Making a Yeast Starter in a Flask (A Walkthrough with Pictures)

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.

Gavin C

Supporting Member
HBT Supporter
Joined
Jul 21, 2014
Messages
7,036
Reaction score
3,486
Location
Dallas
This is an article of mine that appeared on HBT 6-26-2015 and seemed to be well received and be of benefit to some. I thought I would post it in this, the fermentation & yeast forum also, in the hope it be more easily accessible for future reference.

For Starters. Flatulence, Flasks and Fermcap® S​
There are many benefits to making a yeast starter, and a plethora of threads on this forum discussing their merits and the techniques used to make them. It was through my involvement in one such thread I discovered that some people consider making a starter in an erlenmeyer to be potentially dangerous. I hold the view that with correct materials and methods, making a starter directly in the flask is arguably the simplest and most sanitary method one can employ. The purpose of this article is to illustrate this straightforward process, whilst highlighting some important steps along the way eliminating any messy or potentially injurious errors. As with any task, having the right tools for the job is imperative. Let’s look at what’s needed.

1.jpg

A lab-grade borosilicate flask
These are readily available from an array of reputable homebrew and laboratory supply stores and come in a variety of sizes. From personal experience (and much to my chagrin) owning a trifecta of flasks in 1, 2, and 5 liter sizes, I would advise against buying one smaller than 2 liters.

A stir-bar (optional)
Using a stir plate is highly recommended. Constantly stirring the starter optimizes oxygen absorption into the wort and keeps the yeast in suspension. The result is a more rapid completion of the starter and greater yeast growth-rates.

A non-airtight stopper
During fermentation of the starter, a free in-flow of air while at the same time preventing ingress of airborne particulate is desirable. This allows an oxygen-rich, sanitary environment to be maintained inside the flask. A sanitized foam stopper or aluminum-foil will serve this purpose effectively. Airlocks are contra-indicated.

A weighing scales with gram resolution
A starter gravity approximating 1.037 is desirable. To achieve this 1g of dry malt extract is needed for every 10ml of the planned starter size.

A heat source capable of bringing the starter volume to a boil.
I imagine most folks will use their kitchen stove when making a starter. A gas stove is not required, but is arguably preferable, as any required adjustments to the intensity of the heat can be made with immediate effect.

Dry malt extract (DME)
This is an incredibly hydrophilic fine powder. It is imperative to keep it stored in a sealed container or zip-lock bag and to use it in the absence of water vapor to prevent a sticky mess from forming. Albeit an extreme example, the less than desirable results of trying to add DME to already heating water can be seen in this thread.

Water
Assuming the water is potable, tap-water is all that’s required. There is no need to consider mineral or pH adjustments for a starter.

Yeast Nutrient (optional)
Yeast nutrient can be added in small amounts if there are concerns about the viability or health of the source-yeast.

Fermcap® S
This product is an emulsion of the active ingredient, dimethylpolysiloxane. This prevents foam formation by reducing surface tension. It has long been approved by the FDA and WHO for human consumption.

2.jpg

A thorough outline of the science supporting its safety was compiled in 1975 by The World Health Organization's International Program on Chemical Safety. In addition to being a safe and effective anti-flatulence medication, frequently given to infants, the active ingredient in Fermcap® S can be found in many foods and beverages. The effective medicinal dosages are orders of magnitude higher than the amounts used in homebrewing.

To put it bluntly, you can ingest lots of dimethylpolysiloxane to stop you from farting so much. It goes in one end and out the other unchanged. No worries.

3.jpg

Making the starter

1. Calculate the desired starter size and gravity
There are plenty of incredibly useful and free online tools with which to calculate starter size needed for any given batch of homebrew. I am a fan of Homebrewdad's yeast starter calculator as I like to overbuild and harvest yeast for future brews directly from the starter. The projected size of a starter will vary depending on a multitude of factors including starting gravity and volume of the batch, the planned pitch rate, and the projected viability of the yeast being used.

2. Place the flask on the weighing-scales and zero it out
Place the required weight of DME into the flask and subsequently add cool tap-water to reach the desired volume. In order to target the planned specific gravity it is important to add the DME first and then the water. If this is done in the opposite manner, i.e. water first, DME second, the volume will be larger than planned and the gravity reduced accordingly.

3. Carefully add the stir-bar
Tilt the flask and insert the bar, allowing it to gently slide down the flask-wall. I have never broken a flask, but imagine that repeatedly dropping a stir bar into one, could, at least in theory, potentially weaken the glass. Perhaps not.

4. If using yeast nutrient in the starter, now is the time to add it
Adding a stir-bar or powdered yeast nutrient to near-boiling or boiling wort is likely to cause a sudden and violent boil-over to occur. The result is a sticky mess and a potentially painful experience. DO NOT ADD ANYTHING TO THE HEATING OR BOILING WORT.

5. Add one drop of Fermcap® S to the starter
This is an incredibly useful product and is in my view indispensable if making starters in an erlenmeyer flask. One drop weighs approximately 0.05g of which only a portion is dimethylpolysiloxane.

6. Heat the starter wort
Heat the wort while occasionally swirling the flask to completely mix the DME and water.

7. Bring the starter to a boil and boil it for the desired time
It would seem there is no definitive duration for which this needs to be done. In order to render microbe-laden water water safe to drink, the United States’ Center for Disease Control advocates boiling for one minute. Three minutes is recommended above an altitude of 6,500 feet. Boiling for one minute will sanitize water killing the vast majority of water-borne pathogens. Is this boil duration applicable to sanitizing a starter wort and flask? I’ll let the reader decide. I boil my starter for 10 minutes but have no good basis for why. I just let it boil as I do other things.

4.jpg

8. Cool the starter
This can be easily and safely done by taking the flask off the heat, placing a sanitized foam stopper or aluminum-foil and immediately immersing the flask in cold water. A lab-grade borosilicate flask is designed with much greater temperature swings in mind.

9. Add Yeast to the starter wort
Once cooled, remove the stopper and pitch the yeast. Star san or any no-rinse sanitizer can be used to sanitize the outside of the yeast pack/vial or jar prior to pitching. Replace the sanitized sponge stopper once yeast has been added to the starter.

10. Allow the starter to ferment to completion
I usually allow 48 hours for this to occur. If using a stir-plate, this is in all likelihood far more time than is needed.

11. Chill the starter
I routinely chill a starter in the refrigerator for 3-4 days prior to using it. This allows ample time for the majority of yeast strains to flocculate and form a dense layer of yeast in the bottom of the flask. This is particularly important with large starters where adding excessive volumes of spent starter-wort could have an impact on the characteristics of the final beer.

12. Decant wort and pitch yeast
On brew-day, decant the spent wort and pitch the yeast. To prevent stressing the yeast it is desirable to have the yeast and wort at similar temperatures. The wort is cooled to a temperature slightly below that at which initial fermentation will occur and the yeast removed from the refrigerator a few hours prior to pitching with this goal in mind. Differing opinions on pitching temperature exist and I am certainly no authority on the topic. This is the method I favor.

5.jpg

Making a starter in an Erlenmeyer flask is simple, hassle free and can be completed while doing other things. I usually make my starters while cooking dinner on Monday evenings in preparation for a weekend brew. By eliminating the risk of boil-overs, the process becomes entirely uneventful, requiring minimal oversight. For your next starter, why not give it a try?
 
So I thought that a starter served 2 purposes. First it builds cell count to the appropriate amount for the OG of the beer being brewed, and second it rouses the yeast to a metabolically active state, which greatly reduces lag time.

If you allow your starters to fully ferment, and then chill them for a few days, those yeast cells go dormant again. So, following the article by @Gavin C, on brew day they are being pitched in a dormant state.

Do you mix them into a little fermentation temp wort for a few hours beforehand? Or does the increased cell count overcome any lag time lost to the yeast waking up in the fermenter?

I appreciate any help clearing up my confusion. Thanks!
 
Also peak yeast growth occurs at 12-18 hours, after that they stop multiplying and start producing alcohol. So ideally the starter should be made and the liquid yeast pitched, then the whole starter pitched to the beer at 12 -18 hours when they are at maximum growth and metabolically active.

If a step starter is being made, they should be cold crashed at 12-18 hours then the liquid decanted off, then fresh wort added onto the cake.

Then the whole starter gets pitched to the beer after an additional 12-18 hours.. it will again be metabolically active when it hits the fermentor.

I feel like I'm missing a nugget of wisdom here :)
 
So I thought that a starter served 2 purposes. First it builds cell count to the appropriate amount for the OG of the beer being brewed, and second it rouses the yeast to a metabolically active state, which greatly reduces lag time.

If you allow your starters to fully ferment, and then chill them for a few days, those yeast cells go dormant again. So, following the article by @Gavin C, on brew day they are being pitched in a dormant state.

Do you mix them into a little fermentation temp wort for a few hours beforehand? Or does the increased cell count overcome any lag time lost to the yeast waking up in the fermenter?

I appreciate any help clearing up my confusion. Thanks!

Not really sure what you mean by dormant exactly but see your point.

The yeast are in good shape after the starter. I've read many posts where folks advocating pitching the entire starter at high krausen. For a lager that would be about 10% additional wort which will be heavily oxygenated, foul tasting and likely to impact the beer's flavor, also undesirably reducing the FV headspace.

The starter increases the cell count to reach the target. I only want the yeast, not the nasty growth media in the final beer.

The starter wort will contain alcohol. It ferments out very dry. Well under 1.010 usually about 1.006. Not getting your reasoning on pitching it before alcohol is produced I'm afraid, that occurs as the yeast feed. The starter is warmed to pitching temp before it gets into the wort but I'm not sure that is even important from a yeast health point standpoint.

I really included the pitching step and my methods for sake of completion, I'm really not qualified from a knowledge standpoint to say what is best. There is a lot written on the topic.

A faster kickoff to the ferment is not necessarily a good thing. An adequate lag-time is important too. I don't know what is best in terms of lag time duration

If you want to reduce lag-time you can pitch warm and cool to the desired ferment temp. There are differing schools of though on pitching cool v hot. I am not well enough versed in the science to give any advice on that. I pitch cool as I favor this approach currently. Maybe my thoughts will change with more self education on the topic.

A recent example. Yesterday's brew, a lager with WLP833 and a 3L starter made exactly as outlined in the piece. 500ml (90Billion cells harvested for next lager) saved for later and the remaining 2.5 L saved for pitching after decanting 2.2L approx. of spent wort

Less than 8 hours after pitching at 48F visible signs of ferment are visible. The airlock bubbling. Nearly 24 hours later and things are coming along nicely.

Thanks for reading the article and for providing feedback. Hope it is of some use.

I'm sorry I can't be of more help.
 
I follow a similar procedure.

Make starter, let it go for about a day. Save some of it, and pitch the rest. Yesterday I pitched about 1.25L of a 2.75L starter. I then put the rest in the fridge to crash. I'll stir it back up, save a half liter for later use, and let the remaining 1 liter crash in the fridge some more then I'm going to pitch that yeast (decanted) into a batch of cider on Monday.
 
I think what I'm confused about (and my resident microbiologist is also confused about) is that the yeast are at peak metabolic function and peak growth after that first 12-18 hour growth phase. Anything after that, they are going into anaerobic respiration where the majority of the alcohol is produced.

Also when cold crashed, yeast go into a state of suspended metabolic activity (i.e. dormant) and they have to "wake up" before they can go to work on your beer. This is why wyeast comes in "smack packs" they prime the yeast metabolisms with nutrient so they are active when pitched.

If yeast it pitched cold, it stresses them with the thermal shock and more will die, but this is about brewing beer, not making happy yeast. So do stressed yeast make off flavors? That's the real question.
 
The yeast are being pitched into wort very close to the same temperature they are at. Thermal shock is not an issue there.

A bigger concern to off flavors in my view would be adding a large volume of foul starter-wort to the batch.

For smaller starters (1L in a 5 gallon batch I think your approach would be just fine) I would not envisage a problem with the method you outline and I know there is one very popular lager recipe on the HBT forum that the author does just that. Small starter pitched at high krausen. Off to the races very fast.

Anything larger than a liter and I would want to decant off that stuff.

The things I look at which are by all accounts consistent with a healthy fermentation profile seem to be,

Lag time: Is it in the goldilocks zone? What that is, is of course open to debate.
FG: Is it reached?
Ferment time: How rapidly do things take to complete.

For most brews, I can package in under 2 weeks if I desire, FG being reached in less than a week using a targeted pitch rate and a carefully controlled fermentation temperature with a starter as outlined.

I'm certainly not suggesting your approach is inferior just different from what i like to do based on weighing up the arguments on each side based on what I have read and listened to. I'm still new to brewing, happy to learn, be corrected, and more than happy to change my methods if reason dictates.

Clearly you are more knowledgeable than I when it comes to the microbiological aspect of the process. Always very interesting to hear from those in the know. You should add comments to the article itself so that future readers (perhaps that is a touch optimistic on my part given my small readership) can hear your perspective.

Interesting stuff. I'm delighted my article has spawned such debate. Thanks for making the thread.
 
Oh OK, it wasn't clear to me that you were warming your starter to room temp before pitching.

Another misunderstanding: I'm not pitching 3L of nasty starter wort. I crash it after ~18 hours, then decant off the wort, then let it warm to room temp, then pitch fresh starter wort about 3 hours before brew time. This acts like the smack pack wyeast bags and energized the yeast and makes sure they're all active.

I think both methods are perfectly valid, as long as good beer comes out at the end! I still consider myself a beginner brewer too and am constantly looking for ways to improve, but I have a habit of questioning everything (including/especially myself), so I'm glad you don't mind a different perspective and I'm glad to pick your brain! I've already got a bunch of improvements to my starters and my process from you, so thank you!
 
Oh OK, it wasn't clear to me that you were warming your starter to room temp before pitching.

Just warming it to pitch temperature or very close to it.

Gotcha now on your process.

Very similar it seems with the addition of a second feed prior to pitching. Do you use the wort of the main batch for the second feed or just make up a bit of DME based wort?
 
Just warming it to pitch temperature or very close to it.

Gotcha now on your process.

Very similar it seems with the addition of a second feed prior to pitching. Do you use the wort of the main batch for the second feed or just make up a bit of DME based wort?

Just about .5 L of DME based wort. I like to keep it minimal just because I don't like the idea of all that nasty starter liquid either.
 
Always good to ask and question conventional wisdom. I like the idea of the second feed of additional wort but I'm not sure you're getting all that much out of it, imo you'd probably be better off with pitching it at high krausen and adding some nutrients to the wort before high krausen say 6-8 hours after beginning the starter.
 
The yeast may be at peak activity in 18 hrs but they have not finished reproducing. If you wait 48 hrs you will have a lot more cells than if you cut it off at 18.
 
The yeast may be at peak activity in 18 hrs but they have not finished reproducing. If you wait 48 hrs you will have a lot more cells than if you cut it off at 18.

Are you sure about that? My understanding is that they do all their reproducing upfront until they run out of sugar, before beginning anaerobic respiration and digesting all that sugar to produce alcohol. Some new cells are created later, but a lot die during that time too.

I could certainly be wrong though and love to learn!
 
Are you sure about that? My understanding is that they do all their reproducing upfront until they run out of sugar, before beginning anaerobic respiration and digesting all that sugar to produce alcohol. Some new cells are created later, but a lot die during that time too.

I could certainly be wrong though and love to learn!

Not my understanding.

Both oxygen dependent respiration and non-oxygen dependent fermentation are occurring in the wort concurrently. Different cells doing different things or both things with the production of vital energy via ATP production being the yeasts' goal if you will.

It's not a sequential process.

I'm definitely getting outside of my comfort zone in terms of knowledge here so I will just conclude by recommending the Braukaiser's website. A veritable trove of brewing science backed up with experiments including lots on starters.
 
Braukaiser's work seems mainly focused on growth rate vs pitch rate, it would be nice if he would show growth rate vs pitch rate vs time too.

I just found this

https://books.google.com/books?id=o...#v=onepage&q=yeast population vs time&f=false

I hope that link works, its to an excerpt of a book called Froth about the science of beer making. He talks about growth rates on page 87.

It looks like peak growth GREATLY depends on pitch rate. His graphs and models show that with 10 millions cells/mL you end up with peak population around 9 hours. and with 400k cells/mL your peak population occurs at about 18 hours.

I think I really need to sit down and read for awhile, because I'm seeing a mixture of opinions all over the place. Generally though, it looks (to me) like the entire yeast population goes through a sequential lifecycle triggered by available oxygen and available sugars. First the lag phase where they absorb all the available oxygen and reproduce. Then the log phase where they continue to reproduce and consume sugars to grow until their food supply runs out, then they begin true fermentation, then die-off/flocculation.

This lifecycle doesn't happen at exactly the same time for every yeast cell, but by-and-large the population follows this model as a whole.

Aren't there any professional yeast biologists on this forum haha! My microbiologist girlfriend didn't specifically study yeast enough to be sure of herself in this area. She had the understanding of a sequential lifecycle as well, but is the first to admit that she hasn't studied it enough to know for sure.
 
It also looks like the VAST majority of brewers cold crash after a few days and decant then pitch slurry just as your article describes. Who am I to argue with 10,000 gallons of good beer! :mug:

I think it's time for me to shut up and go with the flow since y'all are making much better beer than I am, guaranteed haha
 
I know that it sounds counterintuitive, but one should not allow a starter to ferment to completion before pitching. One's goal when making a starter is different than one's goal when making a batch of beer. There's nothing to be gained by allowing a starter to continue to ferment after maximum cell density has been reached. At that point, it's all downhill with respect to yeast health. Maximum cell density for a 1L starter (~200 billion cells) is usually hit 12 to 18 hours after pitching a White Labs vial. If one is pitching a relatively fresh tube, many yeast strains reach maximum cell density within six hours of pitching because the cells only need to divide (cellular mitosis) two or three times at most.

As they say, a picture is worth a thousand words.

YeastGrowthCurve_zpsb66047c5.jpg



Ideally, one wants to pitch just as the curve starts to flatten out during the deceleration phase. While it may look like one is growing more cells beyond that point, all reproduction is for replacement only. The only cell count that matters when propagating yeast is the viable cell count.

Additionally, the ergosterol and unsaturated fatty acid (UFA) reserves that are synthesized at the beginning of fermentation are shared by the mother cells with all of their daughter cells after the dissolved oxygen has been consumed. Allowing a starter to ferment to completion results in one pitching yeast cells with depleted ergosterol and UFA reserves, resulting in higher dissolved oxygen demand upon pitching. Ergosterol and UFAs make yeast cell membranes more pliable, which, in turn, allows for the passage of nutrients and waste products.

I just found this on a forum from homebrewersassociation.org. It was posted by a guy who writes their technical articles on yeast and is labelled as "Senior Brewmaster". He seems to know what he's talking about anywho, but again, just another opinion on the internet
 
I pitched an 18 hour starter of wyeast english ale last night to a 1.050 gravity NWPA. I cold crashed for 5 hours, decanted 1/2 the liquid, and warmed to room temp before pitching (sort of a hybrid of ideas). Fermenter is being kept at 68F. Vigorous fermentation was going after 4 hours, and a big healthy head of krausen was off and running.

Not that that means a whole lot, but I don't think I hurt my batch with my starter.
 
How appropriately timed. Check out this thread from rayround and brulospher over on brulosophy/reddit.

Ray made a .5L starter for a 1.075 OG DIPA and pitched it after 6~ hours. No issues or taste difference. Mind is boggled. :cross:

http://www.reddit.com/r/Homebrewing/comments/3bi425/yeast_pitch_rate_pt_2_viable_cell_count_vs/

Wow that's really interesting. So it sounds like I'm doing a bastardized cross between increasing cell count and increasing vitality. Hmm I wish I had some lab equipment to do real cell counts and whatnot.

This is turning into quite the interesting question.

Side note

are you wanting to move this discussion over to your article thread @Gavin C?
 
Wow that's really interesting. So it sounds like I'm doing a bastardized cross between increasing cell count and increasing vitality. Hmm I wish I had some lab equipment to do real cell counts and whatnot.

This is turning into quite the interesting question.

Side note

are you wanting to move this discussion over to your article thread @Gavin C?

It's your thread man. No worries at all. Up to you if you wanted to ask a mod to do a thread merge. I don't know how that would be done anyway. Just thought it would be easier for future readers to have the original piece and any discussions together. Lots of good stuff here being posted. Seems very relevant. That was a very interesting read at Brulosophy.

As an aside. Saturday's brew is chugging along nicely when I checked it this morning. Nice big white krausen, 50F. With the starter done exactly per my article. 40 hours post pitch. I'll grab a picture when I get home. edit : pictures taken

48 hours after pitching at 48F allowing passive rise to set temp of 50F (10C)DSC03339.jpg

DSC03337.jpg
 
Last edited:
It's your thread man. No worries at all. Up to you if you wanted to ask a mod to do a thread merge. I don't know how that would be done anyway. Just thought it would be easier for future readers to have the original piece and any discussions together. Lots of good stuff here being posted. Seems very relevant. That was a very interesting read at Brulosophy.

As an aside. Saturday's brew is chugging along nicely when I checked it this morning. Nice big white krausen, 50F. With the starter done exactly per my article. 40 hours post pitch. I'll grab a picture when I get home.

I think a thread merge would be a good idea, I agree that this discussion could be valuable. Should I just pm a moderator? or is there a lamp I need to rub somewhere? :mug:

I would love to get brulosopher involved in this fiasco as well, maybe we can give him some new ideas for exbeeriments

Also I had a question that I forgot to ask earlier. You mentioned a "goldilocks zone" for lag time. The problems with a really long lag time are pretty evident, but is there a disadvantage to a shorter lag time, assuming that the beer hasn't been drastically overpitched?

I was always under the impression that you want as short of lag time as possible with the correct cell count in order to reduce the chance of infection.
 
I think a thread merge would be a good idea, I agree that this discussion could be valuable. Should I just pm a moderator? or is there a lamp I need to rub somewhere? :mug:

I would love to get brulosopher involved in this fiasco as well, maybe we can give him some new ideas for exbeeriments

Also I had a question that I forgot to ask earlier. You mentioned a "goldilocks zone" for lag time. The problems with a really long lag time are pretty evident, but is there a disadvantage to a shorter lag time, assuming that the beer hasn't been drastically overpitched?

I was always under the impression that you want as short of lag time as possible with the correct cell count in order to reduce the chance of infection.
I reckon PM'ing a mod should do it. I don't have the correct lamp rubbing APP so I will let you decide what you should rub and for how long to rub it.:D

Short answer on the lag time. I don't know. I'm kind of theorizing that if we pitched a ridiclous amount of yeast and had the beer ferment out in a few hours then there would not be enough time for various yeast derived flavor compounds to form. I really don't know. I reckon anything under 24 hours to see visible signs of activity is a reasonable point of view. Typically I see activity in under 9 hours with my methods.
 
That's the same paper that I cited (linked) in the article to reference greater yeast growth rates with a stir-plate.

I guess two different readers have two different interpretations of what it implies for making a starter. Not too surprising I suppose.

It is a great read. Very useful I think.
 
I pm'd yooper to see if we can get the threads merged.

I'm sorry, I totally missed that in the original article. I think it's definitely worth further discussion to figure out how our interpretations differ. I'd love to hash out a starter procedure that incorporates most of what you already do, and see if we can speed it up to 24 hours pre-brew or so (except for high gravity or high volume beers that need a step starter). I think we are onto something interesting!
 
I pm'd yooper to see if we can get the threads merged.

I'm sorry, I totally missed that in the original article. I think it's definitely worth further discussion to figure out how our interpretations differ. I'd love to hash out a starter procedure that incorporates most of what you already do, and see if we can speed it up to 24 hours pre-brew or so (except for high gravity or high volume beers that need a step starter). I think we are onto something interesting!

Speed is not an issue for me. Monday starter for a weekend brew.

A big flask avoids the need for a stepped starter completely for me. I could probably even do a starter for 10 gallons of lager in the flask. I make 5.5 gallon batches and use a 6 gallon glass carboy as an FV so that is a somewhat moot point.

Headspace would be a big concern dumping in a big non-decanted starter.

Pitched 200ml (approx) of yeast last time.
 
Speed is not an issue for me. Monday starter for a weekend brew.

A big flask avoids the need for a stepped starter completely for me. I could probably even do a starter for 10 gallons of lager in the flask. I make 5.5 gallon batches and use a 6 gallon glass carboy as an FV so that is a somewhat moot point.

Headspace would be a big concern dumping in a big non-decanted starter.

Pitched 200ml (approx) of yeast last time.

Yeah that makes sense.

The only issue I can see is that: according to that paper, you don't want to dilute your initial pitch into your starter by more than 200 times because it forces them to expend more energy and not be as viable. So if you are starting with less that 25 mL of yeast (for a 5L starter) you could be shocking them. He even recommends only doing about a 10x dilution as some breweries do (although he did question the actual benefit of this practice for home brewing)

I guess it really comes down to my own personal preference. I like to make things optimal and elegant and efficient, so I'm interested to see if I can hit the proper cell counts with less volume and less time. I'm not in a rush, just enjoy being efficient :)

I also am certainly not trying to change the way you do things. I'm sure you make much better beer than I do. I'm just asking questions for their own sake and I want to figure out a method that works for me as well that's a good combination of low-effort and optimal-starter.
 
I think you would enjoy the braukaiser's website. He does great work and it's another different set of data.

I applaud your questioning approach. I am certainly no expert, having only been brewing for a year and a bit.

I'm sure you brew great beer with your methods. I just don't share your interpretation of the data and how best to apply it to starters and fermenting.

The starter calculator I use gives a little warning if the planned starter volume is too much based on Jamil's Mr. Malty data.

The braukaiser's data is at odds with Mr. Malty's however with regard to this. But again, a different reader may have a very different interpretation to mine.
 
The thread merge didn't pan out as I would have wanted. Seems my article is buried at post #17 with your name as the OP. I wanted to keep my name as the OP and the article post #1. I thought that was what you were talking about. Guess I should have been clearer. Sorry about that. My mistake. Never mind. I'll wrap it up here and repost my post.

I could move a post or two around if you want, and thus change the OP (I think). PM me.
 
I jumped the gun and did what passedpawn suggested before reading past post 17. I think (hope) I achieved the intended result. If so, Gavin C just needs to edit the new OP with his original pictures in order to remove the attachment links. Once done, we can delete all of this off topic thread merge stuff. If I further muddled the situation, my apologies. We'll get this sorted.
 
Back
Top