!!! My Hydrolock Is Not Bubblin Is My Beer Ruined What To Do Help Me ASAP !!!

[Miraculix]

Are you saying that yeast below 0C can't be damaged by moisture (from humidity)? If so, are you certain of that, and how?

Because water is solid and bacterial growth won't happen. It also won't get into the cell. It's literally frozen.

 

[Miraculix]

Yes, we have talked about that. You suggested freezer storage and I replied that I had thought about that but didn't dare to because of my concern that cycles of thawing would condensate moisture and when it freezes back ice would damage the yeast cells.
Now I've learned the microscopic amounts of moisture don't even need to be frozen to damage the yeast.

I remember you told you got no problems with your freezer method. Well, neither had I, keeping taped sachets in the fridge at 4C.
Until now.

The water doesn't damage the cell at 4 degrees. It wakes the cell up and then it dies because there is no food. The dead cell will be good food for bacteria and so on....

Once it's frozen, this stuff doesn't happen.

 

[Protos]

The case is not about infection, not at all.
It's about the uninfected yeast that unexpectedly died out in 4 months.
Moisture is the only feasible explanation I can think of, although the dead yeast didn't look moist or clumped when I pitched it into the wort. It had an unusual smell however.

 

[passedpawn]

Didn't we talk about this topic somewhere else? Just tape the opening with regular gafa or whatever tape and throw them immidiately into the freezer. That solves all issues you might have otherwise. A tigth seal is not important anymore once below 0C.

That might work, no idea.

10+ years ago, there was period of time where Lallemand's Nottingham yeast was producing many bad batches for people everywhere. During that time, I had a bad batch that I blamed on Notty and never used that yeast again. Eventually, Lallemand determined that "microholes" where being punched into the sachet by the machine that stamped the expiration date on there. Those holes led to awful performance of the affected yeast do to prolonged oxidation. For that reason, I have never attempted to save a partial sachet of dry yeast.

I can't find record of this, maybe somebody with better google-fu can.

 

[Protos]

It wakes the cell up and then it dies because there is no food. The dead cell will be good food for bacteria and so on....

I agree with this.
But anyway, thawing cycles are unavoidable. Even during the brief moment I weight out a dose from the frozen sachet. It condenses moisture from the air, juices inside the cell thaw as well, and then I freeze the thawed cell again. I don't think such a cell has much chances of waking up at the next thaw cycle.

 

[Protos]

I can't find record of this, maybe somebody with better google-fu can

I read about that. I wasn't a homebrewer back then, though.
The yeast in question was a good one, nothing to blame on Lallemand. I made an excellent Porter with this same sachet 4 months before this strange thing happened.

 

[VikeMan]

Because water is solid and bacterial growth won't happen. It also won't get into the cell. It's literally frozen.

Water is solid. Water vapor is not.

The water doesn't damage the cell at 4 degrees. It wakes the cell up and then it dies because there is no food. The dead cell will be good food for bacteria and so on....

Once it's frozen, this stuff doesn't happen.

Please provide evidence that water vapor can't penetrate a "frozen" dried yeast cell. I asked how you know that yeast below 0C can't be damaged by moisture (from humidity). "Because it's literally frozen" doesn't convince me. And a simple statement that "water doesn't damage the cell at 4 degrees" (or any specific temp) doesn't convince me.

Here's what the late Dr. Clayton Cone (of Lallemand) once wrote (emphasis mine):
"Active Dry Yeast, at <5% moisture, is originally packaged in an oxygen free atmosphere either via nitrogen flush or vacuum. Under these conditions they will lose about 20% activity / year when stored at 20C (68F) and about 5% activity / year when stored at 4C (40F). It is the presence of Oxygen and the pick up of small amounts of moisture that causes the yeast to deteriorate at a faster rate, once the package has been opened. If you can vacuum pack (kitchen vacuum package equipment)or store in an air tight container and refrigerate you may retain a substantial amount of the activity. It would be wise to increase the inoculum 50% to be on the safe side. It is always a gamble, depending on how much moisture the cells have picked up each time you open and close the package and return to the refrigerator."

No mention of bacteria being the principal probem, or even any mention at all. He talked about deterioration, i.e. damage.

Again, I'm not saying you are wrong when you say that "frozen" dry yeast can't be damaged by moisture, but I've seen nothing authoritative to convince me of that.

 

[Miraculix]

Do you ever saw dry stuff get wet while being frozen (including everything surrounding it and the way itself)?

 

[Protos]

I feel the question a bit tough on Miraculix. Few of us can prove our homebrewing practices and conceptions with links or authorities. Nobody writes manuals for frugal homebrewers on how to split a dried yeast sachet between 4 small batches, brewed in a course of a year
Me, f. ex., I can't scientifically ground my practice of resealing yeast sachets, I just do that and it works in most cases. Statistically, with this method I encountered a 1% bacterial issues and 0.5% moisture issues failure rate to date, which is an acceptable risk.
As far as I know from our conversation, Miraculix freezes his yeasts successfully and his failure rate is probably even lower than mine.

 

[VikeMan]

I feel the question a bit tough on Miraculix. Few of us can prove our homebrewing practices and conceptions with links or authorities.

I have no problem at all with people relating their experiences and saying "I do "X" and I've never had an issue." But sweeping absolute statements that are not supported (if they turn out to be incorrect or incomplete) can cause problems for people who see them and rely on them. If something is not generally accepted common knowledge, it pays to apply Carl Sagan's standard of "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” Otherwise, it's just anecdotes, and shouldn't be presented as fact. <climbing down from soapbox>

 

[hotbeer]

But it was stated in the OP. He is measuring gravity. I posted his quote, but here it is again.

So the way you posted it originally didn't look like it came from the same quote. If you'd quoted the same verbiage in one quote box and bolded the statements it would have been more obvious to me.

Still why do you feel it's so important to point out another's transgression and fill up this thread with useless comments. After all it was just a quick question and the OP satisfied me afterward with their reply.

Perhaps I too could ignore your jab, but I have adult ADHD. So I tend to be in a hurry and skim what I read way to fast. And I'm inclined to defend myself!

Otherwise don't worry about it. I'm not bent out of shape at you. Just wondering why you feel compelled to point out mistakes of others. Or how it helps anything if there aren't arguments based on that mistake.

 

[Protos]

My humble, intentionally silly-titled thread is getting to be a bit hotter place than I expected.
Gentlemen, all of you are awesome with your valuable inputs, and the Old Slug Porter in question is happily bubbling in the room.
Today, I put another fermenter next to it: I brewed a Samuel Smith Nut Brown Ale clone, fermented with Lalbrew Windsor. Hope it starts well.
Peace and cheers!

 

[Protos]

Well, a follow-up.
The beer is ready, carbonated and long bottle-conditioned. A tasty Porter, light in Alcohol (4%) but pretty chewy (84% Pale Ale, 8% Dark Crystal, 8% Black Patent). It would make a very nice beer if not the soapy twang in it.
As I understand, the soap offlavour has something to do with decomposed lipids from dead yeast cells. I've had that twang once, when I left a Burton Ale in the primary on the lees for 4 months. Here, just 3 weeks of primary. And still.
I'll drink the batch up, it's not as bad as to dump it. As the last shot in a long session, probably, when the tastebuds are numbed.

My takeaway is that even 4 days on dead yeast pre-fermentation fill the beer with autolysis (or whatever else that soap comes from) flavours.

 

[balrog]

I've done plenty of 3 week primaries and never experienced soap.
Or twang for that matter, that wasn't obviously due to kveik for instance.

 

[Protos]

I always do 3-week primaries (except for Weizens and for ultra-low-gravity Bitters) and I never experience soap.
Except two instances of my total 271 (yeah, that many I've added to the 258 in the original post of Oct 13!) batches: a Burton 4 months on the lees and this Porter with two unsuccessful dead yeast inoculations.
Then, 3 weeks of normal fermentation with a fresh yeast (at the day 4), and still the soapy twang.

 

[Miraculix]

I always do 3-week primaries (except for Weizens and for ultra-low-gravity Bitters) and I never experience soap.
Except two instances of my total 271 (yeah, that many I've added to the 258 in the original post!) batches: a Burton 4 months on the lees and this Porter with two unsuccessful dead yeast inoculations.
Then, 3 weeks of normal fermentation with a fresh yeast (at the day 4), and still the soapy twang.

If you get excessive amount of trub into the primary, this could cause this. The fatty acids in the trub get saponified with excessive time.

If you don't have the excessive amount of trub, no problem.

... Or maybe a mix with the yeast autolysis?

 

[Protos]

Did not have any excess trub in this batch. A perfectly normal batch, just two inoculations of dead yeast in course of 4 days.
When I do have excess trub (and I do often), I don't get soap.
The soap comes exclusively from the dead yeast, I'm sure. All other variables are just like in my other good beers.

 

[Miraculix]

Did not have any excess trub in this batch. A perfectly normal batch, just two inoculations of dead yeast in course of 4 days.
When I do have excess trub (and I do often), I don't get soap.
The soap comes exclusively from the dead yeast, I'm sure. All other variables are just like in my other good beers.

Then...... It might be the yeast!

 

[Protos]

I think so too.
If I knew that, I'd dump the batch pre-reinoculation.
Now, when it's ready... I never dump my beers. (Well, I did that maybe once or twice when I was gettin not just a substandard beer but a pure horror in the bottle, like for example my latest "Rosenwein" with 20% of schitty Wodka with beautiful Rose petals steeped in it).
So now I have a new addition to the long queue of "last shots" to my extensive drinking sessions, which happen not as often as I would have wanted them to, I must admit

 

[Miraculix]

I think so too.
If I knew that, I'd dump the batch pre-reinoculation.
Now, when it's ready... I never dump my beers. (Well, I did that maybe once or twice when I was gettin not just a substandard beer but a pure horror in the bottle, like for example my latest "Rosenwein" with 20% of schitty Wodka with beautiful Rose petals steeped in it).
So now I have a new addition to the long queue of "last shots" to my extensive drinking sessions, which happen not as often as I would have want them to, I must admit

I actually started to dump more stuff. My girlfriend made a fair point once "don't drink what you do not like, because there's just no point in it". She's right. Plus I really like brewing, a dumper means I can brew again quicker. If I got a beer that's substandard, down the drain it goes, empty bottles here we go.

 

[Protos]

I would do the same if here, in The Valley of Tears, brewing ingredients didn't cost me about twice as much as in Europe.
Mr Protos MUST drink what he brews That's good. Combined with prolific brewing, it teaches responcibility in recipe and technique choise

 

[VikeMan]

As I understand, the soap offlavour has something to do with decomposed lipids from dead yeast cells.

Another possibility (besides a large amount of trub, since that's already been discussed), is lipids from the malt. They are fairly small and don't (necessarily) have to ride along with trub. A good vorlauf can help prevent excessive lipids from malt. If you've ever noticed that dull, greyish fatty layer on top of a grain bed, that's (partly) lipids.

 

[Protos]

I don't know. I've brewed with the same batch of malt before and since that unfortunate brew and didn't notice anything unusual.
The only variable was the yeast.
The only thing I wonder, is how did the dead yeast have the time to leave a pronounced soapy flavour during a standard-length fermentation. 25 days in a 6L / 1.5G fermenter is definitely not enough for the real autolysis to manifest.

 

[VikeMan]

25 days in a 6L / 1.5G fermenter is definitely not enough for the real autolysis to manifest.

Depends on what you mean by real. Autolysis is happening all the time. With liquid yeast, it's happening in the package. With dry yeast, it's happening as soon as it's rehydrated. (Not to mention that the dry yeast packs probably contain some cells that were autolyzed before drying.) Yeast health, wort/beer conditions, and time will ultimately drive the rates.

I'm always baffled by comments (not yours) like "autolysis doesn't happen at the homebrew level." It does. The important question is at what point it becomes detectable and how bad.

 

[mac_1103]

The only thing I wonder, is how did the dead yeast have the time to leave a pronounced soapy flavour during a standard-length fermentation. 25 days in a 6L / 1.5G fermenter is definitely not enough for the real autolysis to manifest.

Another thing you might wonder is whether the dead yeast in those sachets really contain enough lipid to be the sources of the soapy flavor even if completely autolysed. I doubt that it's within several orders of magnitude of what you have at the bottom of your FV after fermentation is complete.

 

[Protos]

Depends on what you mean by real.

My definition is "above my personal taste threshold". Which is apparently high, since I've experienced the soap only once, and the reasons were obvious to me: too long in a primary. Now, the reasons are more obscure which confuses me.

I doubt that it's within several orders of magnitude of what you have at the bottom of your FV after fermentation is complete.

Exactly. The volume of trub/yeast was not larger than in a perfectly normal batch.