"Hi wv,

Welcome to the forum!

I think your recipe should work just fine with the Red Star. You may need some nutrients for the yeast, but it seems fine.

Get yourself a hydrometer so you can measure the gravity and know when it's finished. Until then, just let it sit until it stops bubbling, then rack it and let it clear some. When it's clear or when it tastes nice and dry you can run it.

Regards,
--JB"

do I need to do anything with the foam on top before I run it through the still?

Why isn't giving your wash some time to clear a generally accepted distilling process?

"I guess what I'm asking is: is the practice not used for economic reasons? That is, it's just not worth it from a commercial point of view? Or are there other reasons? Does it _improve_ flavor? ... unlikely. Or since the wash is being distilled, does it simply not matter?

I continue to read anecdotal statements on the web about yeast cells bursting in the boil and such ... but there's never a mention of why that would matter ... or what is actually being released into the boil, etc. ... not so long on the facts.

I'm not being argumentative here ... far from it ... just trying to understand if the commercial guys are just trying to save time and a few pennies on each gallon ... which at our scale is in the noise. So are we doing things that can, in fact, help improve quality since we're not subject to commercial pressures ... or just wasting our own time?"

First off i want to say anyone going to the lengths to produce the clearest wash possible who thinks they are getting a better end product then if they didn't im not going to dispute that. I havent tried their stuff and if you are happy with your process and what you are producing thats cool.

I don`t think its an economic thing for the commercial guys. The cost would be negligible to a large distillery. Once the equipment needed for second fermentation was purchased there would be no other incurred cost. The very first batch would take an extra week or whatever but after that its a production line and production would flow exactly the same. Once the beer was moved from first fermentor to second it gets filled again right away so production is continuous.
A second point on the economic side it many of these companies spend a substantial amount of time and effort on filtering their finished distilled product. JD for example burns their own maple(though i hear not at their main facility anymore) to make their own charcoal for filtration. One artisian vodka maker filters their super premium vodka 1000 times(if i remember correctly) because they feel it gives it the cleanest flavour possible. If companies are willing to go to these extremes to produce a better product it seems only reasonable they would be williing to do the same on the before the still side.

Now from my own anecdotal experience i tried clearing solution a few times on sugar based washes. I even went so far as to borrow a wine filter machine and tried filtering a couple batches. I found no noticeable difference, no improvement whats so ever.

I have read the yeast exploding thing as well and can`t help but wonder why it would matter with yeast being such a heavy partical it seems unlikely to make it up the column. Also their are whiskey producers that distill on grain(steam jacketed stills with aggitators) and there is no way they are getting all the yeast out if any. A lot of whiskey producers also use a portion of backset for each batch and if cooking yeast was ruining the flavour wouldn`t this just compound the problem?

I don't claim to be an expert. Im no different then you, just a guy reading what i can, experimenting, thinking and trying to learn more about this great art. And to me as much as it is a science, it definately is an art.

Actually the "big boys"(jack daniels, jim beam, buffalo trace ect.) use continuous beer stipping column stills. They are huge towers with in the neighbourhood of 10 plus perforated plates. The beer is pumped in the top of the column above the first plate. The beer flows down the column from plate to plate and eventually out the waste drain at the bottom. To extract the alcohol steam(yes water vapour) is injected into the bottom of the tower. The steam percolates up through perforated plates changing from pure water steam to higher percentage alcohol vapour with every plate until it reaches the top of the still where it passes through an outtake pipe to the a giant condensor.

Again not to be arguementative but "fastest turnover" is not a concern in a production line. Once production begins it is continuous. An extra stage is not really a big concern. Bourbon rules call for 2 years of barrel aging. And yet jim beam and jack are both doing around 6 years on their cheapest bottled stuff.

Your point about internal heaters burning mash is well taken. I havent played with this style of heating but have read several places it is best suited to sugar washes and not all grain washes.
As far as external heat you can have quite a bit of soild matter in your wash and not burn in my experience. Doing all grains i always get kind of a sludge sticking to the boiler after the run, but its never burned. This is straight from fermentor to boiler straining with a grain bag from the brew store. Once my grain bag split and i figured to hell with it and threw my wash in unstrained. That time it did burn and ruined the whole run. But again that was totally unstrained. I personally having done several all grains have never had burning with external heat with a strained uncleared wash. Maybe others experiences are different.

Bourbon can be aged for as little as 3 months. Straight Bourbon must be aged for at least 3 years and if under four years must be labled as such. That's American law. Blended Bourbon must be at least 51% Straight Bourbon but may also have neutal spirits, flavorings, and colorings added.

"Eric,
Very best of heath and luck to you to enjoy your rig! Have you fired it up yet?"