I plan on brewing NB's Octoberfest this weekend. The OG of the 5-gallon extract kit is 1.058. My WYeast 1007 Smack Pack, which has been refrigerated upon arrival has a manufacturer date of Nov. 14, 2014. I just went to http://www.brewersfriend.com/yeast-pitch-rate-and-starter-calculator/ and put in the calcuations and it said, given my non-stir plate starter method I would need a 5L starter. The yeast is 86 days old and as a result has a 40% viability rate. Does this seem right?! I've never used a pitching calculator, but I didn't think a 5L starter would be necessary to brew a session beer. It's not like 1.058 is some barley wine. I get that the yeast is a little old, but a 5L starter?! Should I just make it in a gallon jug? Has anyone else ever needed a starter this big? I don't want to underpitch, but a 5L starter seems odd to me. Lastly, for my other starters I just used a 1L flask with a foam stopper. I now have an airlock that fits my gallon jug. Should I use that or put the foam stopper in the gallon jug? I've read conflicting things about using airlocks for starters. But, I use the airlock for a 1-gallon batch of beer, so what's the difference?
Really?! A 5L starter is necessary?
- Thread starter eadavis80
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
WoodlandBrew
Well-Known Member
Try this calculator:
http://www.woodlandbrew.com/2015/02/starter-calculator.html
The short answer is: no, you don't need a 5 liter starter.
A stirred starters produce cells faster, but given enough time a starter with only aeration at inoculation will produce nearly the same cell count.
Another option to a large starter is to do it like the professionals and propagate the cells in the fermenter. Add yeast and 1/10th of your wort. Aerate. Allow to propagate for a few days. Add the remainder of your wort. Aerate.
See Greg Dos Practical Pitching.
http://www.woodlandbrew.com/2015/02/starter-calculator.html
The short answer is: no, you don't need a 5 liter starter.
A stirred starters produce cells faster, but given enough time a starter with only aeration at inoculation will produce nearly the same cell count.
Another option to a large starter is to do it like the professionals and propagate the cells in the fermenter. Add yeast and 1/10th of your wort. Aerate. Allow to propagate for a few days. Add the remainder of your wort. Aerate.
See Greg Dos Practical Pitching.
Sounds like you might have set the calculator for lager yeast when 1007 is an ale yeast. Looks like you just need a little over 2L. The gallon jug will work fine - just put a piece of sanitized foil over the top.
No, I used the "ale" settings, not lager. So, if I were to make the starter tonight and just let it work for a few days (with a 2L starter) you think it would be good to go by Monday? Maybe even be done by Sunday to throw it in the fridge Sunday night and then decant, warm and pitch on Monday?
kombat
Well-Known Member
Jamil's calculator has a reputation for being a little overly-conservative with its calculations, but in general, it's better to overpitch than underpitch. I've had it suggest a 5L starter to me before, but that was with lager yeast. Using a stir plate will help considerably.
Here's one thing to watch out for that got me the first time. I brewed an Oktoberfest and the calculator prescribed a 4L starter. So I prepared the starter, on the stir plate, such that it was just finishing up and ready to be pitched on brew day. I racked the beer into the carboy, whipped up a good head of foam with my Fizz-X rod on a drill to aerate, then went to pour in my starter. It was at that point I realized that there was no way it would all fit in the carboy. I'd forgotten to account for the volume of the starter. 4L is not an insignificant volume of liquid to add to a 6.5 gallon carboy that already contains 5.5 gallons of beer and a thick layer of foam.
The point is, give yourself an extra couple of days on the tail end of preparing your starter to cold-crash it in the fridge and settle out the yeast so you can decant the spent starter wort and just pitch the yeast slurry.
Here's one thing to watch out for that got me the first time. I brewed an Oktoberfest and the calculator prescribed a 4L starter. So I prepared the starter, on the stir plate, such that it was just finishing up and ready to be pitched on brew day. I racked the beer into the carboy, whipped up a good head of foam with my Fizz-X rod on a drill to aerate, then went to pour in my starter. It was at that point I realized that there was no way it would all fit in the carboy. I'd forgotten to account for the volume of the starter. 4L is not an insignificant volume of liquid to add to a 6.5 gallon carboy that already contains 5.5 gallons of beer and a thick layer of foam.
The point is, give yourself an extra couple of days on the tail end of preparing your starter to cold-crash it in the fridge and settle out the yeast so you can decant the spent starter wort and just pitch the yeast slurry.
Haha, I've done that.
If you are going to make starters, get a big flask and make big ones every time. It's pretty hard to overpitch the yeast. I only make 4L starters (when I make them at all).
WoodlandBrew
Well-Known Member
A 2 liter starter without a stir plate should yield about 270 billion cells after 3.5 days. There is also statistical analysis to my calculator to show typical variation. The low side is 220 billion and the high side is 290 billion.
Yeah, I guess one thing the software doesn't seem to show is when you're making the starter and when you plan on pitching it. I have no problem making a starter tonight and having it mature over the weekend for a Monday brew day. It just seemed like 5L for an ale yeast with a beer under 1.060 was a lot. But, again, the yeast is several months old. I certainly plan to decant, provided the starter has done its thing by Sunday night, which I assume it would have if I make it tonight.
WoodlandBrew
Well-Known Member
That's been one of of my pet peeves as well which is why I implemented it in my starter calculator.
From the graph you can see that if you start a two liter starter tonight then by Sunday night you should have about 200 billion cells on the low end. Because the yeast has been refrigerated for a while I would guess that you'll be closer to the low estimate than the middle estimate.
soonerpike1748
Well-Known Member
That's an awesome calculator. I just made the jump to 15 gallon batches, so this will help me scale up my yeast starters. Thanks!
The response from WYeast themselves:
Hi Ed,
Short answer - I think a yeast starter would be a good idea for this batch, but it probably doesn't need to be as big as 5 liters.
A 5 liter starter may not be out of line for a big-ish lager to be pitched and fermented cold; but since you're using 1007, I'm guessing the O-fest will be fermented a bit warmer than would be the case if using a lager strain - is that correct?
If that is the case; and given that the pack is about 3 months into its 6 month viability-guarantee; and given that the OG is pretty much at the upper end of what we recommend for a single pack at ale temps (1.060), a yeast starter of about 2 liters (without a stir plate) should do the trick.
Cheers,
Michael
Wyeast Labs
Hi Ed,
Short answer - I think a yeast starter would be a good idea for this batch, but it probably doesn't need to be as big as 5 liters.
A 5 liter starter may not be out of line for a big-ish lager to be pitched and fermented cold; but since you're using 1007, I'm guessing the O-fest will be fermented a bit warmer than would be the case if using a lager strain - is that correct?
If that is the case; and given that the pack is about 3 months into its 6 month viability-guarantee; and given that the OG is pretty much at the upper end of what we recommend for a single pack at ale temps (1.060), a yeast starter of about 2 liters (without a stir plate) should do the trick.
Cheers,
Michael
Wyeast Labs
biertourist
Well-Known Member
Yep. Always listen to Steven-Woodland Brew when it comes to starters.
He's done a TON of great work debunking many of the starter myths and advice. He's specifically looked at the Mr. Malty viability rates.
-If I'm not mistaken, you'll get more cells by doing a smaller starter followed by a larger 2nd starter after decanting; too. But as quite a few people have already pointed out, you don't need to do that for this beer anyway.
Adam
He's done a TON of great work debunking many of the starter myths and advice. He's specifically looked at the Mr. Malty viability rates.
-If I'm not mistaken, you'll get more cells by doing a smaller starter followed by a larger 2nd starter after decanting; too. But as quite a few people have already pointed out, you don't need to do that for this beer anyway.
Adam
I went ahead - per the suggestions received - and made a 2L starter yesterday. Sounds like it will make a healthy batch of yeast for the next brew day, which is Monday. Sunday evening I'll throw it in the fridge and on Monday morning I'll decant and warm to room temp. Thanks all - happy brewing!
WoodlandBrew
Well-Known Member
Thanks for the kind words @bietourist. Your support is appreciated.
@eadavis80 Good luck on your brew!
@eadavis80 Good luck on your brew!
biertourist
Well-Known Member
I only give them when they're deserved; you've earned them the hard way.
I'm fully expecting your yeast calculator to do for us what Bru'nWater did for water calculators. There were so many inaccurate water calculators before Martin's Bru'nWater and now there's little reason to use anything else.
Hopefully you'll revise it quickly and regularly for the first few versions as necessary and then it won't be necessary any more.
Adam
Bamsdealer
Well-Known Member
I'd do a 3 quart beer in your gallon jug. Buy an Oz of centennial And brew your beer to 1.040. 20 min boil. Half at 20 min half at flameout. Should make 7 or so pale ales and a bunch of yeast.
Awesome that they responded. I had the same issue/question with the BF assumptions for viability. I'm curious what percentage WY themselves things should be used at 3 months and 6 months? I'm assuming not 100%, but also not <50% like the calculator says. Seems like an important variable.
Well, I made a 2-liter starter on Thursday and just put it in my fridge after having it ferment out 'till Sunday morning. I'll now cold crash it and then decant Monday morning for the Octoberfest brew day. I'll let you guys know how it goes. I think one thing on starters that's important to remember is that it's all about finding the right amount of yeast so that the yeast still need to reproduce when they get to the wort. If there is only a little need to reproduce, you're losing out on some of the important yeast flavors - at least according to what I've read. That being said, probably still better to overpitch than underpitch. But, if WYeast themselves suggested a 2-liter starter, that's what I had to go with.
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2012
- Messages
- 22
- Reaction score
- 1
If anyone is looking for an economically priced stir plate, you can pick one up for $45 from Adventures in Homebrewing. I purchased one last week, and I'm very satisfied with it. The guy that makes the stir plate - Dan of Stirstarters.com - guarantees it for life.
Here's the link: http://www.homebrewing.org/The-Stirstarter-Yeast-Stir-Plate-_p_1306.html
Here's the link: http://www.homebrewing.org/The-Stirstarter-Yeast-Stir-Plate-_p_1306.html
Yeah, I've looked at those. Just not sure if a stir plate is worth it. Sure, it makes more yeast cells in a hurry, but I can just start my starter a couple days earlier and probably end with close to the same amount of cells and save nearly $50. Plus, I don't make big beers anyway. It would be nice, but it's not a must have for me, personally.
WoodlandBrew
Well-Known Member
This seems to be a misconception that has been unfortunately widely propagated.
I'm sure Jamil Zainasheff had the best intentions when creating his Mr. Malty Starter Calculator, however it seems that brewers have taken the results out of context and drawn conclusions from the calculator that I doubt Jamil intend. The data behind the vastly popular Mr. Malty equation are from growth that had no aeration and no agitation. (See Yeast) This makes them highly suspect when used to predict growth on a stir plate or with any form of agitation for that mater. Oxygen is critical for sterol production in yeast. Without aeration an the onset of fermentation the yeast membranes will lack the pliability they need to bud new cells. Given proper aeration at inoculation yeast can double four times, growing to sixteen times the initial population. Without aeration, as was done by Chris White for the experiments that Jamil used for his calculator, the data show that cell budding was extremely limited.
So this is only true with certain assumptions. Chris White in the brewing elements yeast books says a starter produces 2-3x growth than a non-starter, and that shaking every single hour results in 2x more growth than no agitation at all.
So I think the issue comes down to how effective you can be with work and sleep and manually shaking the starter. Because if you aren't shaking to an ideal level, a stir plate does in fact mean more yeast growth.
I did shaking at first -- there's nothing wrong with being "non-ideal", most of my brewing process is -- but just built a DIY one for $17 and I had to buy everything but an old 2x4 and screws. I mostly did it so I could turn it on and forget about it. Yes it's very ugly.
So I think the issue comes down to how effective you can be with work and sleep and manually shaking the starter. Because if you aren't shaking to an ideal level, a stir plate does in fact mean more yeast growth.
I did shaking at first -- there's nothing wrong with being "non-ideal", most of my brewing process is -- but just built a DIY one for $17 and I had to buy everything but an old 2x4 and screws. I mostly did it so I could turn it on and forget about it. Yes it's very ugly.
WoodlandBrew
Well-Known Member
I'll have to find that section and read it again, but he is probably referring to growth 48 hours after inoculation. At that point in time, yes, there is considerable more growth with agitation. If a starter is allowed to run to completion the yield has been about the same ever time I have run the experiment and also in all the papers I have found where the method, including time line, is clearly identified.
My personal experience has been that I get significantly better growth on a stir plate. Just by looking at the volume of slurry in the end I'd say 50% better.
And the best part is I don't have to baby sit the damn thing. I set it and come back a day later. Done.
I certainly might get one eventually. It's one of the only pieces of equipment at this point I'm missing as an extract brewer. We'll see. I guess as long as I feel my fermentations are good, the question is now is "good" good enough?
WoodlandBrew
Well-Known Member
It sounds like the stir plate is working for you. That's great. No need to change what you are doing.
That's a fine way to compare yield if the wort was identical. Do you have some data that I could look at? Were the experiments the same except for agitation method?
Here is my most recent data:
http://www.woodlandbrew.com/2015/01/cell-density-meter-update.html
My blog has plenty more.
I've seen the same yield whether it shaken three times a day or just once at the onset.
I always use the same starter wort - Pilsen DME at a 10:1 ratio by weight, measured to the gram. My experiences are in no way scientific, and I don't claim them to be. It looks like you you've done much more rigorous work on this subject so I will trust your results reflect the truth more closely than my subjective experiences.
I am going to be starting a 3-stage starter process this week (1.5L->3L->6L). During one of the stages (probably the 3rd) i'll leave one of the flasks off the stir plate and compare the resulting slurry quantity with that of one of the stirred starters and see if there is a difference.
I am going to be starting a 3-stage starter process this week (1.5L->3L->6L). During one of the stages (probably the 3rd) i'll leave one of the flasks off the stir plate and compare the resulting slurry quantity with that of one of the stirred starters and see if there is a difference.
WoodlandBrew
Well-Known Member
That sounds solid assuming that you mean you are using two flasks for one of the stages. For the comparison perhaps you want to set up your final stage just how you normally would and let the stir plate run for a few minutes to homogenize the suspension. Then pour half into another vessel that is the same size as the one on the stir plate and let them propogate side by side. The one on the plate will probably finish in a couple of days, but you'll probably want to give the one off the plate about 10 days to reach completion.
So - Woodland Brew - here is my question given this passage from your previous post: " The one on the plate will probably finish in a couple of days, but you'll probably want to give the one off the plate about 10 days to reach completion." - Are you saying stir plates yield X amount of cells in Y amount of time while non-stir plate starters yield X amount of cells in Z amount of time? If a stir plate just gets to X cells SOONER, I have no problem starting a starter a few days earlier.
WoodlandBrew
Well-Known Member
Yes, that's a very clear way to communicate the idea.
Okay, so stir plates don't create more cells - they create the same amount of cells in less time. It's like burning calories on a treadmill. If I run 7.5 mph I'll burn in 25 minutes what a walker will burn in 90 or so.
I have 5 x 2L flasks so to up the volume I add flasks to my quad stir plate.
Step 1: 1 Flask x 1.5L each = 1.5L
Step 2: 2 Flasks x 1.5L each = 3.0L
Step 3: 4 Flasks x 1.5L each = 6.0L
Point taken about homogenizing it. I think at this point i'm just going skip the experiment since I can't really execute it properly. No sense in adding data that didn't come from a well controlled experiment.
