Hello everyone,
I'm new here but have been brewing beer kits for quite a number of years with quite a lot of success, well at least my friends and family tell me it tastes acceptable and gives them the desired effect! I'm interested in making sure I'm getting it as good as I can because a friend (who really likes my beers) has asked me to brew about 200 pints for his wedding in March.
I use a 40 pint plasic fermenting bucket with tight-fitting lid and airlock, and a brew-belt around it, then after about 10 to 14 days (when the airlock stops bubbling for a couple of days) the beer is bottled and left for about a month before drinking. I tend to use Asda's 17p, 2L bottled table water rather than tap water as it seems to give better results although having read a few forum threads today I will try adding a tsp of gypsom salts to the water next time to see what difference it makes.
I sterilise all my bottles in the dishwasher (using a couple of tsps of Young's steriliser instead of a dishwasher tablet) and am very careful about keeping everything clean througout the process.
My question is about the differences between the two-can 'premier-price' kits (such as Woodfords and St Peter's) and the one-can kits (such as Tom Caxton and EDME).
I've found that the two-can kits always result in a much smoother and thicker sludge at the bottom of the fermenter which has led me to wondering if this is a difference in the quality of the yeasts. I was wondering if it's worth keeping some of this sludge for use with a one-can kit that I'd put on immediately after it.
I take it that this sludge is flocculated yeast cells that are still alive and able to continue their work on another brew...?
As an aside, I have found that the two-can kits do tend to make better-tasting brews than the cheaper ones, but I wonder if that's more to do with the yeast quality, or maybe because I tend to use normal granulated sugar (sucrose), rather than brewer's suger (glucose). Has anyone got any opinions about that?
Many thanks for the replies - I've got a Woodford's Nelson's Revenge settling out in bottles in the garage and a St. Peter's IPA into its 4th day of fermenting at the moment!
I'm new here but have been brewing beer kits for quite a number of years with quite a lot of success, well at least my friends and family tell me it tastes acceptable and gives them the desired effect! I'm interested in making sure I'm getting it as good as I can because a friend (who really likes my beers) has asked me to brew about 200 pints for his wedding in March.
I use a 40 pint plasic fermenting bucket with tight-fitting lid and airlock, and a brew-belt around it, then after about 10 to 14 days (when the airlock stops bubbling for a couple of days) the beer is bottled and left for about a month before drinking. I tend to use Asda's 17p, 2L bottled table water rather than tap water as it seems to give better results although having read a few forum threads today I will try adding a tsp of gypsom salts to the water next time to see what difference it makes.
I sterilise all my bottles in the dishwasher (using a couple of tsps of Young's steriliser instead of a dishwasher tablet) and am very careful about keeping everything clean througout the process.
My question is about the differences between the two-can 'premier-price' kits (such as Woodfords and St Peter's) and the one-can kits (such as Tom Caxton and EDME).
I've found that the two-can kits always result in a much smoother and thicker sludge at the bottom of the fermenter which has led me to wondering if this is a difference in the quality of the yeasts. I was wondering if it's worth keeping some of this sludge for use with a one-can kit that I'd put on immediately after it.
I take it that this sludge is flocculated yeast cells that are still alive and able to continue their work on another brew...?
As an aside, I have found that the two-can kits do tend to make better-tasting brews than the cheaper ones, but I wonder if that's more to do with the yeast quality, or maybe because I tend to use normal granulated sugar (sucrose), rather than brewer's suger (glucose). Has anyone got any opinions about that?
Many thanks for the replies - I've got a Woodford's Nelson's Revenge settling out in bottles in the garage and a St. Peter's IPA into its 4th day of fermenting at the moment!