fishapples.net

Fishbeer.com's new sister site.

fine strong ales

A group of friends are trying to have regular so called "tastings" of beer. I've missed the last couple due to sickness and grant writing, but I made a come back in strong fashion this past Wednesday by hosting barley wine night. Yaniv, Phil, Chris, Ryan, Jeane and Jeryl (sp?) were in attendance. Here are some remarks.

North Coast Old Stock Ale 2002: big fruity nose, apples, musty palate- quite sweet with a pleasing tart acidity in the finish.

North Coast Old Stock Ale 2007: more subdued nose, a bit hoppier, but also a bit sweeter with fuller mouthfeel.

Old Dobzhansky 2003 (my homebrew): bready nose, honey on the palate, quite sweet, floral, tight finish.

Gale's Prize Old Ale 1996: still, molasses in the nose, sweet palate but with a hint of mustiness, surprisingly dry

Gale's Prize Old Ale 1997: tart and sour, the way all other Gale's I've ever tasted have tasted, the 1996 is the sole exception. But the sourness is well balanced by sweet malts, quite nice really.

Mikkeller Big Worse 2007 (?): all the way from Denmark, brewed in Belgium, the Danes apparently have a hard on for big American hops. Very clean, almost chemical like hops and caramel malts dominate, very resinous.

Old Foghorn 2006: nice hoppy nose, fruity also, grapes?, tight palate, winey.

Nogne O #100 2007 (?): this name has a line diagonally through the O but I don't know how to render that with HTML. Another big American hop bomb, kind of astringent, very dark, kind of harsh.

Victory Old Horizontal 2005:

Left Hand Widdershins 2007 (?): oak aged, very smoky, big phenolics, going bad?

New Holland Pilgrim's Dole 2007 (?): tasted like bourbon but we don't think it was barrel aged.

Port Brewing Imperial Stout:

Gales Christmas Ale:

Dogfishhead Olde School"

random gose:

Troegs Rugged Trail:

fairly drunk:

Click the first to enlarge.

scarce o'fat

Like miniature men
we inspect rugged waves of corduroy
covered with a forest
of slender gray winter ingots
and a mottled brown carpet of leaves.

We walk a graphite crucible's rim
that threatens sylvan calcination
and switchback down a crumpled hollow
full of yellowwood trees
and a falling stream
obvious and bright
betwixt green pillows.

Meandering from wall to wall
leaving to ascend
waves of land
rolling to and fro.

Ingot.


What what.

converting malt/beer ratios to original gravities: the beer historian's conundrum

One of my favorite blogs, Shut up About Barclay Perkins, is mostly about the history of beer and brewing. Ron Pattinson posts some really great stuff from primary sources (where he gets it all I have no idea) and I think this semester I might have my beer class (which I should have been preparing for instead of writing this post) read some of when we talk about the Porter Revolution. Maybe.

Today Dr. Pattinson posts some recipes from A Cyclopaedia of Six Thousand Practical Receipts, and Collateral Information by Arnold James Cooley (1854). It was common practice before the widespread acceptance of the hydrometer (or saccharometer) to express the strength of a beer in terms of how much malt was used to make it. This makes sense considering the fact that alcoholic strength depends mainly on how much sugar the yeast have to convert to alcohol and how much sugar depends on how much starch you have from the grain.

But there are other things that effect the alcoholic strength of a beer and this is what makes using malt/beer ratios problematic. The quality of the grain, how the mash is conducted (temperature for instance), the moisture content of the grain, how the fermentation is conducted (temperature for instance), what kind of yeast is used etc. all influence the strength of a beer. So the malt/beer ratios can be pretty variable indicators of beer strength.

But historians of beer and brewing have little choice but to make do with this system because it's all we have. And to get an idea of how strong these beers were it's helpful to try and convert the malt/beer ratios into original gravities, into figures that represent the density of the wort prior to fermentation. Because the density of wort is influenced primarily by the amount of sugar in the wort, it is a good indicator of how strong the beer can be. Of course you have to take into account how the fermentation it conducted etc. but original gravity is a much better indicator of the potential strength of a beer than is malt/beer ratios.

And it's the way we speak about the strength of beer today so it's something we can wrap our heads around pretty easily.

So let's get down to the brass tacks, as it were. Dr. Pattinson intimates that Cooley had no idea what he was talking about for several reasons, but the one I latched onto was the fact that he thinks Cooley got the malt/beer ratios wrong.

For the "Ale, Burton" Cooley says a barrel and a half of beer (48 gallons) was drawn from a quarter of malt (64 gallons of malt). Pattinson says this would result in an OG of over 1400. This is very, very strong. With today's technology you could probably make a 16% abv beer from that wort. In the 1850s, they probably would be able to coax that wort down to a final gravity of at most 1040, probably lower, making a beer of over 13% abv.

Similarly, in his description of "Ale, Dorchester" Cooley says they drew two barrels (64 gallons) from one quarter of malt. Pattinson claims this would give an OG of 1100. Again, this is very strong. This wort would likely make a +10% abv beer.

I think Pattinson might be overshooting a bit.

In her wonderful book Country House Brewing in England, 1500-1900 Pamela Sambrook says that October Beer (the strongest brewed in the English country house) would typically be a barrel drawn from ("well over" in some cases) one quarter of malt (more than eight and a half bushels). And I doubt this brew had an OG over 1140 and therefore a FG probably over 1050 FGs probably go higher the farther back in history you go). And by Pattinson's conversions a quarter of malt would make a barrel of beer with an OG probably over 1180, extremely strong.

Similarly, the "Ales" that were commonly brewed in these country houses were made by drawing one barrel from usually four bushels of malt, or half a quarter, or two barrels from one quarter (p.117). And this brew was meant for regular consumption (at least by the families, at least before ~1700) so I doubt it had an OG of 1100. Because regular consumption of a beer over 10% abv would make you drizunk like you wouldn't belizeve.

Moreover, entire guile small beer in both Sambrook and Ellis is about five barrels from a quarter (Sambrook p.121), which by Pattinson's calculations would probably be around 1040, too strong to adequately quench the field laborer's thirst without making him fall down wasted betwixt the rows. I'm thinking small and table beer had OGs around 1020.

Ellis gives similar numbers in The London and Country Brewer for strong ale as well.

In Bennett's Ale, Beer, and Brewsters she claims that on Lady Clare's estate in the 14th century they were brewing almost 500 gallons of ale per week, drawing two barrels from each quarter (p.18). On Pattinson's conversion, that's a shit ton of 1100 OG ale to be brewing every week. And a lot of very strong ale to drink considering Bennett says that in an average household a person would drink about 1/4 gallon of ale every day (p.19). A drunken household indeed.

I suppose I would just be interested in knowing how Pattinson does his conversion and the justification for it because it doesn't square with what I know from the primary and secondary literature on the subject. I've built this nice little house of historical beer strengths and with one wave of his hand Pattinson threaten's to blow it off like so much fart in the wind.

30 Rock vs Arrested Development again

Listen people (Yaniv), I worked for 13 hours straight today. Literally. So Now I'm watching an episode of 30 Rock on the internet.

And guess who makes a guest appearance in episode 18? That's right, Will Arnet, AKA G.O.B. from Arrested Development. Yes it kind of blew my mind. And yes, he comes onto What's the Frequency Ken. Which is pretty much him coming onto his retarded brother in Arrested Development, Buster. Just sayin'.

On Fishbeer.com I will never, ever, post something about TV. Ever. Fishbeer.com will be the most pure website you've ever seen. Snow white like cocaine. Or South Dakota. Like apple pie on a Sunday morning. Vanilla ice cream on a Thursday night. An NSF proposal on a Wednesday night. Fastlane on a Friday morning. A Monday. Saturday. All day. Every day. Batman.

30 Rock vs Arrested Development

The Rural Juror vs. Bob Loblaw's Law Blog?

The Meat Machine vs. The Cornballer?

You decide.

fishbeer beta

It's just a screen capture. Don't freak out. Click to enlarge.

30 Rock

When I first saw Arrested Development on TV I thought it was a poorly done Fox knockoff of Curb Your Enthusiasm. What with the hand held cameras and improvisational feel. Turns out I was way wrong. Sure, the hand held cameras and improvisational feel are two things those two shows share. And they're both hilarious. But that's about where the similarities end. (turns out Arrested Development was actually very heavily scripted as well, it just feels improvisational)

When I actually gave Curb Your Enthusiasm a try about two years ago I watched every episode on DVD in about two weeks. I loved it. I still love it. I feel bad that I didn't like it when it was on TV. Before it's time? Probably.

And that brings me to today's topic: 30 Rock. Great show. Just started watching it yesterday. I'm four episodes in. You can watch the whole first season here for free.

It is a giant fucking Arrested Development knockoff.

Completely absurd humor. Quick cuts and flashbacks. Same use of music. Lots of references to things that happen in real life. Lots of references to NBC's parent company GE and NBC itself. Hell, it even has a Buster character..."what's the frequency Ken?"

Though I have to say that I dislike shows about shows. Or writing about writing. That shit bugs me to no end. So in that sense, bravo Arrested Development. And 30 Rock, you're good, but not that good.

I've cribbed Wolfe, you stickler

A place for everything was kept
in cold corners of the day
where the breeze walks softly
on skinny worn leather pads
and no dust is there.

Had speech been made
voices would bounce
aghast from plaster
wall to wood
floor freely.

Had things filled space
with hulking shoulders
or skinny waist
a breath you could not take
between their shadows.

But fertile ground it is
waiting perfect for the stuff
of a life too short.

january deam

Recent rains kept the dust down on the gravel road. Driving gently over crunching stones through a forest of bright gray poles each pothole was half filled with milky tan rainwater that splashed up and lacquered the rear fenders of my car. The easy upland landscape rolled in large, broad waves and the road swung and curved around them splitting the carpet of warm brown leaves arbitrarily in two.

The tower tapers toward the top and is capped with a gray box full of empty window frames. It sways back and forth like the road but we climb to the top for a view anyway.

The trail stays to the ridge barely elevated, barely delineated from the rest of the landscape. We pass fields of dark green lycopods and verdant walls of plush moss that stand out distinctly from the rest of the world.

Slipping into the woods, becoming a true foot path the trail winds its way towards the lake through a gauntlet of persistent dry brown leaves. It follows the right arm of the ridge where it splits and the land begins to fall away to each side and the ridge narrows and some sensation of elevation is finally apparent.

Yaniv is standing at the end of the trail in the middle of the cold, leafy fire pit on a broad knob where the land falls steeply away two hundred seventy degrees around him. The lake shimmers dark bluely in the distance through the trees several hundred feet below. He holds my wallet open in his hand and removes two twenties and a ten and crumples them up and stuffs them in his pocket. “I stole your money well. You never verb something good. You verb it well.”

I let him keep the money. That kind of tip is well worth fifty bucks.




Click to enlarge.





Click to enlarge.

winter extravaganza part 5: this is why pennsylvania is this best

Brandywine River Museum








After three hours of frigid midging in Washington's winter encampment I finally landed this wild brown trout today. Hazah.

winter extravaganza part 4: 10th annual new years celebration featuring the second annual dance off