white labs

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.

Dannyc31

Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
Location
NY
Is anyone else having a slow start time with white labs yeast, i used a California 5, which i had to kick start with a champane yeast. Now i have a pumpkin ale going on day three and it is like watching grass grow for the ferm to start. that was a english ale yeast from white labs also. seems they have some bad stuff out there or it is just taking forever to get going.

I am thinking of stopping to use there yeast for everything.

Dan
 
Did you make a starter? If not, a 36+ hour lag time isn't unusual. 3 days seems excessive, though.

It's not bad yeast, it's bad procedures and bad advice. You should always make a starter with liquid yeast. "Pitchable" vials and smack packs really don't have the sort of viable cell count you need.

See www.mrmalty.com for a pretty thorough explanation and a calculator.
 
Might also look into your source of yeast as a possible problem. If it is not handled well between the lab and your home (example: hot weather and slow shipping) then the viability can suffer greatly.

FWIW, I have always had great success with their yeast.
 
I use it exclusively and only once made a starter. Lag time varies but it's always been going by the 36-hr mark for me.
 
Yuri_Rage said:
Did you make a starter? If not, a 36+ hour lag time isn't unusual. 3 days seems excessive, though.

It's not bad yeast, it's bad procedures and bad advice. You should always make a starter with liquid yeast. "Pitchable" vials and smack packs really don't have the sort of viable cell count you need.

See www.mrmalty.com for a pretty thorough explanation and a calculator.
I fully agree, please, don't take me wrong, i appreciate the yeast labs for making yeasts available to the homebrewer, but these pitifull little vials and packs are only a start to what is needed. I cut those things 6 ways and then boost a cut up to 3L in full kraeusen for lagers. Starters are VERY important....:)
 
I've used California V a number of times. Even when I didn't use a starter, I got lag times far better than what OP describes. Make a starter, if you have time. No matter what, aeriate well, as that makes a huge difference in lag times. Pitch at proper temperatures.


TL
 
I have also discovered that a stir plate makes a HUGE difference when making a starter. I get lag times of under 12 hours since I started using one.
 
Whenever yeast is at warmer temperatures for a length of time, like when being shipped for several days, it will increase the lag time. If your batch doesn't start within 24 hours after pitching, a vigorous stir will help a lot. You can also add Yeast Fuel or another type of yeast nutrient to ensure a healthy fermentation. It is also very wise to have a couple packets of Nottingham dry yeast on hand for emergencies. Dry yeast will last several years and it never has a problem starting.

I am willing to give out free samples of our Yeast Fuel (1 per customer or address) simply email [email protected] and mention "Homebrewtalk"
Yeast fuel is a yeast nutrient that is very beneficial to the yeast when fermenting. Our customers have told us that it produces a very clean and fast fermentation. It can take as much as 48 hours off of your fermentation time.
 
Don't believe the hype. Unless you're brewer something like a imperial stout barley wine or other big beers, in my experience, you don't need a start with White Labs. It is just a extra step, and another place one can screw up. If it gets a bug in starter, the bug mutliples too. Also, no way, a quart or any thing less than a gallon starter will give you anything close to the cell count to matter.

Try simple aeroation, like shaking the fermentor for 5-10 minutes. Oxygen will allow the yeast to reproduce to required cell count.
Most of the time, I get a lag time of 12-18 hours with white lab. Pitch temp is probably more importart than a starter. (about 80 degree for ales 50 for lagers) If you are using a Ale pail type , check the seal on the container. I have had it happen that I didn't seal it correctly and the bugger didn't bubble until I close right.
 
thurvin said:
Don't believe the hype. Unless you're brewer something like a imperial stout barley wine or other big beers, in my experience, you don't need a start with White Labs. It is just a extra step, and another place one can screw up. If it gets a bug in starter, the bug mutliples too. Also, no way, a quart or any thing less than a gallon starter will give you anything close to the cell count to matter.

Try simple aeroation, like shaking the fermentor for 5-10 minutes. Oxygen will allow the yeast to reproduce to required cell count.
Most of the time, I get a lag time of 12-18 hours with white lab. Pitch temp is probably more importart than a starter. (about 80 degree for ales 50 for lagers) If you are using a Ale pail type , check the seal on the container. I have had it happen that I didn't seal it correctly and the bugger didn't bubble until I close right.
I couldn't disagree more.

If your yeast seem weak and lag a lot, you need to be making starters. Period.

However, if you're getting decent lag times and healthy yeast without a starter, by all means, continue your present practice....but it doesn't seem like sound advice given the problem at hand.
 
starter's always help the beer. they ensure that you have viable yeast and the vastly increase the cell count. nothing wrong with that and as long as you practice proper sanitation, they'll work great.

There is good liquid yeast that is pitchable for most beers and most people, but it's always a good idea to make a starter.

often the reproductive stage is what causes much of the lag time, unless they're in shock. more oxygen in the wort means they'll take more time to eat it up and reproduce and then they start feeding on the sugars.
 
I didnt have time for a starter, my WLP380 took 84 hours... so, be patient...
 
thurvin said:
Don't believe the hype. Unless you're brewer something like a imperial stout barley wine or other big beers, in my experience, you don't need a start with White Labs. It is just a extra step, and another place one can screw up. ....

Are you trolling, man? All these guys have learned through experience what works and makes good beer..........
 
The Pol said:
I didnt have time for a starter, my WLP380 took 84 hours... so, be patient...

At that huge lag time only God knows what was fermenting your wort...
 
It finally blew, been chugging away for 5 days now, smells fantastic... I am not worried. It was sterile, it was sealed, it will be just fine.
 
The Pol said:
It finally blew, been chugging away for 5 days now, smells fantastic... I am not worried. It was sterile, it was sealed, it will be just fine.

i agree with you, Pol, without a starter, lag times are slow. But, if your procedures are sanitary, it all will come out well. I am familiar with DR. George Fix's statements that deal with the wort test. I have run the test in my own brew shed. After one week at 72f..... nothing. I think you would have to brew in a pig pen to get otherwise..............:)
 
Hey AdIn... I read some of that thread... looks to me like if there is no wild yeast growth in 72 hours... you are totally sterile and should have no problems... since I had NOTHING until 84 hours... I am pretty sure... again... that it is fine.
 
Hey, I'll agree with OldFarmer. If you are confident your procedures are sanitary - no problem. Let us know how it goes.
 
Back
Top