I know many of you may shun these, but for us beer drinkers with
budgets, what do you say? It's hard to say, but I think I prefer
budweiser. On the other hand miller goes down smoother. Is Budweiser
brewed with corn? Excuse me for my lack of knowledge on the subject,
but I'm not a beer expert. I disagree with the commercials that say
Miller has more taste, I actually think bud has more taste, I can't
tell if it's corn or hops or what? Also what's up with this freshness
debate? Which one is usually really fresher. I don't beleive miller's
crap that all american beers are fresh because I bought some icehouse
once that tasted stale as hell, you know, that metallic sort of taste.
Other times I got icehouse and it was fresh. From the cheap beers, in
my opinion Mickeys malt liquor is the best. Nice sweet flavor, goes
down very smooth and no crappy aftertaste. Rolling Rock is also not
half bad, If you can get it on sale.

On Thu, 9 Dec 2004, mainunderdawg wrote:

> I know many of you may shun these, but for us beer drinkers with
> budgets, what do you say? It's hard to say, but I think I prefer

I'm probably on as much a budget as anyone, and I just gotta say no.
My solution is to drink less, drink better. Rather than spend $12 on a
12pack of nasty beer every pay day, I spend $12 on a mixed sixer of really
good beer.

On Thu, 09 Dec 2004 18:10:49 -0800, mainunderdawg wrote:

> I know many of you may shun these, but for us beer drinkers with budgets,
> what do you say? It's hard to say, but I think I prefer budweiser.


Bud is brewed with rice, Miller with corn. This makes Miller the more
American of the two because corn comes from America while rice is an
Asian import. I think the taste you like in Bud is the flavor of the
beechwood aging. Some people think they can taste the corn in Miller,
while the rice contributes practically no taste at all to Bud. Both are
about 90% fermentable, contributing alcohol while adding practically
nothing to the body.

As far as freshness goes, both Bud and Miller are quite religious about
removing out of date beer from distributors and retailers. What
constitutes old? Beer that is 120 days old.

When it comes to my favorite, it's Blatz. It has a skunk taste just like
Heineken and Becks.


-CB

On Thu, 09 Dec 2004 18:10:49 -0800, mainunderdawg wrote:

> I know many of you may shun these, but for us beer drinkers with budgets,
> what do you say? It's hard to say, but I think I prefer budweiser.


Bud is brewed with rice, Miller with corn. This makes Miller the more
American of the two because corn comes from America while rice is an
Asian import. I think the taste you like in Bud is the flavor of the
beechwood aging. Some people think they can taste the corn in Miller,
while the rice contributes practically no taste at all to Bud. Both are
about 90% fermentable, contributing alcohol while adding practically
nothing to the body.

As far as freshness goes, both Bud and Miller are quite religious about
removing out of date beer from distributors and retailers. What
constitutes old? Beer that is 120 days old.

When it comes to my favorite, it's Blatz. It has a skunk taste just like
Heineken and Becks.


-CB

Craig Bergren ) wrote:
: I think the taste you like in Bud is the flavor of the
: beechwood aging.

Tell me more about that. Exactly how is Bud "beechwood aged?"

I think the taste that some people like is the green apple flavor which
comes from acataldehyde, considered an off-flavor by many purists.

--
Bill

reply to sirwill1 AT same domain as above

Craig Bergren wrote:
> On Thu, 09 Dec 2004 18:10:49 -0800, mainunderdawg wrote:
>
>
>>I know many of you may shun these, but for us beer drinkers with budgets,
>>what do you say? It's hard to say, but I think I prefer budweiser.
>
>
>
> Bud is brewed with rice, Miller with corn. This makes Miller the more
> American of the two because corn comes from America while rice is an
> Asian import.
I think you mean Californan import (that's why Kikkoman has a soy sauce
plant here[for a value of here being Folsom CA])
I think the taste you like in Bud is the flavor of the
> beechwood aging. Some people think they can taste the corn in Miller,
> while the rice contributes practically no taste at all to Bud. Both are
> about 90% fermentable, contributing alcohol while adding practically
> nothing to the body.
>
> As far as freshness goes, both Bud and Miller are quite religious about
> removing out of date beer from distributors and retailers. What
> constitutes old? Beer that is 120 days old.
>
> When it comes to my favorite, it's Blatz. It has a skunk taste just like
> Heineken and Becks.



--
Nels E Satterlund I don't speak for the company, specially here
<-- Use this address for personal Email
My Lurkers motto: I read much better and faster, than I type.

Bill Benzel wrote:
> Craig Bergren ) wrote:
> : I think the taste you like in Bud is the flavor of the
> : beechwood aging.
>
> Tell me more about that. Exactly how is Bud "beechwood aged?"

IIRC Beachwood chip are put into the wort.
>
> I think the taste that some people like is the green apple flavor which
> comes from acataldehyde, considered an off-flavor by many purists.
>


--
Nels E Satterlund I don't speak for the company, specially here
<-- Use this address for personal Email
My Lurkers motto: I read much better and faster, than I type.

"Craig Bergren" > wrote in message
news
> Bud is brewed with rice, Miller with corn. This makes Miller the more
> American of the two because corn comes from America while rice is an
> Asian import.

Whatever. I don't know where Bud's rice comes from, but most of the rice
consumed in America comes from California.

> I think the taste you like in Bud is the flavor of the
> beechwood aging.

Beechwood contributes zero flavor. It's used as a clarifier.

The taste difference in Bud is due to their yeast, which kicks out high
levels of acetaldehyde. The chemical tastes like green apple.

-Steve

"Craig Bergren" > wrote in message
news
> Bud is brewed with rice, Miller with corn. This makes Miller the more
> American of the two because corn comes from America while rice is an
> Asian import.

Whatever. I don't know where Bud's rice comes from, but most of the rice
consumed in America comes from California.

> I think the taste you like in Bud is the flavor of the
> beechwood aging.

Beechwood contributes zero flavor. It's used as a clarifier.

The taste difference in Bud is due to their yeast, which kicks out high
levels of acetaldehyde. The chemical tastes like green apple.

-Steve

"Nels E. Satterlund" > wrote in message
...

> Bill Benzel wrote:
>> Craig Bergren ) wrote:
>> : I think the taste you like in Bud is the flavor of the
>> : beechwood aging.
>>
>> Tell me more about that. Exactly how is Bud "beechwood aged?"
>
> IIRC Beachwood chip are put into the wort.

No, it's post-fermentation. Or, to be more accurate (and if I recall
correctly) it's at the very end of fermentation. The beechwood acts as a
yeast flocculator. Bud doesn't spend a whole lot of time on the wood, but it
is still used.

-Steve

"Nels E. Satterlund" > wrote in message
...

> Bill Benzel wrote:
>> Craig Bergren ) wrote:
>> : I think the taste you like in Bud is the flavor of the
>> : beechwood aging.
>>
>> Tell me more about that. Exactly how is Bud "beechwood aged?"
>
> IIRC Beachwood chip are put into the wort.

No, it's post-fermentation. Or, to be more accurate (and if I recall
correctly) it's at the very end of fermentation. The beechwood acts as a
yeast flocculator. Bud doesn't spend a whole lot of time on the wood, but it
is still used.

-Steve

Craig Bergren wrote:

> On Thu, 09 Dec 2004 18:10:49 -0800, mainunderdawg wrote:
>
>>I know many of you may shun these, but for us beer drinkers with budgets,
>>what do you say? It's hard to say, but I think I prefer budweiser.
>
> Bud is brewed with rice, Miller with corn. This makes Miller the more
> American of the two because corn comes from America while rice is an
> Asian import.

Nope. Rice is grown in California and Louisiana, among other places.
Budweiser uses a specific kind of rice, brewer's rice, and it's all
American-grown.

> I think the taste you like in Bud is the flavor of the
> beechwood aging.

Except that the "beechwood aging" process adds virtually nothing to the
flavor of Bud (well, what little flavor the stuff has, anyway). Bud's
"flavor" comes from its specific blend of pale malted barley and rice,
its not-quite-at-threshold-perception blend of hops, and the qualities
of A-B's house yeast strain(s).

> Some people think they can taste the corn in Miller,

That's a pretty neat trick, since Miller uses mainly corn syrup (and
some brewer's corn), and the corn syrup is mainly sugar, so it ferments
out fairly cleanly. If you taste "corn" flavors in beer, it's due to
something else.

> while the rice contributes practically no taste at all to Bud. Both are
> about 90% fermentable, contributing alcohol while adding practically
> nothing to the body.

This much is quite true.

> As far as freshness goes, both Bud and Miller are quite religious about
> removing out of date beer from distributors and retailers. What
> constitutes old? Beer that is 120 days old.

I'm not sure A-B lets Bud sit on the shelves even that long.

> When it comes to my favorite, it's Blatz. It has a skunk taste just like
> Heineken and Becks.

Yum, mispackaged bottled beer that's been overexposed to bright store
lights. My un-favorite.
--
dgs

Expletive Deleted wrote:

> On Thu, 9 Dec 2004, mainunderdawg wrote:
>
>>I know many of you may shun these, but for us beer drinkers with
>>budgets, what do you say? It's hard to say, but I think I prefer
>
> I'm probably on as much a budget as anyone, and I just gotta say no.
> My solution is to drink less, drink better. Rather than spend $12 on a
> 12pack of nasty beer every pay day, I spend $12 on a mixed sixer of really
> good beer.

Word to that. Life's too short to drink cheap beer. Drink better, and
drink less.
--
dgs

mainunderdawg wrote:

> I know many of you may shun these, but for us beer drinkers with
> budgets, what do you say?

I say, most of us are on budgets. That doesn't mean we have to drink
boring, predictable, mass-produced, low-flavor, bland junk. Drink less,
so you can afford better. It isn't that hard.
--
dgs

mainunderdawg wrote:

> I know many of you may shun these, but for us beer drinkers with
> budgets, what do you say?

I say, most of us are on budgets. That doesn't mean we have to drink
boring, predictable, mass-produced, low-flavor, bland junk. Drink less,
so you can afford better. It isn't that hard.
--
dgs

"mainunderdawg" > wrote:
> I know many of you may shun these, but for us beer drinkers with
> budgets, what do you say?

I'd say that you can probably find better beers for the same price,
or cheaper beers that are as good, so why bother with Miller or Bud?

> Also what's up with this freshness debate?

There's no debate. Bud is trying to ram the idea that fresh beer
is good, and they're taking pains to get beer into stores/bars
fast. But overly fresh beer isn't any better than overly stale
beer really.

> Which one is usually really fresher. I don't beleive miller's
> crap that all american beers are fresh because I bought some
> icehouse once that tasted stale as hell, you know, that metallic
> sort of taste. Other times I got icehouse and it was fresh.

Keep in mind the off tastes may not be due to how fresh a beer
is, but how well it has been treated. A case of beer left in
the window isn't going to be as good as one stored chilled in a
dark room.

> From the cheap beers, in my opinion Mickeys malt liquor is the
> best. Nice sweet flavor, goes down very smooth and no crappy
> aftertaste. Rolling Rock is also not
> half bad, If you can get it on sale.

Both of these have too much corn for my tastes...
--
//*================================================= ===============++
|| Russ Perry Jr 2175 S Tonne Dr #114 Arlington Hts IL 60005 ||
|| 847-952-9729 [NEW!] VIDEOGAME COLLECTOR! ||
++================================================ ================*//

Expletive Deleted wrote:
>
> Rather than spend $12 on a
> 12pack of nasty beer every pay day, I spend $12 on a mixed sixer of really
> good beer.

Geez, buying single bottles of beer because you're "on a budget" makes
about as much sense as "rent to own".

Instead of paying $12 for 6 beers a day, why not skip a day and buy 24
bottles of beer every other day for $24-30? If it's variety you crave
(as long as you don't DRINK 12 bottles per day) before you know it
you'll have a good supply of great beer that hasn't sat around for who
knows how long under the bright lights of the typical "beer" store that
sells singles.

Expletive Deleted wrote:
>
> Rather than spend $12 on a
> 12pack of nasty beer every pay day, I spend $12 on a mixed sixer of really
> good beer.

Geez, buying single bottles of beer because you're "on a budget" makes
about as much sense as "rent to own".

Instead of paying $12 for 6 beers a day, why not skip a day and buy 24
bottles of beer every other day for $24-30? If it's variety you crave
(as long as you don't DRINK 12 bottles per day) before you know it
you'll have a good supply of great beer that hasn't sat around for who
knows how long under the bright lights of the typical "beer" store that
sells singles.

"dgs" > wrote in message
...
> Nope. Rice is grown in California and Louisiana, among other places.
> Budweiser uses a specific kind of rice, brewer's rice, and it's all
> American-grown.

He might mean that rice in general, the plant, not the actual grain they
use, is an import. I think A-B's rice comes from California and Arkansas,
but I'm not sure about the Arkansas.

> > I think the taste you like in Bud is the flavor of the
> > beechwood aging.
>
> Except that the "beechwood aging" process adds virtually nothing to the
> flavor of Bud (well, what little flavor the stuff has, anyway).

Beechwood aging does not add flavor, but avoids an off-flavor, according to
what A-B people told me.

> Bud's
> "flavor" comes from its specific blend of pale malted barley and rice,
> its not-quite-at-threshold-perception blend of hops, and the qualities
> of A-B's house yeast strain(s).

Again, A-B people told me that the yeast is the most significant factor in
the taste of Bud.

> > Some people think they can taste the corn in Miller,
>
> That's a pretty neat trick, since Miller uses mainly corn syrup (and
> some brewer's corn), and the corn syrup is mainly sugar, so it ferments
> out fairly cleanly. If you taste "corn" flavors in beer, it's due to
> something else.

Don't tell Joel, he's sure he tastes corn in S*iner B*ck.

--
Lew Bryson

"As for talking shit in this NG, Lew, you're the undisputed king, and
that's no SHITE." -- Bob Skilnik, 1/31/02

www.lewbryson.com

"dgs" > wrote in message
...
> Nope. Rice is grown in California and Louisiana, among other places.
> Budweiser uses a specific kind of rice, brewer's rice, and it's all
> American-grown.

He might mean that rice in general, the plant, not the actual grain they
use, is an import. I think A-B's rice comes from California and Arkansas,
but I'm not sure about the Arkansas.

> > I think the taste you like in Bud is the flavor of the
> > beechwood aging.
>
> Except that the "beechwood aging" process adds virtually nothing to the
> flavor of Bud (well, what little flavor the stuff has, anyway).

Beechwood aging does not add flavor, but avoids an off-flavor, according to
what A-B people told me.

> Bud's
> "flavor" comes from its specific blend of pale malted barley and rice,
> its not-quite-at-threshold-perception blend of hops, and the qualities
> of A-B's house yeast strain(s).

Again, A-B people told me that the yeast is the most significant factor in
the taste of Bud.

> > Some people think they can taste the corn in Miller,
>
> That's a pretty neat trick, since Miller uses mainly corn syrup (and
> some brewer's corn), and the corn syrup is mainly sugar, so it ferments
> out fairly cleanly. If you taste "corn" flavors in beer, it's due to
> something else.

Don't tell Joel, he's sure he tastes corn in S*iner B*ck.

--
Lew Bryson

"As for talking shit in this NG, Lew, you're the undisputed king, and
that's no SHITE." -- Bob Skilnik, 1/31/02

www.lewbryson.com

Nels E. Satterlund wrote:

> Craig Bergren wrote:
> rice is an
>> Asian import.
>
> I think you mean Californan import (that's why Kikkoman has a soy sauce
> plant (in) Folsom CA

Huh? Rice is from California because they make soy sauce there? Does
that mean french fries come from Fremont, Ohio; Muscatine, Iowa; and
Stockton, California because Heinz makes ketchup there?

Nels E. Satterlund wrote:

> Craig Bergren wrote:
> rice is an
>> Asian import.
>
> I think you mean Californan import (that's why Kikkoman has a soy sauce
> plant (in) Folsom CA

Huh? Rice is from California because they make soy sauce there? Does
that mean french fries come from Fremont, Ohio; Muscatine, Iowa; and
Stockton, California because Heinz makes ketchup there?

>Beechwood aging does not add flavor, but avoids an off-flavor, according to
>what A-B people told me.

The bud ads I saw some years ago, it seemed perfectly obvious to me,
were intended to mislead gullible consumers into thinking that beer
was "aged" (presumably for a long time) in those big beautiful barrels
we see in pictures of wine cellars, made only of expensive beechwood,
to impart that delicious bud flavor.

I often used those ads when discussing false advertising, and my
college-level students invariably responded in that misled way, when I
showed a slide of such an ad and asked them 'What does that ad tell
you?"

They were staggered to hear me read about "beechwood aging" from a
book on beer-making; and then I added that by dividing the figure
stated in the ad as the tremendous amount of beechwood A-B bought per
year, by the amount of bud produced in a year, it came to about two
ounces of wood per "quarter" of beer--about the amount of wood in a
No. 2 pencil.

So much for Truth in Advertising!

vince norris

>Beechwood aging does not add flavor, but avoids an off-flavor, according to
>what A-B people told me.

The bud ads I saw some years ago, it seemed perfectly obvious to me,
were intended to mislead gullible consumers into thinking that beer
was "aged" (presumably for a long time) in those big beautiful barrels
we see in pictures of wine cellars, made only of expensive beechwood,
to impart that delicious bud flavor.

I often used those ads when discussing false advertising, and my
college-level students invariably responded in that misled way, when I
showed a slide of such an ad and asked them 'What does that ad tell
you?"

They were staggered to hear me read about "beechwood aging" from a
book on beer-making; and then I added that by dividing the figure
stated in the ad as the tremendous amount of beechwood A-B bought per
year, by the amount of bud produced in a year, it came to about two
ounces of wood per "quarter" of beer--about the amount of wood in a
No. 2 pencil.

So much for Truth in Advertising!

vince norris

Craig Bergren wrote:

> [...]
> Corn is a new world grain, a post-columbian import to Asia and Europe.
> Thus Miller is more American because it uses American ingredients.

It uses *an* ingredient that was native to the Americas. Rice is grown
in the USA. It has become an American crop, thus an American
ingredient. If you don't think so, then that makes the vast majority
of Americans "not American" for the same reason.

Wanna guess where barley comes from, then? And wheat?
--
dgs

On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 17:30:33 -0800, Steve Jackson wrote:

> "Craig Bergren" > wrote in message
> news >
>> Bud is brewed with rice, Miller with corn. This makes Miller the more
>> American of the two because corn comes from America while rice is an
>> Asian import.
>
> Whatever. I don't know where Bud's rice comes from, but most of the rice
> consumed in America comes from California.

More rice is grown in Arkansas than in any other state, by a long shot.
Rice, is not indigenous to the U.S. as is corn. Rice comes from Thailand,
or thereabouts (at least according to the rice industry).
http://www.riceweb.org/History.htm

If these assumptions are correct, then domestication most likely took
place in the area of the Korat or in some sheltered basin area of northern
Thailand, in one of the longitudinal valleys of Myanmar's Shan Upland, in
southwestern China, or in Assam.

or more recently from Madagascar (Africa):
http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/...w/RR/afr1.html

The Texas rice industry owes its origins to the introduction of
rice (Oryza sativa) seed from Madagascar to the Carolina colonies about
1685.

http://www.riceweb.org/countries/usa.htm

Rice in the US is produced in three principal areas: the Grand Prairie and
Mississippi River Delta of Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Missouri
from 32° to 36° N latitude; the Gulf Coast of Florida, Louisiana, and
Texas from 27° to 31° N latitude; and the Sacramento Valley of
California from 38° to 40° N latitude.

Arkansas produces more rice than any other state with almost 3 times the
acreage of California.
http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications...field/rcs-bby/

Arkansas--the largest rice growing State in the United States--harvested
area is projected at 1.45 million acres... At 495,000 acres, harvested
area in California is down 33,000 acres ...

On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 17:30:33 -0800, Steve Jackson wrote:

> "Craig Bergren" > wrote in message
> news >
>> Bud is brewed with rice, Miller with corn. This makes Miller the more
>> American of the two because corn comes from America while rice is an
>> Asian import.
>
> Whatever. I don't know where Bud's rice comes from, but most of the rice
> consumed in America comes from California.

More rice is grown in Arkansas than in any other state, by a long shot.
Rice, is not indigenous to the U.S. as is corn. Rice comes from Thailand,
or thereabouts (at least according to the rice industry).
http://www.riceweb.org/History.htm

If these assumptions are correct, then domestication most likely took
place in the area of the Korat or in some sheltered basin area of northern
Thailand, in one of the longitudinal valleys of Myanmar's Shan Upland, in
southwestern China, or in Assam.

or more recently from Madagascar (Africa):
http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/...w/RR/afr1.html

The Texas rice industry owes its origins to the introduction of
rice (Oryza sativa) seed from Madagascar to the Carolina colonies about
1685.

http://www.riceweb.org/countries/usa.htm

Rice in the US is produced in three principal areas: the Grand Prairie and
Mississippi River Delta of Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Missouri
from 32° to 36° N latitude; the Gulf Coast of Florida, Louisiana, and
Texas from 27° to 31° N latitude; and the Sacramento Valley of
California from 38° to 40° N latitude.

Arkansas produces more rice than any other state with almost 3 times the
acreage of California.
http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications...field/rcs-bby/

Arkansas--the largest rice growing State in the United States--harvested
area is projected at 1.45 million acres... At 495,000 acres, harvested
area in California is down 33,000 acres ...

On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 17:30:33 -0800, Steve Jackson wrote:

> "Craig Bergren" > wrote in message
> news >
>> Bud is brewed with rice, Miller with corn. This makes Miller the more
>> American of the two because corn comes from America while rice is an
>> Asian import.
>
> Whatever. I don't know where Bud's rice comes from, but most of the rice
> consumed in America comes from California.

More rice is grown in Arkansas than in any other state, by a long shot.
Rice, is not indigenous to the U.S. as is corn. Rice comes from Thailand,
or thereabouts (at least according to the rice industry).
http://www.riceweb.org/History.htm

If these assumptions are correct, then domestication most likely took
place in the area of the Korat or in some sheltered basin area of northern
Thailand, in one of the longitudinal valleys of Myanmar's Shan Upland, in
southwestern China, or in Assam.

or more recently from Madagascar (Africa):
http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/...w/RR/afr1.html

The Texas rice industry owes its origins to the introduction of
rice (Oryza sativa) seed from Madagascar to the Carolina colonies about
1685.

http://www.riceweb.org/countries/usa.htm

Rice in the US is produced in three principal areas: the Grand Prairie and
Mississippi River Delta of Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Missouri
from 32° to 36° N latitude; the Gulf Coast of Florida, Louisiana, and
Texas from 27° to 31° N latitude; and the Sacramento Valley of
California from 38° to 40° N latitude.

Arkansas produces more rice than any other state with almost 3 times the
acreage of California.
http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications...field/rcs-bby/

Arkansas--the largest rice growing State in the United States--harvested
area is projected at 1.45 million acres... At 495,000 acres, harvested
area in California is down 33,000 acres ...

On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 17:32:12 -0800, Steve Jackson wrote:

> "Nels E. Satterlund" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> Bill Benzel wrote:
>>> Craig Bergren ) wrote:
>>> : I think the taste you like in Bud is the flavor of the beechwood
>>> : aging.
>>>
>>> Tell me more about that. Exactly how is Bud "beechwood aged?"
>>
>> IIRC Beachwood chip are put into the wort.
>
> No, it's post-fermentation. Or, to be more accurate (and if I recall
> correctly) it's at the very end of fermentation. The beechwood acts as a
> yeast flocculator. Bud doesn't spend a whole lot of time on the wood, but
> it is still used.
>
> -Steve


According the AB website:

"After a layer of beechwood chips is spread on the bottom of the lager
tanks, the beer is transferred into the tanks. A portion of freshly
yeasted wort called Kraeusen is added. Beechwood Aging is part of
secondary fermentation in which the yeast settles on the beechwood chips
and works until the beer is completely fermented. As secondary
fermentation occurs, the beer is naturally carbonated and its final flavor
develops - resulting in a smooth-tasting beer. This expensive process is
unique to Anheuser-Busch. done."

On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 17:32:12 -0800, Steve Jackson wrote:

> "Nels E. Satterlund" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> Bill Benzel wrote:
>>> Craig Bergren ) wrote:
>>> : I think the taste you like in Bud is the flavor of the beechwood
>>> : aging.
>>>
>>> Tell me more about that. Exactly how is Bud "beechwood aged?"
>>
>> IIRC Beachwood chip are put into the wort.
>
> No, it's post-fermentation. Or, to be more accurate (and if I recall
> correctly) it's at the very end of fermentation. The beechwood acts as a
> yeast flocculator. Bud doesn't spend a whole lot of time on the wood, but
> it is still used.
>
> -Steve


According the AB website:

"After a layer of beechwood chips is spread on the bottom of the lager
tanks, the beer is transferred into the tanks. A portion of freshly
yeasted wort called Kraeusen is added. Beechwood Aging is part of
secondary fermentation in which the yeast settles on the beechwood chips
and works until the beer is completely fermented. As secondary
fermentation occurs, the beer is naturally carbonated and its final flavor
develops - resulting in a smooth-tasting beer. This expensive process is
unique to Anheuser-Busch. done."

On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 17:32:12 -0800, Steve Jackson wrote:

> "Nels E. Satterlund" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> Bill Benzel wrote:
>>> Craig Bergren ) wrote:
>>> : I think the taste you like in Bud is the flavor of the beechwood
>>> : aging.
>>>
>>> Tell me more about that. Exactly how is Bud "beechwood aged?"
>>
>> IIRC Beachwood chip are put into the wort.
>
> No, it's post-fermentation. Or, to be more accurate (and if I recall
> correctly) it's at the very end of fermentation. The beechwood acts as a
> yeast flocculator. Bud doesn't spend a whole lot of time on the wood, but
> it is still used.
>
> -Steve


According the AB website:

"After a layer of beechwood chips is spread on the bottom of the lager
tanks, the beer is transferred into the tanks. A portion of freshly
yeasted wort called Kraeusen is added. Beechwood Aging is part of
secondary fermentation in which the yeast settles on the beechwood chips
and works until the beer is completely fermented. As secondary
fermentation occurs, the beer is naturally carbonated and its final flavor
develops - resulting in a smooth-tasting beer. This expensive process is
unique to Anheuser-Busch. done."

"Craig Bergren" > wrote in message
news
> According the AB website:
>
> "After a layer of beechwood chips is spread on the bottom of the lager
> tanks, the beer is transferred into the tanks. A portion of freshly
> yeasted wort called Kraeusen is added. Beechwood Aging is part of
> secondary fermentation in which the yeast settles on the beechwood chips
> and works until the beer is completely fermented. As secondary
> fermentation occurs, the beer is naturally carbonated and its final flavor
> develops - resulting in a smooth-tasting beer. This expensive process is
> unique to Anheuser-Busch. done."

Just to clarify, krausening is not unique to A-B. The beechwood "aging" is,
but krausening is a not-common but not-unusual technique. And it is still
frequently used by several German breweries.

_Steve

"Craig Bergren" > wrote in message
news
> According the AB website:
>
> "After a layer of beechwood chips is spread on the bottom of the lager
> tanks, the beer is transferred into the tanks. A portion of freshly
> yeasted wort called Kraeusen is added. Beechwood Aging is part of
> secondary fermentation in which the yeast settles on the beechwood chips
> and works until the beer is completely fermented. As secondary
> fermentation occurs, the beer is naturally carbonated and its final flavor
> develops - resulting in a smooth-tasting beer. This expensive process is
> unique to Anheuser-Busch. done."

Just to clarify, krausening is not unique to A-B. The beechwood "aging" is,
but krausening is a not-common but not-unusual technique. And it is still
frequently used by several German breweries.

_Steve

"Craig Bergren" > wrote in message
news
> According the AB website:
>
> "After a layer of beechwood chips is spread on the bottom of the lager
> tanks, the beer is transferred into the tanks. A portion of freshly
> yeasted wort called Kraeusen is added. Beechwood Aging is part of
> secondary fermentation in which the yeast settles on the beechwood chips
> and works until the beer is completely fermented. As secondary
> fermentation occurs, the beer is naturally carbonated and its final flavor
> develops - resulting in a smooth-tasting beer. This expensive process is
> unique to Anheuser-Busch. done."

Just to clarify, krausening is not unique to A-B. The beechwood "aging" is,
but krausening is a not-common but not-unusual technique. And it is still
frequently used by several German breweries.

_Steve

"Craig Bergren" > wrote in message
news
> Rice originates from somewhere near Thailand. It was first grown in the
> United States on large plantations in the Carolinas (Carolina Golden).
> The North American slave trade was based on acquisition of labor to
> cultivate rice, Africans having natural immunity to malaria that white
> endentured servants from Europe lacked.

I'm wondering where you got the info. Isn't malaria still more than a little
problematic in sub-Saharan Africa? And I was under the impression that
cotton supplied more of the demand for slave labor than anything else. But
I'm far from an expert on either point, so my impressions could be way off.

> Corn is a new world grain, a post-columbian import to Asia and Europe.
> Thus Miller is more American because it uses American ingredients.

Bah. If it's grown or produced in America, it's America. We don't call pasta
Chinese, because they came up with the noodle long before the Italians. We
don't say that hamburgers aren't very American because cattle aren't native
to the Western Hempisphere. We don't say that Hershey's is really more
Mexican than anything, since that's where Europeans discovered chocolate, or
that Starbucks is more Colombian than American.

-Steve

"Craig Bergren" > wrote in message
news
> Rice originates from somewhere near Thailand. It was first grown in the
> United States on large plantations in the Carolinas (Carolina Golden).
> The North American slave trade was based on acquisition of labor to
> cultivate rice, Africans having natural immunity to malaria that white
> endentured servants from Europe lacked.

I'm wondering where you got the info. Isn't malaria still more than a little
problematic in sub-Saharan Africa? And I was under the impression that
cotton supplied more of the demand for slave labor than anything else. But
I'm far from an expert on either point, so my impressions could be way off.

> Corn is a new world grain, a post-columbian import to Asia and Europe.
> Thus Miller is more American because it uses American ingredients.

Bah. If it's grown or produced in America, it's America. We don't call pasta
Chinese, because they came up with the noodle long before the Italians. We
don't say that hamburgers aren't very American because cattle aren't native
to the Western Hempisphere. We don't say that Hershey's is really more
Mexican than anything, since that's where Europeans discovered chocolate, or
that Starbucks is more Colombian than American.

-Steve

"Craig Bergren" > wrote in message
news
> If we take
> into consideration hops, Bud is loses even more All American points
> because not only do they use more grains that didn't originate in the US,
> they use hops that aren't even grown here.

Hops, as far as I know, are not native to either of the Americas at all, so
all beers "lose" on that count.

>
> http://www.realbeer.com/library/rbpm...ail-199710.php
> "The new agreement has A-B buying 8% of the Czech hop harvest over the
> next
> ten years."

And as for that, those Czech hops represent a pretty small proportion of the
hops A-B uses. They have massive hop fields in Idaho (I think it's Idaho -
Lew?) where the overwhelming bulk of their hops originate.

-Steve

On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 23:26:18 -0800, Steve Jackson wrote:

> "Craig Bergren" > wrote in message
> news >
>> Rice originates from somewhere near Thailand. It was first grown in the
>> United States on large plantations in the Carolinas (Carolina Golden).
>> The North American slave trade was based on acquisition of labor to
>> cultivate rice, Africans having natural immunity to malaria that white
>> endentured servants from Europe lacked.
>
> I'm wondering where you got the info. Isn't malaria still more than a
> little problematic in sub-Saharan Africa? And I was under the impression
> that cotton supplied more of the demand for slave labor than anything
> else. But I'm far from an expert on either point, so my impressions could
> be way off.

Where did I say Africans were immune to malaria? I said they were the
basis of the slave trade, imported to work the swamps in the Carlolinas
because they were more resistant to malaria. They were also more resistant
to yellow fever. These beliefs may not be real, but the importers of the
slaves certainly thought they were true at the time. Cotton was also a
demand for slaves, but the trade was already well established by the
earlier rice plantations. It wasn't until introduction of the cotton
gin that cotton began to replace rice and rice cultivation moved to
Louisiana, Texas, and Arkansas. Certainly when this country was founded,
rice was king in the deep south with indigo a close second.

http://www.mariner.org/captivepassag...al/arr014.html

"Africans in South Carolina did have greater resistance to some of the
diseases such as yellow fever and malaria, however, because both diseases
were endemic in Africa and thus many slaves were immune to them."

http://www.slaveryinamerica.org/scri...m=m&letter=yes

"Malaria: A protozoal disease transmitted by the Anopheles mosquito, it is
one of the oldest in human history. It derives its name from the Italian
word for bad air, mal'aria, because early Romans associated the sickness
with the foul smelling vapors from nearby swamps. It probably originated
in Africa, and it was commonly believed during the era of the slave trade
that certain West Africans carried a resistance to the disease in their
blood."

http://www.richland2.org/rce/slavery.htm
"Slavery had been important to South Carolina since the first English
settlement in 1670. Slave labor was first used in the Lowcountry for the
cultivation of rice. Planters knew very little about growing rice and
depended upon slaves from West Africa's rice growing areas for the
knowledge to raise the crop. By the early 1700's, the labor of thousands
of slaves made rice the most important crop in the Lowcountry.
"
"With the spread of the cotton gin after 1793, cotton became the dominant
crop throughout the South."


>
>> Corn is a new world grain, a post-columbian import to Asia and Europe.
>> Thus Miller is more American because it uses American ingredients.
>
> Bah. If it's grown or produced in America, it's America. We don't call

Please speak for yourself. I didn't say that Bud is un-American, only
that Miller is more American than Bud. Not only does Miller use
ingredients that are grown in the US, they use ingredients that are
indigenous to the US. Bud not only uses foreign grown hops, their grain
bill is completely of imported varieties of grain. After all, what could
be more Irish than the potato. The answer is Guinness!

> pasta Chinese, because they came up with the noodle long before the
> Italians. We don't say that hamburgers aren't very American because
> cattle aren't native to the Western Hemisphere. We don't say that
> Hershey's is

I would never say that hamburgers, or for that matter, hot dogs are not
American. However, I would say that corn flakes are more American than
either. Nothing is more American than the BATF.

> really more Mexican than anything, since that's where Europeans discovered
> chocolate, or that Starbucks is more Colombian than American.
>

Every educated American knows that the best chocolate is Belgian or Swiss
and Starbucks is communist, the worst thing an American can be.

> -Steve

CB

Steve Jackson > wrote:
>"Nels E. Satterlund" > wrote:
>> Bill Benzel wrote:
>>> Craig Bergren ) wrote:
>>> : I think the taste you like in Bud is the flavor of the
>>> : beechwood aging.
>>>
>>> Tell me more about that. Exactly how is Bud "beechwood aged?"
>>
>> IIRC Beachwood chip are put into the wort.
>
>No, it's post-fermentation. Or, to be more accurate (and if I recall
>correctly) it's at the very end of fermentation. The beechwood acts as a
>yeast flocculator. Bud doesn't spend a whole lot of time on the wood, but it
>is still used.

I did another Anheuser-Busch factory tour Friday. 21 days
in the (huge) tanks on beechwood.
And the beechwood (not beachwood-- ew!) is used *strictly*
so there's more surface area for the yeast to be exposed to
the beer (it's no longer wort at that point-- 5-6 days of
fermentation). Beechwood is the wood of choice because it has
no flavor contribution to the beer.
--
Joel Plutchak "Never try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes
plutchak at [...] your time and it annoys the pig." -anonymous

Steve Jackson > wrote:
>"Nels E. Satterlund" > wrote:
>> Bill Benzel wrote:
>>> Craig Bergren ) wrote:
>>> : I think the taste you like in Bud is the flavor of the
>>> : beechwood aging.
>>>
>>> Tell me more about that. Exactly how is Bud "beechwood aged?"
>>
>> IIRC Beachwood chip are put into the wort.
>
>No, it's post-fermentation. Or, to be more accurate (and if I recall
>correctly) it's at the very end of fermentation. The beechwood acts as a
>yeast flocculator. Bud doesn't spend a whole lot of time on the wood, but it
>is still used.

I did another Anheuser-Busch factory tour Friday. 21 days
in the (huge) tanks on beechwood.
And the beechwood (not beachwood-- ew!) is used *strictly*
so there's more surface area for the yeast to be exposed to
the beer (it's no longer wort at that point-- 5-6 days of
fermentation). Beechwood is the wood of choice because it has
no flavor contribution to the beer.
--
Joel Plutchak "Never try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes
plutchak at [...] your time and it annoys the pig." -anonymous