Handbook of Brewing I (Hardwicke) v II v III (Stewart)

[user 246304]

For anyone who has or who has read these three editions, can you give a brief breakdown on how they differ, and if you were to get one, which one you'd opt for?

 

[ajdelange]

I've only seen I and II. They are both the same in the sense that an editor (Hardwicke in one case and Stewart in the other) was contracted to do the books which they do by recruiting various experts in particular fields to write the chapters. They are then supposed to pull the chapters together to make a coherent book. In my experience this is never done (I did a chapter for one such and got 0 feedback except with respect to spelling, punctuation etc and that was from the production people.{ It's pretty plain from the other books done in this way that I have read that other editing authors don't do this either. In any cae my interest in this particular book was the water chapters and it is my opinion that Moll gave a much more useful treatment in the Hardwicke edition than the guy in the first Stewart edition II. In particular I hold that guy responsible (though he isn't really) for promulgation of the myth that it is not necessary to consider both sulfate and chloride concentrations in designing a beer but rather only their ratio.

That aside, both editions are good. II and III are obviously going to be more up to date than I.

 

[user 246304]

OK, thanks for the breakdown, AJ. Now I'd like to read the second edition, merely to read the ratio argument. I'm sure it would all vanquish me anyway, but I'd love to see it. Seems I or III are ultimately ones to plan on, though. Appreciate your overview.

While I have you - I've had DeClerck on my Siebel cart forever (I've also had Kunze on my VLB cart forever. I loved Kunze when I first read him). I presume you recommend DeClerck, even if he wasn't written yesterday, yes?

 

[ajdelange]

It isn't really an argument. Simply a reference to a paper that found that in one test tasters seemed to prefer based on the ratio rather than the absolute level. No interpretation or explanation beyond that is given.

Yes, I do recommend deClerck even though he is dated. If you get nothing else from him you will at least appreciate your $100 pH meter!

 

[user 246304]

Ah, I see. Gotcha, thanks, AJ.

With DeClerck: One of the things I liked about Kunze - and this is a terrible lapse in memory on this - is I seem to recall a nice blend of brewing science, and commercial brewing practice (very thin now, but, what, a discussion of the beta glucans rest and what it does, where it works best, how it works; inorganic acids in mashing, the engineering modes of different mashing systems....I don't know, doesn't sound like much, but at the time, I liked it as a kind of counterweight to Briggs et al...you know?). So I guess I'm asking, is DeClerck more of a "pure science" text, or a blend of science and brewing application?

I should add, I just plain enjoyed Kunze. I find Briggs et al dry, but important. I enjoy Hornsey's book, but I know it's necessarily selective.

 

[ajdelange]

DeClerck has much more brewing science than Kunze who does not cover it very deeply at all IMO. Lots on how a mash tun is built - not much on the chemistry of what takes place within it.

 

[user 246304]

DeClerck has much more brewing science than Kunze who does not cover it very deeply at all IMO. Lots on how a mash tun is built - not much on the chemistry of what takes place within it.

That may have been why Kunze was attractive to me at the time, lol.

Thanks, AJ. I ordered DeClerck and will sally forth.

 

[mabrungard]

DeClerck has much more brewing science than Kunze who does not cover it very deeply at all IMO. Lots on how a mash tun is built - not much on the chemistry of what takes place within it.

I agree with AJ's statement. While the DeClerk text is very good, I also like the info presented in the Malting and Brewing Science volumes. They are also worth your investment.

 

[user 246304]

I agree with AJ's statement. While the DeClerk text is very good, I also like the info presented in the Malting and Brewing Science volumes. They are also worth your investment.

Thanks Martin. I have the M&BS series, just need to commit. First read through 20 years ago was a heck of a lot easier than now!