I think i killed my Wyeast 1332

Let me start by saying i have never had a fermentation not start overnight. Only done a half dozen brews but still never had it happen.

In preparation for my latest brew i did lots of reading on the forum on best practices ect. I decided to try and control the fermentation temperature by placing the carboy in a little water with a fan blowing on it in the coldest room in the house ( I live in FL its 100 degrees outside)

I followed everything else as usual. My smack pack expanded just fine. I had put it in the fridge the night before brewing got it out at the start of the brew to let it warm back up. I pitched it at about 5 p.m. EST on sunday the beer was around 75 degrees. Have seen zero airlock activity.

Last night i moved the beer back to my normal fermenting location and swirled the beer around to suspend the yeast again hoping that the elevated temp would wake everyone up but got nothing. The stick on thermometer is reading 68 this morning which is in normal range. It was down to the 64-66 range last night.. I didn't think i had gotten the beer that cold but it looks like I put it to sleep.

Im pretty sure at this point i just need to re pitch a new pack of wyeast 1332 into it and let it go to work. Is that the case? Im going to do whatever i can to salvage this one, its the first batch going into the new kegging system.

Thanks for any help in advance.

Leave your yeast alone, you're bugging them.

Time for yeast to kick off can vary significantly from batch to batch, from strain to strain, and from temperature to temperature. If you are controlling your temperatures better than you have in the past, that's probably why. 12 hours is not even close to too long.

Plus, of course, airlock activity is not a measurement of fermentation.

MalFet said:

Leave your yeast alone, you're bugging them.

Time for yeast to kick off can vary significantly from batch to batch, from strain to strain, and from temperature to temperature. If you are controlling your temperatures better than you have in the past, that's probably why. 12 hours is not even close to too long.

Plus, of course, airlock activity is not a measurement of fermentation.

Click to expand...

So knocking on the side of the carboy yelling wake up is not a good thing?

We are at the 36 hour mark and the beer is just sitting on top of the yeast. NO krausen has built up on top of the beer. Also the yeast was def active in the smack pack, it expanded nicely over the course of a 24 hour period. I did put it to sleep by sticking it in the fridge overnight before brew day so maybe that was part of the issue in the slow start.

silver02ws6 said:

So knocking on the side of the carboy yelling wake up is not a good thing?

We are at the 36 hour mark and the beer is just sitting on top of the yeast. NO krausen has built up on top of the beer. Also the yeast was def active in the smack pack, it expanded nicely over the course of a 24 hour period. I did put it to sleep by sticking it in the fridge overnight before brew day so maybe that was part of the issue in the slow start.

Click to expand...

Pitching cold yeast is actually recommended by several of the yeast biologists. More likely, the cause for the "delay" (36h is still in the range of normal) is pitching rate, as it doesn't sound like you made a starter. How big is the beer?

Its the tounge splitter extract kit fron NortherBrewer. I think it ended up comming in around 1.035 pretty sure it was low. I will take another gravity ready when i get home tonight didnt have time to mess with it this morning.

silver02ws6 said:

So knocking on the side of the carboy yelling wake up is not a good thing?

We are at the 36 hour mark and the beer is just sitting on top of the yeast. NO krausen has built up on top of the beer. Also the yeast was def active in the smack pack, it expanded nicely over the course of a 24 hour period. I did put it to sleep by sticking it in the fridge overnight before brew day so maybe that was part of the issue in the slow start.

Click to expand...

As the sticky says, fermentation can take 24 to 72 hours.

Lat I heard, 36 hours is less than 72.

And just because your batch behaved "x" way LAST TIME (or 6) doesn't mean there's anything wrong this time, simply because it is acting differently, you should NEVER assume all of them will. Nor should you worry if it doesn't.

There is nothing "typical" in brewing...every fermentation is different, and should not be used to compare one with another...you can't do that.

No two fermentations are ever exactly the same.

When we are dealing with living creatures, there is a wild card factor in play..Just like with other animals, including humans...No two behave the same.

You can split a batch in half put them in 2 identical carboys, and pitch equal amounts of yeast from the same starter...and have them act completely differently...for some reason on a subatomic level...think about it...yeasties are small...1 degree difference in temp to us, could be a 50 degree difference to them...one fermenter can be a couple degrees warmer because it's closer to a vent all the way across the room and the yeasties take off...

Someone, Grinder I think posted a pic once of 2 carboys touching each other, and one one of the carboys the krausen had formed only on the side that touched the other carboy...probably reacting to the heat of the first fermentation....but it was like symbiotic or something..

I find there is little "normal" in brewing, every fermentation has a wildcard factor from dealing with the yeasties.

silver02ws6 said:

Its the tounge splitter extract kit fron NortherBrewer. I think it ended up comming in around 1.035 pretty sure it was low. I will take another gravity ready when i get home tonight didnt have time to mess with it this morning.

Click to expand...

If it's an extract kit, there's really no way for you to be that far off your target OG unless you used too much water or not all of the ingredients. More likely, the water and the wort weren't properly mixed when you topped off your carboy at the end.

I'm going to disagree here. If you don't have signs of fermentation after 36 hours, something is wrong. Yes, it can indeed take up to 72 hours for fermentation to begin. That is absolutely true. It is also considerably less than ideal. The yeast will make beer, but it probably won't be the best beer your could be making.

I'll just use Chris White's recent yeast book as the most recent reference, though Noonan, Fix and others cover the same ground. The lag phase lasts 12 -15 hours. That's the time that the yeast acclimates and adapts to its surroundings, takes up oxygen, minerals and amino acids, and begins to build proteins and synthesize sterols. After that the yeast enters the exponential growth phase where it begins to consume sugars and produce alcohol and CO2.

A lag phase lasting longer than usual is an indicator of poor yeast health, usually from underpitching or lack of nutrients or oxygen. The yeast will certainly survive. They will definitely make beer . . . eventually. But along the way they will also create a host of undesirable flavor compounds from the stress. Personally, I'd repitch. I'd also give the fermentation a little longer than usual to clean itself up after fermentation ends.

Chad said:

I'm going to disagree here. If you don't have signs of fermentation after 36 hours, something is wrong. Yes, it can indeed take up to 72 hours for fermentation to begin. That is absolutely true. It is also considerably less than ideal. The yeast will make beer, but it probably won't be the best beer your could be making.

I'll just use Chris White's recent yeast book as the most recent reference, though Noonan, Fix and others cover the same ground. The lag phase lasts 12 -15 hours. That's the time that the yeast acclimates and adapts to its surroundings, takes up oxygen, minerals and amino acids, and begins to build proteins and synthesize sterols. After that the yeast enters the exponential growth phase where it begins to consume sugars and produce alcohol and CO2.

A lag phase lasting longer than usual is an indicator of poor yeast health, usually from underpitching or lack of nutrients or oxygen. The yeast will certainly survive. They will definitely make beer . . . eventually. But along the way they will also create a host of undesirable flavor compounds from the stress. Personally, I'd repitch. I'd also give the fermentation a little longer than usual to clean itself up after fermentation ends.

Click to expand...

Oh, I'm with you on that. But it's unlikely that his yeast is actually dead as his first post asked.

You can disagree all you want, but in truth, on here, countless time folks come back and say at or near the 72 hour mark that fermentation kicked off. That's WHY the mods made that sticky to begin with. You can read all those stories in that thread, or daily on all the "is my yeast dead" threads we get on here, where the OP comes back and says everything is fine.

Just because the opinions of authors in a NEW book says one thing, doesn't mean that it's the be all and end all, it doesn't necessarily negate all the other information or experiences that went on before. We have hundreds of thousands of posts of brewer's experiences on here that counters it.

Sometimes authors get it wrong, or sometimes they're not seeing the whole picture. Palmer did in how to brew and admitted that he went by outdated information when he wrote his infamous "get the beer off the yeast cake or else the dreaded autolysis is going to instantly ruin your beer" passage. He came back and said, in light of all the information he was reading on websites and forums where folks were skipping secondary and leaving beer alone for a month, he went back and re-evaluated his beliefs on the matter.

It's all well and good to quote it, it's a great book. But you have to factor in the experiences on here. AND they bear out something different.

*shrug*

Revvy said:

Just because the opinions of authors in a NEW book says one thing, doesn't mean that it's the be all and end all. . .

Sometimes authors get it wrong, or sometimes they're not seeing the whole picture.

Click to expand...

Are you genuinely suggesting that Chris White -- of White Labs, one of the largest brewing yeast suppliers in the world -- is mistaken about yeast life cycles? Or that Greg Noonan and George Fix before him were also wrong? Perhaps you'd like to take on Kunze or Narziss as well? Your ego knows no bounds.

Yes, yeast can indeed take a while to get started. That doesn't make it normal or optimal. If yeast is slow to acclimate and come out of the lag phase, something is wrong. You can still get beer, it just won't be as good as it could be. Anecdotal evidence is just that. If a lot of people said they regularly drove drunk and never had an accident, would that make it a good idea? Just because a lot of people have waited 72 hours before fermentation began and still got beer doesn't make it a good practice. Beer is pretty forgiving. You can screw up a lot of things and still get something drinkable. But is drinkable all we're really shooting for here? I thought the point of the forum was to offer advice on how to make better beer.

I was with you till that last post. Chillax, brosef.

I'm just saying it's a lot less cut and dried than YOU might think, and your post implies. And telling a new brewer his beer is more than likely bad because it hasn't started fermenting at 36 hours is patently bad advice, and causes unneeded stress.

My belief is that 1 occurrance is an anamoly, 2 may be a coincidence, BUT 3 or more occurance is an epidemic, or the truth...and countless times a day on here we have folks who don't have fermentation til near the 72 hour marks.

You can quibble about it all you want, or deal in semantics, but we deal in sheer volume of users on here, and daily we have lots of beers that turn out perfectly fine that had a longer lag time than what the books say.

You dismiss it as anecdotal, that's your choice...it doesn't mean it's not happening. I didn't put a sticky at the top of the forum talking about it. I didn't fill it with stories of folks beers coming out fine that took 72 hours to get going. Hundreds if not thousands of folks did....

So they're all lying and/or their beers are all bad?

Let's face it. There are thousands of new and/or less experienced brewers on this site. They're also many experienced brewers as well. Please, I am not dissing HBT. Just stating facts. There's tons of info here, but not all I would follow or live by either. That's the great and not so great of a huge online forum.

I would also agree that if your yeast hasn't started in 36 hours than its not in an optimal enviroment for growth or fermentation, but It may still make great beer. I've never had an ale take longer than 24 hours(mostly 12 hours) to start showing signs of fermentation. I also pitch 2 vials for 6 gallons, 2 liter starter on a stir plate, and use pure O2 for oxygen.

Everyone relax I just had a few simple questions and there has been some really good information regarding my little problem. Im going to stop by the homebrew store on my way home tonight and pick up another pack of 1332 and repitch in the morning if nothing is happening. I know this batch may not turn out great but you live and learn, or it could end up being the best batch ever (jury is still out)

Most of the things stated here I kinda knew on some level, but also wanted a little reinforcement to put the ol head at ease.

Nothing funky is growing on the top of it so thats a good sign! It just needs a little wake call to get going is all!

I can't resists this one...

OK I can see that Chris in his book is referring to how it should be done (according to Chris an acknowledged expert)... ergo, using correct pitching rates of temperature matched yeast and wort with correct nutrient levels etc etc you will get fermentation as he explains, he is giving you what you should see if you have done everything right and what we all see 90% of the time. Experience of the thousands of brews completed by members of this forum has shown us that you still get complete fermentation if you go outside these steps but you risk something going wrong the 1% that lag more than others the 7% that fail and the other that the drinkers are too drunk to notice.

Let say that Silver02ws6 has under pitched but over aerated and has lots of nutrients on board then the yeast could multiply for longer times extending the lag phase before they show signs. Now his beer will taste different but still be beer and still get drunk... hopefully that is the case and he can save his other pack of 1332 for another batch!

When you make your own yeast from Slants you sweat it a bit more as it takes days to get a pitchable quantity.

Clem

So almost everyone was right. It wasn't dead, got home this afternoon and its fermenting away!

silver02ws6 said:

So almost everyone was right. It wasn't dead, got home this afternoon and its fermenting away!

Click to expand...

Once again the yeast comes through, just as *ahem* the "ancedotal evidence" (and the sticky) said it would.

Of course it is. I never suggested otherwise. I did say, however, that the over-long lag phase was a sign of less than ideal fermentation conditions and would lead to beer that will most likely be less than what it could have been. That's still true. It is true no matter how much you pat yourself on the back or copy and paste bad advice to new brewers. A 72 hour lag phase, even a 36 hour lag phase, is a sign that something is wrong.

To the original poster, best of luck to you. Wyeast 1332 is one of my favorite yeasts and the reason I clicked on this thread in the first place. In the future make sure you use a healthy pitch of yeast, aerate or oxygenate your wort well, and provide yeast nutrients to make sure that your yeast has the best environment possible for making great beer. If you are interested, try reading some of the books mentioned upthread. They'll give you a head start on making your beer even better. An internet forum can only take you so far.

After this, I'm done. The inmates have taken over the asylum. And I'm not drinking their beer.

Chad said:

Of course it is. I never suggested otherwise. I did say, however, that the over-long lag phase was a sign of less than ideal fermentation conditions and would lead to beer that will most likely be less than what it could have been. That's still true. It is true no matter how much you pat yourself on the back or copy and paste bad advice to new brewers. A 72 hour lag phase, even a 36 hour lag phase, is a sign that something is wrong.

To the original poster, best of luck to you. Wyeast 1332 is one of my favorite yeasts and the reason I clicked on this thread in the first place. In the future make sure you use a healthy pitch of yeast, aerate or oxygenate your wort well, and provide yeast nutrients to make sure that your yeast has the best environment possible for making great beer. If you are interested, try reading some of the books mentioned upthread. They'll give you a head start on making your beer even better. An internet forum can only take you so far.

After this, I'm done. The inmates have taken over the asylum. And I'm not drinking their beer.

Click to expand...

Its all good in the asylum. I agree that conditions could not have been right considering how long it lagged. Im pretty sure I shocked the yeast considering the temp changes it went through in about a 6 hour period and that was my fault. At least its up and running. Sitting around 72 degrees hanging out in a chair with a towel wrapped around it.

I will check out the books mentioned. I have a lot of random knowledge and need start building the bridge between it all.

On a side note I picked up a frigidaire 7 cu freezer for $100 bucks today, so the tongue splitter will have a nice home when the 1332 is finished doing its job.

Chad said:

Of course it is. I never suggested otherwise. I did say, however, that the over-long lag phase was a sign of less than ideal fermentation conditions and would lead to beer that will most likely be less than what it could have been. That's still true. It is true no matter how much you pat yourself on the back or copy and paste bad advice to new brewers. A 72 hour lag phase, even a 36 hour lag phase, is a sign that something is wrong.

To the original poster, best of luck to you. Wyeast 1332 is one of my favorite yeasts and the reason I clicked on this thread in the first place. In the future make sure you use a healthy pitch of yeast, aerate or oxygenate your wort well, and provide yeast nutrients to make sure that your yeast has the best environment possible for making great beer. If you are interested, try reading some of the books mentioned upthread. They'll give you a head start on making your beer even better. An internet forum can only take you so far.

After this, I'm done. The inmates have taken over the asylum. And I'm not drinking their beer.

Click to expand...

Chad I think the reason Revvy and you disagreed is because of different view points. But when it comes down to it I think everyone would admit you are right something is not right with the yeast, Revvy's point is it will still work, just not be perfect, and Austin being new to brewing needs to understand both sides of the equation.

You obviously have been brewing a long time and have a great deal of experience and hence hold you beer to a higher standard than most and slightly off flavors is a beer would bug you to the point of frustration. And to make it worse you are a cook so you have one of those palates that picks up tastes I can only dream of noticing.

In the end your post as done it job and help Austin see a different opinion and that if he experiences a off taste or a stuck batch what the cause might have been and so he can learn, or if he would rather not risk it can go with the new packet of yeast.

I think in the interest of science Austin should mail us all some of the drop when it is done so we can have a really discussion about this, cause otherwise it is a dry argument.

Clem