Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

MUM wash

Expand Messages
  • vodkaman1976
    Ok fellows last night I did my initial stripping run of my mum wash. It yielded 3 1.75 liter bottles and about a quarter of another. My first bottle came out
    Message 1 of 4 , Sep 1, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Ok fellows last night I did my initial stripping run of my mum wash.
      It yielded 3 1.75 liter bottles and about a quarter of another. My
      first bottle came out of the still smelled a little cidery like the
      mash did but was clear. 2nd bottle started clear but turned cloudy and
      still smelled cider like with a few floaties. 3rd bottle was clear but
      had a few floaties and smelled cider like. I ran the still fairly
      hard I started collecting at around 80 and didn't stop till it got up
      to about 97 and very little was coming out. Should I combine all the
      bottles in a container then dilute to 40% then add back to the boiler
      for my 2nd run?
    • rye_junkie1
      ... Good work. Yes combine everything back together for the second run. Are you refluxing or Pot? If Pot I would consider running this 3 times. Your not
      Message 2 of 4 , Sep 1, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In new_distillers@yahoogroups.com, "vodkaman1976"
        <vodkaman1976@...> wrote:
        >
        > Ok fellows last night I did my initial stripping run of my mum wash.
        > It yielded 3 1.75 liter bottles and about a quarter of another. My
        > first bottle came out of the still smelled a little cidery like the
        > mash did but was clear. 2nd bottle started clear but turned cloudy and
        > still smelled cider like with a few floaties. 3rd bottle was clear but
        > had a few floaties and smelled cider like. I ran the still fairly
        > hard I started collecting at around 80 and didn't stop till it got up
        > to about 97 and very little was coming out. Should I combine all the
        > bottles in a container then dilute to 40% then add back to the boiler
        > for my 2nd run?
        >

        Good work. Yes combine everything back together for the second run.
        Are you refluxing or Pot?
        If Pot I would consider running this 3 times. Your not makin' whiskey
        so you want this to be clean and near neutral. Run the second run to
        203F and discard everything that comes out before 172F. On the 3rd
        again discard everything before 172 the collect 500ml of "Heads" and
        collect in small containers to 185F. Cut and blend to taste and you
        will be a happy camper.
        If refluxing then you probably know what to do.

        Mason
      • Ric Cunningham
        Disclaimer: I am not a representative for or a reseller of the products listed in this email. I am however a user of each product listed for the use listed. I
        Message 3 of 4 , Mar 20, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          Disclaimer: I am not a representative for or a reseller of the products listed in this email. I am however a user of each product listed for the use listed. 


          I just read the paper on the MUM wash and have a few comments:

          1. The foaming caused during Irish moss addition is due to the addition of nucleation sites for CO2 liberation in the fermented wash. To prevent this you should degas the wash prior to adding any fining agents, this is the same as a wine maker would do. 

          2. If foaming during fermentation is an issue then you can use a product called FermcapS. This is an emulsified silicone oil product used through out the food and beverage industry for foam control. 

          3. The use of miracle gro and the vitamins for yeast nutrition may be similar to the products used by Mead and wine makers:
                       DAP - Diammonium Phosphate
                       Fermaid K - Potassium rich yeast nutrient blend

          For those like me that are concerned with the use of plant targeted nutrient blend I would suggest using product that are used industry wide as accepted in the manufacture of fermented beverages. I am not saying that those who use alternate products are doing anything wrong or should stop. I only point out proven, accepted alternatives.

          Thank you all for your time and efforts to make this a great forum for the hobby. 


          Ric Cunningham 
        • Harry
          ... Thank you for the contribution Ric (good info too). However I must say that the point of a MUM wash (Mason s Universal Mash) has been somewhat overlooked.
          Message 4 of 4 , Mar 20, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In new_distillers@yahoogroups.com, Ric Cunningham <wilypig@...> wrote:
            >
            > Disclaimer: I am not a representative for or a reseller of the products
            > listed in this email. I am however a user of each product listed for the use
            > listed.
            >
            >
            > I just read the paper on the MUM wash and have a few comments:
            >
            > 1. The foaming caused during Irish moss addition is due to the addition of
            > nucleation sites for CO2 liberation in the fermented wash. To prevent this
            > you should degas the wash prior to adding any fining agents, this is the
            > same as a wine maker would do.
            >
            > 2. If foaming during fermentation is an issue then you can use a product
            > called FermcapS. This is an emulsified silicone oil product used through out
            > the food and beverage industry for foam control.
            >
            > 3. The use of miracle gro and the vitamins for yeast nutrition may be
            > similar to the products used by Mead and wine makers:
            > DAP - Diammonium Phosphate
            > Fermaid K - Potassium rich yeast nutrient blend
            >
            > For those like me that are concerned with the use of plant targeted nutrient
            > blend I would suggest using product that are used industry wide as accepted
            > in the manufacture of fermented beverages. I am not saying that those who
            > use alternate products are doing anything wrong or should stop. I only point
            > out proven, accepted alternatives.
            >
            > Thank you all for your time and efforts to make this a great forum for the
            > hobby.
            >
            >
            > Ric Cunningham
            >


            Thank you for the contribution Ric (good info too). However I must say that the point of a MUM wash (Mason's Universal Mash) has been somewhat overlooked. The whole concept of this concoction is in the name, UNIVERSAL. It is designed to be made up from ingredients that are available off-the-shelf in groceries or supermarkets worldwide.

            DiAmmonium Phosphate (DAP, a fertilizer) and Fermaid K (proprietary yeastfood mix) are not available in a lot of places, internet orders notwithstanding. If they were (readily available worldwide) we wouldn't need the MUM concept.


            Slainte!
            regards Harry
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.