Is making a starter a false economy?

[GNBrews]

Lately, I've be trying to save a few bucks on my liquid yeast purchases by picking the Wyeast propagator packs instead of the activator, and using a starter to bring the cell count to an appropriate pitching rate. My starter wort usually consists of 1.25lb LME/gal, 1lb DME/gal, or lately, adding a bit of extra grain to my mash (+1.50lb) to have a gallon of excess wort. That gallon of wort is then split into (4) 1qt mason jars, and pressure-cooked for future use.

Tonight I find myself doing the accounting, and questioning the economy.

According to the Wyeast pitching calculator, using 1qt of starter wort with a stir plate (which I have) will give me approximately 7 million cells/ml in a 5gal fermentation, which is ideal for a standard gravity (<1.060) beer. The activator package provides this same pitching rate w/out the work of the starter.

A bit of math:

Malt Extract from my LHBS
Liquid - $2.42\lb = ($2.42 * 1.25lb)/4qt = ~$0.76/starter
Dry - $3.98\lb = ($3.98 * 1lb)/4qt = ~$1.00/starter
2-row pale Malt - $0.86\lb = ($0.86 * 1.5lb(.75% mash eff))/4qt = ~$0.32/starter

Wyeast from my LHBS
Propagator - $4.50
Activator - $5.75

Price difference = $1.25

Now, the question is whether my time spent setting up the pressure cooker to can the wort, energy used during the canning/stirring, and time monitoring the stir plate progress is worth that $1.25. I doubt it.

Obviously, if you're harvesting/banking yeast this is a moot point, as you really have to use a starter.

Just something to think about.

 

[Yooper]

My feeling is that you have to do a starter even with the activator packs, so for the $1.25 more, I get more yeast to work with. You can make a starter, and then split the yeast into two portions. One to step up, and use for the brew, and one for in the fridge. I also wash my yeast, and get at least 3 jars out of each primary. And I often wash again, so I may get 5-10 batches out of one White Labs vial or one Wyeast activator pack.

Check out mrmalty.com's pitching calculator, or the pitching calculator now on the Wyeast website. Even an activator pack can benefit from a starter.

 

[StunnedMonkey]

According to the yeast pitching calculator at MrMalty, the recommended pitch into a modest 1.050 beer is 184 billion cells. Even the Wyeast Activator Packs only claim 100 Billion, so it seem you'd still be underpitching by quite a bit even for a modest brew, let alone 1.060 (219 Billion recommended).

I personally use White Labs as opposed to WYeast (most of the time) but I think I'd be inclined to use Activator Packs AND a starter.

 

[stlB]

I've yet to brew a batch so I am just askin here. But if I find two beers that use the same yeast and also have two pounds of free amber DME it would be very penny wise to make a starter-harvest-wash-restarter...repeat correct? sorry to hijack

 

[CDbrews]

just pitch the next one on the yeast cake... will save you time and no starter required

 

[Edcculus]

I've never seen a starter as a way to save money. Thats what dry yeast is for. The only way to save $ on liquid yeast is to wash or slant.

 

[EricCSU]

You could always do a batch of 1040 beer with just 2 row and then put the wort in mason jars and sterlize them. You could get 20 quart jars out of it which would last for a long time and it wouldn't cost as much as DME.

Eric

 

[GNBrews]

According to the yeast pitching calculator at MrMalty, the recommended pitch into a modest 1.050 beer is 184 billion cells. Even the Wyeast Activator Packs only claim 100 Billion, so it seem you'd still be underpitching by quite a bit even for a modest brew, let alone 1.060 (219 Billion recommended).

I personally use White Labs as opposed to WYeast (most of the time) but I think I'd be inclined to use Activator Packs AND a starter.

As much as I value Jamil's opinion (being a Brew God and all ;-) ), I also tend to believe Wyeast might have a pretty good handle on recommended pitching rates. Their chart/guide gives 6 million cells/ml as adequate for beers under 1.060.

You could always do a batch of 1040 beer with just 2 row and then put the wort in mason jars and sterlize them. You could get 20 quart jars out of it which would last for a long time and it wouldn't cost as much as DME.

Eric

Yep, that's what I do now that I've gone to all-grain batches. If you use a paint strainer bag inside of a pot, you can even do a 150F mini mash in the oven with fairly easy cleanup. A quart of 1.040 wort costs me ~$0.32. BUT...it's much less work to not have to sterilize the wort after the mash, and just pay the extra $1.25 for the larger smack pack.

As I said before, if you're a yeast rancher, starters are just a way of life.

 

[Scimmia]

As much as I value Jamil's opinion (being a Brew God and all ;-) ), I also tend to believe Wyeast might have a pretty good handle on recommended pitching rates. Their chart/guide gives 6 million cells/ml as adequate for beers under 1.060.

They sell based on simplicity. You really think the optimum pitching rate is the same for a 1.035 beer as it is for a 1.060 beer? Not a chance.

We're here because we want to make the best beer possible, not just doing things as easy as we can get away with.

 

[jds]

My trick for making starters is to add an extra half gallon or gallon onto a session beer brewday, pour some of the wort into cheap containers after chilling, and freeze them for later use as a starter.

To make a starter, I toss one or more quart-sized chunks of wortsicle into a saucepan, boil to sterilize, chill in the sink, pitch yeast, and chuck it on the stirplate.

It's more work at starter-making time than using pressure-canned wort, but doesn't require a pressure canner, and doesn't require that I keep extract on hand for starters. Grain is cheap. Extract, not so much. The extra effort over making starters from extract is minimal, especially since the extra effort required on brewday is vanishingly close to zero.

 

[sea2summit3]

They sell based on simplicity. You really think the optimum pitching rate is the same for a 1.035 beer as it is for a 1.060 beer? Not a chance.

We're here because we want to make the best beer possible, not just doing things as easy as we can get away with.

Plus its fun! AG, yeast starters, DIY stir plate... I'm beginning to feel like a mad scientist... especially with my hair getting long and not combing it on brew day mornings.

Seriously though, I'm striving to make the homebrew I can, especially after moving into all grain. If making a yeast starter helps me achieve goals of pleasing my taste buds, I'm all for it. But, if space is a constraint (for storing starter wort) or the added time and work isn't worth it, then an extra $1.25 isn't too bad. For me, its an ever growing obsession with the hobby. But I'm still new

 

[MBasile]

My feeling is that you have to do a starter even with the activator packs, so for the $1.25 more, I get more yeast to work with. You can make a starter, and then split the yeast into two portions. One to step up, and use for the brew, and one for in the fridge. I also wash my yeast, and get at least 3 jars out of each primary. And I often wash again, so I may get 5-10 batches out of one White Labs vial or one Wyeast activator pack.

Check out mrmalty.com's pitching calculator, or the pitching calculator now on the Wyeast website. Even an activator pack can benefit from a starter.

Yeah, washing is sounding like a great idea. I washed some Pacman from my last brew. I propagated the yeast from a bottle of Dead Guy so it was like buying my yeast for $5 and getting some free beer with it too

Supposedly a few generations in the yeast get nice and strong too, so if you're looking for economy and quality, look into washing.

 

[mordantly]

who can say they homebrew to SAVE money? thats a lie. possible reasons include: the challenge, excitement, having a real product that is equal to high end commercial. ingredients are cheaper, but time, equipment, etc are always going to factor in. it just makes sense to do everything one can to shape the outcome. ie: pitching rate affecting the profile. noone should join any hobby in my opinion if the sole intent is cost savings.

 

[jpsloan]

To make a starter, I toss one or more quart-sized chunks of wortsicle into a saucepan, boil to sterilize, chill in the sink, pitch yeast, and chuck it on the stirplate.

I think "wortsicle" is my new favorite word!

On-topic: Here's a question from the converse position... if money's not a problem for you, would there be any advantage in making a starter versus just buying two smack-packs?

 

[EricCSU]

I think "wortsicle" is my new favorite word!

On-topic: Here's a question from the converse position... if money's not a problem for you, would there be any advantage in making a starter versus just buying two smack-packs?

There are some advantages to doing that. You can brew on the spur of the moment. You have a lower risk of contamination. For a bigger beer, you might need to buy three or four vials or smack packs.

Eric

 

[ChrisKennedy]

There is a difference between adequate pitching rates and ideal pitching rates.

 

[SpanishCastleAle]

As much as I value Jamil's opinion (being a Brew God and all ;-) ), I also tend to believe Wyeast might have a pretty good handle on recommended pitching rates. Their chart/guide gives 6 million cells/ml as adequate for beers under 1.060.

That's probably because Wyeast has always claimed that their Activator packs are 'pitchable' for 5 gallons of beer under 1.060. So they needed to make sure their pitch rate calculator didn't say that they've been lying/mistaken for all this time.

 

[craigbrew]

save time and money by making a real wort starter.

 

[Laughing_Gnome_Invisible]

My trick for making starters is to add an extra half gallon or gallon onto a session beer brewday, pour some of the wort into cheap containers after chilling, and freeze them for later use as a starter.

To make a starter, I toss one or more quart-sized chunks of wortsicle into a saucepan, boil to sterilize, chill in the sink, pitch yeast, and chuck it on the stirplate.

It's more work at starter-making time than using pressure-canned wort, but doesn't require a pressure canner, and doesn't require that I keep extract on hand for starters. Grain is cheap. Extract, not so much. The extra effort over making starters from extract is minimal, especially since the extra effort required on brewday is vanishingly close to zero.

Word, +1 ....and other interwebby ways of agreeing.

 

[buffalobrewer]

I think "wortsicle" is my new favorite word!

I would do the wortsicles, but with all the hopsdirect shiny bags in my freezer I don't have any more room

 

[jpsloan]

I would do the wortsicles, but with all the hopsdirect shiny bags in my freezer I don't have any more room

Too many hopsicles to fit any wortsicles?

 

[mordantly]

i wish i suffered from that problem.. my freezer is full of 20# pork butt, and msc beef, chickens, sausage, etc. courtesy of my mommy. i even had to take my 6 pint glasses out for the space.

 

[ReeseAllen]

What benefit, other than faster fermentation, does using a starter give you over pitching the yeast straight from the packet, either dry or liquid? Every time I brew, I just open the yeast packet and dump it into the carboy and call it good, regardless of whether the recipe calls for a starter. The beer always ferments to the desired FG within two weeks and I end up with a giant yeast cake at the bottom of my carboy. Why bother with the starter?

 

[ChrisKennedy]

What benefit, other than faster fermentation, does using a starter give you over pitching the yeast straight from the packet, either dry or liquid? Every time I brew, I just open the yeast packet and dump it into the carboy and call it good, regardless of whether the recipe calls for a starter. The beer always ferments to the desired FG within two weeks and I end up with a giant yeast cake at the bottom of my carboy. Why bother with the starter?

It makes better beer.

 

[The Pol]

My method is this... for my first couple lagers, I pitched 2 packets of DRY lager yeast for a 6 gallon batch. Fermentation in 16 hours, cold pitched.

When both beers are ready to go to the kegs to lager, I am just going to pitch right on those cakes in those fermentors. Easier than washing, making a starter and repitching.

I love the power of dry yeast... in the future if I use liquid, I will probably make a 6 gallon batch and save a gallon to freeze to use as starter later. 2 pounds of grain to add an extra gallon to a brew session is like $1 for a gallon of starter wort.

For lagers, you really want to pitch a substantial amount of yeast. The byproducts of underpitching will be much more noticeable in a clean lager.

 

[MultumInParvo]

I would do the wortsicles, but with all the hopsdirect shiny bags in my freezer I don't have any more room

I drive by buffalo on my way home from school. I officially offer to help you out with having too many hops. I'll be sure to properly dispose of them too!

 

[passedpawn]

What benefit, other than faster fermentation, does using a starter give you over pitching the yeast straight from the packet, either dry or liquid? Every time I brew, I just open the yeast packet and dump it into the carboy and call it good, regardless of whether the recipe calls for a starter. The beer always ferments to the desired FG within two weeks and I end up with a giant yeast cake at the bottom of my carboy. Why bother with the starter?

Your yeast is reproducing a lot, which produces lots of estery flavors. A big starter produces a cleaner, crisper beer.

If you are brewing hefe's or belgians, then you might want to underpitch. For a lager, you need a ton of yeast.

 

[ReeseAllen]

Your yeast is reproducing a lot, which produces lots of estery flavors. A big starter produces a cleaner, crisper beer.

If you are brewing hefe's or belgians, then you might want to underpitch. For a lager, you need a ton of yeast.

I brew IPA, American Pale Ale, and tomorrow my first hefe. I don't drink or brew lagers. Do I really need to bother with the starter?

 

[JKoravos]

That's probably because Wyeast has always claimed that their Activator packs are 'pitchable' for 5 gallons of beer under 1.060. So they needed to make sure their pitch rate calculator didn't say that they've been lying/mistaken for all this time.

That's pretty much been my take on Wyeast's calculator, it just doesn't sit right with me the way the pitching rate steps up at certain gravities. A step function in yeast pitching rate doesn't make sense to me.

Also, I believe that I read somewhere that Jamil helped Wyeast with their calculator. That would make it even more weird.

 

[The Pol]

I brew IPA, American Pale Ale, and tomorrow my first hefe. I don't drink or brew lagers. Do I really need to bother with the starter?

Depends, are you using liquid yeast? If so, then yes, unless you are pitching more than one pack. What is your OG? Depending on that, yes.

Different OGs require different pitching rates, you need to know what the optimum pitch rate is for your particular beer, and then know how much you are pitching into it. There is no hard and fast rule that fits all, it depends on the OG and what yeast you are using.

 

[remilard]

I think "wortsicle" is my new favorite word!

On-topic: Here's a question from the converse position... if money's not a problem for you, would there be any advantage in making a starter versus just buying two smack-packs?

Yes, depending on several factors the yeast you buy is probably a week old or older. Making a starter allows you to pitch more viable yeast and to get a more consistent viability batch to batch.

 

[passedpawn]

I brew IPA, American Pale Ale, and tomorrow my first hefe. I don't drink or brew lagers. Do I really need to bother with the starter?

The hefe won't matter much, because it relies on yeast esters for some of its character.

The IPA's hop bitterness and aroma will hide the potential effects of underpitching.

The Pale Ale absolutely should be pitched properly. It is the one most likely to affected.

I always, always make a starter because I have to. All my yeast is in the form of 15ml frozen tubes. I step them up to 250ml, then 2L, then 4L before I pitch.

 

[Beernewb]

i kinda feel the same way here, mr malt, mr malty, mr malty....

obviously wyeast knows a thing or two about yeast....and beer.

people wouldn't buy their product...and continue buying their product if it didn't work....they have no reason to tell you their activator is enough for 5 gallons of 1.060 or under wort unless it is. sometimes the best beer is made just by keeping it simple. i did the bee cave robust porter with two paks of the activator, had an og of 1.074, a crazy blow-off and and excellent beer after 5 weeks in the primary and 3 in the bottle that gets better and better every week.

As much as I value Jamil's opinion (being a Brew God and all ;-) ), I also tend to believe Wyeast might have a pretty good handle on recommended pitching rates. Their chart/guide gives 6 million cells/ml as adequate for beers under 1.060.



Yep, that's what I do now that I've gone to all-grain batches. If you use a paint strainer bag inside of a pot, you can even do a 150F mini mash in the oven with fairly easy cleanup. A quart of 1.040 wort costs me ~$0.32. BUT...it's much less work to not have to sterilize the wort after the mash, and just pay the extra $1.25 for the larger smack pack.

As I said before, if you're a yeast rancher, starters are just a way of life.