Recent content by Dirt_McGirt

I've been brewing on a Bayou Classic SQ14 a little over a year, and I'm starting to feel like I'm outgrowing the 6" burner it has - the slow heatup (esp in cold weather or w/ large batches) makes my brewdays take longer than I'd like. I see that Northern Brewer sells 10" banjo burners...

I just tried this and was maybe at 195 for the first batch. I had one bottle go kablooie and the caps on two others fly off. Second batch was at about 170-175 and was fine. Is that high enough to have done the job?

Thanks for the responses. The sour mash wound up with some funky off-smells - sour milk and bile, definitely some other stuff that contaminated it, probably from too much oxygen and temps that weren't kept high enough. Going to scrap this one and try again. Oh well - sixteen batches without...

I've got a 3lb sour mash with lacto 3 days in and am hoping to brew my first sour tomorrow. I happened to have a small cheap disposable styrofoam cooler on hand, so I just used that. Unfortunately, just a litte while ago I took a look at it and the cooler appears to have small amounts of thick...

Is there a way to measure the ABV of a beer once it's brewed without knowing the OG? I know it's not possible via hydrometer, but wondering if there are other devices/techniques that can do this. Thanks!

Jesus. Way to make this personal with insults. Real nice.

I'm especially biased because I can't stand any of those sickly-sweet spice flaovored liquers, either. Jager, Aftershock, Goldschlager, Sambuca - they're all nauseating hangover potions, for me. The idea of frankensteining a beer into one of those is just.....egch!

*looks in vain for vomit emoji* Only a masochist would want that inflicted upon them. Anyway, when saying "I'll clean the kitchen" means 90% that "I'll clean up the brewing mess I created."

My bad, I misunderstood your original post. You are correct that it's not a survey. But at the end of the day, it's a distinction without a difference. If the triangle test is what the conclusions are based on, that's the part that matters.

Fair enough regarding p-values, although the non-randomness of his sample selection itself doesn't mean much - tons of surveys and other human research suffers from some degree of sampling bias because of funding and other constraints that make them non-random in one way or another. I think...

He absolutely does that. http://brulosophy.com/2015/08/10/yeast-comparison-danstar-belle-saison-vs-safbrew-abbaye-exbeeriment-results/ | RESULTS | Over the course of 6 days, a pool of 22 people consisting of BJCP judges, Cicerone Certified Beer Servers, experienced homebrewers, and...

I'll admit it's been a couple years since my graduate statistics and research methods classes. But I recall that if you're using p-values and confidence levels for a survey, the point is to show that the results are representative of the target population, which in this case is presumably...

That's certainly true, and useful. And to be clear, my intention isn't to crap all over what he does or anything. Just that writing the results like it's being submitted to a journal for peer review is a bit over the top, IMO.

I've read his side by side experiments with interest, and they've gotten me to at least think about some things differently, like being more confident that I don't need to strain out trub and break material when transferring to primary, faster grain to glass timeframes, and use of cold crashing...

Welcome from a Va. Beach native!