Search results

I was reading through White Labs FAQ and read that we can get reports on cell count on the packets we use. Just did a starter with WLP590 and it had a cell count of 2.83 billion per mL. This starter showed activity within 4 hours. They state the packets can contain 1-3 billion cells per mL...

I just use the same amount of water and DME on a 1 L starter and it's usually between 1.030 and 1.028. They'll usually ferment out between 1.011 and 1.002. I'll be honest I don't check that often, but decided to this round to have some evidence when I contact white labs about what I'm experiencing.

Alright, just decanted the starter and it started showing traces of activity. It went from 1.030 to 1.024 over 2 days. Again this has been the norm for me ever since the transition to Pure Pitch packaging. It is what it is, and my solution to get the activity I want from the Pure Pitch yeast...

Even taking into consideration a lower starting gravity on a batch of beer, it would be very difficult for me to proceed with just pitching directly from a Pure Pitch. Not just using the starter for propagation but to make sure it's viable. Doing this with any liquid yeast regardless of...

I only have access to one homebrew shop and when they used vials I didn't have nearly the problem with lag that I do now. Perhaps I can try and use another HBS when the possibility presents itself. Just curious if anyone else out there in other regions were experiencing the same problem. Most of...

Any one having lag issues with the Pure Pitch? I have to do at least 3 starters prior to pitching to a batch of beer before the yeast shows any significant activity. The first starter barely drops from the initial gravity. Manufacture date has no influence on this.

Checked the gravity 33 days after pitching the WLP099 and it has fermented down to 1.017. Huge difference between 1.023 and 1.017 in terms of flavor. The residual sweetness is not in the way as much. I did pitch a pack of the safale abbey yeast this past Thursday. Hoping I can get it down to the...

I wish that were the case. Mash temp was 148. For my malty brews I mash at 156 without incident. Perhaps old grains? I've had stalled fermentations before and all it took was another pitch to dry it out. This one has me stumped.

I was just guessing on the D180. The only other thing I could think of in my brewing process was not a long enough mash for conversion. Think I did at least 60 minutes. With that being said, the grain total wasn't any more than what I usually brew due to the D180 contributing some fermentables...

It's looking like that is the case, which is a bummer. Was hoping it was the 530 but if it was the 099 (maybe not enough yeast?) should have finished the job. Wonder if it had to do with the D180. After 6 days of 099 it dropped from 1.029 to 1.024 and another 6 days brought it down only 1...

That is very encouraging. I'll just continue to wait it out. Your replies are appreciated.

It was pitched into an already stalled WLP530 fermentation so that may have something to do with it it. Like you said I'll check back in a week and see if it has progressed. Still slowly pushing co2 through the airlock.

Thank you for the reply. I read how WLP099 can take some time to finish so I'm hoping that's it. It's still showing some activity it has been all along, and I'll check again in a week. I pitched plenty in terms of estimated cell count for what was left sugar wise. I'll report back in a week...

So the WLP099 has gotten it down to 1.023. Fermentation characteristics are nice, but it still has that residual sweetness. The only other time I have used WLP530 was on a Saison and that hit 86% attenuation (1.053 to 1.007). Too bad I didn't have the same results with the Westy. I have used...

After a weeks worth of WLP099 propagation it has been pitched to the beer in a secondary vessel. During that extra week the beer on the original yeast didn't ferment down one bit and stayed at 1.028. Tasted the starter of the the WLP099 and it was a tart bugger. Had similar taste to WLP001...

Yeah, I'd agree on not adding o2 at this point. I'd say 1.015 wasn't too bad. Just a few points off. I decided to stay away from the Belgian saison strains because the risk of phenols/funk may come through more than I care too. Also didn't want to do 530 again because of what you experienced...

I decided to go with WLP099. I'll let it sit on the WLP530 for one more week while I get a couple of starters made of the WLP099. Thank you for sharing your experience. That is exactly what I was looking for. Cheers

What was your attenuation after the second pitch? Right now I sit at 67% and that isn't going to get it done. Still trying to get the remaining 20%. Thanks for the reply. Cheers

Greetings, I started out at 1.087 and I sit at 1.028 after 12 days. Airlock has slow activity with around 1 minute in between bubbles. Two things I think caused this (sluggish first stage starter and I ramped the temp to high in the beginning). As a side note this is the second stalled brew...

So I had a chance to rebrew this beer yesterday after our discussion and here are the results(Recipe Unchanged from Above): Strike Water Additions: Total Volume: 5.40 Gallons Total Alkalinity (as CaCO3): 29 Calcium: 30 Magnesium: 10 Untreated Water pH: 7.05 Calcium Chloride: 1.7 Grams...