<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Hazy Daze Wit &#8211; Transfer to Secondary</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.brewerman.com/2007/08/hazy-daze-wit-transfer-secondary/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.brewerman.com/2007/08/hazy-daze-wit-transfer-secondary/</link>
	<description>Craft beer, Homebrewing, Reviews</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 May 2009 00:57:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: brewer</title>
		<link>http://www.brewerman.com/2007/08/hazy-daze-wit-transfer-secondary/comment-page-1/#comment-21637</link>
		<dc:creator>brewer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 17:59:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.brewerman.com/2007/08/hazy-daze-wit-transfer-to-secondary/#comment-21637</guid>
		<description>Yeah ... Not my best beer, but still very drinkable.  Just hard to deal with a multi-step mash when you&#039;re not able to apply direct heat.  Decoction is one of those things that takes practice.  I think, with the right mash schedule and a better decoction execution, the small negatives with the final product could be addressed.  Don&#039;t think there&#039;s anything wrong with the recipe.  I think, when I brew it next, I&#039;m going to ratchet back the wheat to a 60% barley/40% wheat ratio.  May give it a bit less of the bready, viscous characteristics that made it into the final beer and were a bit distracting.

The spicing was perhaps just a bit aggressive ... But only a bit.  Thought it gave some astringency, but that very well could have come from the decoctions pulling tannins out of the crushed malt hulls / rice hulls that were in the mash.

Again, very drinkable.  Good tartness, spice flavor, great color, good base beer flavor.  Just would have been a hell of a lot easier with a direct heat mash.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah &#8230; Not my best beer, but still very drinkable.  Just hard to deal with a multi-step mash when you&#8217;re not able to apply direct heat.  Decoction is one of those things that takes practice.  I think, with the right mash schedule and a better decoction execution, the small negatives with the final product could be addressed.  Don&#8217;t think there&#8217;s anything wrong with the recipe.  I think, when I brew it next, I&#8217;m going to ratchet back the wheat to a 60% barley/40% wheat ratio.  May give it a bit less of the bready, viscous characteristics that made it into the final beer and were a bit distracting.</p>
<p>The spicing was perhaps just a bit aggressive &#8230; But only a bit.  Thought it gave some astringency, but that very well could have come from the decoctions pulling tannins out of the crushed malt hulls / rice hulls that were in the mash.</p>
<p>Again, very drinkable.  Good tartness, spice flavor, great color, good base beer flavor.  Just would have been a hell of a lot easier with a direct heat mash.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://www.brewerman.com/2007/08/hazy-daze-wit-transfer-secondary/comment-page-1/#comment-21481</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Aug 2008 15:51:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.brewerman.com/2007/08/hazy-daze-wit-transfer-to-secondary/#comment-21481</guid>
		<description>Whatever happened with the Wit? How did it turn out?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whatever happened with the Wit? How did it turn out?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
