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

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Revvy said:
I just don't get why folks resist it so much...it's either laziness, or ignorance of how simple it is.
Click to expand...

One word, pride! Keeping people from learning something new since the beginning of time!
 
Revvy said:
I just don't get why folks resist it so much...it's either laziness, or ignorance of how simple it is.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that’s just the point. It’s not that simple. I think that’s where Bob was going with this. Best case, your over simplified six step plan will get you from 100 billion cells to 112 billion. It might proof your yeast, but doesn’t exactly set the bar very high since your average homebrew recipe needs over 200. I could be wrong, but I think he’s saying that you should treat pitching rates the same way you treat other ingredients. With a degree of accuracy. Going through the motions of making a starter without regard to pitch rate might make you feel like you’re doing something useful but it’s no guarantee that you’re going to get better beer.

I’m thinking that Bob’s “best practice” would be to buy or build a stir plate and learn the importance nutrients and oxygen play in making a starter. Until then you have a better shot of getting the proper cell count by direct pitching enough liquid yeast or using dry yeast. It's not being ignorant or lazy. It's using the resources you have available to you at the time to make the best beer possible.
 
JustLooking said:
Yeah, that’s just the point. It’s not that simple. I think that’s where Bob was going with this. Best case, your over simplified six step plan will get you from 100 billion cells to 112 billion.
Click to expand...

Then you start it a week early and feed it every day or so with fresh wort, til you get your cell count...It's still not hard to do.

And you don't necessarily need a stirplate, they're nice, but in reality people have been making and building up starters for decades without them. I have a labgrade one from work, but half the time I'm brewing at my GF's and make my starters there, without it.

Having one is great but it should dissuade someone from NOT making a starter.
 
Revvy said:
Then you start it a week early and feed it every day or so with fresh wort, til you get your cell count....
Click to expand...
Thank-you for confirming that making a starter is not as simple as the original description you posted.



Revvy said:
And you don't necessarily need a stirplate,
Click to expand...
Never said it was. I just suggested that it might be part of the "best practice" that Bob was refering to.

chart[1].JPG
 
JustLooking said:
Thank-you for confirming that making a starter is not as simple as the original description you posted.
Click to expand...


Wait a minute, did I miss something? The last time I made a starter, I pretty much followed a 6 step process just like the one Revvy posted, and it worked fine.
When did making a starter become complicated?
If your already brewing your own beer, making a starter should be a no-brainer.
 
Revvy said:
Then you start it a week early and feed it every day or so with fresh wort, til you get your cell count...It's still not hard to do.

And you don't necessarily need a stirplate, they're nice, but in reality people have been making and building up starters for decades without them. I have a labgrade one from work, but half the time I'm brewing at my GF's and make my starters there, without it.

Having one is great but it should dissuade someone from NOT making a starter.
Click to expand...

It's a lot easier than continued feeding. A smack pack might not have enough yeast for 5 gal. of wort, but it's got more than enough for 2-3 qt. I make one step, 2 or 3 qt. starters in a gal. glass jug. Without stir plate, I start them a week ahead, let them ferment out, refrigerate and decant. With a stir plate, I start about 5 days ahead. Dead easy.
 
Sulli said:
Wait a minute, did I miss something? The last time I made a starter, I pretty much followed a 6 step process just like the one Revvy posted, and it worked fine.
When did making a starter become complicated?
If your already brewing your own beer, making a starter should be a no-brainer.
Click to expand...


You're no different than the many posters here who pitch a single pack of liquid yeast into 5 gallons of 1.060 wort and say, “it worked fine.” Making a starter is not what’s important. Pitch rate is. Using the accepted pitch rate of one million cells, the best you could expect to achieve from that method is a rate recommended for a 1.024 beer.

I’m not in complete agreement with all these numbers, but that’s what you get using the formulas that Mr Malty is based on. It’s the one the Revvy uses when he says a single liquid yeast pack is only good for a 1.020 wort.

My point is that there is science and math behind understanding yeast and pitch rates. There’s even more science behind making a starter and knowing that the end result is what you were expecting. It’s not as simple as the outdated graphic that Revvy posted. Just blindly making a starter and tossing it in your wort is not what's going to make your beer better. Adjusting your technique after understanding why you're doing what you're doing will.

You may even come to the conclusion that I have. That making a starter is not what makes great beer.
 
JustLooking said:
You're no different than the many posters here who pitch a single pack of liquid yeast into 5 gallons of 1.060 wort and say, “it worked fine.” Making a starter is not what’s important. Pitch rate is. Using the accepted pitch rate of one million cells, the best you could expect to achieve from that method is a rate recommended for a 1.024 beer.

I’m not in complete agreement with all these numbers, but that’s what you get using the formulas that Mr Malty is based on. It’s the one the Revvy uses when he says a single liquid yeast pack is only good for a 1.020 wort.

My point is that there is science and math behind understanding yeast and pitch rates. There’s even more science behind making a starter and knowing that the end result is what you were expecting. It’s not as simple as the outdated graphic that Revvy posted. Just blindly making a starter and tossing it in your beer is not what's going to make your beer better. Adjusting you technique after understanding why you're doing what you're doing will.

You may even come to the conclusion that I have. That making a starter is not what makes great beer.
Click to expand...

Come on, man. There is literally not a singular thing that "makes great beer". People on here say all the time "fermentation temp control makes great beer!" or proper pitch rate or aeration, etc. All of these things contribute to great beer, but no one flips their lid when someone corrects another poster's fermentation temp.
 
pabloj13 said:
Come on, man. There is literally not a singular thing that "makes great beer".
Click to expand...
Who said there was? I said that making a starter isn't one of them.

No one flips there lid (as you say) when someone correct another posters fermentation temperature is because it's one of the most important parts of making a great beer. The act of making a starter isn't.
 
JustLooking said:
Who said there was? I said that making a starter isn't one of them.

No one flips there lid (as you say) when someone correct another posters fermentation temperature is because it's one of the most important parts of making a great beer. The act of making a starter isn't.
Click to expand...


I would be willing to bet you a trillion dollars that we can find a number of people who would swear that they make "great" beer without controlling their fermentation temp.

And it's hilarious that things like temperature controlled fermentation chambers, constantly changing ice, swamp coolers, monitoring temps, etc. is NOT considered daunting for a new brewer, but putting some numbers into MrMalty and spending 15 minutes making a starter is.
 
pabloj13 said:
I would be willing to bet you a trillion dollars that we can find a number of people who would swear that they make "great" beer without controlling their fermentation temp.
Click to expand...
Not a bet that I'd take. People will swear to a lot of stuff.

Heck, I just heard a guy say that he could make a starter in 15 minutes. :D
 
Denny said:
It's a lot easier than continued feeding. A smack pack might not have enough yeast for 5 gal. of wort, but it's got more than enough for 2-3 qt. I make one step, 2 or 3 qt. starters in a gal. glass jug. Without stir plate, I start them a week ahead, let them ferment out, refrigerate and decant. With a stir plate, I start about 5 days ahead. Dead easy.
Click to expand...

True, I just was giving multiple feedings as an example of making a big starter. But we're both right, it's not hard at all....Despite whatever justlooking is getting at.

Hell you can make it even easier than both you and I are talking about.

You can make a starter without using malt extract, and step it up without using malt extract...Here's everything someone needs to make up a small starter to a big starter, without even boiling and cooling.

MALTA_GOYA_BIG.jpg


A six pack of Malta Goya from the grocery store. Hell, I was just in krogers today and they had them on the bottom shelf in the section with the salsas and stuff.

Just open up a bottle, pour it in a vessel, and pitch yeast....

Justlooking, is THAT too hard for you?????
 
JustLooking said:
You're no different than the many posters here who pitch a single pack of liquid yeast into 5 gallons of 1.060 wort and say, “it worked fine.” Making a starter is not what’s important. Pitch rate is. Using the accepted pitch rate of one million cells, the best you could expect to achieve from that method is a rate recommended for a 1.024 beer.

I’m not in complete agreement with all these numbers, but that’s what you get using the formulas that Mr Malty is based on. It’s the one the Revvy uses when he says a single liquid yeast pack is only good for a 1.020 wort.

My point is that there is science and math behind understanding yeast and pitch rates. There’s even more science behind making a starter and knowing that the end result is what you were expecting. It’s not as simple as the outdated graphic that Revvy posted. Just blindly making a starter and tossing it in your wort is not what's going to make your beer better. Adjusting your technique after understanding why you're doing what you're doing will.

You may even come to the conclusion that I have. That making a starter is not what makes great beer.
Click to expand...

Trust me bud, I understand the math behind starters. this application didn't write itself.
 
JustLooking said:
My point is that there is science and math behind understanding yeast and pitch rates. There’s even more science behind making a starter and knowing that the end result is what you were expecting. It’s not as simple as the outdated graphic that Revvy posted. Just blindly making a starter and tossing it in your wort is not what's going to make your beer better. Adjusting your technique after understanding why you're doing what you're doing will.
Click to expand...

It's sounds like you're being a troll more than you're being helpful.....

We're discussing how simple it is to make a starter. And that "outdated" graphic shows how simple it is to make a starter.

And getting to the numbers is no more difficult.....

And honestly, "blindly" making even the simplest starter is STILL better than making none at all....we're trying to get folks to do something basic, so maybe once the realize how dead simple it is, they'll be more apt to make them and pay attention to pitching rates.

But I would rather have someone make a starter, even with my "outdated" chart (which I stole from one of the most read threads on here, that's probably been repsponisble for more people actually making starters (Deathbrewer's tutorial) than not make on at all.
 
JustLooking said:
Heck, I just heard a guy say that he could make a starter in 15 minutes. :D
Click to expand...

are you serious? have you ever made a starter? is does only take about 15 mins. stepping it up takes another 15. anyway you cut it, making starters is one of the simpler parts of the brewing process. i've been following this thread since i first posted, but didn't feel the need to chime in and repost until now. do you actually have a point you're trying to make or are you just arguing against one of the more common brewing practices for arguments sake?
 
Sulli said:
Wait a minute, did I miss something? The last time I made a starter, I pretty much followed a 6 step process just like the one Revvy posted, and it worked fine.
Click to expand...
Sulli said:
Trust me bud, I understand the math behind starters. this application didn't write itself.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I didn’t realize that you were making a 1.024 batch. Nice session beer I’ll bet. Now that you think of me as your buddy, we should get together and sample a few.
 
JustLooking said:
Sorry, I didn’t realize that you were making a 1.024 batch. Nice session beer I’ll bet. Now that you think of me as your buddy, we should get together and sample a few.
Click to expand...

Don't know where this 1.024 thing is coming from, perhaps you've forgotten to take your meds today?
 
NordeastBrewer77 said:
are you serious? have you ever made a starter? is does only take about 15 mins. stepping it up takes another 15. anyway you cut it, making starters is one of the simpler parts of the brewing process. i've been following this thread since i first posted, but didn't feel the need to chime in and repost until now. do you actually have a point you're trying to make or are you just arguing against one of the more common brewing practices for arguments sake?
Click to expand...

+1 my thoughts exactly.
 
Sulli said:
Don't know where this 1.024 thing is coming from, perhaps you've forgotten to take your meds today?
Click to expand...

Experiment at White Labs show that a half liter starter made with 100 billion cells in a method similiar to what is prescribed by Revvy will yield 112 billion cells

1,000,000 (pitch rate) X 20,000 (milliliters or wort) X 6 Plato (~1.024 sg) = 112,000,000 (cells)
 
JustLooking said:
1,000,000 (pitch rate) X 20,000 (milliliters or wort) X 6 Plato (~1.024 sg) = 112,000,000 (cells)
Click to expand...

how bout a 1.75L starter with a gravity of 1.04? how many cells will that produce? a half litre starter is hardly what people talk about when making a starter to ensure proper pitch rates. i really think you just wanna argue this for little or no reason. a 500 ml starter (og 1.024) would grow virtually no new cells, but a 1.5L starter at 1.04, which is more on par with what people pitch into beer, will grow cells. even just doubling the cell count of a smack pack (~70 billion cells) to ~140 or so billion cells is significant growth. now take a stir plated or regularly shaken starter of 1.5 or 1.75L at 1.040 and you'll end up with a much more appropriate cell count for avg gravity beers. quit saying that making a starter isn't important because very little growth happens in a 500ml of 1.024 starter.
 
JustLooking said:
Experiment at White Labs show that a half liter starter made with 100 billion cells in a method similiar to what is prescribed by Revvy will yield 112 billion cells

1,000,000 (pitch rate) X 20,000 (milliliters or wort) X 6 Plato (~1.024 sg) = 112,000,000 (cells)
Click to expand...

Your going to have to break out the crayons and draw me a picture.

I can't see anywhere in Revvy's post, where he says to make a 1/2 liter starter.:confused:

And only an idiot would assume that the jug in the photos was a 1/2 liter jug, because obviously none of the items in that photo are to scale.
 
NordeastBrewer77 said:
are you serious? have you ever made a starter? is does only take about 15 mins. stepping it up takes another 15.
Click to expand...
Umm… that’s 30 minutes. And that’s assuming that you can get water to a boil, boil for 10 minutes and then get it chilled to 70 degrees, not to mention set up and clean up, all in 15 minutes. Be honest. On a good day, your looking at a half hour.

Not that 30 minutes is a problem. And if you don’t have an alternative, it’s time well spent. It’s the exaggerations and the dumbing down that I object to. Seems like Revvy’s plan is to fool noobs into making useless half liter starters to ease the transition into making something more substantial. Pretty silly if you ask me.

The noob would be better served with advise to brew smaller beers and direct pitch enough healthy yeast (either dry or liquid) to hit the proper pitch rate rather than make a starter that's too small to do the job. After all, isn't the object to make good beer.
 
NordeastBrewer77 said:
how bout a 1.75L starter with a gravity of 1.04? how many cells will that produce? a half litre starter is hardly what people talk about when making a starter to ensure proper pitch rates. i really think you just wanna argue this for little or no reason. a 500 ml starter (og 1.024) would grow virtually no new cells, but a 1.5L starter at 1.04, which is more on par with what people pitch into beer, will grow cells. even just doubling the cell count of a smack pack (~70 billion cells) to ~140 or so billion cells is significant growth. now take a stir plated or regularly shaken starter of 1.5 or 1.75L at 1.040 and you'll end up with a much more appropriate cell count for avg gravity beers. quit saying that making a starter isn't important because very little growth happens in a 500ml of 1.024 starter.
Click to expand...

Sulli said:
Your going to have to break out the crayons and draw me a picture.

I can't see anywhere in Revvy's post, where he says to make a 1/2 liter starter.:confused:

And only an idiot would assume that the jug in the photos was a 1/2 liter jug, because obviously none of the items in that photo are to scale.
Click to expand...

The picture revvy posted said to boil 2 cups of water, which is 1/2 liter. And, yes, in general a 1/2 liter starter won't be very productive...
 
Sulli said:
Your going to have to break out the crayons and draw me a picture.

And only an idiot would assume that the jug in the photos was a 1/2 liter jug, because obviously none of the items in that photo are to scale.
Click to expand...
Most people don't rely on crayons and pictures and know that 2 cups of water is pretty close to a half liter.:cross:

YeastStarterChart[1].jpg
 
Ah, thank you for pointing that out.:eek:
No, I would not waste my time making a 500 ml starter, unless my yeast had very low viability.
The procedure outlined in the photos is what I was referring to as being a simple process.
 
Sulli said:
The procedure outlined in the photos is what I was referring to as being a simple process.
Click to expand...

That's EXACTLY why I posted it, to show how SIMPLE a process it is....only an idiot or a troll would think otherwise...

And I can't figure out what he is...I'm going to hope he's just a troll...Otherwise I have little faith in humanity's capacity for intellect.....

But the standard process IS for making basic starters, beginning with two cups of water, and a half cup of dme.....

From how to brew-\
Boil a pint (1/2 quart) of water and stir in 1/2 cup of DME. This will produce a starter of about 1.040 OG. Boil this for 10 minutes, adding a little bit of hops if you want to. Put the lid on the pan for the last couple minutes, turn off the stove and let it sit while you prepare for the next step. Adding a quarter teaspoon of yeast nutrient (vitamins, biotin, and dead yeast cells) to the starter wort is always advisable to ensure good growth. It is available from your brewshop.
Click to expand...
\\


Oy vey....And he's really quibbling about how long it takes water to boil????? :rolleyes:
 
I can't believe this thread made it to 11 pages...debating starters for liquid yeast, are we seriously having this conversation? JustLooking if you're not willing to spend the extra 30 minutes to make a starter than go buy a packet of dry yeast. You'll save yourself some time/money since obviously this hobby takes up too much of your time. If more brewers took starters with liquid yeast seriously there would a big decrease in the daily number of "It's been X hours and no signs of fermentation" posts.
 
JustLooking said:
Yeah, that’s just the point. It’s not that simple. I think that’s where Bob was going with this. Best case, a 1/2 liter starter will get you from 100 billion cells to 112 billion. It might proof your yeast, but doesn’t exactly set the bar very high since your average homebrew recipe needs over 200. I could be wrong, but I think he’s saying that you should treat pitching rates the same way you treat other ingredients. With a degree of accuracy. Going through the motions of making a starter without regard to pitch rate might make you feel like you’re doing something useful but it’s no guarantee that you’re going to get better beer.

I’m thinking that Bob’s “best practice” would be to buy or build a stir plate and learn the importance nutrients and oxygen play in making a starter. Until then you have a better shot of getting the proper cell count by direct pitching enough liquid yeast or using dry yeast. It's not being ignorant or lazy. It's using the resources you have available to you at the time to make the best beer possible.
Click to expand...

^Fixed that for you. That probably would have prevented this massive communication breakdown between us.

Making a starter is a simple process. Do you agree or not?
 
JustLooking said:
Nice attempt at a back pedal. You posted something stupid and when I call you on it you think that calling me an idiot and a troll will fix it. :rolleyes:


I'm not the one quibbling over how long it takes water to boil. I'm not the one claiming I could make a starter in 15 minutes. That all you.
Click to expand...

I'm not back peddling...Like I said, I think you're just a troll. And I'm not going to play any more.
 
Guys, guys! I've discovered the ultimate in time saving! Quitting homebrewing and buying it at the store! I is genius...
 
Revvy said:
Are you really doing this too?
Click to expand...

Well, I don't see how you can bring to a boil, boil for 10 minutes, and chill down to 70*f in an ice bath in 15 minutes....

And, a two cup starter is fine to determine solely if yeast is viable, but if you want the starter to get your yeast count up to recommended pitching rates, it needs to be bigger, and mrmalty.com is a great resource to determine size based on yeast age, pitching rate, aeration, etc...
 
AZ_IPA said:
Yes, but it takes longer than 15 minutes to mix, boil, chill, and pitch. And you really need more than 2 cups of water. ;)
Click to expand...

Yes, it definitely takes longer than 15 minutes, no argument there.

As far as the size of the starter is concerned; it depends on your inoculation rate. 2 cups would be fine if you were only inoculating with 25 billion cells.
 
Sulli said:
^Fixed that for you. That probably would have prevented this massive communication breakdown between us.

Making a starter is a simple process. Do you agree or not?
Click to expand...
Agreed! Funny how such a small detail could cause so much trouble.

Group hug :confused::drunk::D








except for being called and idiot and a troll
how does he get away with that?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
004 next gen yeast 70ml packets
Replies
7
Views
566
micraftbeer
micraftbeer
D
Yeast starter calc...some problema about inoculation rate
Replies
5
Views
202
IslandLizard
IslandLizard
Zippy123
Yeast starter for pressure lager (~68 F ferm)
Replies
10
Views
630
rallenhall
rallenhall
Tony B
Too much yeast?
Replies
1
Views
214
Tony B
Tony B
Tony B
Overbuild starter from dry yeast
Replies
8
Views
492
fluketamer
F
InkBird 300

Latest posts

Back
Top