Dry lager yeast: should I make a starter?

[McMullan]

I think many folks will take offense to this statement including myself. I always direct pitch my dry yeast into my fermenter. I have won several medals with my lagers using this technique and not once have there been any comments on the score sheets that mention anything about that ‘home-brew thing’. I also give away lots of samples (many to members on this forum) and I’ve also never received any comments like that from them.

What are you comparing with? How do you know you wouldn't have won more medals had you made starters for dry yeast and repitched?

Edit: note when I typed 'pitching directly into FV wort' I was referring to the practice of not making a starter, not how dry yeast cells get rehydrated.

 

[camonick]

What are you comparing with? How do you know you wouldn't have won more medals had you made starters for dry yeast and repitched?

Edit: note when I typed 'pitching directly into FV wort' I was referring to the practice of not making a starter, not how dry yeast cells get rehydrated.

I’ve pitched dry packets and re-pitched saved slurry from previous fermentations, and to my unrefined palate, I can’t tell any difference, as well as others I’ve shared with. Pitching dry packs into my wort is so much faster and easier than dicking around with a starter.
I’ll do me, you do you.

 

[moreb33rplz]

Some people actually like that classic 'home-brew thing' acquired by poor pitching practices, including pitching dry yeast directly into FV wort. It's really not wrong, if you like that kind of thing. If you like it you like it. Carry on doing whatever works for you. Our tastes buds are wired differently, that's all. What I consider 'that home-brew thing' others might consider 'more flavoursome' than commercial beers. I guess some of us aim to emulate home brew and some of us aim to emulate commercial beers. For me it's mainly traditional English ales, which don't taste anything like standard home brew. Applying my thinking and process to lagers has helped me produce some pretty good traditional lagers, too. It works according to my senses.

This is kinda triggering and passive aggressive. Also wrong to imply that direct pitching dry yeast results in a subpar, or even different, flavor profile or beer drinking experience.

I'm not a scientist. But I have brewed several hundred batches over 18 years using every kind of yeast delivery method you can possibly think of, and direct pitching dry yeast is certainly towards the top of my preference list.

 

[McMullan]

This is kinda triggering and passive aggressive. Also wrong to imply that direct pitching dry yeast results in a subpar, or even different, flavor profile or beer drinking experience.

I'm not a scientist. But I have brewed several hundred batches over 18 years using every kind of yeast delivery method you can possibly think of, and direct pitching dry yeast is certainly towards the top of my preference list.

This screams to me that you have a flaw in your brewing.

Carry on doing whatever works for you.

It doesn't work for me. And I've been doing valid comparisons in my brewing environment for several months now, specifically to assess the performance of dry lager yeast. I'm pretty confident the advice I offer (to the interested) is sound enough to be offered in the first place.

 

[JohnDBrewer]

If you have two packs pitch them both for lagers. If you have just one and know it has been well taken care of (i.e. not shipped through the mail with uncontrolled temp, etc.) you'll probably be ok. If only one pack shipped or store in an uncontrolled environment do a starter.

 

[McMullan]

I’ve pitched dry packets and re-pitched saved slurry from previous fermentations, and to my unrefined palate, I can’t tell any difference, as well as others I’ve shared with. Pitching dry packs into my wort is so much faster and easier than dicking around with a starter.
I’ll do me, you do you.

No offense intended, but what I read here is that you're really against spending about 10 minutes hands-on time making a simple yeast starter. After spending the best part of 2 days planning, preparing and executing a brew day then cleaning up, spending 10 minutes hands-on time to pitch the best yeast possible - which we have to prep fresh ourselves - is a no-brainer, to me.

 

[Yeast Farmer]

Oooh, I kicked a hornet's nest didn't I, lol. To try to bring things back into context, I think we can agree on a general consensus that making a starter with dry yeast is not necessary and not ideal, compared to just using the right amount of dry yeast. My specific situation is that I have one (1) packet of w 34/70 on hand, when ideally as per the manufacturer's instructions, I should use two. I'm wondering if the benefits of propagating a packet of yeast in a starter outweighs the alleged negative side effects of making a starter with dry yeast. Just pitching the single packet is also on the table. I suspect that all of the above options will result in beer.

W 34/70 used to be a cheap yeast, but it ain't no more. The lowest price I can find for a packet is $8.49. You can find it as low as $6 per on ebay if you buy 6 at a time. $6 in my mind is still expensive for a packet of dry yeast, considering that I still have a bunch of Nottingham that cost me around half that. And I'm not sure if I want to get into lagering enough to drop $36 on yeast right now.

Just yesterday I bought a nice craft beer at the restaurant for $6.50 and you're complaining about an extra $9 to make 5 gallons of beer?

There's nothing wrong with that logic, but I haven't bought a beer in a restaurant in 10 years. I'm not paying that for something that I can make for a buck. The price of beer to me is what it costs me to make it, and $9 per batch is a significant increase.

Some people actually like that classic 'home-brew thing

I know what you mean and I don't take offense. I'm not emulating commercial beers, and I don't enter competitions. There are two kinds of homebrewers: those who want to make the best possible beer, and those who want to make economical beer. I'm the latter kind, although I don't think there's anything wrong with the quality of my beer, as far as my personal tastes go. I prefer my homebrew over any commercial examples of similar styles, and that includes ales fermented at 75-80 degrees or with underpitched yeast. Using grain and hops that I like makes a million times more of a difference to me.

 

[tennesseean_87]

I'm a dry yeast guy. I wouldn't make a starter, but I'd direct pitch two packets. I often direct pitch a single packet into 3G of wort at traditional lager temps, but for 5G I would bump that up into 2 packets and let it ride.


You probably could and be perfectly fine. But if you're looking to save money on yeast, I would just reuse the slurry or dump a new, higher OG wort onto a fresh yeast cake.

This. Make a smaller batch or a super session-gravity steam beer that you won't be underpitching. Then use the clurry/cake to make stronger/bigger batches of lager.

 

[McMullan]

I agree, dry brewer's yeast isn't necessarily cheap anymore. one of the reasons I haven't bothered trying 34/70 is high cost. I can get a decent authentic-to-style liquid yeast for a few bucks more. Nothing if I'm culturing from my own collection. In terms of brewing with less waste, dry yeast starters are a viable option, no pun intended

 

[McMullan]

This. Make a smaller batch or a super session-gravity steam beer that you won't be underpitching. Then use the clurry/cake to make stronger/bigger batches of lager.

That's a starter batch, technically speaking. About 1g/L wort. That potentially translates into about 3 big starters from one pack of dry yeast

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

The lowest price I can find for a packet is $8.49.

If you are in the USA, take a look at ritebrew.

 

[lumpher]

This argument is about as pointless as a "discussion" on religion or politics. We each have our ways because they work for us. Take every point expressed here with a grain of salt, and make a starter or not. They both work.

 

[Smudgey]

YEAST: The Practical Guide to Beer Fermentation by Chris White and Zamil Zainasheff

"Another case where you normally do not want to make a starter is with dry yeast. Dry yeast is inexpensive, and it is usually cheaper, easier, and safer to buy more dry yeast than to make a large starter. Many experts suggest that placing dry yeast in a starter just depletes the cell reserves that the yeast manufacturer tries to build into their product. For dry yeast, do a proper rehydration in tap water: do not make a starter."

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

For dry yeast, do a proper rehydration in tap water: do not make a starter."

... but
... if one decides that dry yeast is too expensive and
... if one trusts yeasts lab / provider web sites for good starting points:
... in 2022 we have this as an option
...

(link to PDF).

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

 

[Steveruch]

If you are in the USA, take a look at ritebrew.

Label Peelers will ship dry yeast free via the post office. Wait until they have a sale and stock up.

 

[McMullan]

This argument is about as pointless as a "discussion" on religion or politics. We each have our ways because they work for us. Take every point expressed here with a grain of salt, and make a starter or not. They both work.

Unlike religion and politics it's quite straightforward to determine what actually works better when pitching yeast. Very easy to control for our biases and opinions. Those who refuse to accept making a starter with dry yeast is better believe in something else, which they're entitled to do, of course. Not everyone's prepared to invest in more time and effort. Why should they? It boils down to a personal choice. For others the fun of brewing is about the challenge of continuous improvement and gaining knowledge to better understand.

 

[Voskar]

I do yeast starters with Dry Yeast, but use 1/4 tsp of dry yeast into 1 litre wort, that way my packet of yeast lasts a long time. Just reseal the packet with tape. Been doing it for years.

 

[AZ Maverick]

I have been brewing for 25 years.
I used to not make a starter with dry yeast, but when I finally started doing lagers I also started making starters with dry yeast.
Now I make starters with dry yeast all the time, for ales or lagers.
My experience is that I get better, more reliable, and more attenuation when I make starters with dry yeast.
I can't tell any difference in flavor at all.
I guess others may think it's not necessary or just flat wrong, and to each their own - but I'm gonna keep making starters...

 

[MugsWorth]

For liquid yeast, yes, but you don't want to make starters with dry yeast. It destroys their cell walls. Dry yeast is ready to go right out of the pack. Pitch 2 and call it a day.

Excellento !!

 

[tennesseean_87]

That's a starter batch, technically speaking. About 1g/L wort. That potentially translates into about 3 big starters from one pack of dry yeast

Right, but you get to drink it and don't spend the time and money on multiple stepped starters.

Another thing I generally try to do is brew a series with using the slurry to repitch. Session steam-->5% lager-->strong lager. Usually I'll do some sort of lawnmower beer or something, then a pils, helles, schwarz, Penn porter, and then go for a dopplebock, baltic porter, etc. with the yeastcake.

 

[McMullan]

Right, but you get to drink it and don't spend the time and money on multiple stepped starters.

Another thing I generally try to do is brew a series with using the slurry to repitch. Session steam-->5% lager-->strong lager. Usually I'll do some sort of lawnmower beer or something, then a pils, helles, schwarz, Penn porter, and then go for a dopplebock, baltic porter, etc. with the yeastcake.

Starters, stepped or not, are a little bit like making a pot of tea. Very easy. Minimal hands-on time. They don't cost much either, if you make a little extra wort on brew day. Store it. Use it when needed. An uncle called 'Bob'

 

[moreb33rplz]

It doesn't work for me. And I've been doing valid comparisons in my brewing environment for several months now, specifically to assess the performance of dry lager yeast. I'm pretty confident the advice I offer (to the interested) is sound enough to be offered in the first place.

What do you think is better about making a starter vs dry pitching?

 

[Dland]

Right, but you get to drink it and don't spend the time and money on multiple stepped starters.

Another thing I generally try to do is brew a series with using the slurry to repitch. Session steam-->5% lager-->strong lager. Usually I'll do some sort of lawnmower beer or something, then a pils, helles, schwarz, Penn porter, and then go for a dopplebock, baltic porter, etc. with the yeastcake.

I dry pitch first in series, and then do not even re pitch slurry, just leave a quart of fresh yeasty beer in fermentor. I also don't bother to step the gravities. I've run the same initial pitch cone to cone, or continuous fermentation, for up to 9 batches now between cleaning fermentor and starting a new yeast. I'm not sure how well this would work without a conical with bottom dump though, I do at least two trub dumps for every cone to cone batch.

But when brewing less frequently, I always only dry pitch now, and have never had a problem.

That said, I kind of feel silly responding to another thread on this subject, the poor horse has been dead for some time now, and people just keep beating it.

Honestly, I'm just killing time until I'll allow myself a first beer, eighteen minutes to go....

 

[McMullan]

What do you think is better about making a starter vs dry pitching?

More viable cells programmed to ferment wort. Compared with dry yeast, programmed to adapt to commercial drying conditions. Basic biology really.

Edit: pitching dry lager yeast I get unbalanced beers with an almost phenol off flavour mixed with a weird 'ironed cotton' thing. Don't get this any other time. Lagers fermented with a dry yeast starter or repitched slurry dry yeast at gen 0 are much cleaner, to me.

 

[moreb33rplz]

More viable cells programmed to ferment wort. Compared with dry yeast, programmed to adapt to commercial drying conditions. Basic biology really.

Edit: pitching dry lager yeast I get unbalanced beers with an almost phenol off flavour mixed with a weird 'ironed cotton' thing. Don't get this any other time. Lagers fermented with a dry yeast starter or repitched slurry dry yeast at gen 0 are much cleaner, to me.

So cell count is the reason you do it

That's why you dry pitch an appropriate amount of yeast

If you're getting off-flavors from dry pitching yeast, you're messing something up, it isn't the yeast. And there is no difference between yeast slurry at the bottom of your fermented beer that started with dry yeast or liquid yeast or space paste yeast or magic fairy dust yeast

 

[easttex]

I finally have a fridge set up for temperature controlled fermentation, so I'm about to try my first lager. I usually don't do yeast starters, but I've seen a lot of things saying that they are a necessity for lagers. I've also seen things saying that starters are unnecessary or not recommended for dry yeast. But what if I'm making a lager with dry lager yeast? I have one packet of 34/70, 5 gallon batch.

Related question: If I make a starter, can I get away with using half the packet and saving the rest? (yeah, I'm a cheapskate.)

Just bottled a room-temp Helles style beer with Lutra kveik, so it will be interesting to see how the pseudo-lager compares to the real thing.

Just do it and don't tell anybody and you'll probably make a delicious beer.

 

[wepeeler]

I have been brewing for 25 years.
I used to not make a starter with dry yeast, but when I finally started doing lagers I also started making starters with dry yeast.
Now I make starters with dry yeast all the time, for ales or lagers.
My experience is that I get better, more reliable, and more attenuation when I make starters with dry yeast.
I can't tell any difference in flavor at all.
I guess others may think it's not necessary or just flat wrong, and to each their own - but I'm gonna keep making starters...

No difference in flavor? So why go through the extra step, time and money to make a starter?

 

[AZ Maverick]

No difference in flavor? So why go through the extra step, time and money to make a starter?

A couple of reasons.
From my post, "My experience is that I get better, more reliable, and more attenuation when I make starters with dry yeast."
Also, dry yeast isn't as inexpensive as it used to be so starters are less expensive (since I do all grain) than buying multiple dry yeast packs.
Liquid yeast isn't an option where I live in the middle of AZ during the summer as there is no way to cool them during delivery even with the cool packs that they come with.

 

[wepeeler]

A couple of reasons.
From my post, "My experience is that I get better, more reliable, and more attenuation when I make starters with dry yeast."
Also, dry yeast isn't as inexpensive as it used to be so starters are less expensive (since I do all grain) than buying multiple dry yeast packs.
Liquid yeast isn't an option where I live in the middle of AZ during the summer as there is no way to cool them during delivery even with the cool packs that they come with.

Flavor isn't what you're searching for when brewing? How do you come to the conclusion that you get better, more reliable yeast when making starters? I can understand the more attenuation, because it's measurable, but if the flavor is the same I'm not sure why you'd go through the hassle.

I routinely get warm liquid packs in the mail. Definitely make a starter for that. Only 1 pack has failed me in well over 200.