"Joris Pattyn" > wrote in message
...

> Ah, but that's where my time-factor comes in. Given time enough (for the
> sacrosanct stabilisation of the flora), I'm convinced it must be possible.

You may be right. Unfortunately, that time factor is such that you or I may
never be around to see it.

>> And I'd venture to guess that *that* is what makes lambic, lambic. As I
>> understand, the exposure to air is relatively short, but the fermentation
>> and aging vessels are full of accumulated microflora that have a very
>> strong effect on the beer. I'd be willing to be that if an American
>> brewer got hold of some of those vessels and then made a beer in the
>> States following general lambic recipes, overattenuation and aging, and
>> did so in those vessels, they'd get something very close to what a
>> Belgian lambic brewer would get.
>>
>
> Well - I do not know about that!! Reason is that that is exactly the way
> the West-Flemish "lambic"brewers have proceeded. Where Bockor (Jacobins)
> have bought the vessels from Heyvaert, Van Honsebrouck (St. Louis) had
> done so already with the Van Haelen inventory. But seen the results of
> both, I have serious doubts about such a transatlantique venture. Remark
> that Peter Bouckaert took over the Rodenbach yeasts, but had Frank Boon
> bring over readily-made kriekbeer for his Transatlantique.

I'd forgotten about that, and it's a good point. Something tells me that the
right mix of "stuff" in the barrel would do the trick, but it's just a WAG.
It may be that the initial "infection" before it ever makes it to the
barrels plays a very large role in the flavor profile. And that is obviously
something that one cannot duplicate outside a particular region. But, of
course, another region's natural microflora may produce an equally
enjoyable - although altogether different - result.

-Steve