet sucrose seems to me to be a softer flavour where the Aussie cane sucrose has a "citrus tang". You can actually smell the "citrus tang" when you open a jar of table sugar that has been stored for a while. Very slight but detectable. 

At the height of the HBD debates, I contacted the fermentation manager at one of our larger commercial breweries to get their take in inversion. It was pretty inconclusive - yes they did use some inverted sucrose for some products but always in combination with other "adjuncts". I believe today that there is little if any invert sugar used in commercial brewing in Australia.

So again, we leave the yeast to have its way - or maybe we can train up a squadron of bees to produce a perfect invert sugar......

Wes


----------



## Ross (17/2/08)

TidalPete said:


> No stirs here stagga.  What price democracy? My original (non-offensive?) post has *GONE*
> Very, very, upset here.
> 
> TP :beer:



sorry to go :icon_offtopic: but if moderators pull a thread for whatever reason, isn't it common courtesy to advise the poster & give him/her the reason? This seems to have been a regular occurance of late & has lead to all sorts of (hopefully daft) conspiracy theories. 
I've generally recieved excellent communication from the mods on posts that i've made in the past which have caused someone to complain, even when the post hasn't been pulled - but likewise have had posts removed without so much as a word.

Cheers Ross


----------



## braufrau (17/2/08)

wessmith said:


> This is quite a contentious issue and occupied a lot of bandwidth on the HBD some years back. Some believe that you can taste the invertase in the finished beer, while others claim it makes no difference. In the end it is impractical to try and produce a fully inverted sucrose for brewing. The acid/heat method just doesnt make sense when you look at how much acid and neutralising base has to be added.



So do you have an idea of how much gets inverted with the tsp in of citric acid over the stove method?


----------



## Ross (17/2/08)

wessmith said:


> The acid/heat method just doesnt make sense when you look at how much acid and neutralising base has to be added.
> Wes



Wes,

I've always done the teaspoon of citric acid into a kilo of sugar & gently boiled for 20 mins berfore adding to my wort, especially when i'm making a high gravity brew where I want high attenuation.
Am i wasting my time with this? I've always been very pleased with the results, but never done a comparison as I've never wanted to risk a brew.

Cheers Ross


----------



## braufrau (17/2/08)

Here's another one ... dunnow if its a myth or not ... never bitter more than 21IBUs wih POR!
Or a variation .. don't use POR as an aroma hop. :huh:


----------



## wessmith (17/2/08)

The teaspoon of citric acid in a kilo of sugar would probably invert around 10% of the sugar. To get to a 60% invert with acid commercially, a large amount of sulphuric acid is added and then after inversion it has to neutralised with caustic soda. All the resulting chemical compounds remain in the invert sugar. This should give you some idea of the amount of acid needed. Not for me!

You can get a very good 96% invert syrup from any commercial bakery supplier - its called Trimoline but a bit $$ though. I think the 20kg i bought years ago cost me $80. It has been produced through the invertase enzyme method.

Wes


----------



## Ross (17/2/08)

wessmith said:


> The teaspoon of citric acid in a kilo of sugar would probably invert around 10% of the sugar.
> 
> Wes



Well there's a great myth busted, thanks Wes - It was doing a search for "inverted sugar" that found me my first beer forum (Grumpy's) & the method described to produce it - I've been using the method ever since. Next time i shan't bother & hopefully will notice no difference.

cheers Ross


----------



## Online Brewing Supplies (17/2/08)

Ross said:


> sorry to go :icon_offtopic: but if moderators pull a thread for whatever reason, isn't it common courtesy to advise the poster & give him/her the reason? This seems to have been a regular occurance of late & has lead to all sorts of (hopefully daft) conspiracy theories.
> I've generally recieved excellent communication from the mods on posts that i've made in the past which have caused someone to complain, even when the post hasn't been pulled - but likewise have had posts removed without so much as a word.
> 
> Cheers Ross


 :icon_offtopic: Ross I have to agree . I have recently been on the recieving end of being accused of having had some ones post pulled off one of my retail threads. Which was not the case as I explained. I was then accused by the same person of getting some one else to put in the report .All of which created ill feelings .Now forgotten of course. But I think the mods should as they have in the past explain the reasons why posts are pulled with out giving out personal details.I think this will go a long way to making this forum a happier play ground and stop the conspiracy theories.
GB


----------



## Stuster (17/2/08)

Ross said:


> Well there's a great myth busted, thanks Wes



+1. Good to know what you notice as well, Ross.


----------



## Darren (17/2/08)

goomboogo said:


> I apologise for going off original topic but I'm seeking a clarification. Darren, you stated in an earlier post that you begin the boil with the lid off (first 20 or so minutes). Does this mean that at some other point in the boil you have the lid on?




Hey Goomboogo,

Yeah, I leave the lid off until the boil is really boiling (yes it does take more gas to get to the boil) Once the hot break has formed and the chance of boilover has passed I put the lid on. My boiler is a big old keg and my lid is the original keg top. It has a hole in the middle that lets steam escape for the remainder of the boil. So yes, lid off to allow the DMS to escape at the beginning, replace for the last half hour or so.

cheers

Darren


----------



## Darren (17/2/08)

braufrau said:


> Here's another one ... dunnow if its a myth or not ... never bitter more than 21IBUs wih POR!
> Or a variation .. don't use POR as an aroma hop. :huh:




Only one way to find out BF,

Give it a go. 

My experience says it is true. I have doubted and tested most of the "myths". Bittering with POR above about 25 IBU is harsh.

Fresh POR hops are nice for aroma. Stale POR for aroma is like stale cheese.

cheers

Darren


----------



## Darren (17/2/08)

wessmith said:


> This is quite a contentious issue and occupied a lot of bandwidth on the HBD some years back. Some believe that you can taste the invertase in the finished beer, while others claim it makes no difference. In the end it is impractical to try and produce a fully inverted sucrose for brewing. The acid/heat method just doesnt make sense when you look at how much acid and neutralising base has to be added. More recent catalysed inversion methods or even the use of synthetic invertase are all too expensive, so in the end we leave it up to the yeast.
> 
> Now, is there any flavour difference between Aussie cane sucrose crystals and Belgian beet sucrose crytals? - my answer is yes. Beet sucrose seems to me to be a softer flavour where the Aussie cane sucrose has a "citrus tang". You can actually smell the "citrus tang" when you open a jar of table sugar that has been stored for a while. Very slight but detectable.
> 
> ...



I was alsways under the impression the reason that "invert sugar" was made was primarily for colour. You can get some really nice red hues if boil at the correct temps for long enough. Great for Belgian styles. Adding a bit of citric acid during the process doesn't hurt (even if it does only invert 10%).

If you are using the cane sugar as an adjunct for aussie style beer, simply make it into a solution with water and add at the beginning of the boil. The heat and low pH of the boil will probably do most inversion that would occur on the stove-top.

cheers

Darren


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (17/2/08)

Dont let Tony read that bit about POR...... :lol:


----------



## bindi (17/2/08)

Ross said:


> Well there's a great myth busted, thanks Wes - It was doing a search for "inverted sugar" that found me my first beer forum (Grumpy's) & the method described to produce it - I've been using the method ever since. Next time i shan't bother & hopefully will notice no difference.
> 
> cheers Ross




I have been using the same [grumpy's] method for ages  I shan't bother and also hope for no difference.


----------



## wessmith (17/2/08)

Darren said:


> I was alsways under the impression the reason that "invert sugar" was made was primarily for colour. You can get some really nice red hues if boil at the correct temps for long enough. Great for Belgian styles. Adding a bit of citric acid during the process doesn't hurt (even if it does only invert 10%).
> 
> cheers
> 
> Darren



Darren, I think you may be confusing invert sugar with caramelised sugar when you refer to colour. One thing is for sure though, that piece on how to make candy sugar written many years ago by the "guru" up north has confused so many people. It is just plain wrong as I and others have pointed out on many, many occasions. Candy sugar or crystalline sugar is the exact opposite of invert sugar. If the addition of citric acid did what is claimed, ie cause the sugar to become an invert sugar, then you would not have a block of crystaline sugar as the result. It would remain a syrup.

Wes


----------



## Batz (17/2/08)

Ross said:


> sorry to go :icon_offtopic: but if moderators pull a thread for whatever reason, isn't it common courtesy to advise the poster & give him/her the reason? This seems to have been a regular occurance of late & has lead to all sorts of (hopefully daft) conspiracy theories.
> I've generally recieved excellent communication from the mods on posts that i've made in the past which have caused someone to complain, even when the post hasn't been pulled - but likewise have had posts removed without so much as a word.
> 
> Cheers Ross




The moderators on this site do a fair job IMO,of course I am a moderator.
When I started I was the third moderator on the site,we mainly deleted porn or other spam type threads before we were big enough to have the systems to stop this.
Now it seems we try our best to stop internal bickering !

You can't please all of the people all of the time  And time may be against each mod. to write an explanation to each poster as to why his post was pulled,usually I believe you would receive this.
Please try to remain calm  We are doing our best,it's a thankless job.


Batz


----------



## Darren (17/2/08)

wessmith said:


> Darren, I think you may be confusing invert sugar with caramelised sugar when you refer to colour. One thing is for sure though, that piece on how to make candy sugar written many years ago by the "guru" up north has confused so many people. It is just plain wrong as I and others have pointed out on many, many occasions. Candy sugar or crystalline sugar is the exact opposite of invert sugar. If the addition of citric acid did what is claimed, ie cause the sugar to become an invert sugar, then you would not have a block of crystaline sugar as the result. It would remain a syrup.
> 
> Wes




Hi Wes,

No I am not that confused. What I wrote in the previous post was that taking a little bit of cane sugar and heating it at controlled temperatures produces a colour that no grain can acheive. The "guru" up north (No not Ross, Graham Sanders mostly knew what he was talking about) was well aware that total inversion was not acheived but the colour was fabulous. His work on this subject is well worth a read especially for the budding Belgian ale brewer. A bit of citric acid can do nothing but help.

cheers

Darren


----------



## wessmith (17/2/08)

Darren said:


> Hi Wes,
> 
> A bit of citric acid can do nothing but help.
> 
> ...



How?

Wes


----------



## dr K (17/2/08)

Wes nails it !
Invert sugar is commercially (generally) a syrup.
Sucrose (no matter whether it comes fro cane or beet) is a di-saccharide. Yeast does not like eating this. The simple addition of water in the right conditions will split some or all of the sucrose into Fructose and Glucose which yeast is happy to eat. These conditions include heat, acidity and enzymes as part of the process. If you throw sucrose into your fermentor the enzymes and the falling pH will take care of it, if you throw sucrose into your boil some of the sucrose will become F and G but not all, if you boil your syrup with citic acid then even more of of your sucrose will convert but still not all. 
All you are doing is giving the yeast a helping hand, whether or not it needs it is speculative.
Would it not be nice if we lived in a perfect world....

K


----------



## ozpowell (17/2/08)

Add chilli to beer makes it crisper??? :huh: In case you haven't seen it yet....

Cheers,
Michael.


----------



## lowtech (17/2/08)

wessmith said:


> Nup, TRUE. Yeast cant ferment sucrose and has to invert it before fermentation can begin (on the sucrose). Yeast produces the enzyme invertase to do the job which splits glucose and fructose from sucrose. Dont forget though, there will also be other fermentables available in the brew like maltose as an example.
> 
> Wes



Err...Ummm....That was sorta my point.

Yeast produces invertase to do the inverting......ergo..... adding citric acid is a waste of time and an unnecessary step for HB'ing.
Plenty of Aussie type ales with 5/10% sucrose uninverted have not led to any odd flavours for me or elicited any comments from judges in comps.
Dex, a monohydrate seems to be more suitable in a belgian gold though(read drier finish)

LT


----------



## braufrau (17/2/08)

wessmith said:


> If the addition of citric acid did what is claimed, ie cause the sugar to become an invert sugar, then you would not have a block of crystaline sugar as the result. It would remain a syrup.



But you don't get a block of crystalline sugar .. you get toffee which is sort of glass like because the small amounts of glucose and fructose is enough to upset the stacking of the sucrose. If you don't make your toffee properly you do get crystals of sugar in it and then its sort of like licking a cats tongue.
If you see what I mean!  And also ... whether you end up with syrup for making daiquiris or toffee for the school fete depends on the amount of water in the mix. 

Anyway .. its good to know the 10% figure.


----------



## dr K (17/2/08)

> Dex, a monohydrate seems to be more suitable in a belgian gold though(read drier finish)


 Wow..next if I ever brew a Belgian Gold I will not forget the monohydrate, hope my LHBS has some!!!
Seriously Dextrose is another way of saying Glucose, which BTW has the same chemical composition as Fructose and if you take the number of C H and O molecules in Sucrose and add 2 x H and 1 x 0 (H2O) you can split it down the middle to make Fructose and Glucose (Dextrose)..simple really.
Much of the sugar debate comes from the fact that sucrose is cheaply and readily available in supermarkets, dextrose is only found in specialty stores and is far more expensive ofttimes due to an inflated profit margin.


K


----------



## Stuster (17/2/08)

dr K said:


> Much of the sugar debate comes from the fact that sucrose is cheaply and readily available in supermarkets, dextrose is only found in specialty stores and is far more expensive ofttimes due to an inflated profit margin.



Really. OMFG.  

You cynic you.


----------



## dr K (17/2/08)

> Really. OMFG.



Fair call !!!!!
I have yet to get up after Rolling On The Floor Laughing.....

Klutz


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (17/2/08)

Table sugar in beer....WOW.....thats an amazing concept....


----------



## winkle (17/2/08)

I wonder if Lion Nathan have heard of this concept


----------



## boingk (17/2/08)

Myth: ''There isn't much you can do to improve a kit-beer''

Fact: WTF? Yes there is! One of my favourite beers happens to be a kit-based one adulterated with LDME, a tad of dextrose, Munich grain and Tettnang hops all the way. Not to mention a certain Fermentis yeast... Not much you can do? My ass, thats just an excuse for mediocrity!

EDIT: And as for table sugar being significantly cheaper than dextrose, well, sure if you call 2 bucks a kilo a bank-busting difference than I guess it is. All my dorm mates at uni who flinch when I tell them I'm drinking home brew [and would they like a glass?]...well the discussion goes like this:

Me: Yeah? What it was bad hey?
Them: Oh yeah man, not too good hey - but it messed me up! Weird taste though, it was foul.
M: Hmmm, not really harsh...bitter...kinda vegemitey was it?
T: Yeah! Thats right, thats what it tasted like.
M: Well, the guy probably just used table sugar with the kit...never turns out too well.
T: Oh, ok then... *takes a drink of my brew* ...hey not bad! Cheers!


----------



## Darren (17/2/08)

Wes and dr K,

Its the colour you fools, its the colour. How many times do i have to say it???? Boiling sugar with water gently and controlled makes for the most brilliant reds


Wes,

Nothing wrong with a bit of citric acid in a Belgian syle ale. After all, even the Germans use acid malt 8)

cheers

Darren


----------



## newguy (18/2/08)

Myth: Kit beers are inferior to AG. The silver medal awarded to a kit beer at MCAB X would seem to indicate otherwise. The silver in category 10 American Ale was taken by former club member David Gummer (the MCAB folks misspelled it as Grummer). The beer is based on a Brewhouse Kit with some added grains and hops.


----------



## wessmith (18/2/08)

Darren said:


> Wes and dr K,
> 
> Its the colour you fools, its the colour. How many times do i have to say it???? Boiling sugar with water gently and controlled makes for the most brilliant reds
> 
> ...



Darren, your thought processes still seem to be in catch up mode. Boiling sugar slowly with a little water leads to caramelisation - something I pointed out to you in an earlier post. Far from being fools, dr K and I are well aware of the colour benefits of caramelised sugar - be it table sugar or the malt sugars in a good crystal/cara malt. It is the caramelisation that gives you the rich red colours. 

And you still haven't explained what part you think acid plays in this process.

Wes


----------



## Darren (18/2/08)

hydrolysis


----------



## braufrau (18/2/08)

wessmith said:


> Darren, your thought processes still seem to be in catch up mode. Boiling sugar slowly with a little water leads to caramelisation - something I pointed out to you in an earlier post. Far from being fools, dr K and I are well aware of the colour benefits of caramelised sugar - be it table sugar or the malt sugars in a good crystal/cara malt. It is the caramelisation that gives you the rich red colours.
> 
> And you still haven't explained what part you think acid plays in this process.
> 
> Wes



Yep. Inversion is what DrK says ... sucrose split into 2. No colour change. And caramalisation is oxidation of the sugar.
Inversion (10% or whatever %) happens at quite low temperatures. (with an acid catalyst) but caramalisation of sucrose happens at 160C. Fructose caramalises at
110C. What I "invert" my sugar I heat it to ~120C and I see very little caramalization, that may be more evidence that its not very inverted.

BTW DrK - glucose and fructose have the same chemical formula but different structures and are therefore metabolised differently. For instance, in humans,
glucose has a GI of 100 on the glucose scale (obviously) and fructose a GI of 24 which indicates their very different metabolic pathways .

I'm now badgering HWMBO to stick some of my "inverted" sugar in a polarimeter. It'd be funny if the result was the same as sugar ... 0% inversion. 

There was a good basic brewing thingy where they used 6 different sugars in otherwise the same wort/yeast/fermentation and they went into raptures over dark belgian syrup. Anyway it was Dec 28th 2006. 

Oho ... that remninds me ... basic brewing generate their own myths! "People who claim to be allergic to bees have actually been stung by wasps."
I was so offended by that comment I had to stop listening to that particular episode.


----------



## InCider (18/2/08)

Food grade hose.

I bought racking hose from Bunnings. $3 for 5 meters. It's not food grade, but is PVC, is clear and smells the same as the bought stuff from the HBS.

What could possibly leach out at 10-15 degrees and lower when kegging?

InCider.


----------



## Trough Lolly (19/2/08)

InCider said:


> Food grade hose.
> 
> I bought racking hose from Bunnings. $3 for 5 meters. It's not food grade, but is PVC, is clear and smells the same as the bought stuff from the HBS.
> 
> ...



....or filtering beer for that matter! B) 

Cheers,
TL


----------

