A hobby in other words <GRIN>. -- graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" -----------------------------------
Gonz wrote: > Homebrewing could be alot of work, depending on how "fanatical" you > are about it. But it could also be pretty easy. I still buy most of > the beer I drink. I homebrew mostly for fun, not to supply me with > beer. Its not economical, unless you buy cheap ingredients. The > taste can be phenomenal however, even in some instances, much better > than anything commercial I have ever had. The downside is that it can > be time consuming, take up alot of space, and stink up your kitchen > with a strong hoppy smell. Oh, of course, it can also make you buy > expensive gear, much like photography. ;) > > > > On 6/12/07, graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I find it simpler to buy a beer I like. Especially these days when I can not >> drink much because it reacts with my medications. >> >> -- >> graywolf >> http://www.graywolfphoto.com >> http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf >> "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" >> ----------------------------------- >> >> >> Gonz wrote: >>> Much of the flavor of beer is in suspended particles that you could >>> filter out to pretty much any degree if you'd like. I homebrew, and I >>> filtered a lager once and it came out beautiful, and the taste did not >>> suffer from the filtering. I basically used a coarse filter for it, >>> but I've heard other experienced homebrewers tell me that they have >>> used very fine filters and the beer comes out really clear, but >>> tasting like crap. >>> >>> I buy hops from all over the world to duplicate the style of the >>> particular beer I'm brewing as accurately as possible. If you want to >>> get really into it, you can in many cases duplicate even the water by >>> starting out with pure distilled and adding to it the right mineral >>> proportions to create a replica of the water used at the brewery. >>> There are some people who do this and there are formulas out there for >>> water recipes. I just use good bottled water and that seems to do the >>> trick. >>> >>> On 6/11/07, John Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> On Mon, Jun 11, 2007 at 10:23:55PM -0400, Adam Maas wrote: >>>>> Cory Papenfuss wrote: >>>>>>> of most Washington/Oregon IPAs. Beer should be clear. >>>>>> "BOOO! GET OFF THE STAGE!" >>>>>> >>>>>> *Light lagers* should be clear, but ales are perfectly acceptable >>>>>> with a bit of cloudiness IMO. >>>>>> >>>>>> -Cory >>>>>> >>>>> IPA's also should be clear and arguably so should Pale Ales, they're the >>>>> Light Lagers of Ale. Other Ales may be cloudy. >>>>> >>>>> -Adam >>>> I still disagree, most of the time. Just about any British bitter, and >>>> significant percentage of other brews, had better be completely clear - >>>> free of yeast, chill haze, etc. That doesn't mean the beer has to be >>>> transparent and colourless, of course - stouts, mild ales, etc. can be >>>> so dark that you can't see through them. >>>> >>>> A lot of bottled beers (Worthington White Shield, as just one example) >>>> throw a sediment in the bottle (as do many home-brewed beverages). >>>> Some people like to tip the sediment into their glass, while other >>>> people prefer to leave it in the bottle. But cask-conditioned ales >>>> should run clear - that's why you rack them a few days ahead of time >>>> (and why finings are often added at the same time as the final hops). >>>> When you see sediment in your glass, it's time to change the barrel. >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> [email protected] >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
