Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 (Tek) 9/26/83; site hercules.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!hogpc!houti!ariel!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!teklds!hercules!archiel
From: archiel@hercules.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.misc,net.wines
Subject: Re: Gueuze
Message-ID: <165@hercules.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 16-Apr-84 16:52:30 EST
Article-I.D.: hercules.165
Posted: Mon Apr 16 16:52:30 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 18-Apr-84 08:33:36 EST
References: <201@ucbvax.UUCP> <241@haring.UUCP>
Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR
Lines: 21

Of course most commercial breweries (and wineries, for that matter) do not
trust to fate that a desirable strain of yeast or other microorganism will
grow in their wort (or must)!  The results are VERY unpredictable.  If there
is enough acetobacter around, for example, the result will be a vat of malt
(or wine) vinegar, which doesn't make a very good beverage.  I agree, most
commercial beer is barely worthy of the name, but cultured yeasts are not the
cause of this.  Use of increasingly large percentages of adjuncts (for
lightness and economy) is a more likely candidate.  Think again before you
long for the "good old days" of "wild beer."  It would probably cost much
more, be in shorter supply, and you might have to deal with an occaisional
mouth full of "witch's brew" when you had expected the taste of your favorite
lager, ale, or whatever.
-- 

				Archie Lachner
				Logic Design Systems Division
				Tektronix, Inc.

uucp:    {ucbvax,decvax,pur-ee,cbosg,ihnss}!tektronix!teklds!archiel
CSnet:   archiel@tek
ARPAnet: archiel.tek@csnet-relay