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

Sulli said:

Problem is, I started brewing my own because all the grocery store beer in Salt Lake sucks.

Click to expand...

AZ_IPA said:

At least you have Squatters, Beerhive, and Redrock....

Click to expand...

pabloj13 said:

Those two studies that you cite only use a 4 fold range of yeast concentration with the lowest pitching rate being .63 million cells/mL per degree Plato. That is not woefully underpitched. I wouldn't expect a drastic difference with those numbers. Basically they use Two slightly underpitched and two slightly overpitched. With regards to overpitching, it is pretty well established that severe overpitching also produces off flavors and changes the character of the beer. That is why people are advocating pitching the correct amount, not more, not less. With regards to Duvel and Westmalle, it is also not surprising that some Belgian producers underpitch since stressing the yeast gets them to throw more esters and other compounds desirable in a Belgian beer.

Click to expand...

Glossolalia said:

I really don't have the time to get into this deeply, but I wanted to make a few points:

1. There's a lot of directives here that are very dogmatic about how the beer-making process should occur. I understand structure and a sound foundation is important for a beginner, but as a scientist, I also understand that despite several millennia of fermentation experience, we still have surprisingly very little knowledge concerning what is happening in a fermenting wort. The science, to date, is simply not strong enough to support a single directive as "the right way." If scientists don't agree on what "correct" process is and exactly how changes in the process affect taste than neither will HBTers.

2. The reason I mention Duvel and Westmalle is simply that there is a wide-range of flavor profiles in the beer universe. As international beer tastes become more heterogeneous, beer cultures exhibit a greater degree of cross-fertilization, and the market expects a continuous innovation in beer flavors, personally, I'd prefer not to be so dogmatic about "correct" process. For those who aim to coax specific flavors from yeast to create a yeast-forward beer, they should not necessarily see experimentation with yeast pitch rates, fermentation temperatures, and wort oxygenation as anathema. One should also keep in mind that "best practice" for growing yeast in the lab is not necessary equivalent to the "best practice" for getting the flavors you want from said yeast.

3. A lot of the current homebrew dogma, particularly that seen in the US, comes down a line of brewers who sought to make beers with as clean and neutral yeast profiles as possible. As seen from the recently popularity of saisons, sours, and "farmhouse-style" ales in the US, not everyone is interested in exclusively brewing the old yeast-neutral styles. Thus, one should not see that there's only one single correct process when dealing with yeast. It's going to be beer-dependent. If you go back to White Labs' presentation that I think was referenced earlier in this thread, blind tasters preferred different pitch rates depending on the beer style being brewed. If I remember correctly, for the Hefeweizen, for example, the bling tasters preferred the underpitched samples. For amber ale, they preferred pitch rates several times that of the Hefeweizen.

All that being said, I do use starters. Then again, I'm not using commercial yeasts so I don't have a choice. I have a handful of house yeast strains, a couple I've isolated myself. I also have a microscope so I can be consistent in pitching the cell number I want so it's possible to repeat successful experiments. My initial pitch into the starter is much smaller than that proscribed here, and my final pitch into the wort also tends to be much smaller than that proscribed here. However, I like esters and aromatics, and I brew beer styles that put those aspects at the forefront. I don't have attenuation issues, fermentation stalling, or "off flavors."

Click to expand...

Glossolalia said:

I really don't have the time to get into this deeply, but I wanted to make a few points:

1. There's a lot of directives here that are very dogmatic about how the beer-making process should occur. I understand structure and a sound foundation is important for a beginner, but as a scientist, I also understand that despite several millennia of fermentation experience, we still have surprisingly very little knowledge concerning what is happening in a fermenting wort. The science, to date, is simply not strong enough to support a single directive as "the right way." If scientists don't agree on what "correct" process is and exactly how changes in the process affect taste than neither will HBTers.

2. The reason I mention Duvel and Westmalle is simply that there is a wide-range of flavor profiles in the beer universe. As international beer tastes become more heterogeneous, beer cultures exhibit a greater degree of cross-fertilization, and the market expects a continuous innovation in beer flavors, personally, I'd prefer not to be so dogmatic about "correct" process. For those who aim to coax specific flavors from yeast to create a yeast-forward beer, they should not necessarily see experimentation with yeast pitch rates, fermentation temperatures, and wort oxygenation as anathema. One should also keep in mind that "best practice" for growing yeast in the lab is not necessary equivalent to the "best practice" for getting the flavors you want from said yeast.

3. A lot of the current homebrew dogma, particularly that seen in the US, comes down a line of brewers who sought to make beers with as clean and neutral yeast profiles as possible. As seen from the recently popularity of saisons, sours, and "farmhouse-style" ales in the US, not everyone is interested in exclusively brewing the old yeast-neutral styles. Thus, one should not see that there's only one single correct process when dealing with yeast. It's going to be beer-dependent. If you go back to White Labs' presentation that I think was referenced earlier in this thread, blind tasters preferred different pitch rates depending on the beer style being brewed. If I remember correctly, for the Hefeweizen, for example, the bling tasters preferred the underpitched samples. For amber ale, they preferred pitch rates several times that of the Hefeweizen.

All that being said, I do use starters. Then again, I'm not using commercial yeasts so I don't have a choice. I have a handful of house yeast strains, a couple I've isolated myself. I also have a microscope so I can be consistent in pitching the cell number I want so it's possible to repeat successful experiments. My initial pitch into the starter is much smaller than that proscribed here, and my final pitch into the wort also tends to be much smaller than that proscribed here. However, I like esters and aromatics, and I brew beer styles that put those aspects at the forefront. I don't have attenuation issues, fermentation stalling, or "off flavors."

Click to expand...

Esmitee said:

#1 thing I have found out that ( I must do) is, gather all of the information ( I )need to make ( MY OWN DECISION ) from all of the different ideas,thoughts and methods, brought in front of me.

Click to expand...

JustLooking said:

Denny has given us some great recipes and I have great respect for his knowledge and experience. He may make a starter for every batch, but I don’t think he would argue too strongly against my practice.

Click to expand...