The neat thing for me with the Albany ale stuff is that it is all micro. It is hard to make generalizations or abstractions because this is about one place. Yet it is one place over 400 years. There are a lot of eras over 400 years, maybe each with its own beer.
And, yes, yes, I know I might want to change the name of the blog these days to "A Good Albany Beer Blog" but remember - this is about you, not me. It's about you getting the point of all this. It is an illustration. Maybe even performance art. So, you have to admit you have bought in. And you want to know that the latest is that Craig "the Mole" Gravina with the New York State Museum sent me this:
I traced the basic path of all three Albany creeks - Beaverkill (bottom), Rutten Kill (middle), Fox Creek (top) from the 1790 and 1857 maps and overlaid that on the google map. Nineteen of the known brewery locations are on or very near a water source other than the Hudson. And I think I know why Boyd was drilling for water - pollution. As the population of Albany grew, it moved west away from the river. Which meant [Ed.: censored under the few remaining NY blue laws] flowed down hill, literally. The less people, less contamination. The breweries, further west, were moving up stream to try and out pace the population.
Serious neato factor. That is the map to the left. If blows up to something way bigger than your screen so be warned. We are loading most of the stuff over at the Facebook group just to keep this place sane but you see what is happening, right? You can't know what is going on with the brewers without knowing what is going on with the communities. So look at the map down here to the right.
That is Albany in 1758. Rotate in in your mind one eighth counter clockwise and you will see the creeks line up. Fox Creek is the north end of town in 1758. That is, by the way, one hundred and forty or so years after brewing starts in the town. Notice how roads developed along creeks. And breweries near the creeks? Notice how the old 1600s Dutch town is still there? As are the late 1700s post Revolutionary suburbs to the south and the 1800s parks based on new ideas about wholesome living to the west? And the Egg. That weird Egg.
Why do I care about the creeks? Because if you can check out the water qualities and you cross reference the brewers and you add an insane amount of table salt, you may well replicate what the water was like that Albany ale in its heyday was like. But when was its heyday? And how far west were they?






Comments
Craig - October 7, 2010 10:20 PM
The Beaverkill ran a few hundred yards behind what is now the Cultural Education Center, where I work. So on the drive home, I went to see if I could tell where it was. Most definitely! What Lincoln Park is today was obviously the valley floor which cradled the creek. As I moved west toward Hinkel Brewery I could see the valley narrow and rise quickly, this is the area, I believe, was know as Buttermilk Falls. The narrow valley parallels Park Avenue, continues west and pans out at the top of the hill at Delaware Avenue.
I had no trouble seeing that creek, 150 years ago, in my minds eye.
Stan Hieronymus - October 8, 2010 12:18 AM
Alan - Thinking about you and performance art, perhaps recruiting Laurie Anderson for some sort of beer-related fund raiser, makes me pause.
Craig - October 8, 2010 12:39 AM
I read that wrong at first. I thought it said Loni Anderson!
I think she's living on the air in Cincinnati... Cincinnati WKRP
Alan - October 8, 2010 8:45 AM
"...Oh, Superbeer..."
Pok - October 8, 2010 2:13 PM
I think that if Albany brewers were taking their water from either surface or groundwater it would not be particularly salty. Not salty in the way that the groundwaters of the Syracuse area are. The salty waters derived from teh Salinas formation don't come to surface in the Albany area the way they do in Syracuse.
So, parhaps the Albany Ale is not particularly "soft" with salt.
Alan - October 8, 2010 2:41 PM
P., you might have missed that they were adding masses of salt in the boil. Perhaps to replicate the "mineral springs" idea is one idea bouncing around.
Gary Gillman - October 12, 2010 2:42 PM
Alan, on the salt thing again. Ron has a current posting from Barclay Perkins in the 1930's, disclosing details for various types of porter.
Something caught my eye, the reference to adding 3 oz salt to the copper per barrel. That would be a 36 gallon barrel.
Thomas Read in the 1835 NY Senate testimony said he used 4 quarts of salt for 60-70 barrels. Since some of his fellow brewers said they used only a "little" or "trifling" amount of salt, and some used none, let's take his 70 barrels, which was probably for winter brewing. That's a total of 2240 gallons beer (32 gal. to the barrel). Or 62.2 English barrels (36 gal. to the barrel). That is a shade over 2 oz salt per English barrel, used by Read. Yet in London in the 1930's, after attemperators and other refrigeration, they are still using 3 oz. salt per barrel. I can't see the use of salt by Albany brewers as anything unusual. I don't say of course that pale ale brewers all used salt addition in England over this 100 period, but this seems a typical practice of Anglo-American brewers. (Some didn't add salt in my view because their water was hard enough).
It might be interesting simply to add table salt to one of your home brewings in the proportions mentioned and see what comes of it. Does the taste survive in the finished product? I ask this because I am mindful of the advice of the late Quebec-based chef and cookery writer, Jehanne Benoit. She said, don't add salt to a salad dressing made with an olive oil base (oil and vinegar), it simply falls to the bottom. Might the same occur with salt in a finished beer?
Gary
Alan - October 12, 2010 3:05 PM
Ron had confirmed by email a few weeks ago that he understood the salt to be far higher than anything in England. And, as indicated, it is far higher than anything in an natural water table. Time for the math to be checked.
Alan - October 12, 2010 3:14 PM
I couldn't find my salty math but <a href="">it was over here</a>:
"4 dry quarts of table salt = 11.21 pounds according to this calculator and 9.6 pounds this one, too.. That converts to 2.5 to 3 ounces a 31.5 gallon barrel or about 0.085 to 0.1 of an ounce (or 2.4 to 2.8 grams) per gallon. That adds 247 to 291 ppm NA and 381 to 448 ppm Cl. That is a lot. More than any city listed in table 9-2 of Al Korzonas's Homebrewing, Vol 1. Nearing four times Dortmund, the natural saltiness of the brewing towns.
So either I botched the ppm calculation or it is very high. In any event, it is 3/8ths of a tablespoon of salt in a pint of water.
Gary Gillman - October 12, 2010 3:35 PM
Well, maybe I am off because of dry quarts, I hadn't thought of dry measure. But 3 oz. per 32 gallon barrel more or less doesn't seem that different to me to 3 oz. per 36 gallons considering too the natural differences in salinity and taste in various salts. And considering also there was a range of usage amongst the Albany brewers. Some used a trifling amount, or very little (their words), and this must mean in some cases 3 oz per barrel as in the 1930's in London for BP would not have surprised them.
Gary
Alan - October 12, 2010 4:50 PM
Could be. I am going to try a pint of the stuff tonight as I don't trust my ppm calculation. I will report.
Craig - October 12, 2010 4:57 PM
3/8 tablespoon = 1-1/8 teaspoon. That seems pretty salty. Standard medical saline is is about .16 oz (1 teaspoon) of un-iodized salt to 16 oz of water .
Craig - October 12, 2010 7:20 PM
okay, 3/8ths of a tablespoon of salt in a pint of water is very salty... yuck!
Alan - October 12, 2010 7:37 PM
Now I have the math all the other way:
9.6 pounds to 60 barrels
0.16 pounds to 1 barrel
0.16 pounds to 31.5 gallons
2.56 ounces to 31.5 gallons
0.08 ounces to one gallon
0.01 ounces to one pint
Craig - October 12, 2010 8:51 PM
Okay, so that's actually not that much. 0.01 Ounces = 0.06 Teaspoons. That's like 1/16 of a teaspoon.
Craig - October 12, 2010 9:03 PM
So I just did a test with a 1/6 of a teaspoon in 16 oz of normal, Albany tap water. If I were served this at someone's house, I don't know if I would notice it's salinity. I compared to an "unsalted control" and I could only notice a slight bit more salt. Maybe in distilled water, it would be more noticeable, but not in this test. I've had Saratoga water and it has a significantly more pronounced mineral and salt flavor.
Alan - October 12, 2010 9:42 PM
Good thing I redid the math before horking back the bitches brew that I thought was the ale of our fathers.
Craig - October 12, 2010 11:59 PM
Think of it this way. The salt issue is settled AND we now have a piece of the puzzle. Salt was a named ingredient by twenty of the brewers in the 1835 Senate hearing. Water, barley, hops and yeast have to be there, salt does not. They state it is added for flavor, and it's preservative and clarifying properties.
Alan - October 13, 2010 8:54 AM
And stuff. Yea, that's it. It wasn't a dead end at all. We're great. No time wasted. I wasn't on a goose chase at all...
Alan - October 13, 2010 11:24 AM
I had no idea of the other "salt" and Albany connection.
Craig - October 13, 2010 1:03 PM
Ironweed, Salt, The Other Guys, the Time Machine, Age of Innocense, Scent of a Woman all were partially filmed in Albany.
Craig - October 13, 2010 2:20 PM
Albany and Troy, my bad
Craig - October 13, 2010 4:15 PM
Check number 6 from Abraham Nash's testimony in the 1835 report. It notes the water to be soft, but still with an addition of salt. the soft water and country ale, in his words, was "much preferred" in NYC.
Alan - October 13, 2010 5:23 PM
When I was a kid in Halifax bars in the early 1980s, old men salted their beer, tapping the shaker on the rim of the two eight ounce glasses that was considered the single serving.
Pok - October 13, 2010 9:34 PM
I have a similar recollection of the old tavern fixtures in Northern Ontario salting their "50". I don't know why they did it but I presume it was for taste.
Alan - October 13, 2010 10:42 PM
Oh, I took to salting it, too, there for a while. Not being backwards pretentious either. Makes a pretty rough like Moosehead pale ale or Olands Ex much smoother.
Gary Gillman - October 17, 2010 12:20 PM
Just on the point of salting beer in the tavern: I recall this practice from Montreal taverns in the 1970's. It was done to raise a head on the beer, and perhaps for additional flavor.
Gary
Alan - October 17, 2010 6:09 PM
In Halifax, the reason I heard from old guys was to make it less bitter. But the same old guys told us to not drink bottled beer because of all the bugs and rodent feces that get in the bottling process.