oh, Im not embarrassed are you? if u can remember this post is a debate not a one sided scientific factoid
Right! We're not going to let our yeast debate be settled by silly things like "science"!
oh, Im not embarrassed are you? if u can remember this post is a debate not a one sided scientific factoid
if u can remember this post is a debate not a one sided scientific factoid
Leaving the "undisputed" scientific facts out of the conversation there is the "undisputed" reality of many people's experiences using Nottingham.
I use it all the time for ales that start out from 1.050 to 1.062.. I start with about 6 - 7 gallons in the fermenter. I pour directly into the fermenter from my kettle and pitch the yeast evenly on the resulting foam. I try to keep it at about 64 for the first week.
Nottingham comes in 11 gram packages.. It has never failed to do what it is supposed to do..FERMENT. It is usually bubbling along in the first 6-8 hours.
My son used it on a 5 gallon batch of brown ale OG 1.058. When pitching he took the pack straight from the fridge, ripped it open and as he was pitching it on the surface about 1/2 the package fell out in one lump and sunk to the bottom.. No stirring or anything was done. He simply covered the fermenter and went on his way.
Result; The full fermentation was delayed by about 4 hours or so. The final product was as usual very good.
I don't know if I would ever need any better results from a yeast or even want them.. Nottingham is noted for blowing airlocks and bucket lids into outer space so why try to supercharge it. Maybe if I was doing 10 gallons at 1.060.
OMO
bosco
No, the whole point is that this is a proven scientific fact, and is not debatable. Reminds me of people who deny evolution or global warming b/c it disagrees with some ill-informed pre-conceived notion.
Anyway, it is clearly pointless to argue any further. I'm punching out...enjoy your homebrew.
The results (taste, apperance ect) ARE debateable no matter what the science says. The so called facts are found doing research right? which is exactly what we do every time we brew. So does our research not matter? are you saying beer taste better because you rehydrated? That IS the topic remember?
The results (taste, apperance ect) ARE debateable no matter what the science says. The so called facts are found doing research right? which is exactly what we do every time we brew. So does our research not matter? are you saying beer taste better because you rehydrated? That IS the topic remember?
Dougie63 said:keyboard commandos lol, just cant debate anything without taking personal jabs eh?
There should be a selection on MrMalty and other pitching calculators for whether you're a "by the books" person or a "good enough" person. Literature says pitching rates are important. How important, and for what types of beers, and for what volumes, and personal taste, makes all the difference. And those things can't be adequately addressed here.
You can learn from the books or learn from experience. Most of the wisdom on this forum comes from other peoples' experience. Most of the time, that's good enough for me.
(I'm looking at you slurry thickness slidebar on the MrMalty website)
As the OP of this thread, many thanks one and all, but before we drop it, what about yeast slants where we have very few cells that we have to grow up to a colony with billions of cells before we pitch, which is why I asked why not use 1/10 of a packet of dry yeast for each brew and hydrate, then grow on with sterilised 1.020 wort.
As the OP of this thread, many thanks one and all, but before we drop it, what about yeast slants where we have very few cells that we have to grow up to a colony with billions of cells before we pitch, which is why I asked why not use 1/10 of a packet of dry yeast for each brew and hydrate, then grow on with sterilised 1.020 wort.
my 30 minute, 60minute and 90 minute microscope slides to not show this "fact" of 50% die off from pitching dry. longer than that is pointless as I'm producing Co2 and krausen in 4 hours anyway.
My many side-by-side timed test don't show rehydrating starts ferments faster.
Fermentis even changed is packaging in the last couple years to say "sprinkle into wort" and removed "rehydrate". the die off thing is brewlore.
my 30 minute, 60minute and 90 minute microscope slides to not show this "fact" of 50% die off from pitching dry. longer than that is pointless as I'm producing Co2 and krausen in 4 hours anyway.
My many side-by-side timed test don't show rehydrating starts ferments faster.
Fermentis even changed it's packaging in the last couple years to say "sprinkle into wort" and removed "rehydrate". the die off thing is brewlore.
This debate reminds me of the arguments of "fully qualified" compared to "best qualified". Sprinkling may be "fully qualified" while hydration may be "best qualified".
Another fact about this yeast: "It is unnecessary to aerate wort." I am sure that we all follow that as well. It is also Kosher and GMO Free. I love scientific facts. The only problem with them is that there are no "facts" but only theory and sometimes convention. After all, it was once a scientific "fact" that the Earth was flat. Ever read a science book from the 50's? You might get a laugh or two from the "facts".
If you follow the instructions for "best qualified", you would need to add cooled wort three times over a period of 15 minutes to your properly hydrated yeast so as to prevent "petite mutants". So you have your cooled wort sitting around for an extra 15 minutes and have three additional transfers in you sterile garage laboratory.
If is it not broken, do not fix it!
If one university does one experiment in one laboratory it becomes 'real science'. If a thousand homebrewers get a different result we are all ignorant.
EXACTLY!
Experiments performed under controlled conditions by people who understand how to perform them and interpret the results have validity.
And pitching dry yeast without re-hydrating has been proven under laboratory conditions to be less optimal than re-hydrating first. END OF STORY.
Enter your email address to join: