Why Not to Pitch On Your Yeast Cake
- Thread starter Bob
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk:
remilard
Well-Known Member
Bru
Well-Known Member
Except for this :
Conclusion
Despite the 9 fold difference in pitching rate and oxygen injection, which showed differences in the fermentation performance, the samples tasted remarkably similar and none of the blind taste tests could tell them apart. The actual difference in dissolved oxygen that was available to the yeast was likely much smaller, but the pitching rates were definitely widely different.
This experiment needs to be seen as inconclusive and further experiments need to be done with a different yeast. But at that point only 3 or 4 fermentations should be run to test either the influences of the pitching rate or the oxygen levels. Having only 3 to 4 samples that need to be evaluated is more manageable than 9 samples.
Conclusion
Despite the 9 fold difference in pitching rate and oxygen injection, which showed differences in the fermentation performance, the samples tasted remarkably similar and none of the blind taste tests could tell them apart. The actual difference in dissolved oxygen that was available to the yeast was likely much smaller, but the pitching rates were definitely widely different.
This experiment needs to be seen as inconclusive and further experiments need to be done with a different yeast. But at that point only 3 or 4 fermentations should be run to test either the influences of the pitching rate or the oxygen levels. Having only 3 to 4 samples that need to be evaluated is more manageable than 9 samples.
scottlindner
Well-Known Member
Why are you reading this thread?
Any good wiki will use a governance model to ensure what you fear doesn't happen. Wikipedia enforces governance and standards on topics that have the problem you are suspicious of. So if you are skeptical, you may want to seek out only those sources with adequate governance that suit your needs.
Scott
slowbie
Well-Known Member
I know wikipedia's 'governance and standards' and I can assure you that I have seen blatantly incorrect information last literally for years. And I'm not even talking about things that could be points of contention or open to interpretation. I'm talking accepted scientific fact.
However, I should say that I did not mean to be as dismissive of the article as I seemed. After re-reading my post I realized that I wasn't communicating the point I wanted to get across, which is this: I did not read the article yet because I am a busy guy, but I plan to. However, once I do read the article, regardless of what it says I will be skeptical because of my past experience with wikis.
remilard
Well-Known Member
I don't think "except" means what you think it does. There is definitely a link from a German brewing scientist that is critical of overpitching.
Was it confirmed by a single ad-hoc trial carried out by an amateur brewer? No. Is it possible for a single ad-hoc trial carried out by an amateur to impeach the conclusions of rigorous science? No.
![Craft A Brew - Safale BE-256 Yeast - Fermentis - Belgian Ale Dry Yeast - For Belgian & Strong Ales - Ingredients for Home Brewing - Beer Making Supplies - [3 Pack]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51bcKEwQmWL._SL500_.jpg)
jkarp
Well-Known Member
If your profile data is valid, you're barely a year into your drinking / brewing career. If you're really serious about homebrewing, there's much valuable info to be learned from Kai. Worry less about wiki formats and more about learning from respected and published experts like Kai and applying such knowledge to your own personal brewing experience.
Experience always trumps "what I read" or "what I heard" claims in homebrewing.
scottlindner
Well-Known Member
Then you also know it is your duty to report it when you see it.
slowbie
Well-Known Member
I have never heard about him, but I will keep that site in mind as I continue to learn and grow in my homebrewing. It seems that the site is not a true wiki, but the format confused me. It doesn't look like I just anybody could edit it, and since Kai seems to have some good references, I'm inclined to trust it more. I apologize for my misunderstanding.
I read the article, I kept an open mind, and now I'm starting to wonder if I'm the only one who read past the abstract. The maximum yeast count in the experiment is only 30% above the suggested rate given in the OP. If anything, the study is grounds to stop making starters and pitch directly from the vial. The maximum yeast count is 300mL of slurry, which the article states is taken from a yeast cake of a previous batch. Bob suggested 228mL given the same situation. And actually, the batch in the article is a little over 5.25 gallons, while the OP gave numbers for a 5 gallon batch. This means that the highest pitch rate in the article is 25% more than what was presented as optimal. The lowest, on the other hand, is only pitched at about 2/15 of the accepted rate.
EDIT: I forgot to mention that I did check and both were using a 12 P wort which makes things convenient.
An aside:
Yes, but I went through a wikipedia troll phase in early college, just to see how long I could make misinformation last. I'm not saying I'm proud of it, but I am saying that it has left me with a degree of skepticism.
doctorRobert
Well-Known Member
Are you in your home brew troll phase now?
slowbie
Well-Known Member
I'm sorry that I'm being such a troll by pointing out facts. I'll leave you guys alone now.
cheezydemon3
Well-Known Member
SO a yeast cake has enough to pitch......what? 400 batches?
COOL!!!!!!
They are even better than I thought.
So I will scoop out what? 1 cup? and discard the rest.
Whatever the measurement (and the smaller the better since TRUB and other evils are also reduced
) at some point a yeast cake fraction is basically equal to a starter.
FANTASTIC.
With the trub reduction, and that much new cell production, I will use the same "cake" for the next 2 years and post results.
COOL!!!!!!
They are even better than I thought.
So I will scoop out what? 1 cup? and discard the rest.
Whatever the measurement (and the smaller the better since TRUB and other evils are also reduced
) at some point a yeast cake fraction is basically equal to a starter.FANTASTIC.
With the trub reduction, and that much new cell production, I will use the same "cake" for the next 2 years and post results.
slowbie
Well-Known Member
SO a yeast cake has enough to pitch......what? 400 batches?
COOL!!!!!!
They are even better than I thought.
So I will scoop out what? 1 cup? and discard the rest.
Whatever the measurement (and the smaller the better since TRUB and other evils are also reduced
FANTASTIC.
With the trub reduction, and that much new cell production, I will use the same "cake" for the next 2 years and post results.
That is exactly what the OP said to do.
You weren't being a troll by pointing out facts. You were trolling by asking for specific brewing references, and then dismissed them out of hand since "anybody could write it". You yourself pointed out that you were previously a wikipedia troll, and that's where his comment came from.
Listen to some of Basic Brewing Radio's podcasts featuring Kai, and read some of his articles and texts before quickly dismissing them. You'll learn alot. Some of Kai's videos on decoction have helped me tremendously with understanding the process. (The strong German accent helps with me picturing myself using German techniques along with Kai).
What we all have to remember is that nobody posts things on here, to "make things up". Sure, it's a community of brewers so we all bring our beliefs, processes, and ideas into it. But all told, there are many years of work in the science of brewing behind many of these claims. I am not a scientist, so I can only speak from my experience. That's why I appreciate the scientists who DO the studies and the work and further my understanding while improving the quality of my beer.
slowbie
Well-Known Member
I'm sorry if I didn't convey the message I intended to, but when I wrote this:
I was intending to say that I thought that anybody could edit it anonymously(a key word I should have included). As I said, I have seen too many problems with websites that allow anonymous editing. Also, when I mentioned good references I was referring to the people in this very thread who recommended him, because I have been very appreciative of the things I've been able to learn from this community. If I had more time when I initially viewed the article perhaps I would have realized that it was the work of a single person and rather than expressing my hesitations about community edited articles I would have looked for more information about the author.
I made a mistake by judging too quickly, was called out on this mistake, and then apologized and attempted to correct my mistake by reading the article and bringing up my comments. I was grateful for the behavior of the community in general in light of that, but was disappointed that rather than conversation being allowed to continue after I attempted to correct my mistake, I was dismissed as a troll instead.
slowbie
Well-Known Member
I am skeptical of community edited sources, especially those that can be edited anonymously, but I was mistaken in thinking that it is even relevant to our topic here. This is not the place to discuss the ethics and accuracy of community edited forums and I shouldn't have brought it up in the first place. I apologize. Let's get back to the topic at hand, and if you'd like my opinions on what you've written above, you may send me a PM. Again, I apologize for starting this off-topic digression in the first place.
Besides, I think cheezydemon prefers that I keep my trolling on topic.
Bru
Well-Known Member
It seems there are two arguements here - pitching on the cake results in inconsistent results and pitching on the cake results in worse beer.
What Im suprised at is despite the aggressive tone of certain posts no evidence has been provided at all to support either arguement.
I can only assume that those who are so certain have done there own tests ?
Surely someone can provide some evidence - home brewery or commercial ?
For those that are so confident - what tests, done by whom will you trust ?
And before I get shot down - Im agnostic on this one.
What Im suprised at is despite the aggressive tone of certain posts no evidence has been provided at all to support either arguement.
I can only assume that those who are so certain have done there own tests ?
Surely someone can provide some evidence - home brewery or commercial ?
For those that are so confident - what tests, done by whom will you trust ?
And before I get shot down - Im agnostic on this one.
remilard
Well-Known Member
Bru
Well-Known Member
Either to see the studies or to hear other homebrewers experience.
Brewers have either pitched on the cake - what were the results ? or not because they "know" it to be negative or some other reason.
I can't recall reading anything from any other brewer that substantiates the arguement.
Where do you stand ? Have you found pitching on the cake to be negative in any way ?
Brewers have either pitched on the cake - what were the results ? or not because they "know" it to be negative or some other reason.
I can't recall reading anything from any other brewer that substantiates the arguement.
Where do you stand ? Have you found pitching on the cake to be negative in any way ?
SpanishCastleAle
Well-Known Member
Maybe even a little more than a homebrewer. From the OP's profile:
Also mentioned his apprenticeship at a Ringwood brewery in the OP.
Just realized your post was perhaps a typo.
slowbie
Well-Known Member
The OP lists several books you could look for if you wanted to. Otherwise, here is a link to an abstract with opportunity to purchase the entire article.
I personally have not chosen to pitch on the yeast cake for the following reasons:
1. I do not recall anyone producing an argument saying that pitching on the yeast cake produces better beer than making a starter.
2. It's really easy to scoop out the proper amount of yeast slurry from the cake, and then sanitize my fermenter, and regardless of whether or not overpitching is a problem, it makes me feel better about my sanitation.
3. So far, every study I've found that dealt with the topic has supported the OP's points.
SpanishCastleAle
Well-Known Member
IMO, there are aspects of the OP that could have been worded better. I think the bottom line is - know your pitch rate (or at least approximate it as best you can). If pitching an entire yeast cake is the correct pitch rate then pitch the entire cake.
There's a big difference between 'making the best beer I can' and 'never had a problem'.
cheezydemon3
Well-Known Member
The whole thing can be shut down by these facts...............
1. White labs employs no fairies or other mythical creatures to spontaneously create "fresh" yeast.
2. The quantity of yeast to be saved from a yeast cake will contain very little TRUB.
3. If you are worried that your beer will be .00000000000000000000128% worse due to the fraction of trub, WASH THE DAMN STUFF.
4. Using the entire cake (if you keep it cool) will result in a 2% worse brew(), which some could care less about.
5. Anyone intent on exact replication of a brew, should ranch their own yeast.(after all, who says that those damn fairies at white labs don't ever make a mistake?)
6.RADADHBOSTFU
1. White labs employs no fairies or other mythical creatures to spontaneously create "fresh" yeast.
2. The quantity of yeast to be saved from a yeast cake will contain very little TRUB.
3. If you are worried that your beer will be .00000000000000000000128% worse due to the fraction of trub, WASH THE DAMN STUFF.
4. Using the entire cake (if you keep it cool) will result in a 2% worse brew(
), which some could care less about.5. Anyone intent on exact replication of a brew, should ranch their own yeast.(after all, who says that those damn fairies at white labs don't ever make a mistake?)
6.RADADHBOSTFU
jkarp
Well-Known Member
FWIW McCuckerson, I agree. I pitch on full cakes every now and then - usually with lagers. Always had fantastic results and really don't care what the OP thinks of it or what the German texts say.
First-hand experience trumps opinion any day in my book.
gxm
Well-Known Member
I'll chime in that I also agree.
I mostly pitch onto cakes for lagers, and I, SWMBO, my friends and my neighbors love the results.
Bob telling me that my beer could taste "better", without defining what that means, and without tasting the beer, is just annoying.
wyzazz
Well-Known Member
I would tend to agree, however that is for the Mods to decide.
I think everyone gets way too defensive on the internet, brew how you want to brew, pitch on your cake if you want to. What works for one brewer may not work for another. If you like your beer, if others like your beer then keep on doing what you're doing.
Brew on Brutha's and Sista's!
SpanishCastleAle
Well-Known Member
I agree with everything except the lock the thread part. If a thread bothers someone they can just not click on it. I'm all for smaller government/less 'moderation'.I would tend to agree, however that is for the Mods to decide.
I think everyone gets way too defensive on the internet, brew how you want to brew, pitch on your cake if you want to. What works for one brewer may not work for another. If you like your beer, if others like your beer then keep on doing what you're doing.
Brew on Brutha's and Sista's!
I've always thought that "Why do you brew?" is key. If one likes to sweat every detail that's cool and if one likes to take RDWHAHB to the nth degree that's cool too. There's room for everyone in this hobby.
For some people, liking their beer and having all their friends/family/neighbors like their beer isn't enough. They still want to improve it. Heck, most of my friends/family/neighbors like McDonalds and BMC...and I know better than to expect them to tell me they don't like the free beer I'm giving them.
cheezydemon3
Well-Known Member
I thank BOB, not because he was right, but because he wasn't.
Healthy discussion is good.
I will, from here on, use a smaller portion of my cake (thanks BOB) but I will use that yeast until the end of time (again, thanks Bob).
I will only buy yeast if I need a different strain.
*The yeast that sat in my ale pail for 4 months until it was dried and cracked, and still sprang to life in no time when pitched on, producing fantastic beer, tells me that yeast are hard to kill.
They go dormant. They don't die at a rate of 25% a day or whatever the hell was suggested.*
Healthy discussion is good.
I will, from here on, use a smaller portion of my cake (thanks BOB) but I will use that yeast until the end of time (again, thanks Bob).
I will only buy yeast if I need a different strain.
*The yeast that sat in my ale pail for 4 months until it was dried and cracked, and still sprang to life in no time when pitched on, producing fantastic beer, tells me that yeast are hard to kill.
They go dormant. They don't die at a rate of 25% a day or whatever the hell was suggested.*
Off topic posts and snarky comments will not be tolerated. There is good information in here, and there is value in discussion. There is NO value in snarky comments, off-topic posts and namecalling. OT posts will be removed.
mojotele
Well-Known Member
That's fair, Yooper. You deleted a lot of the nonsense, so that'll hopefully get the thread back on track. Thanks for that.
And, in the spirit of getting the thread back on track, I'll address a couple things.
To be fair, I think Bob did try to define what he meant by "better." For instance:
Granted, he isn't talking about your beer. But I don't think that's a reasonable expectation. Plus, he's talking about over-pitching and not reusing a yeast cake. Perhaps you haven't over-pitched when reusing a yeast cake. I guess his point is that you're much more likely to over-pitch, but it really depends on the beer. He probably could have stated that better.
I agree, but I don't think we're talking about first-hand experience versus opinion here. We're talking about first-hand experience versus first-hand experience. Certain studies have shown one thing, but anecdotal evidence has shown another. In those sorts of situations there's often one or more variable of which one of the parties isn't aware. It is much more likely that the party with the anecdotal evidence is the one missing said variable(s) since they have a much less controlled experiment.
EDIT: I hypothesize that the main "unknown variable" is just how many yeast cells you have in any given yeast cake. Bob cites averages, but that may not be very helpful for figuring out why pitching on a particular yeast cake works for some. In other words, how often and by how much does a yeast cake deviate from the average? What would make it deviate from the average? People who have successfully pitched on to yeast cakes without seeing any of the signs of over-pitching may not be over-pitching at all.
And, in the spirit of getting the thread back on track, I'll address a couple things.
To be fair, I think Bob did try to define what he meant by "better." For instance:
Granted, he isn't talking about your beer. But I don't think that's a reasonable expectation. Plus, he's talking about over-pitching and not reusing a yeast cake. Perhaps you haven't over-pitched when reusing a yeast cake. I guess his point is that you're much more likely to over-pitch, but it really depends on the beer. He probably could have stated that better.
I agree, but I don't think we're talking about first-hand experience versus opinion here. We're talking about first-hand experience versus first-hand experience. Certain studies have shown one thing, but anecdotal evidence has shown another. In those sorts of situations there's often one or more variable of which one of the parties isn't aware. It is much more likely that the party with the anecdotal evidence is the one missing said variable(s) since they have a much less controlled experiment.
EDIT: I hypothesize that the main "unknown variable" is just how many yeast cells you have in any given yeast cake. Bob cites averages, but that may not be very helpful for figuring out why pitching on a particular yeast cake works for some. In other words, how often and by how much does a yeast cake deviate from the average? What would make it deviate from the average? People who have successfully pitched on to yeast cakes without seeing any of the signs of over-pitching may not be over-pitching at all.
