Does my yeast packet with built in starter, need a starter? - Page 3

MrManifesto · 01-15-2012, 10:45 PM

When I went to that yeast class I could definitely taste a difference in the differently pitched beers. While I've teased revvy about his long answers, he's right on this.

**Diver165** · 01-15-2012, 10:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Revvy

WTF is that supposed to mean?

I don't think he was being rude. I think he was being playful.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Revvy

It's up to you...do you just want "good" beer, or do you want Great beer?

*shrug*

Exactly! Are starters required? NO. Do they make better beer? Yes, most will agree with that. But the biggest mistakes people make dry pitching or rehydrating is to under pitch. (LOL I say all of this as I am putting together my stir plate! **I **** you not!**)

**thegerm** · 01-16-2012, 12:57 AM

I can make a very long list of things that a not necessary to make beer. But who cares? If all you wanna do is make booze, go make toilet wine and have a party. If you want to make better beer, then make a starter and pitch the appropriate cell count. Why people come to a forum about beer and discourage people from doing one of the most effective techniques towards making better beer boggles me.

People decide for themselves whether certain techniques are worth their time for the corresponding increase in quality of their beer. You're entitled to your own compromises, but you're not entitled to assert that you are not in fact making a compromise when the technique is THOROUGHLY proven.

MrManifesto · 01-16-2012, 01:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thegerm

I can make a very long list of things that a not necessary to make beer. But who cares? If all you wanna do is make booze, go make toilet wine and have a party. If you want to make better beer, then make a starter and pitch the appropriate cell count. Why people come to a forum about beer and discourage people from doing one of the most effective techniques towards making better beer boggles me.

People decide for themselves whether certain techniques are worth their time for the corresponding increase in quality of their beer. You're entitled to your own compromises, but you're not entitled to assert that you are not in fact making a compromise when the technique is THOROUGHLY proven.

yup.

i sure didn't spend hundreds of dollars on equipment and take hours/days/weeks out of my life, brewing, reading and surfing forums to make "ok" beer. i LIKE brewing and i want to make the best beer possible. part of this is liking to do brewing related things...like making a starter. makes me feel cool! so...i just can't see a reason to not do it. it's fun, easy and is proven with no doubt to give you a better beer. you've gotta be real lazy or making a very small beer to not want to do this.

hercher · 01-16-2012, 01:04 AM

As an FYI, a Wyeast propagator pack is designed to inoculate 5 gallons of standard ale wort with slightly less than 6 million cells per milliliter of wort. This is consistent with rates indicated by Hough, Briggs et al., Malting and Brewing Science, volume 2.

I stand by my original statement of a starter being helpful, but not necessary.

pabloj13 · 01-16-2012, 01:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hercher

As an FYI, a Wyeast propagator pack is designed to inoculate 5 gallons of standard ale wort with slightly less than 6 million cells per milliliter of wort. This is consistent with rates indicated by Hough, Briggs et al., Malting and Brewing Science, volume 2.

I stand by my original statement of a starter being helpful, but not necessary.

1) He never said anything about what kind of beer he was brewing
2) That is if the yeast are completely healthy, within a certain range of their production date, etc.

MrManifesto · 01-16-2012, 01:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hercher

As an FYI, a Wyeast propagator pack is designed to inoculate 5 gallons of standard ale wort with slightly less than 6 million cells per milliliter of wort. This is consistent with rates indicated by Hough, Briggs et al., Malting and Brewing Science, volume 2.

I stand by my original statement of a starter being helpful, but not necessary.

this is true, but each one is only giving you around 100b cells. to make a beer small enough to only need 100b cells, your OG needs to be 1.027, according to mrmalty. i don't know that many of us are making beers that small.

i know this conversation is getting old, but....

Demus · 01-16-2012, 03:48 AM

Can a "junior member" chime in here? I've read debates on this matter on other forums, and you guys certainly seem like dedicated proficient brewers. In my brewing, I haven't seen any of the problems ascociated with "under pitching". I do however use yeast nutrient and O2 injection in all my brews after being rapidly chilled. They kick off quickly and ferment down to the expected attenuation with "smack packs". They taste great; I know I know, subjective and you'll argue they'd be even better with a starter! My point is a properly prepared wort IS A STARTER! The little critters do their thing in the presence of well aerated, nutrition rich wort. This is underemphasized in discussions about starters in my opinion. Pitch a giant starter into a wort that's just beeen shaken in the carboy for a few minutes for aeration with no nutrients added and you'll still have fermentation issues. Fascinating hobby aside, brewing is a pretty time consuming thing. My brew days can easily exceed 5 hours which isn't popular with the wife and kids. If I can save some time and hastle, I'm all for it. Sorry if that's some sort of blasphemy!!

Peace...

**johnsma22** · 01-16-2012, 04:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hercher

As an FYI, a Wyeast propagator pack is designed to inoculate 5 gallons of standard ale wort with slightly less than 6 million cells per milliliter of wort. This is consistent with rates indicated by Hough, Briggs et al., Malting and Brewing Science, volume 2.

I stand by my original statement of a starter being helpful, but not necessary.

The Wyeast Propagator packs were designed to be made into starters, but the point is moot because Wyeast has discontinued them due to the fact that there were too many people mistakenly pitching them directly in their wort. Most people stopped buying them because of the need to make a starter with them and went with the Activator Packs instead.

I no longer use Wyeast products and switched to White Labs liquid yeast some time ago. I make a starter for every batch if I'm using liquid yeast. Is it necessary? Don't care! I do it because I enjoy the process, and I'm always trying to improve my processes.

If it's good enough for Jamil and John Palmer to make a starter for every batch, then it's good enough for me. I'm sure that you could ferment in an old shoe and get beer, but that doesn't mean that it's a good idea!

**thegerm** · 01-16-2012, 05:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnsma22

The Wyeast Propagator packs were designed to be made into starters, but the point is moot because Wyeast has discontinued them due to the fact that there were too many people mistakenly pitching them directly in their wort. Most people stopped buying them because of the need to make a starter with them and went with the Activator Packs instead.

I no longer use Wyeast products and switched to White Labs liquid yeast some time ago. I make a starter for every batch if I'm using liquid yeast. Is it necessary? Don't care! I do it because I enjoy the process, and I'm always trying to improve my processes.

If it's good enough for Jamil and John Palmer to make a starter for every batch, then it's good enough for me. I'm sure that you could ferment in an old shoe and get beer, but that doesn't mean that it's a good idea!

The only time I've heard JZ advocate not making a starter and just pitching a single vial or smackpack is for milds, ordinary bitters and 60 shillings. And even that was with the caveat that the yeast pack was fresh.