Waking up 13 month old yeast

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.

LansingX

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2011
Messages
57
Reaction score
3
Location
Lansing
Thought I would share a success story on reviving a 13 month old Wyeast 1056 American Ale. Not sure how or why I ended up with this old packet of yeast, but I was planning an Ale this weekend and figured what the heck, I will try a starter with it and see if it works. It was showing signs of life about 24 hours later.

I recently made a home made stir plate with a cigar box and an old computer fan. Not sure why I waited so long… that thing is something else and is definitely a great addition to my home brewery. And the idea for a cigar box stir plate was found on this great forum! Thank you to all you innovative souls on this forum.
 
I'd be interested in knowing how the starter behaved and how a brew turns out.

Hopefully, the beer will be simple enough to judge the yeast without too many other aromas and flavors to complicate the analysis.


Please, as you go, take a minute and post any further results.

Cheers
 
I used year old 1762 to ferment a dubbel and I regret it. I treated it very well, grew it up a lot, gave it lots of nutrients, stir plate, plenty of oxygen in the wort, and I only got 72% attenuation. The beer was tasty, but could have done with another 8-10 points of attenuation. I will never use old yeast again. While they obviously have the ability to ferment, how healthy are they?
 
I used year old 1762 to ferment a dubbel and I regret it. I treated it very well, grew it up a lot, gave it lots of nutrients, stir plate, plenty of oxygen in the wort, and I only got 72% attenuation. The beer was tasty, but could have done with another 8-10 points of attenuation. I will never use old yeast again. While they obviously have the ability to ferment, how healthy are they?

If you read the published attenuation rates for beer yeast they generally range at approximately 72-75%. That performance IMHO does not indicate anything but a healthy beer yeast. If you want higher attenuation, you would go to a Wine or champagne yeast.
 
With older yeast its usually a good idea to do a stepped starter (2-3 steps) so that you get the cell count needed. Easy to do with yeastcalc.com's site. I've used 10+ month old yeast like that so far. Might even use a pack from Sept 2011 that way.
 
To clarify about my dubbel, I did do 3 steps of starters to grow the old yeast up, with lots of nutrients, oxygen, and a stir plate each time.

Also, my dubbel recipe was fairly standard with about 8% crystal malt, some wheat, munich, and base malt, and 10% sugar. So I expected something more like 78-80% attenuation. Maybe 75% at the veeerry lowest.

In Jamil and Chris's Yeast book, they talk about successive generations of yeast that experience sub-par oxygenation. By the fifth batch the attenuation was a full degree plato higher than normal, and it took an extra day to finish fermentation. I liken using old yeast to this situation - subpar yeast will definitely still ferment something, but how well? Vitality is just as important as viability.
 
Also, my dubbel recipe was fairly standard with about 8% crystal malt, some wheat, munich, and base malt, and 10% sugar. So I expected something more like 78-80% attenuation. Maybe 75% at the veeerry lowest.

YEAST STRAIN: 1762 | Belgian Abbey II™

An excellent yeast strain for use in Belgian dark strong ales. This strain has a relatively “clean profile” which allows a rich malt and distinctive ethanol character to shine. Delicate dried fruit esters can be produced when used at higher fermentation temperatures or in a high gravity wort.

Origin:
Flocculation: medium
Attenuation: 73-77%
Temperature Range: 65-75° F (18-24° C)
Alcohol Tolerance: approximately 12% ABV

Your expectation of 78-80% was a bit overzealous.
 
As I understand, those attenuation ranges are for all-malt worts. So theoretically if I make a 1.060 all-malt beer and achieve 75% attenuation with this yeast, I'll have a FG of 1.015. If I were to add enough sugar to this wort to make it a theoretical OG of 1.072, the beer would still ferment to 1.015 because the yeast would consume every bit of the sugar. 1.072 to 1.015 is about 80%
 
As I understand, those attenuation ranges are for all-malt worts. So theoretically if I make a 1.060 all-malt beer and achieve 75% attenuation with this yeast, I'll have a FG of 1.015. If I were to add enough sugar to this wort to make it a theoretical OG of 1.072, the beer would still ferment to 1.015 because the yeast would consume every bit of the sugar. 1.072 to 1.015 is about 80%

Theory is a wonderful thing that sometimes has no application to reality.
 
So you don't think a yeast can perform beyond the manufacturer's listed attenuation ranges? Especially when we're talking about adding 100% fermentable sugars and not exceeding the yeast's alcohol tolerance?

There's already plenty of examples of this on this forum:

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f73/simple-dubbel-309296/ (84% ADF)

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f73/skunked-monk-belgian-dubbel-265071/ (86% ADF)

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f73/strawberry-blood-dubbel-137032/ (83% ADF)

It ain't just hypothetical, it's achievable. But you gotta have a great fermentation. If you're bringing this up because you're a fan of using old yeast that's fine, but I'm just giving experiential evidence as a reason why it might be worth a second thought. Besides all of that, I loved that dubbel and drank the hell out of it - I just consider it a fortuitous problem.
 
It ain't just hypothetical, it's achievable. But you gotta have a great fermentation. If you're bringing this up because you're a fan of using old yeast that's fine, but I'm just giving experiential evidence as a reason why it might be worth a second thought. Besides all of that, I loved that dubbel and drank the hell out of it - I just consider it a fortuitous problem.

I don't agree with your theory that "old yeast" is going to do a sub par job.

And yes, I do use old yeast. I just revived 6 different strains from 2-1/2 year old slants and I'm going to use all of them.
 
As mentioned earlier in this thread vitality and viability are important. They are a measure of yeast health and typically what you would look at under a microscope when using older yeast. You want to see how many living yeast cells remain and how active they are (the simple definition). And as stated the best way to use older yeast would be to do a stepped starter, slowly growing the yeast count and through the process ensuring proper yeast activity. This is, however, different from yeast mutation. As a particular culture of yeast is used more than once it starts to "mutate", meaning the characteristics of yeast which is for example 7 generations old might not be exactly the same as the original strain. This doesn't mean what the yeast is bad it just means that you might have different attenuation or flocculation etc when compared to the original.
 
I used year old 1762 to ferment a dubbel and I regret it. I treated it very well, grew it up a lot, gave it lots of nutrients, stir plate, plenty of oxygen in the wort, and I only got 72% attenuation. The beer was tasty, but could have done with another 8-10 points of attenuation. I will never use old yeast again. While they obviously have the ability to ferment, how healthy are they?

I am confused....if you grew up the old yeast via stepped starters you aren't dealing with old yeast anymore. You "should" have an army of healthy new yeast.
 
I don't agree with your theory that "old yeast" is going to do a sub par job.

And yes, I do use old yeast. I just revived 6 different strains from 2-1/2 year old slants and I'm going to use all of them.

If you're doing slants then you're worlds above most homebrewers, me included. I can definitely see how you are able to effectively use old yeast.

My experience is based on an old yeast cake stored for over a year, and I believe the OP is talking about finding an old smack pack in the fridge. I'd consider both of these inferior to selecting the good yeast from a slant and growing it up.
 
I am confused....if you grew up the old yeast via stepped starters you aren't dealing with old yeast anymore. You "should" have an army of healthy new yeast.

I guess I'm concerned about either the old yeast mutating during storage, or a case in which they are so nutrient starved that when they finally have the chance to grow again, they are unable to effectively repair themselves and reproduce properly. I mentioned above the story from Yeast in which successive generations of oxygen-starved yeast were less effective fermenters. The common knowledge seems to be that yeast can recover from anything you throw at them but that's not the case. You gotta start with healthy yeast to get more healthy yeast.
 
kanzimonson said:
Also, my dubbel recipe was fairly standard with about 8% crystal malt, some wheat, munich, and base malt, and 10% sugar. So I expected something more like 78-80% attenuation. Maybe 75% at the veeerry lowest./QUOTE]

Also, don't forget crystal malts are largely unfermentable and will impact for final gravity, thus impacting your attenuation.
 
kanzimonson said:
Also, my dubbel recipe was fairly standard with about 8% crystal malt, some wheat, munich, and base malt, and 10% sugar. So I expected something more like 78-80% attenuation. Maybe 75% at the veeerry lowest./QUOTE]

Also, don't forget crystal malts are largely unfermentable and will impact for final gravity, thus impacting your attenuation.

Right, but I mentioned that because I feel that's a relatively common amount of crystal to put in a dubbel, and therefore I should expect a pretty standard attenuation of 75-80%
 
kanzimonson said:
Also, my dubbel recipe was fairly standard with about 8% crystal malt, some wheat, munich, and base malt, and 10% sugar. So I expected something more like 78-80% attenuation. Maybe 75% at the veeerry lowest.

Also, don't forget crystal malts are largely unfermentable and will impact for final gravity, thus impacting your attenuation.

Where did you hear/read that?? IF you're mashing as well (as in partial mash or all grain) it's NO issue at all. Even a pound of base malt is more than enough. Plus, there are even plenty of other malts (crystal included) that don't need base malt to convert, you just need to mash them.
 
As I understand, those attenuation ranges are for all-malt worts. So theoretically if I make a 1.060 all-malt beer and achieve 75% attenuation with this yeast, I'll have a FG of 1.015. If I were to add enough sugar to this wort to make it a theoretical OG of 1.072, the beer would still ferment to 1.015 because the yeast would consume every bit of the sugar. 1.072 to 1.015 is about 80%

I expect the one with added sugar to have a lower FG. Simple sugars ferment more than 100% apparent attenuation.

Theory is a wonderful thing that sometimes has no application to reality.

?????? Makes no sense.

Plus, there are even plenty of other malts (crystal included) that don't need base malt to convert, you just need to mash them.

This is the first time I have ever hear Crystal has sufficient enzymes to convert (actually, any enzymes at all). I know there is a lot of starches in crystal that need to be mashed to get the most from crystal. Where did you find out crystal can self convert?
 
This is the first time I have ever hear Crystal has sufficient enzymes to convert (actually, any enzymes at all). I know there is a lot of starches in crystal that need to be mashed to get the most from crystal. Where did you find out crystal can self convert?

It's been posted on the boards. The currently available malts are modified enough to not be an issue to the extent that they were years ago. While I wouldn't go with a recipe that has less than 75-80% base malt, you can brew with confidence up to about those percentages. I've easily hit within a yeast's listed attenuation range with 20% (or up to 25%) non-base malts (different malts, mostly crystals and other roasted/toasted malts). So to assume that you'll miss the mark by more than a few points due to having caramel/crystal type malts in the recipe is false. More likely, something else in the brewing/fermenting process accounted for the poor attenuation of the yeast. There's enough factors there that could have been the cause.

Keep in mind, the OP was put up 3 days ago... Far too soon to see what the FG is. But, I would expect to have attenuation within the range of the yeast.

BTW, you cannot get more than 100% attenuation. Simply not possible. How can you have yeast eat more than 100% of the sugars available?? :drunk: Adding sugar to a brew increases the OG and can result in a lower FG due to how much of the simple sugar is consumed (80-100%).
 
BTW, you cannot get more than 100% attenuation. Simply not possible. How can you have yeast eat more than 100% of the sugars available??

Think wine or cider. They always end up below 1.000, often closer to 0.990, resulting in more than 100% apparent attenuation. Agreed, you cannot get more than 100% real attenuation, but that is not what we measure.
 
Think wine or cider. They always end up below 1.000, often closer to 0.990, resulting in more than 100% apparent attenuation. Agreed, you cannot get more than 100% real attenuation, but that is not what we measure.

Going below 1.000 isn't over 100% attenuation due to what's fermenting. It just means the amount of alcohol makes the gravity lower than water. Also, the 'always end up below 1.000' statement is 100% false. I've made batches of mead and it's NOT difficult to have it finish above 1.000. IF you know what you're doing that is. Sure, formulate a must that's good for 12% ABV and use a yeast that will go to 16% or above and it WILL go below 1.000. Has nothing to do with getting higher than 100% attenuation.

Have you even made a wine or cider yet?
 
Going below 1.000 isn't over 100% attenuation due to what's fermenting. It just means the amount of alcohol makes the gravity lower than water. Also, the 'always end up below 1.000' statement is 100% false. I've made batches of mead and it's NOT difficult to have it finish above 1.000. IF you know what you're doing that is. Sure, formulate a must that's good for 12% ABV and use a yeast that will go to 16% or above and it WILL go below 1.000. Has nothing to do with getting higher than 100% attenuation.

Have you even made a wine or cider yet?

How do we measure attenuation?

Going from 1.060 to 1.015 = 75% apparent attenuation.

Going from 1.060 to 1.000 = 100% apparent attenuation.

Going from 1.060 to 0.994 = 110% apparent attenuation.

Again, I agree you physically can't get more than 100% real attenuation, but we measure apparent attenuation, and if you check my posts, you will see I use the word 'apparent' every time I talk about attenuation.

Yes I have made plenty of cider and wine. Personally I like it dry, so have never planned to make a sweet brew. I think the highest I have ever had with a wine of cider is 1.000.

Read the posts before you start responding.
 
How do we measure attenuation?

Going from 1.060 to 1.015 = 75% apparent attenuation.

Going from 1.060 to 1.000 = 100% apparent attenuation.

Going from 1.060 to 0.994 = 110% apparent attenuation.

Again, I agree you physically can't get more than 100% real attenuation, but we measure apparent attenuation, and if you check my posts, you will see I use the word 'apparent' every time I talk about attenuation.

Yes I have made plenty of cider and wine. Personally I like it dry, so have never planned to make a sweet brew. I think the highest I have ever had with a wine of cider is 1.000.

Read the posts before you start responding.

'apparent attenuation' is fine for BEER, but [IMO/IME] worthless when it comes to things like mead.

Oh, and how many fingers am I holding up??

g'night b's...
 
Update:

I apologize to those interested for not initially posting more information. I did use a Wyeast "smack pack" dated Oct 2011. I did not do a stepped starter. I did a one liter starter approximately 72 hours prior to pitching. I think the yeast had consumed most of the sugars in the starter wort because at pitching, the airlock had slowed down on bubbling. The starter wort was very light colored and full of tiny bubbles like any other successful starter. I fermented at 62 degrees and ended with 1.010 FG. OG was 1.043, so my apparent attenuation was 76% and within the Attenuation range listed by Wyeast Labs of 73-77%. FG sample tasted very good and what I was looking for in this beer. BTW, this is my first attempt at a Chocolate Ale. It went into secondary on top of 4 oz cocoa nibs. Taste at bottling was quite good with a very slight hint of chocolate.
 
Back
Top