Do you use a starter?

The duder at my LHBS told me starters are not necessary and not always a good idea but reading this place it seems like some of you swear by them. Where do you stand?

I have only brewed about 20 batches thus far and have used starter and o2 on 5 of my last 8,. There is quite a lot of data to support using a starter when your brewing higher gravity beers and/or using liquid yeast. IMHO pitching the correct amount of yeast cells and controlling fermentation temperatures has improved my finished product quite a bit.

Here is a link to a pitch rate calculator and some other excellent information.

Cheers...

Sometimes: whenever I'm using liquid yeast. Dry yeast always gets pitched right into the beer.

-Joe

I brew only ordinary bitter (Still) so I don't really need a starter. Dry yeast would do just as well. The cheap side of me likes to wash yeast and save a couple of bucks, but really, I just like the extra playtime with beer stuff.

I have never used a starter, but I now have the flask, and stir plate and will be using starters for higher OG beers.

I avoid making starters by engineering my pipeline. I'll direct-pitch smaller, low-gravity batches, harvest the yeast, and repitch that in bigger beers.

For a strain I don't expect to reuse, I do make a starter. No starter for dry yeast.

+1 bad67z, the right amount of yeast and the right temp makes better beer.

Only when I'm brewing a style that requires a liquid yeast, which isn't very often. 95% of the time, dry yeast does the trick.

For the first generation of liquid yeast and sometimes with old slurry I've had refrigerated for too long. I repitch unwashed slurry for a string of brews, even with dry yeast.

Some say not to repitch from dark beers to lighter ones or hoppy to less hoppy ones but frankly 1 cup (or less) to 5.5 gallons makes zero noticeable difference.

My last IPA I just scooped up yeast off of the top of a APA that was at high kraeusen. I was surprised how fast it took off.

Short answer: Unless I'm only using dry yeast, I basically always make a starter.

Long anser:
I nearly always use a starter when I'm brewing a beer that requires a liquid yeast, which is a little over half my beers--a single smack pack or vial is really an underpitch for almost anything except for very small milds.

40ish% of the time, dry yeast does the trick and I don't need a starter; even for a high grav beer, I'll normally pitch 2 packets of dry yeast rather than make a starter.

Several of my beers use commercial dregs, too; I'll make a little starter to, say, give the Orval dregs a head start before pitching them into a beer that needs some funk.

When I use a liquid yeast for something I brew often, I wash some and save it for future batches so I'm not rebuying $8 packs.

If it's convenient (ie there are 2 beers of varying gravity that I want to make around the same time that use the same yeast), I'll engineer the pipeline a bit--for instance, making a small starter for a scottish ale first, then using a part of that yeast cake from that in a big barleywine (using the whole thing would normally be a pretty big overpitch even for a 1.100 OG ale).

I have been thinking about not using a starter (or using a very small one) with my next hefeweizen, to enhance ester production.

I've starter doing a starter lately, and I wish I didnt. My first wheat beer brew, delicious, without a starter. My last two with starters? Turned a german hefe into an american wheat, no flavor.

I will never use a starter on a wheat again.

other beers, to reduce esters, I can see a value. but, i use dry yeast for the beer i want a little yeast flavor.

dry=no starter, liquid=starter

Maybe this should be another thread but if one pays $6-$8 for a liquid yeast, why would you just not pay the $2-$4 for a dry pack if it is better without making the starter. I have never used a starter and all of my beers have been great (but one and I will not talk about it) I know all about specific strains for specific brews and you can only get those strains with liquid and so on. I am in the same camp as Laughing_Gnome_Invisible as far as more time playing with brew stuff but, for those who do not want to spend time messing with a starter and risking contamination why spend more money. Do you not get more viable yeastie beasties with drys than liquids? (correct or back wards?) If so why spend the extra cash?

i'm with you. i haven't used a liquid in a long time. the styles i do, dry works as well, and i can have several around the house to help me decide what style is next...

I don't use a starter when using dry yeast, but do when using liquid (including harvested yeasts).

-a.

instapman said:

Maybe this should be another thread but if one pays $6-$8 for a liquid yeast, why would you just not pay the $2-$4 for a dry pack if it is better without making the starter.

Click to expand...

Because it's not better. Dry yeast is compromised in health and purity. Anyway, of the 15 or so dry beer yeast strains available, not one is known to reliably turn out a quality hefeweizen or Trappist-style beer, and there isn't a flocculent lager strain like 838/2308.

Limiting yourself to dry yeast is like limiting yourself to brewing with extract only. Yes, you can make great beer, and there are some huge advantages in convenience, but it is confining.

I think a lot of people underestimate the importance of yeast and fermentation. The yeast make the beer, we just feed them and give them a nice home.

instapman said:

Maybe this should be another thread but if one pays $6-$8 for a liquid yeast, why would you just not pay the $2-$4 for a dry pack if it is better without making the starter. I have never used a starter and all of my beers have been great (but one and I will not talk about it) I know all about specific strains for specific brews and you can only get those strains with liquid and so on.

Click to expand...

Yeast is one of the major determinants in what a beer tastes like (and looks like to an extent).

You answered the question in the bolded statement. If I want Chico yeast, I'll normally use US-05 over WLP-001 or Wyeast 1056. But there are something like 54 Wyeast yeasts and 40 White Labs varieties currently available; there are 8 Fermentis dry varieties and 3 Danstar varieties. For a lot of yeasts, there just isn't a suitable dry version available.

(As I mentioned above, I rinse and reuse the liquid yeasts that I use commonly, so it's a lot less than $6-8 per brew.)

Looking at the beers in my .sig, 8 of the 11 use yeasts that aren't available dry:

Oude Bruin: Roeselaire, (along with Orval dregs, Hanssen's Oude Kriek dregs, Monk's Cafe Flemish Sour dregs) nothing comparable available in dry
Split-oak smoked porter: US-05
Stanley Steamer: California lager yeast, not available in dry
St James Gate Stout: Irish ale yeast, not available in dry
Amarillo Slim (IPA/APA): US-05
Saison Duphunk (bugged): French Saison and Roeselaire (along with Orval dregs), neither available in dry
Saison Laurentian: French Saison, not available in dry
Toil and Trouble (Scottish 80/-): Scottish ale, not available dry
Earl White (ginger/bergamot wit): Belgian Witbier, no good dry substitute
Number 8 (Belgian Strong Dark Ale): Rochefort yeast, not available dry
Eternale (Barleywine): Scottish ale, not available dry
Ancho Villa RIS: US-05

I sometimes do when it is a bigger beer. I primarily use dry yeast so smaller beers just get the rehydrated yeast poured in. This was until yesterday when my 2000ml flask hit the garage floor. I still haven't brought myself to pick up the mess.

I will not brew with a liquid yeast culture without making a starter. I only use dry yeast like 1% of the time.

I don't like repaying for yeast, nor do I have an excuse as a microbiology major for not growing my own yeast. So I do.

I really enjoy it though, so no worries.

I farm several strains of yeast.So for me a starter is necessary...

Laughing_Gnome_Invisible said:

The cheap side of me likes to wash yeast and save a couple of bucks, but really, I just like the extra playtime with beer stuff.

Click to expand...

What LGI said.

I used to be the king of slow starting fermentations with liquid yeast, and I've never tried dry yeast until this year. Jealous of people claiming to have fermentation start in sometimes 10 times shorter time than me and the advantages (namely flavor), I bought some stir plates and flasks and made my first starters which happened to go into my first two AG brews. So far the first one tastes great and my fermentation started in probably around 12 hours instead of 20-30. Its progress.

I've used dry yeast a few times and only re-hydrated it once, don't think I did it at the right temp and it got a slow start just like the other few packets of dry yeast I've pitched so far. I've heard you should not deplete the built in resources in dry yeast by trying to make a starter so I won't. Also most dry yeast comes in larger equivalent quantities and is considerably cheaper than liquid so you don't have a large financial incentive to multiply dry yeast. I will surely practice more to achieve the status of awesome yeast master and pass on my findings to other homebrewers.

I always use a yeast starter on a stir plate if using vials, or smack packs. With dry yeast I do not hydrate and simply pitch into the wort.
So far no issues with stuck fermentations...etc

I only make a starter when I use liquid yeast on a 5+ gallon batch of wort larger than 1.035 (which is a lot of my beers). I often make a light beer (1.035 or so) as a starter for a larger brew. Or a 3 gal batch of 1.050 ish as a starter for bigger beers.
Dry yeast = no starter.

When using liquid yeast and I'm starting from a vial or smack pack.

I've reused yeast a few times and have started planning my brews around using lower gravity beer to grow yeast for my higher gravity batches.

Never made a starter. I've only brewed 17 batches so far, maybe 1/4 of those were liquid yeast. Loved every batch...