Starter and stir plate with dry yeast?

[Knutz38]

I'm new to this and have done only 2 batches so far. In both I used liquid yeast with a starter AND a stir plate and got great fermentation activity.
I'd like to know if a stir plate can be used with a starter using dry yeast?

Thanks for the replies

 

[BigFloyd]

Can you? Yes.

Should you? No.

 

[kombat]

You CAN, but you shouldn't.

Dry yeast is packaged with the necessary reserves already built in to them so they're ready to just wake up and go straight to work on your actual beer. When you use them in a starter, they deplete those energy stores fermenting the starter wort, such that when you pitch them into the main wort, they're tired and spent.

Dry yeast is cheap. If you need a higher cell count, just pitch multiple packs. And rehydrate your dry yeast first - don't just sprinkle it in dry!

 

[cluckk]

I've always done liquid yeast with starters and it is the best practice. However, this year I have been experimenting with dry yeasts. I will probably only make a couple batches that use liquid this year. The nice thing about dry is that the packets are cheap enough that when you need more yeast, you buy another packet. I think I'm getting spoiled because dry yeast is so easy.

 

[Quaker]

Absolutely you can and it will help. At a minimum it's recommended to hydrate your dry yeast to avoid immediately killing a percentage of the population by over stressing them by pitching directly into wort. Waking them up with a starter is always a good idea. It will help reduce lag time after pitching. It also gives assurance your pack wasn't mistreated by proving if they are viable beforehand.

Must you, no. But you will get a healthier fermentation.

 

[andy6026]

Not to take this off topic, but can you wash and save dry yeast after it's been used, and then make a starter when re-using?

 

[kombat]

Absolutely you can and it will help. Waking [dry yeast] up with a starter is always a good idea. It will help reduce lag time after pitching. [Y]ou will get a healthier fermentation.

No offense Quaker, I know you're just trying to help, but your comments contradict all credible literature on dry yeasts. I'm sure you have the best intentions, but all yeast manufacturers and every brewing book I've ever read advises NOT to do a yeast starter with dry yeast. They recommend rehydrating in 10x the yeast's weight in boiled and cooled plain water at around 80° F for 30 minutes. But definitely NOT a starter.

I don't know if your information is simply out of date or you're misinformed, but your advice is inaccurate.

 

[kombat]

Not to take this off topic, but can you wash and save dry yeast after it's been used, and then make a starter when re-using?

Absolutely, I do this all the time.

 

[WildGingerBrewing]

Absolutely you can and it will help. At a minimum it's recommended to hydrate your dry yeast to avoid immediately killing a percentage of the population by over stressing them by pitching directly into wort. Waking them up with a starter is always a good idea. It will help reduce lag time after pitching. It also gives assurance your pack wasn't mistreated by proving if they are viable beforehand.

Must you, no. But you will get a healthier fermentation.

I have started making starters with my dry yeast. I tried it just for the helluvit about 6 months ago and the results have been great. My fermentation starts MUCH quicker, and by "much" I mean within 2-3 hours the wort is churning away. I am also seeing much better attenuation. My last 3 beers have all finished at 1.005 or 1.004 from a 1.060 or 1.058. Typically, fermentation finishes at a 1.012 or 1.010. It might not be a recommended practice, but as long as I keep getting great results, I won't stop doing it.

 

[Quaker]

Did a quick check. This is from Palmer's How To Brew. Stand a bit corrected, although I wouldn't change my practices. If the properly prepared wort is good enough for liquid yeast, it will be for dry as well.

 

[Knutz38]

One last thing. If the dry yeast is pitched into the wort, shouldn't the jug be shaken quite a bit to get the yeast dispersed throughout the wort?

 

[WildGingerBrewing]

Did a quick check. This is from Palmer's How To Brew. Stand a bit corrected, although I wouldn't change my practices. If the properly prepared wort is good enough for liquid yeast, it will be for dry as well.

View attachment 173616

"proof the yeast by adding 1 tsp of extract or sugar..." That's what a starter is! I disagree with the ones saying it "shouldn't be done" as I have numerous gallons of good beer proving other wise. I have also pitched dry yeast directly into the wort with no rehydrating or starter and have never had an issue with that either. Personally I wouldn't recommend pitching it dry, but I know it works and my brew buddy only pitches dry yeast, dry.

Edit: Yes, shake the crap out of it to disperse and aerate the wort.

 

[duboman]

Boydster put together a terrific stickie about dry yeast in the Fermentation forum that i highly recommend you read as it pulls a lot of correct information together and corrects some misconceptions.

My chime in, starters are not recommended for new packets of dry yeast and I get this info from the great microbiologists that I've spoken personally with at the Siebel Institute that produce Llalemand and Danstar Yeasts. Once the yeast has been used in a batch, yes it can be washed and harvested and then a starter should be used fro subsequent batches. This is where some of the misconceptions arise.

 

[BigFloyd]

Did a quick check. This is from Palmer's How To Brew. Stand a bit corrected, although I wouldn't change my practices. If the properly prepared wort is good enough for liquid yeast, it will be for dry as well.

Sorry my fellow HBTer, but you're quoting an outdated version of "How to Brew". John Palmer has discarded the idea of "proofing" dry yeast (which is, as you noted, quite different from making a starter with it).

In order to see any significant net gain in the cell count from a pack of dry yeast (which is already around 200-220 billion), you'd have to first rehydrate it (to avoid killing cells by pitching dry into starter wort) and then make about a 2L starter. Considering the cost of DME and the effort one must go to in prepping a starter, it makes more sense to buy an extra packet (or packets) of dry yeast for ales over 1.060 or lagers (which need double the pitch rate of ales).

Having the fermentation kick off within 2-3 hours of pitching isn't as great a thing as you might think. It's most likely a sign of either too high of a pitch temperature and/or over-pitching (shortening or even skipping the important aerobic lag-reproductive phase).

 

[kombat]

If the properly prepared wort is good enough for liquid yeast, it will be for dry as well

Why would you assume that?

All the literature I've read on yeast claims in fact the opposite is true.

 

[kombat]

I have started making starters with my dry yeast. I tried it just for the helluvit about 6 months ago and the results have been great. My fermentation starts MUCH quicker, and by "much" I mean within 2-3 hours the wort is churning away.

The ideas that the purpose of a starter is to speed up the start of fermentation, or that a quick start to fermentation is even a desirable thing, are incorrect.

A yeast starter has but one purpose: To grow the appropriate number of yeast cells to ferment the main wort. Pitching the correct number of cells decreases the lag phase (as they don't need to multiply as much), so if one is used to chronically underpitching their yeast, the experience of a faster kickoff might seem novel, but in fact it is merely what they should have been doing all along. It is the "normal" start to fermentation, as opposed to the weak, sluggish start they're used to due to underpitching.

 

[WildGingerBrewing]

The ideas that the purpose of a starter is to speed up the start of fermentation, or that a quick start to fermentation is even a desirable thing, are incorrect.

A yeast starter has but one purpose: To grow the appropriate number of yeast cells to ferment the main wort. Pitching the correct number of cells decreases the lag phase (as they don't need to multiply as much), so if one is used to chronically underpitching their yeast, the experience of a faster kickoff might seem novel, but in fact it is merely what they should have been doing all along. It is the "normal" start to fermentation, as opposed to the weak, sluggish start they're used to due to underpitching.

I agree with this. This purpose of a starter is to produce more yeast. But a slow start to fermentation can cause stress on the yeast and produce off-flavors. So a faster start is more desirable. That is not to say over-pitching is the "recommended" thing to do, and maybe by making a starter with dry yeast, I am over-pitching. That being said, the results speak for themselves. And until I make a beer this way, that sucks, and sucks due to the yeast and not a procedural error on my part, I will continue to make starters.

As with everything in this hobby, ask 100 people a question, and you will get 95 different answers. Regardless of what others say, or you read in books, if it works for you, then it obviously works. Why would you stop doing something that works, just because other people said you should? In the many years I have been brewing (about 20 off and on), I do very little of the same things I did when I first started. I read every book and took all of the advice I could get. And it was a great base of knowledge. But trial and error over the years has given me a proven method and procedure that works for me every time. This hobby is about "creation" and "design". If you are afraid to make a mistake, try new things and, *gasp*, dump a batch, then you are just going through the motions. Step outside the box every now and then. And if what you are doing works for you, then by all means continue to do it.

 

[kombat]

Why would you stop doing something that works, just because other people said you should?

Out of a desire for perfection, or at least improvement.

WildGinger, you make a lot of good points, and I'm with you 100% with regard to trying new things, breaking the rules sometimes, and experimenting. That's a big part of the fun of this (or any) hobby, in my opinion.

The yeast argument is pretty well-researched and documented, such that we don't need to resort to subjective, ambiguous experience and anecdotes. We know what the yeast are doing, and how best to prepare them for battle. Sure, sending them in unprepared or outnumbered will still work, and can even still produce great-tasting beer. But surely you'd agree that following "proper" protocol will usually result in even better beer.

The science is pretty clear on the dry yeast topic. If you pitch dry yeast directly into wort (which is what you're doing when you use them in a starter), you're killing up to half of the cells right off the bat. The starter could potentially grow those cells back up to their full potential, but doesn't that seem kind of pointless? You've wasted all that time and money to grow the same number of cells you would have had in the first place if you'd simply followed proper rehydration protocol in plain water. Why waste your time and money? If you need more cells, why not just buy another pack of yeast?

If you're properly rehydrating your dry yeast in the recommended amount of plain, sterile water, at the recommended temperature, and then pitching it into a starter, then you may have a case for increasing your cell count, but it's not clear to me that that's what you were describing, nor am I convinced this is any cheaper than just buying another pack. Finally, the good folks who actually produce and sell the yeast (whom I assume know what they're talking about) advise against the practice, as it depletes the energy reserves their scientists have worked hard to build into the dry yeast.

I'm all for experimentation and thinking outside the box, and I would never conform to doing something just because everyone else does it without understanding the "why" of it, but the research on this topic is pretty conclusive. Properly preparing your yeast simply results in less stress on the yeast, which directly translates into fewer esters and better tasting beer.

If you're happy with "good," then keep doing what you're doing. But I prefer to strive for "better."

 

[WildGingerBrewing]

Out of a desire for perfection, or at least improvement.

WildGinger, you make a lot of good points, and I'm with you 100% with regard to trying new things, breaking the rules sometimes, and experimenting. That's a big part of the fun of this (or any) hobby, in my opinion.

The yeast argument is pretty well-researched and documented, such that we don't need to resort to subjective, ambiguous experience and anecdotes. We know what the yeast are doing, and how best to prepare them for battle. Sure, sending them in unprepared or outnumbered will still work, and can even still produce great-tasting beer. But surely you'd agree that following "proper" protocol will usually result in even better beer.

The science is pretty clear on the dry yeast topic. If you pitch dry yeast directly into wort (which is what you're doing when you use them in a starter), you're killing up to half of the cells right off the bat. The starter could potentially grow those cells back up to their full potential, but doesn't that seem kind of pointless? You've wasted all that time and money to grow the same number of cells you would have had in the first place if you'd simply followed proper rehydration protocol in plain water. Why waste your time and money? If you need more cells, why not just buy another pack of yeast?

If you're properly rehydrating your dry yeast in the recommended amount of plain, sterile water, at the recommended temperature, and then pitching it into a starter, then you may have a case for increasing your cell count, but it's not clear to me that that's what you were describing, nor am I convinced this is any cheaper than just buying another pack. Finally, the good folks who actually produce and sell the yeast (whom I assume know what they're talking about) advise against the practice, as it depletes the energy reserves their scientists have worked hard to build into the dry yeast.

I'm all for experimentation and thinking outside the box, and I would never conform to doing something just because everyone else does it without understanding the "why" of it, but the research on this topic is pretty conclusive. Properly preparing your yeast simply results in less stress on the yeast, which directly translates into fewer esters and better tasting beer.

If you're happy with "good," then keep doing what you're doing. But I prefer to strive for "better."

I do not believe this statement to be true. And if you look at the Fermentis website, it even states that a proper method for pitching is to pitch directly into wort, without rehydration. If this kills "up to half the yeast", why would be a recommended procedure? I cannot speak of any other dry yeast other than Safale S-05, because it is the only one I use. If other brands show differently, then so be it.

As far as "good" versus "better", I invite you over anytime you are in the Dallas area for a beer and you can be the judge. As I said, years of brewing have lead to my current process.

All of this being said, I don't use dry yeast for all of my beers. I use liquid yeast with a starter, for probably 3/4 of them. The OP asked if it was OK to make starter with dry yeast, and in my experience, the answer is "yes". If you do not agree with that, I can live with that and we can agree to disagree.

One last thing, even though I do make a starter with dry yeast, it is NOT the most cost effective way to brew. Dry yeast is cheap. But so is DME. I don't mind the extra money and time it takes to do it. If you are brewing on a limited budget, then by all means, don't make a starter with dry yeast.

 

[boydster]

There is nothing to disagree with when someone makes a factual statement like "If you pitch dry yeast directly into wort (which is what you're doing when you use them in a starter), you're killing up to half of the cells right off the bat." If you are looking for proof to backup that statement, you need only refer to cell counts done by Sean Terrill, Clayton Cone, or any reputable source that has experimented with using dry yeast. If you want the most from the dry cells in the packet, you need to rehydrate them in warm water first.

Now, if you are rehydrating the yeast and then tossing it into a typical 1L starter, you aren't going to have enough sugar to allow for healthy growth. You would basically be aging the yeast cells and encouraging VERY little cell growth, so the colony that you pitch would be mostly old, scarred cells that may or may not survive the entire fermentation. That clearly is not an advantage and would negate the very purpose of making a starter. A 2L starter will result in more growth, but to really have an optimal growth rate and the healthiest possible colony, you'd have to make a 3L-4L starter, and you'd have a colony of 380+ billion with just a 3L starter - that's more than most folks need to ferment a 5 gallon batch.

The discussion about nutrient reserves and depleting energy has some merits, but only so far. Once the yeast is rehydrated, it has been designed to have the nutrients it needs for a burst of energy after about 30 minutes so it can make its way through the lag phase quickly (from Clayton Cone: "We have built into each cell a large amount of glycogen and trehalose that give the yeast a burst of energy to kick off the growth cycle when it is in the wort."). If you are making a sufficiently large starter so you can ensure you are pitching a sufficient number of healthy, young cells then the point is moot, but that means making a larger starter than most beginners have the equipment or the use for. Plus, a 4L starter will cost more than a second pack of 05, so why bother?

That brings us to this point: we're in the beginner section, and this is getting beyond how a beginner would use dry yeast, so the conversation comes back to: You generally should not make a starter with dry yeast, just buy an extra packet if you need more than what comes in a single pack.

 

[WildGingerBrewing]

There is nothing to disagree with when someone makes a factual statement like "If you pitch dry yeast directly into wort (which is what you're doing when you use them in a starter), you're killing up to half of the cells right off the bat." If you are looking for proof to backup that statement, you need only refer to cell counts done by Sean Terrill, Clayton Cone, or any reputable source that has experimented with using dry yeast. If you want the most from the dry cells in the packet, you need to rehydrate them in warm water first.

Now, if you are rehydrating the yeast and then tossing it into a typical 1L starter, you aren't going to have enough sugar to allow for healthy growth. You would basically be aging the yeast cells and encouraging VERY little cell growth, so the colony that you pitch would be mostly old, scarred cells that may or may not survive the entire fermentation. That clearly is not an advantage and would negate the very purpose of making a starter. A 2L starter will result in more growth, but to really have an optimal growth rate and the healthiest possible colony, you'd have to make a 3L-4L starter, and you'd have a colony of 380+ billion with just a 3L starter - that's more than most folks need to ferment a 5 gallon batch.

The discussion about nutrient reserves and depleting energy has some merits, but only so far. Once the yeast is rehydrated, it has been designed to have the nutrients it needs for a burst of energy after about 30 minutes so it can make its way through the lag phase quickly (from Clayton Cone: "We have built into each cell a large amount of glycogen and trehalose that give the yeast a burst of energy to kick off the growth cycle when it is in the wort."). If you are making a sufficiently large starter so you can ensure you are pitching a sufficient number of healthy, young cells then the point is moot, but that means making a larger starter than most beginners have the equipment or the use for. Plus, a 4L starter will cost more than a second pack of 05, so why bother?

That brings us to this point: we're in the beginner section, and this is getting beyond how a beginner would use dry yeast, so the conversation comes back to: You generally should not make a starter with dry yeast, just buy an extra packet if you need more than what comes in a single pack.

Again, you are talking about Lavilin and Danstar. I cannot speak to them because I have never used them. I can say for a FACT, that Fermentis' website says it is acceptable practice to pitch dry yeast directly into the wort without rehydration. Tell me why this would be acceptable if it kills half of their yeast?!?!?! I emailed Fermentis and am awaiting an answer. I will post it here when I get a response. Until then, brew on fellas

 

[boydster]

This is with US-05, NOT Danstar/Lallemond: http://seanterrill.com/2011/04/01/dry-yeast-viability/

It says just sprinkle into wort on the package because it is easy, it will technically work, and it doesn't scare beginners away from using their product. Liquid yeast packaging also says to just pitch without making a starter. In both cases, the goal is the same: make the product look as attractive and easy-to-use as possible for someone that hasn't used it before. For an experienced brewer, what it says on the packet doesn't matter because they will have done their own research and don't need to be babied through the process.

 

[boydster]

Here's a second experiment Sean Terrill did with 05: http://seanterrill.com/2011/07/29/dry-yeast-viability-take-two/

One more, from a different source, BKYeast: http://bkyeast.wordpress.com/2013/03/13/more-on-yeast-rehydration/

 

[kombat]

I do not believe this statement to be true. And if you look at the Fermentis website, it even states that a proper method for pitching is to pitch directly into wort, without rehydration.

Not exactly. The manufacturer's data sheet on the yeast does in fact first describe how to properly rehydrate the yeast.

It offers the "sprinkling dry" technique as an alternative, but it doesn't portray that as the "proper" method that you characterized it as.

If this kills "up to half the yeast", why would be a recommended procedure?

Why, because Fermentis is in the business of selling more yeast, of course.

As far as "good" versus "better", I invite you over anytime you are in the Dallas area for a beer and you can be the judge.

You pay for my plane ticket, and I'm there! It's currently -6° F (-18° F with the windchill) in my neck of the woods today. I imagine it's considerably more temperate in Dallas.

The OP asked if it was OK to make starter with dry yeast, and in my experience, the answer is "yes". If you do not agree with that, I can live with that and we can agree to disagree.

Absolutely. I'm simply pointing out that I have science, research, and books backing up my position, up against your own (dare I say "limited?") personal experience. It seems your argument is basically, "I did it and it still worked." Have you ever done a side-by-side comparison with the exact same wort, one pitching rehydrated dry yeast and the other pitching a dry yeast starter, and compared the resulting beers head-to-head? THAT would be an interesting data point.

 

[WildGingerBrewing]

This is with US-05, NOT Danstar/Lallemond: http://seanterrill.com/2011/04/01/dry-yeast-viability/

It says just sprinkle into wort on the package because it is easy, it will technically work, and it doesn't scare beginners away from using their product. Liquid yeast packaging also says to just pitch without making a starter. In both cases, the goal is the same: make the product look as attractive and easy-to-use as possible for someone that hasn't used it before. For an experienced brewer, what it says on the packet doesn't matter because they will have done their own research and don't need to be babied through the process.

Here's a second experiment Sean Terrill did with 05: http://seanterrill.com/2011/07/29/dry-yeast-viability-take-two/

One more, from a different source, BKYeast: http://bkyeast.wordpress.com/2013/03/13/more-on-yeast-rehydration/

Very interesting articles/studies. Thanks for the info. I will concede that scientifically I am wrong. I will, however, stand by the fact that it works for me.

Not exactly. The manufacturer's data sheet on the yeast does in fact first describe how to properly rehydrate the yeast.

It offers the "sprinkling dry" technique as an alternative, but it doesn't portray that as the "proper" method that you characterized it as.



Why, because Fermentis is in the business of selling more yeast, of course.



You pay for my plane ticket, and I'm there! It's currently -6° F (-18° F with the windchill) in my neck of the woods today. I imagine it's considerably more temperate in Dallas.



Absolutely. I'm simply pointing out that I have science, research, and books backing up my position, up against your own (dare I say "limited?") personal experience. It seems your argument is basically, "I did it and it still worked." Have you ever done a side-by-side comparison with the exact same wort, one pitching rehydrated dry yeast and the other pitching a dry yeast starter, and compared the resulting beers head-to-head? THAT would be an interesting data point.

Sunny and 43* here ha

I have never done a side-by-side comparison although it does sound like fun. Maybe I need to plan to do so. Regardless, this has been an interesting, if not informative, conversation. Cheers to you both!