Being new to the whole brewing thing, there is so much to read about all aspects of brewing and sometimes there is conflicting information, so what are the pros and cons of making a yeast starter.
thanks
newbe dave
thanks
newbe dave
Yeast starts vs not
- Thread starter dave8fire
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
It is typically recommended to make a liquid yeast starter for the higher than normal abv% beers. I would go so far as to say it's essential for any ale above 1.064 OG. Some people decide to pitch two packets of dry yeast. And while that may work, I would personally consider it to be a hack move that affects the health/quality/complexity of the final product... Especially if you're desiring a bit more character from the malt and the yeast.
Golddiggie
Well-Known Member
If you use liquid yeast in your brews, then you should be making starters for them. If your batch OG is above 1.030, it will benefit from the use of a starter. Considering the cost difference between making a starter, and pitching another packet/vial of liquid yeast, it makes even more sense to use a starter. Get/make a stirplate and you can make smaller starters, that are done faster. Look at what yeastcalc.com tells you for a starter size for your batch. Be sure to also enter in the yeast manufacture date on the site. I use this site these days because it helps me to figure out what size starters to make with either a two, or three, step schedule. I can get far more yeast cells, to pitch, with two small steps than one huge step.
There are plenty of pro's for using/making starters. The ONLY con I can think of is you need to plan your batch a bit better. If you're doing a single starter step, with fairly fresh yeast (under 2-3 months old), and you're using a stirplate, you can make the starter about 2-3 days before your brew day. You let it go on the stirplate for 12-24 hours, then cold crash for 24+ hours so that you can decant the spent starter and pitch just the yeast slurry.
Having more viable yeast cells going into the wort (your batch of beer) means you'll have a shorter lag phase, for one thing. This is a good thing. I typically have activity in under 12 hours from pitching my slurry. Many times, it's VERY active by that time.
One thing to keep in mind. With the stirplate, or even without one, you do NOT want to use an airlock on your starter (flask or something else). You NEED to have a gas exchange happening. With a stirplate, you get CO2 out and air in, constantly (which gives you the faster time to finish). You use either one of the foam stoppers, or a sanitized piece of aluminum foil over the top. You can use foil on mason jar for starters too.
Personally, I prefer to use my flasks for starters. IF you go that route, get at least a 2L flask. I find I'm using my 3L flask most often. IMO, a 1L flask is nigh on useless for 5 gallon batches of beer. Unless you want to always make at least a two step starter (for normal OG batches, or those under 1.060).
There are plenty of pro's for using/making starters. The ONLY con I can think of is you need to plan your batch a bit better. If you're doing a single starter step, with fairly fresh yeast (under 2-3 months old), and you're using a stirplate, you can make the starter about 2-3 days before your brew day. You let it go on the stirplate for 12-24 hours, then cold crash for 24+ hours so that you can decant the spent starter and pitch just the yeast slurry.
Having more viable yeast cells going into the wort (your batch of beer) means you'll have a shorter lag phase, for one thing. This is a good thing. I typically have activity in under 12 hours from pitching my slurry. Many times, it's VERY active by that time.
One thing to keep in mind. With the stirplate, or even without one, you do NOT want to use an airlock on your starter (flask or something else). You NEED to have a gas exchange happening. With a stirplate, you get CO2 out and air in, constantly (which gives you the faster time to finish). You use either one of the foam stoppers, or a sanitized piece of aluminum foil over the top. You can use foil on mason jar for starters too.
Personally, I prefer to use my flasks for starters. IF you go that route, get at least a 2L flask. I find I'm using my 3L flask most often. IMO, a 1L flask is nigh on useless for 5 gallon batches of beer. Unless you want to always make at least a two step starter (for normal OG batches, or those under 1.060).
Are you saying this with the assumption that you would be over-pitching by adding more dry yeast?
Some yeast calculators give estimates for the amount of dry yeast, just as they give recommendations for the size for starters with dry yeasts. I have always taken this to mean that, with proper hydration, following the dry yeast recommendations would land me in the ballpark for proper pitching rates.
Have you had a different experience with this?
Otherwise I agree with all else that was said.
No.
WoodlandBrew
Well-Known Member
A thread about starters and no one has said Mr. Malty? I'll say it: Consult Mr. Malty.
http://www.mrmalty.com/calc/calc.html
For a good write up on pitch rates take a look at the one on the WYeast website:
http://www.wyeastlab.com/hb_pitchrates.cfm
http://www.mrmalty.com/calc/calc.html
For a good write up on pitch rates take a look at the one on the WYeast website:
http://www.wyeastlab.com/hb_pitchrates.cfm
Experience then?
Just looking to learn something new. I have never heard it said that increasing dry yeast pitching rates has a detrimental affect on the beer.
Or are you saying that you feel dry yeast provides less character than liquid yeast?
Again, just asking to learn.
Golddiggie
Well-Known Member
Mr. Malty is ok for a SINGLE step starter. IF that's all you need, great. If you don't want to (or cannot) make a single [large] starter, you can make two, or three, much smaller starters and get the same (or more) yeast cells to pitch.
I also don't have any love for the Wyeast tool. IMO, it sucks worst of all. They make great yeast, but that tool is nigh on useless (for me at least).
The utility on the yeastcalc does everything I need it to. Mr. Malty can help you with dry yeast and slurry calculations. I don't need either of those.
WoodlandBrew
Well-Known Member
Over pitching means that there will be less cell divisions by the time the fermentation completes. When the cells divide they produce some of their characteristic flavors. Whether two packs of dry yeast is over pitching depends on how much beer you are making, but you would need to be making about 10 gallons of a 1.060 gravity beer for it to be appropriate.
I with you on all of that.
I asked bobbrews if he was assuming 2 packets would be over-pitching and he said no.
So I'm curious why he thinks simply increasing the amount of dry yeast will result in a suboptimal beer. Or if he thinks that dry yeast inherently limits the beer compared with liquid yeast.
Joe: Hey Pat, I'm making a 1.091 OG Imperial Stout. It's going to finish at 1.009 and be insane.
Pat: That's cool. What kind of yeast are you using?
Joe: US-05.
Pat: US-05 really? Don't you think you're betting off making a big yeast starter with WLP001 or something?
Joe: Nah, don't have time... I'll just pitch two packets of US-05.
Pat: ......
That type of scenario is what I have a gripe over. If the head brewer of The Bruery was homebrewing 5 gallons of Black Tuesday, I don't think he would resort to pitching another pack of dry yeast as opposed to making an appropriate sized yeast starter. Extreme example, but you get the point. I'm not talking about the complexity of the yeast strain since they are essentially the same. But rather, the initial health and overall quality/complexity of the final beer as a whole given the attention to detail and care that went into the process. It wouldn't be the same beer with dry yeast.
Golddiggie
Well-Known Member
IME/IMO, pitching a few percentage points more, or less, yeast isn't going to be a major impact. I'm talking about a difference of under 10%. I believe that slightly more yeast would be better than less in this case. Of course, keep in mind the yeast will still reproduce/replicate in the beer wort, so you'll still get what you want from the yeast.
What about making a smaller batch (2.5 gal) of a higher gravity beer? I know that for anything over 1.063+/- of a 5 gal batch, you should make a starter. My thinking was that the cell count of a dry yeast packet in a half batch of a high gravity would suffice....is that thinking correct? Btw, I'm doing half batches so I can brew AG with my limited space/equipment.
Golddiggie
Well-Known Member
Use the pitch calculation site(s) to KNOW how much to pitch. Don't guess on this. Especially since using the sites is FREE.
freeflydude
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2012
- Messages
- 50
- Reaction score
- 1
With liquid yeast there is a lot more variety than with dry yeast. Also, dry yeast are usually packaged in a way that the manufacturers recommend not using a starter because they have already been prepared with the optimum nutrients in the package. Putting them in a starter can use up their energy reserves and makes them less likely to finish the job. With dry the recommendation is to rehydrate in warm water prior to pitching which is not the same as building a starter.
With liquid yeast building a starter gives you the ability to control the pitching rate by adjusting the size of your starter. You calculate the starter size based on batch size and estimated OG. It also allows you to build one vials worth of liquid yeast into whatever size you need so is much less costly than buying 2 or more vials. I typically have some activity in 3-4 hours after pitching a yeast starter and within 8-10 hours it's fully active. the faster fermentation gets going reduces chances of other bugs from taking over during the lag.
Both dry and liquid can create really good beer if you understand the principles behind them and their limitations. It really is up to the individual brewer to decide what works best for their style. Personally I use both but prefer liquid when I'm doing all grain.
Dry pros: long shelf life, lower cost, simple to use, don't need to plan days in advance
Dry cons: very limited selection/variety, can't control pitching rate as well.
Liquid pros: better control of pitch rate, much more variety in yeast strains which is a big advantage, you can just pitch vials directly if you don't want to make a starter but will take more which adds cost.
Liquid cons: short shelf life, must be kept refrigerated, more expensive, more complicated if using a starter (not absolutely required but recommended), must plan ahead if using a starter, additional equipment may be needed to make a starter (stir plate recommended).
Last but not least you can reuse yeast saved from a previous batch. This gets a lot more involved but if you want to use the same yeast over and over is a good way to save money. There are plenty of threads that deal with that on this forum if you're interested.
With liquid yeast building a starter gives you the ability to control the pitching rate by adjusting the size of your starter. You calculate the starter size based on batch size and estimated OG. It also allows you to build one vials worth of liquid yeast into whatever size you need so is much less costly than buying 2 or more vials. I typically have some activity in 3-4 hours after pitching a yeast starter and within 8-10 hours it's fully active. the faster fermentation gets going reduces chances of other bugs from taking over during the lag.
Both dry and liquid can create really good beer if you understand the principles behind them and their limitations. It really is up to the individual brewer to decide what works best for their style. Personally I use both but prefer liquid when I'm doing all grain.
Dry pros: long shelf life, lower cost, simple to use, don't need to plan days in advance
Dry cons: very limited selection/variety, can't control pitching rate as well.
Liquid pros: better control of pitch rate, much more variety in yeast strains which is a big advantage, you can just pitch vials directly if you don't want to make a starter but will take more which adds cost.
Liquid cons: short shelf life, must be kept refrigerated, more expensive, more complicated if using a starter (not absolutely required but recommended), must plan ahead if using a starter, additional equipment may be needed to make a starter (stir plate recommended).
Last but not least you can reuse yeast saved from a previous batch. This gets a lot more involved but if you want to use the same yeast over and over is a good way to save money. There are plenty of threads that deal with that on this forum if you're interested.
Golddiggie
Well-Known Member
I have yeast that's 10 (almost 11) months old, before I made the starters, that's going to be used this weekend. Going with three starter steps to get the cell count where I need it to be. So while the live/viable cell count will drop over time, you can still use it many months later. Provided, of course, you know what you're doing. IF I didn't go with the starter schedule, I would have needed at least 6 vials of (super fresh) yeast for the batch.
I actually didn't know that the dry yeast packets came with the optimum nutrients. That being said, should I avoid yeast starters with them all together? What if I have a dry yeast and want to ferment a high gravity brew...should I just add a second packet or just go for a liquid yeast and make a starter? Also, if I were to make a starter with a dry yeast, could I just add additional nutrients?
freeflydude
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2012
- Messages
- 50
- Reaction score
- 1
With high gravity using dry you should add more packets and rehydrate. I've read that putting them through a starter will deplete their built in energy reserves. Most manufacturers recommend rehydrating in warm water with dry. Liquid is different because they have let the yeast go dormant so building a starter gets them back into action and increases viability/cell count. Think of dry yeast being active and frozen in time in that state while liquid yeast are hibernating/dormant and need to build up their energy reserves for fermentation. I always add yeast nutrients and oxygen to the wort either way to help them on the long road.
great, thanks!
And show me the Wyeast pack that actually has 100 billion viable cells in it (other than right off the line) and I'll be surprised (to put it lightly). The fact that they don't recognize a loss of viability for most (dare I say, all?) retail customers is rather specious, IMO. Somebody following that advice for a pack that's several months old is just bound to be disappointed.
Golddiggie
Well-Known Member
Both of the known good tools (mr.malty and yeastcalc) show a loss of viability even if the yeast is a few days/week old.
While you can brew something that won't need a starter, with ultra-fresh yeast (OG <1.030) I seriously doubt that I ever will. All my brews have an OG above 1.050 with most being above 1.060.
If the brewer doesn't make a starter for a pack that's several months old (or even several weeks old) the batch will have a much longer lag phase. I pitched the slurry from a three step starter last night. Made the starter with two vials of WLP099 that were made in December of 2011. Batch was going into the blowoff assembly (more wort made it into primary than I had thought would) after not even 12 hours. :rockin: I was within 10% of the cell count I needed for the batch (offset due to more wort post boil).
IMO, pitching closer to the yeast cell count needed for a batch is a rather important item. I know many new brewers (and even some more experienced ones) scoff at making starters. Or think it's too difficult to do. I see that as them being lazy and not really caring about how the batch comes out. Proper yeast handling is just as important (more to some) as the recipe you're brewing. Learning how to yeast wrangle will only improve your brews moving forward. Right up there with fermenting a batch at the right temperature (which is the yeast doing more for the batch).
You're preaching to the choir.
Golddiggie
Well-Known Member
RIC0
Well-Known Member
What I've found in my fairly new life of being a brewer is that wyeast sucks. Maybe I'll gain more appreciation for it after I use a starter the next time I use it. We will see.
All the beer I've brewerd with wyeast and not used a starter have taken a long time to start fermenting as well as produce low ABV%. With that being said lesson learned that wyeast HAS TO HAVE a starter otherwise be prepared for dissapointment.
All the dry yeast I've used has done its job as it should when it should.
Will be washing some yeast and making my first starters after my current batch of german ale is racked.
All the beer I've brewerd with wyeast and not used a starter have taken a long time to start fermenting as well as produce low ABV%. With that being said lesson learned that wyeast HAS TO HAVE a starter otherwise be prepared for dissapointment.
All the dry yeast I've used has done its job as it should when it should.
Will be washing some yeast and making my first starters after my current batch of german ale is racked.
NicoleBrewer
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2012
- Messages
- 208
- Reaction score
- 14
I love wyeast and have never had an issue. If I pop my pack a few hours before I need to pitch it and let it expand it always does the job. Some yeasts are more active than others, and I have used types that take a little bit longer to start bit I think that is just the nature of it's type.
Golddiggie
Well-Known Member
IMO, your Wyeast 'issues' are all self inflicted. While I do use starters (recommended when using ANY liquid yeast) I've not had a batch finish poorly. If you're using older packs, then you really do need a starter. I've used packs that were OLD (for liquid) with solid results. You also need to have the beer fermenting in the right temperature range. That's no different for liquid or dry yeast.
IME, be smart and you'll have zero issues and great brew. Brew stupid and you'll have issues.
RIC0
Well-Known Member
I've got a good steady environment for fermenting two rooms to be honest with one being lower 60's the other upper 60's.
I agree that my lack of experience has some faults with not using starters, as mentioned I"m not a seasoned brewer, but getting better daily thanks to this site and the search button.
As for the age of the smack packs, didn't really look at the date but both came with kits from Williams brewing.
I think the issue as you mentioned is that starters are a must with liquid packs and if wyeast would do the honors of noting that on their packs that would help us new brewers. Shame on them.
I agree that my lack of experience has some faults with not using starters, as mentioned I"m not a seasoned brewer, but getting better daily thanks to this site and the search button.
As for the age of the smack packs, didn't really look at the date but both came with kits from Williams brewing.
I think the issue as you mentioned is that starters are a must with liquid packs and if wyeast would do the honors of noting that on their packs that would help us new brewers. Shame on them.
Golddiggie
Well-Known Member
Technically, you don't NEED to use a starter (if your 5 gallons or wort is under 1.060 and the pack is super-fresh), but the lag time will be much longer and you can get more phenols because of it. I use yeastcalc.com to figure out my starter schedule (with ease). Having a stirplate makes starters stupid simple/easy, and fast. I've had the 10+ month old yeast take longer to get going in the first starter (~24 hours to get going, done in 48 total). Cold crash, decant and add fresh starter wort and that gets going FAST. Within an hour, or two, it's active and done in about 12-14 hours.
IMO/IME, learning to wrangle liquid yeast gives you a far better brew in glass. I've been using just a couple of strains for [almost] all my brews (liquid from Wyeast) with this method. I've even frozen yeast that I cannot buy right now. I'll be able to thaw out a vial of that, make a starter (or two) and use it in a batch whenever I want.
I'm only into brewing for just over two years, so not nearly as 'seasoned' as some. But, I don't F around when it comes to the important steps. Yeast handling is right up there with temperature control (fermenting beer temp, not ambient).
BTW, room temp in the lower 60's can me upper 60's, or even low 70's for fermenting temperature. I'd check to see what temperature the beer is actually fermenting at and make sure it's well within the range of the yeast.
Oh, and trashing a yeast lab because YOU can't use it right just isn't right...
I've communicated with both Wyeast and White Labs tech's before and they're both great companies. Use their products correctly and you'll get great beer time and again.
RIC0
Well-Known Member
golddiggie your advice and response is greatly appreciated.
I've got the temp strips on my buckets and carboys to see what is actually going on and don't truly trust room temperature.
Several things i've learned as of recently is that starters really are key secrets to great brewing, sterilization and fermentation temps. I've got 2 of the 3 down and tonight on my trip to the local store for some beer i'll be getting some of them small glass jars for my first starter collection.
Also in this day in age we shouldn't have to make a product better by using starters. Shouldn't these yeast companies have all this figured out by now??? After all they are the experts.
I'm a perfectionist in a way, maybe a little OCD and dont' consider myself to be a sloppy brewer by any means. I check primary temps 3-5 times daily.
I've got the temp strips on my buckets and carboys to see what is actually going on and don't truly trust room temperature.
Several things i've learned as of recently is that starters really are key secrets to great brewing, sterilization and fermentation temps. I've got 2 of the 3 down and tonight on my trip to the local store for some beer i'll be getting some of them small glass jars for my first starter collection.
Also in this day in age we shouldn't have to make a product better by using starters. Shouldn't these yeast companies have all this figured out by now??? After all they are the experts.
I'm a perfectionist in a way, maybe a little OCD and dont' consider myself to be a sloppy brewer by any means. I check primary temps 3-5 times daily.
Golddiggie
Well-Known Member
The product IS great. It's just that WE want/need more cells for the beers most of us make. If they gave more yeast cells per pack, the cost would go up and more people would B&M about that. So, spend a little on some DME (100g/1L of starter) and make starters to get the count needed for the batch. OR just buy more packs.
They do list where the yeast, technically, is usable (5 gallons with an OG of under 1.060). WE choose to get a higher pitch cell count. It gives us less lag time, and less chance of things we don't want.
Also, if you oxygenate your wort (pure O2) you'll have better fermentation. That's due to the higher ppm of O2 you can get with pure O2 that you simply cannot get from ambient air.
Do yourself a favor, pick up the Yeast book if you haven't already. Give it a solid read and see what you pick up.
WoodlandBrew
Well-Known Member
Cell counts I've done on White Labs yeast indicate that viability does not drop as fast or in the same way as the calculators show. If the yeast is refrigerated there is almost no loss in viability over time. It may take a little longer to get going, but once it is going it preforms just like the 100 billion cells that they advertise.
bigbadal
Active Member
I have made belgian pales and imperial IPA up to 1,070 and pitched one smack pack - no problems no stuck fermentation or under attenuation. Don't waste time or money is what I say but look above how many people say making a starter is 100% essential for the successes of any beer so you be the judge my friend!
Golddiggie
Well-Known Member
How long does it take to get going (lag phase)? Also, how fresh are the packs? IME, older packs, and underpitching increases lag time. Virtually all the threads made from people having more than 24 hours of no activity are due to underpitching and extended lag time it results in. Pitching the correct amount of cells results in greatly reduced lag time. Also, using [liquid] yeast that's older (over a month or two from production date] greatly benefits from a starter.
I used a starter for my big barleywine (still fermenting BTW) with two old (10+ months old) vials of WLP099. It was full active in less than 8 hours. That's with it in the lower end of it's temperature range too (actually a bit below it).
IMO do what you want. But, consult the calculation tools/sites to see how much you're actually underpitching. While you can still ferment that way, you have a higher chance of having increased off flavors due to stressed yeast. With how cheap it is to make a starter (on a stirplate at least), I don't see it as any issue doing so. At least if you buy the DME in more than 1# bags from a seller that isn't going to grape you over it. 100-200 grams of DME is short money when you think about it. Far less than getting another pack of yeast, or dumping a batch if it's completely not what you wanted (or tastes so bad you can't drink it).
bigbadal
Active Member
Thats one thing I forgot to mention, my LHBS ask me what I want when she does a wyeast order every 3 months so I use yeast that has been packaged under 2 weeks
Golddiggie
Well-Known Member
That doesn't mesh... Unless you're only using the yeast one time, or not getting any more until after she places another order (3 months later). If you're buying the yeast before she places another order, it could be over 3 months old by the time you buy it, or use it.
Being opposed to making starters, IMO, is unwise. Thinking you can't is uneducated. Knowing how, knowing their benefits, having the hardware to make at least a simple starter, and choosing not to is foolish.
bigbadal
Active Member
It's not complicated man read the post again....
fresh yeast comes every 3 months the date is clearly printed on the packet under 2 weeks old.
me put yeast in beer NO STARTER!
I NEVER reuse yeast too much trouble.
I can walk you through it step by step if you like but I think that may be as useful as beating a dead horse.
fresh yeast comes every 3 months the date is clearly printed on the packet under 2 weeks old.
me put yeast in beer NO STARTER!
I NEVER reuse yeast too much trouble.
I can walk you through it step by step if you like but I think that may be as useful as beating a dead horse.
Golddiggie
Well-Known Member
I read it right the first time... IF the yeast comes in ONCE every 3 months, and you get a pack, or use a pack you buy that's 2 weeks old, at that time (right after the once a quarter order comes in) then you're using semi-fresh yeast. If you go to use a pack 2 months later, guess what, it's 2-1/2 months old. It doesn't stop aging when you bring it home. So unless you only use liquid yeast once a quarter, you'll seriously benefit from making starters.
I've washed/harvested yeast before and it's a minor deal to do. I don't do it at this point, but that doesn't mean I won't at some future point. I've actually frozen a dozen vials of a strain that's not available right now (1882-PC). Since it could be a year, or more, before it's released again, I didn't want to not be able to use it. I'm planning on thawing out one of the vials sometime in the next month and making a couple of step starter from it. I'll freeze the yeast I get from that to increase my yeast bank size. Freezing yeast is crazy simple with just a few items.
RIC0
Well-Known Member
With that being said that is what got my panties in a wad to begin with and made me chime in on this thread. I made a imperial stout that took 4 friggon days before the airlock was active and what should be a 8 or 9% beer is now bottled at 6.4% Wyeast smack pack was used.
Not arguing with anyone in the thread as I'm still learning but aggravated I spent the money and time for an imperial that is not what i wanted it to be. I'll still drink it though....
cluckk
Well-Known Member
Making a starter is not an example of "making the product better." It is an example of using the product properly. Besides, do you really want someone sending you a 2 liter smack pack?
As for packaging, the back (at least on mine) does say you can pitch directly for beers under 1.050 (I believe is the figure). It goes on to say larger beers should be pitched with a starter.
