Maybe not, but in bottles absolutely. Or the dry stout on tap and the imperial in bottles.
Yesterday I drank a 2024 dry stout while cooking. A 2021 imperial for dessert. The 2021 dry stout is but a fond memory.
Liquid yeast - am I missing something?
- Thread starter FS7
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
Maybe not, but in bottles absolutely. Or the dry stout on tap and the imperial in bottles.
Yesterday I drank a 2024 dry stout while cooking. A 2021 imperial for dessert. The 2021 dry stout is but a fond memory.
To me they’re different beers and I also bottle, especially the stronger stuff. I would bottle the imperial and not tie up a tap with a 9 or 10%er thats not an all the time drinker.
Then if its me, I’m going to sit that imperial on bourbon soaked oak cubes for awhile so that one is going to take longer.
Its all variable and seasonal and whatever you want to do,
But you're going to age the imperial for at least a year, right?
Also, the first ("starter") brew need not be a stout. And, if beer 1 is pale, the second beer could be anything consistent with the yeast choice.
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2013
- Messages
- 7,661
- Reaction score
- 14,567
Well, DUH!
I mean, along with a Bonde, an APA, a Marzen, a Kolsch, and English pub ale, and maybe a Piwo Grodziskie.
It could really be anything. Maybe an Irish Red even. I just don’t want character from the first beer to carry over to the second. Like I wouldn’t do an IPA with all that hop and late hop as the first beer. Unless you’re going to wash the yeast and I’ve never done that.
Wyeast has nice style information on their site listed under each strain all the styles they recommend for each one
Yes, pitching on top of the yeast cake from the first brew works best, I suppose, if the non-yeast residue is either minimal or consistent with the new, possibly really strong second brew. Not really a great idea if there's dry hops in the fermenter, for example, or if the first brew was dark and the second wants to be super pale. However, it seems like a reasonably small amount of leftovers wouldn't strongly carry over. As with many homebrewing things, one can be too worried or not worried enough. And, of course, OP plans an imperial stout -- so a bit of leftover hops or whatnot would likely be undetectable even to a refined palate.
Interesting to see this topic because I pitched 2 packets of WLP860 and got nothing happening about a week ago. Technical info - 1.051 SG, 5.17pH, 5.2 gallons, 48F temp. Oxygenated using a wand and pure O2 for 1.5 minutes at 0.75 lpm. I waited 5 days before giving up and pitched 2 packets of W34/70. I had checked gravity again and confirmed it was still the same before pitching. anyway, 12 hours later I started getting some activity and now have a good Krausen going 2 days after pitching the 34/70.
I’ve only used White Labs once before but never will again. Viability from the lot number said it should be at 92%. WL blamed the LHBS. I’ve never had any issue with any yeast before. I use liquid for ales and dry for lagers generally. Never again using WL. Too expensive, not reliable, poor customer service response to an issue.
I’ve only used White Labs once before but never will again. Viability from the lot number said it should be at 92%. WL blamed the LHBS. I’ve never had any issue with any yeast before. I use liquid for ales and dry for lagers generally. Never again using WL. Too expensive, not reliable, poor customer service response to an issue.
Thanks for sharing. Totally lame on WL's part. Those packs must have been mishandled before the LHBS.
On a side note, can you talk about the application of O2 for 1.5 minutes at .75 LPM? Do you have the ability to do a slower flow rate?
On a side note, can you talk about the application of O2 for 1.5 minutes at .75 LPM? Do you have the ability to do a slower flow rate?
I use the Blichmann oxygen flow regulator, so whatever it can do I could adjust to, although the 1 LPM stopped flowing some time ago.
I was just going to point out that at .75LPM, a lot of oxygen gets wasted by going into foam and back in to the atmosphere. By choosing a slower flow rate and longer time, the O2 has a better chance of staying in the solution.
duncan_disorderly
Well-Known Member
Do people still buy WL yeast at these prices and, if so, why? I do brews that cost less in total than the price of a WL pack. I realise that people have different resources and different priorities, but there are cheaper, better options, no?
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2013
- Messages
- 7,661
- Reaction score
- 14,567
While I've used White Labs in the past, I generally have settled on WYeast's offerings, but no other reason than historical momentum on my part. But I will say that I have *ALWAYS* made a starter of one sort or another, and have not experienced lag times of anything like 72 hours.
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2020
- Messages
- 2,272
- Reaction score
- 2,357
I did a conservative cost analysis back in post #21. Even simpler than that is to consider a dry pack vs. liquid. Consider 34/70 is $8 and the WLP is $16 at Morebeer. So $8 difference. If I use either four times that's just $2 more a batch. I'm not at all happy with the price increase for White Labs, so I will be more careful about storing yeast and I am considering banking them in full on slants. Also, I will be checking for the strains that are well known to be the same from other companies.
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2020
- Messages
- 2,272
- Reaction score
- 2,357
I used that yeast before, from what I recall it was good in the Helles I brewed it for. It was more of a speciality yeast I think is why I didn't use it again or I didn't have a chance to order it. I have had some temp controller issues to where the fridge was off, which cast a lot of doubt on my banked bottles. Not sure, I used a bock yeast and then WLP835 in the next iterations. Your packs were probably dead or very low viability. You could have seen that with a starter. You were at the bottom of the range for that yeast but I would have expected activity at 5 days.
I counted up my recipes and I have brewed 82 batches in not quite 6 years and they have all been with liquid yeast. That's Phase II of my brewing career. In Phase I of my brewing journey, starting a few years before the turn of the century and into the early aughts, I also excusively used liquid yeast quite soon after starting to homebrew. While I sometimes use Wyeast or other companies, I'd say about 85-90% of the time in Phase II, I've used White Labs. I've never pitched dry yeast in Phase II. I've had a couple of instances where the yeast may have been dead, as many times I have had it shipped. Sometimes it's unavoidable in the summer. A time or two I have had to scramble and get a second pack. I don't much care about the dates either unless the yeast is about 1.5-2 years old. I just make a starter almost every time. If it's really old, I may step it up using a weaker wort first.
I've been temperature controlling my lagers since Phase I. I had a recollection earlier today as to another reason I used to brew my lagers at below 50 and it was because they were in my keezer. I keep the temp at 44 not like 40 and below as some other people do. I was reluctant to warm it up past that but I would go up to 48F when when fermenting lagers but I didn't want to go much further than that if I could help it. Some time in the beginning of Phase II I realized that the yeasts had specific temperature ranges so I started working within those. I used to expect more slow activity in the past but now I don't usually see that unless I do something out of the ordinary, like rush the starter before it's ready. Plus I use a separate ferm chamber and I don't worry about the serving temperature, so I just go ahead and adjust temperature as desired. About 3/4 of the year, the temp in the basement is under ale fermenting temp so I use a heating mat and in the summer I use the ferm fridge. Fermentation is temperature controlled. I've done it with my yeast several times as my basement is cooler but a lot of the time I haven't. It's not optimal to be cooler but I need to get a bucket or box to keep the starter insulated in. The heating pad is also awkward on the ehrlenmeyer flask as is the temp probe.
duncan_disorderly
Well-Known Member
I guess a key factor is the choice available to us. Here in the UK we get White Labs and Wyeast, and one or two online places do Imperial. But they've flown the Atlantic and need a starter every time. Which is good practice anyway. I culture up some yeasts from local brewery beers, and from swapped home brew. I'm not the lab tech type but I store harvested yeast and make starters and really don't spend much on yeast. Last time I looked WL were about £13.50 and Wyeast £10. I couldn't buy liquid yeast every brew, out of my price range. Learning to handle yeast is just an important aspect of brewing, maybe the most important, for making quality beer. So embrace it, I say!
DuncB
Well-Known Member
I don't get through kegs of stout that quickly. Plenty of time for an imperial stout to start maturing though.
DuncB
Well-Known Member
Think of a yeast starter as a microbatch of oxidised beer and it won't be so scary, just more brewing.
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2020
- Messages
- 2,272
- Reaction score
- 2,357
I went and looked at my old recipe sheets and I was also using White Labs yeast back in Phase I.
@duncan_disorderly White Labs has a Copenhagen production facility. Don't know much about it other than it was established in 2014. I'd still do the starter!
@duncan_disorderly White Labs has a Copenhagen production facility. Don't know much about it other than it was established in 2014. I'd still do the starter!
madscientist451
Well-Known Member
I usually brew a bunch of lagers this time of year for summer drinking and always start off with a smaller, 1.5 to 2 gallon batch. Then the whole yeast slurry goes into a 5 gallon batch. Then I pitch half into the next batch and save the rest for making starters. After 6-7 runs, I have enough lagers, so I’m done.
Last edited:
duncan_disorderly
Well-Known Member
Ah. This I did not know. It leans me towards using them, but then I see the price. Occasional treat and lots of yeast farming, I guess! Thanks.
HighVoltageMan!
Well-Known Member
There are strains that are not available in a dry form. WLP007 is one of them. I have used a lot of S04 and WLP007 and many claim they are the same, but in practical terms they are very different. WLP007 is an awesome yeast and I haven't found a good replacement. It's fast, it drops like a rock, it's clean at 64F, doesn't puke from a high krausen and I have won a lot of medals using this yeast. SO4 is a fine yeast, but it's not as good as 007.
The price has gone up and I now store the yeast under a layer beer with a 2.5% buffering solution of KHPO4 from a starter a built up as soon as I got the yeast. I can make 4-6 beers from the one yeast pouch. The yeast can survive up to 6 months with no issues, just build it up with a starter.
The price has gone up and I now store the yeast under a layer beer with a 2.5% buffering solution of KHPO4 from a starter a built up as soon as I got the yeast. I can make 4-6 beers from the one yeast pouch. The yeast can survive up to 6 months with no issues, just build it up with a starter.
duncan_disorderly
Well-Known Member
What is KHPO4?
Potassium phosphate. Actually comes as KH2PO4 (monobasic) and K2HPO4 (dibasic). You mix the two in varying ratios to buffer at the desired pH.
Monopotassium phosphate. It's a buffer. It's a salt. It's in Gatorade.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopotassium_phosphate
Well yeah, but I don't want to share.
HighVoltageMan!
Well-Known Member
It's a buffering solution that help preserve the yeast by stabilizing the internal pH of the cell. 2-3% by weight can preserve yeast. It's an alternative to cryo-preservation (freezing). Not all yeast respond the same to it in my experience, but Wyeast 2124 does very well with this as a preservative.
Here's an old white paper on the subject:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/j.2050-0416.1955.tb06256.x
Master Brewer's Podcast has an episode about it:
https://www.masterbrewerspodcast.com/189
It's a price to pay for subjective nuance improvements. Not all strains are available in dry. Never just assume a liquid culture is ready to pitch, even for a low OG ale. A shop owner may not know there is a 9 month old pack in the fridge. Bottom line, a 5 gallon Marzen would need 3 packs of WL assuming it's less than 3 months old. That or you can make a 2 liter starter with one pack.
When Imperial came along with 200 billion cells in a ~$10 pack, it seemed like one could get away without a starter for many beers. Maybe that was never really true, but it still works for me most of the time. This thread has me thinking I should reconsider.
DuncB
Well-Known Member
Careful ( with consideration of infection) opening of the new white labs package allows a small sample to be taken to build a starter. This can be done several times. This wasn't possible with the previous packaging.
McMullan
wort maker
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2015
- Messages
- 2,566
- Reaction score
- 3,438
I always viewed these bigger packs as just a form of cheap marketing engineered to compete against WL and Wyeast. If fresh enough, great, but most people don't receive them that fresh. There's nothing that can be done to preserve the viability of a pack of dormant wet yeast. They're ticking over metabolically in very resource-limited conditions. There are no magic buffers that break the laws of physics. The way I see it, it just means more cells are dying in a bigger pack. Viability loss occurs at a rate. For argument's sake, let's just assume it's 10% per week, or 20 billion cells vs 10 billion cells, respectively, in a bigger vs smaller pack. It won't take too long before both packs become under pitches without a starter. I'd rather be able to buy <1 billion cells in a tiny vial for a fraction of the price, step up a starter and pitch healthier yeast. Literally, less = more, due to biology 'breaking' the laws of physics. But this isn't compatible with the expectations of greedy business models and shareholder 'value' at any cost to the customer. So we have to figure out how to do it ourselves, which we already have. Go forth and multiple.
Last edited:
HighVoltageMan!
Well-Known Member
That's kind of what's happening anyway with these liquid yeast packs. I don't want to get a 6 month old yeast pack with viability unknown, I would much rather have a much smaller amount of super fresh yeast and build it up.
I try to get the freshest liquid yeast. I build it up with a 2 liter starter and store in a buffering solution to improve survivability. Before brewing, take a small amount from the yeast store and build it up again. I can get up to 10 batches with a single pack and have super fresh yeast every time.
If I knew the cell count or knew it was only days old I could get by with a lot less yeast. Although I would want 10 billion cells just incase something went wrong with the handling of the yeast.
duncan_disorderly
Well-Known Member
So you use about 10% of the yeast created by a 2 litre starter to make fresh starters each time you brew, yes?
Yes, that would be nice. Unlikely, though.
HighVoltageMan!
Well-Known Member
Yeah. A 2 liter starter gives you roughly 300 billion, so even with 50-70% mortality rate on the yeast you would be good. 8-10 billion on low side. If I'm brewing a lager or higher gravity ale, I will build it up in two steps. Lagers use a 1 liter followed by a 4 liter. The net cell count is @ 600-750 billion cells.
You can estimate the cell count by known growth rates. A 1 liter starter will produce @ 200 billion cells if it hits terminal gravity, the next 4 liter step would produce close to 800 billion if it's allowed to high terminal gravity. I don't like to see the starter finish at terminal gravity because it's hard on the yeast, so the trick is to cold crash the starter just after high krausen. The yeast still have enough "food" left build up reserves during the cool down and there is still some "food" during the storage period until it's pitch again. In addition, the cell count is nearly as high as if it were allowed to hit terminal gravity. The yeast from these starters have a very short lag time, I have gotten lagers going in 12 hours or so with a 1.050 OG @ 48F (9C).
The key is to pick a yeast calculator to use and stick with it. You will eventually dial in the pitch rate even if your cell counts aren't entirely accurate.
For every new pack, I will bank it on a slant, as well as 10 mm in a culture tube or cryovial (per McMullan's method). I'll develop the first generation up to 2.5 or 5 liters, then reuse that multiple times, then go back to the slant. Saves me a lot of money and I'm happy with the results.
duncan_disorderly
Well-Known Member
That's great info, and it sits well with what I know already. Thank you.
FloppyKnockers
Well-Known Member
I laughed too hard at this. Upon opening my fermenter, I'm too eager to smell the fresh batch. Will I never learn?
McMullan
wort maker
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2015
- Messages
- 2,566
- Reaction score
- 3,438
No, you can’t. Unless you’re very skilled in the art of counting cells with a microscope and following watertight procedures to collect representative samples, forget all about ‘cell number’. Mass or volume are much better surrogates and more doable for most home brewers. Just be consistent and determine empirically what works best for you. Note too that a 2L starter doesn’t automatically give you (by virtue of volume) 300 billions cells. Seeding an appropriate volume of starter wort with about 75 billion cells does.
Similar threads
