Am I missing something?

[pericles]

IPAs are most of what I brew, and, as a result, my trub is usually pretty hoppy. As a result, I've struggled with yeast rinsing for years. Recently, I tried to get started top-cropping, but I've been disappointed with the volume of yeast I collect that way, and I don't much care for the risk of infection I take by dipping a spoon into my beer during fermentation.

About six months ago I tried something different: instead of collecting yeast from the end of fermentation, I doubled the size of my starter. I pitch half, and I rinse the other half.

I've immediately noticed a couple of advantages: first off, there's no hops in my starters, so there's no hops in my yeast to rinse out. Also, because I make starters with extra-light DME every time, I never have to screw around my brewing order to make sure I go from lighter beers to darker beers. In other words, I can repitch the yeast I used in my Black-Double IPA into my summer wheat beer, and there's no flavor transfer. And, because my starter OG is so much lower than most of what I brew, there's much less break material to rinse away, and the yeast I retain is much cleaner than previous experiments. Finally, because my starters go through fewer transfers than my beers, and are always in smaller vessels, sanitation is easier, and I'm more comfortable I'll have an infection free yeast.

One of the benefits of re-pitched yeast, in addition to cost savings, is that third, fourth, and fifth generation yeasts often give more vigorous fermentations; when I started repitching from starters, I was concerned that my yeast wouldn't get the same quality boost. I was wrong. Far from giving me tepid ferments, the yeast I'm repitching now has been the cleanest, fastest, most vigorous fermenting yeast I've ever pitched. In fact, it blew the top clean off an American amber ale!

One downside is that brewing a double-sized starter requires twice as much DME, which adds a dollar or two of cost to the process; harvesting the yeast following fermentation is free.

Another downside is that the yeast I harvest has to survive in my fridge from the BEGINNING of one brew, until the BEGINNING of the next. If I were harvesting from a finished fermentation, the yeast would only have to survive from the END of one brew until the beginning of the next. Of course, if you brew more than one beer at a time, this might be an advantage for you: it means you don't have to wait until the end of your ferment to collect new yeast. And, in my case, it isn't a problem because I brew regularly enough that the two week wait in my fridge isn't a problem.

It seems weird, but I've been so impressed by the results I'm getting, that I can't figure out why this technique doesn't seem to have caught on? When people talk about reusing yeast, it's always either through top-cropping or yeast rinsing. Is there a hidden-downside that I'm not aware of?

If not, I'd recommend this procedure to everyone - I haven't bought WLP001 in six generations, and they've been the best six beers I've ever brewed!

 

[ThePearsonFam]

so, for clarity, you are no longer harvesting, just pitching a vial into a starter and splitting the starter?

--or-- are you harvesting and growing a larger starter and splitting that to multiple beers?

 

[pericles]

Option one: I am no longer harvesting. My process is

(1) vial of yeast into an oversized starter
(2) pitch half-the starter into wort
(3) retain the second half, and let the yeast floc
(4) decant the spent wort from the second half of the starter
(5) add cooled boiled water to the retained yeast
(6) refrigerate until it's time to brew again
(7) 72 hours before brew-day, I take the rinsed retained yeast out of the fridge, let it come to room temperature, and add it into another over-sized starter,
(8) the process starts over at step-2.

 

[ThePearsonFam]

gotcha... I've seen this dicussed before. I don't know if there was a proven/empirical answer to the question. I can't imagine, if you're making a starter with wort, that there is anything wrong with your technique.

Actually, the more I think about it... I wonder if you're risking a long-range infection since you're making a wort and then generating yeast cells, not making alcohol (that'll kill bad stuff). Just thinking out loud here. I'd like to hear what more experienced folks have to say.

 

[mattd2]

I am just wondering why you would need a double size starter (at least after the initial vial starter), as the first time you are making 2 x the volume of yeast - using 1 and keeping 1 - so any additional starter in my mind would only require anough wort to produce 1 extra volume of yeast, i.e. the normal amount of starter wort. This could be why you are getting more and more vigarous fermentations out of them.
The only downside vs washing is that each beer you brew requires another generation of yeast to be made. Some people on here say that you should not go beyond 3-5 gens per original vial/packet but others say this is a myth. With washing each generation gets enough yeast for at least 3 more beers so even with 3 gens your looking at enough yeast for 40 beers. With you method this would be 4 (original + 3 gens). I personally think the generation limit is a myth so I wouldn't be concerned much.

 

[ThePearsonFam]

I think that gen limits aren't a myth, but I DO think they're overstated. Even White Labs says you can go more than 10 gens without issue (assuming you're good to the yeast). I'd go further and say that ~1/4 of the cake is used for the next batch, so you get 4 batches from the original cake, then 16, on and on... only issue is storing the yeast.

 

[RiverBirchBrew]

Option one: I am no longer harvesting. My process is

(1) vial of yeast into an oversized starter
(2) pitch half-the starter into wort
(3) retain the second half, and let the yeast floc
(4) decant the spent wort from the second half of the starter
(5) add cooled boiled water to the retained yeast
(6) refrigerate until it's time to brew again
(7) 72 hours before brew-day, I take the rinsed retained yeast out of the fridge, let it come to room temperature, and add it into another over-sized starter,
(8) the process starts over at step-2.

I just started doing this with my last batch. Everything seems to be going smoothly. I'm fighting the urge to turn yeast into the trading cards of home brewing. I feel the need to "collect them all".

 

[pericles]

I am just wondering why you would need a double size starter (at least after the initial vial starter), as the first time you are making 2 x the volume of yeast - using 1 and keeping 1 - so any additional starter in my mind would only require anough wort to produce 1 extra volume of yeast, i.e. the normal amount of starter wort. This could be why you are getting more and more vigarous fermentations out of them.

That's a good point! The reason I do brew starters is that I actually keep the retained yeast in white labs vials; if I didn't, I wouldn't know how many cells I was using. This way, I can guestimate how many I'm using, and retain surplus from the previous generation. So, in other words, I agree with you, but only use about a quarter of the retained yeast in the second round of starter.

I think that gen limits aren't a myth, but I DO think they're overstated.

I agree. BUT, I lack the courage of my convictions. I just brewed a seventh generation starter, but I took the fact that there wasn't much yeast left in the jar as an opportunity to add a new vial of 001. Now it's about 30% 7th generation, 70% 1st generation. It'll be interesting to see what happens.

 

[TwoGunz]

I have a slightly different approach. When I'm making my starter I just grab a few drops of the initial slurry from the vial or pack and put it on a couple gelatin/dme slants and put it in the fridge. Next time I want to brew I just make a couple of step up starters and I'm off and running. If you need more slants grab some of the starter slurry and make more.

 

[VanHolton]

I think that gen limits aren't a myth, but I DO think they're overstated. Even White Labs says you can go more than 10 gens without issue (assuming you're good to the yeast). I'd go further and say that ~1/4 of the cake is used for the next batch, so you get 4 batches from the original cake, then 16, on and on... only issue is storing the yeast.

Although the processes differ between commercial breweries and home brewers in terms of yeast maintenance, I know Surly repitches for about 30 gens. Granted, they're not refrigerating yeast between brews, but still, 30 gens! It was an impressive figure to hear considering the home brewing community seems to advocate going no more than 10.

 

[ThePearsonFam]

Yes, I think 10 is the "top" for us due to less than perfect conditions... Bull. I'll just keep going til I have a "off" yeast cake.

 

[StMarcos]

I'd just keep the yeast under beer if doing that approach. Also, the later generations are supposed to be getting better at fermenting the beer you're using it for, not starter wort. Ideally in a starter, you're doing what the yeast companies do to make more pure culture yeast. So, the yeast you buy isn't really first generation, in the same way that your starter yeast isn't second.

 

[jangelj]

I, too, have been doing this for several months now. I find it MUCH easier to split a large starter (I do about 60-70% in the wort, and save 30-40% for a future starter) than to try and wash out the hops and trub from a batch of IPA (I like hops!).

Then I make a big starter from the 30-40% that I had saved and start the process all over again. Works great!