john@cisden.UUCP (John Woolley) (12/18/85)
Is this newsgroup only for discussion of *wine*, or is (sigh) **beer** allowed, too? -- Peace and Good!, Fr. John Woolley "The heart has its reasons that the mind does not know." -- Blaise Pascal
rjn@hpfcla.UUCP (12/21/85)
re: "Is this newsgroup only for discussion of *wine* ..." This newsgroup has barely enough discussion of grape wine to justify its continued existence. I doubt anyone will object if you choose to discuss "hop wine" or "barley wine" :-) Regards, Hewlett-Packard Bob "fond of dry plum wine myself" Niland 3404 East Harmony Road [ihnp4|hplabs]!hpfcla!rjn Fort Collins CO 80525
miller@loral.UUCP (David P. Miller) (12/21/85)
Hey !!. That's a great idea . Why not net.beer !!. Any suds fans second that ??. BIG DAVE. -- David P. Miller - Loral Instrumentation. sdcsvax!sdcc3!sdcc6!loral!miller ******************************************************************************** "Sticks and stones may hurt my bones but words ......................."
jt@nrcvax.UUCP (Jerry Toporek) (12/23/85)
In article <327@cisden.UUCP> john@cisden.UUCP (John Woolley) writes: >Is this newsgroup only for discussion of *wine*, or is (sigh) **beer** >allowed, too? Beer is not only allowed, but also highly recommended. (But not Coors ;->)
spp@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU (Stephen P Pope) (01/03/86)
In article <34100001@hpfcmp.UUCP>, rjn@hpfcla.UUCP writes: > re: "Is this newsgroup only for discussion of *wine* ..." > > [ihnp4|hplabs]!hpfcla!rjn Fort Collins CO 80525 According to official description from USENET, this group is for discussions on "wines and spirits". Beer is neither. however, I expect the intent is all alchololic beverages, so bottoms up guys! steve
ttp@kestrel.ARPA (01/03/86)
Enough discussion of whether or not there'll be a discussion about
beer! I'd like to hear comments about MacKewan's {sp?} Edinburgh Ale
(come's with a RED label, not a green/red pattern}. It's available at
the Liquor Barn, if you happen to be in the SF bay area. I don't know
about its ingredients. It has a sweet taste. What IS ale as
opposed to beer? Why doesn't this one taste like any other ale I've
tasted? Alternatively, which other ales (or beers) are like this one?
-tomdave@ur-helheim.UUCP (David F. Carlson) (01/06/86)
In article <3718@kestrel.ARPA> ttp@kestrel.ARPA writes: > >Enough discussion of whether or not there'll be a discussion about >beer! I'd like to hear comments about MacKewan's {sp?} Edinburgh Ale >What IS ale as opposed to beer? Why doesn't this one taste like any other ale I've >tasted? Alternatively, which other ales (or beers) are like this one? > >-tom Ale vs beer is a very old question. It used to be that brewing with hops was considered a bad thing. King Henry V (I believe) decreed on pain of prison death or worse that all beers brewed in England must not have any hops. In less repressive times people found out that the bittering of the hops produced more enjoyable beers, and there use was made virtually universal. Previous to hops, people used to put palatable things like nettles into beer. Originally, ales used to have less hops and thus be more full bodied and less bitter. Today that line is so confused as to be non-existent. Light beer, heavy ales, lagers, pilsners--who can tell? MacKewan's Edinburgh is a ale which is, as you say, sweet. In days of yore a greater amount of ales used to be sweet. (British stouts and ales of this variety reflect this.) In fact, mead, the "original" viking drink was made of honey--pretty sweet stuff. The sweet stouts and ales are made by including, at some stage of the brewing process, large quantities of unfermentable sugars--fructose or lactose, etc. are added, producing a curious taste to the uninitiated. yours for better beer dave btw: In my tenure on this net, beers and wine are welcome topics. So go ahead and post. -- "The Faster I Go the Behinder I Get" --Lewis Carroll Dave Carlson {allegra,seismo,decvax}!rochester!ur-valhalla!dave
msc@saber.UUCP (Mark Callow) (01/09/86)
> In article <3718@kestrel.ARPA> ttp@kestrel.ARPA writes: > >beer! I'd like to hear comments about MacKewan's {sp?} Edinburgh Ale > >-tom > > MacKewan's Edinburgh is a ale which is, as you say, sweet. In days of > ... > Dave Carlson > Enough already. I hoped the person answering the ale vs. beer question would correct the name but no such luck. It's *McEwan's* Export (in Britain at least. They may well call it "Edinburgh" in the U.S.) Brewed by Scottish and Newcastle Breweries plc. (probably at their brewery in Newcastle Upon Tyne -- just kidding, it's brewed in Edinburgh). Other ales produced by this combine include Newcastle Brown and Newcastle Amber Ales. -- From the TARDIS of Mark Callow msc@saber.uucp, sun!saber!msc@decwrl.dec.com ...{ihnp4,sun}!saber!msc "Boards are long and hard and made of wood"
tjsmedley@watmum.UUCP (Trevor J. Smedley) (01/10/86)
>What IS ale as opposed to beer?
I always thought that one was top fermented (yeast on top in the
fermentation tanks) and the other bottom fermented. Can't remember
which is which though. I'll see if I can look it up somewhere.davidsen@steinmetz.UUCP (01/13/86)
The imported "Newcastle Brown Ale" comes with a descriptive bboklet which
indicates that the brewing of ale is done with the yeast at the top of the
brew, while the brewing of beer is done by yeast at the bottom. This is both
yeast selection and ingredients from what I've read. At any rate , make mine
ale.
--
-bill davidsen
seismo!rochester!steinmetz!--\
/ \
ihnp4! unirot ------------->---> crdos1!davidsen
\ /
chinet! ---------------------/ (davidsen@ge-crd.ARPA)
"It seemed like a good idea at the time..."dave@ur-helheim.UUCP (David F. Carlson) (01/20/86)
In article <620@steinmetz.UUCP> davidsen@kbsvax.UUCP (Davidsen) writes: > >The imported "Newcastle Brown Ale" comes with a descriptive bboklet which >indicates that the brewing of ale is done with the yeast at the top of the >brew, while the brewing of beer is done by yeast at the bottom. This is both >yeast selection and ingredients from what I've read. At any rate , make mine >ale. My hassle with defining a beer as a bottom brewed malted beverage is that the yeast (Carlsbergensis, for the Danish brewery) was not isolated until the 1870's (as my fractured memory remembers). That means that no one drank any beer but rather ale for all time before that date. Think of how the history books would have to be changed! No folks, I don't buy the top/bottom argument. That date is the advent of LAGER beer but what of other types of beer? -- "The Faster I Go the Behinder I Get" --Lewis Carroll Dave Carlson {allegra,seismo,decvax}!rochester!ur-valhalla!dave
laura@hoptoad.uucp (Laura Creighton) (01/30/86)
In article <433@ur-helheim.UUCP> dave@helheim.UUCP (David F. Carlson) writes: > >My hassle with defining a beer as a bottom brewed malted beverage is that the >yeast (Carlsbergensis, for the Danish brewery) was not isolated until the 1870's >(as my fractured memory remembers). That means that no one drank any beer but >rather ale for all time before that date. Think of how the history books would >have to be changed! No folks, I don't buy the top/bottom argument. That date >is the advent of LAGER beer but what of other types of beer? > If you are in the US you have a worse problem. The government, with infinite wisdom, has decided that the only difference between a beer and an ale is *Alcohol Content*. If it has more than <I forget how much> then it is an Ale. Period. No exceptions for American made beers/ales and very few loopholes for imported stuff. So the label means nothing. Of course, if you are in the US you have an even worse problem -- most Americans really do want to drink carbonated dish water. This makes the brewing process rather interesting -- you have to get the mash out *fast* or you might get some real beer by mistake...so some places add extra alcohol later to make up for it. Really revolting... -- Laura Creighton sun!hoptoad!laura (note new address! l5 will still ihnp4!hoptoad!laura work for a while....) hoptoad!laura@lll-crg.arpa