Starter for White Labs Necessary?

[RallyintheValley]

Hey all, I'm getting set to brew my second batch this weekend. It's Midwest Supplies' Irish Stout extract kit. All the reviews said to upgrade to the White Labs liquid yeast, so I did.
My question is, since it is a lower gravity beer, do I still need to make a starter? From what I've read/heard, starters are only necessary for OG's approaching 1.060 or so. This will be more like 1.040.
I'll be fermenting at room temperature, 72 degrees. I don't yet have the option of going any colder.

Thanks!

 

[SoonerDoc]

A starter shouldn't be necessary but you can always do one.

 

[pwndabear]

thats usually my temp as well. i have never made a starter with whitelabs and have always come out with good finished product and a fast starting fermentation. but it never hurts to make a starter

 

[Revvy]

A starter shouldn't be necessary but you can always do one.

*groan*

It's really a good idea to make starters when using ANY liguid yeast for all beers above 1.020 OG...

The biggest reason I suggest folks make a starter is if you make one you'll have peace of mind.

And you won't be starting an "is my yeast dead" thread in a couple of days. (Which then one of us will answer with...."Had you made a starter..."

Making a starter first insures that your yeast is still alive and viable before you dump it in your beer. You will be less likely to start one of those "is my yeast dead?" threads that are on here every day.

You will also ensure that you have enough yeast usually the tubes and smack packs are a lot less yeast that you really should use for healthy fermentation.

Making a starter also usually means your beer will take off sooner, because the first thing that the little buggers do in the presence of wort (whether in a flask or in a fermenter) is have an orgy to reproduce enough cells to do the job...So it won't take such a long time in the fermenter since they started doing it in the flask.

Additionally it is better for the yeast to consume and reproduce incrementally rather than just dumping them into the fermenter...The yeast will be less stressed out than if you just dump them in.

Stressed out yeast can lead to a lot of off flavors...maybe even (though rare) the dreaded autolysis....Or the curse of 1.030....getting a stuck fermentation because the yeast have bit the dust.

So making a starter proves your yeast is still healthy, allows you to grow enough yeast to do the job, cuts down on lag time, and ensures that you will not get off flavors or stuck ferementations from stressed out yeast.

Also has to do with the actual pitch rates of the smack packs and tubes, and has to do with the data that Jamil Z has on his mr malty website.

I'll quote some of it, but really you should look at the stuff there;

http://www.mrmalty.com/pitching.php

Ales & Lagers

The general consensus on pitching rates is that you want to pitch around 1 million cells of viable yeast, for every milliliter of wort, for every degree plato. A little less for an ale, a little more for a lager. George Fix states about 1.5 million for a lager and 0.75 million for an ale in his book, An Analysis of Brewing Techniques. Other literature cites a slightly higher amount. I'm going with Fix's numbers and that is what the pitching calculator uses.
The Math

If you're curious, here is the simple math to calculate the number of cells needed. For an ale, you want to pitch around 0.75 million cells of viable yeast (0.75 million for an ale, 1.5 million for a lager), for every milliliter of wort, for every degree plato.

(0.75 million) X (milliliters of wort) X (degrees Plato of the wort)

* There is about 3785 milliliters in a gallon. There are about 20,000 milliliters in 5.25 gallons.

* A degree Plato is about 1.004 of original gravity. Just divide the OG by 4 to get Plato (e.g., 1.048 is 12 degrees Plato).

So, for a 1.048 wort pitching into 5.25 gallons you need about 180 billion cells.

(750,000) X (20,000) X (12) = 180,000,000,000

As an easy to remember rough estimate, you need about 15 billion cells for each degree Plato or about 4 billion cells for each point of OG when pitching into a little over 5 gallons of wort. If you want a quick way of doing a back of the envelope estimate, that is really close to 0.75 billion cells for each point of gravity per gallon of wort. Double that to 1.5 billion for a lager.
Pitching From Tubes, Packs, or Dry Yeast

Both White Labs and Wyeast make fantastic products and you can't go wrong with either one. There are differences between their strains and each brand has pluses and minuses yet neither is better than the other across the board. Use the brand your local homebrew shop carries, if you need a way to decide.

A White Labs tube has between 70 and 120 billion cells of 100% viable yeast, depending on the yeast strain. Some cells are much larger than others and there are more or less per ml based on size. (The information on the White Labs web site stating 30 to 50 billion cells is out of date.) We can just assume there are around 100 billion very healthy yeast. You would need 2 tubes if you were pitching directly into 5.5 gallons of 1.048 wort to get the proper cell counts.

A Wyeast Activator pack (the really big ones) and the pitchable tubes have an average of 100 billion cells of 100% viable yeast. The smaller packs are around 15-18 billion cells. You would need 2 of the large packs if you were pitching directly into 5.5 gallons of 1.048 wort to get the proper cell counts. For the small packs, you'd need eleven of them!

But to make it easier he has a great pitch rate calculator http://www.mrmalty.com/calc/calc.html

And according to his numbers on his calculator, really any beer above 1.020, you should be making a starter for.

Me personally when I use liquid yeast I just make a starter. I may not be as anal as some brewers and makes sure that I have the exact cellcount for whatever gravity beer I am making, but I do make one for the above reasons I mentioned, namely peace of mid, and a reduction in lag time.

Seriously, that's one way to insure you have clean tasting beer, not to stress out or underpitch your yeast. You may find the "bothering" to make a starter will make even the less than best kit beer come out tasting great.

 

[Captain_Bigelow]

I have pitched many without starters with no problems. If you do create a starter though you will ensure your yeast is good and your fermentation will start quicker.

If you want to get cooler temps, try a swamp cooler. Lowes/ W-M have plastic pails which can be used for only about $7.

 

[j1laskey]

No, you shouldn't have to. I would take the vial out of the fridge approximately 3-6 hours prior to pitching. Shake well. On my brew day I will leave the vial on the counter and shake vigorusly off and on through out the brew day until I am ready to pitch. I have always used Whit Labs liquid yeast, and have never had a problem with stalled fermentation. You are using the Irish Ale Strain?

 

[RallyintheValley]

"I have always used Whit Labs liquid yeast, and have never had a problem with stalled fermentation. You are using the Irish Ale Strain?"

Yep Irish Ale.

After reading your responses, I'm actually thinking about not using a starter this time and brewing it again WITH a starter as my next batch. That way, I'll be able to fully understand the difference it makes taste-wise. And I promise not to start a "is my yeast dead" thread if the first one fails!

Revvy, thanks for the detailed response. I hadn't seen mrmalty before, so it was a good read. I'm obviously just starting out, and after reading your post I realized that if I want to eventually be really good at brewing, I should really just try both making a starter and not. I'm thinking the best way to fully grasp the process is trial and error!!

Thanks again everybody!

 

[Revvy]

"
Revvy, thanks for the detailed response. I hadn't seen mrmalty before, so it was a good read. I'm obviously just starting out, and after reading your post I realized that if I want to eventually be really good at brewing, I should really just try both making a starter and not. I'm thinking the best way to fully grasp the process is trial and error!!

Thanks again everybody!

No actually I think the way to be a really good brewer is to do it right the first time. And making a starter with liquid yeast IS the right way to do it. Why risk off flavors or stuck fermentations, or needless worry, when making a starter WILL guarantee that that won't happen?

Your "logic" makes no sense to me, it's not like we're talking about the choice between using a long primary or a secondary, or glass over plastic, the DATA on mr malty is right there to see, PLUS it gaurentees everything is going to work from the get go.

But hey, it's your beer.....

 

[Shooter]

I haven't made a starter on a few occasions. The first was a five gallon smoked porter, one of my first beers. I just dumped the tube into the wort. It was also a pretty hot ferment, quite possibly the worst beer I've ever made. It also developed a nice gusher infection months down the line. It really was a total disaster of a beer.

I've also pitched a swelled Wyeast smack pack into a two gallon batch on a couple of batches. Both of those turned out great, but these were two gallon batches with starting gravities somewhere in the mid 1.040 range. I recently made a five gallon batch of tafel bier. I will be tasting the first sample later this week. I pitched a swelled pack into that one as well. However, this was a pretty fresh pack going into a beer with a starting gravity of 1.026. So, I took a risk.

There are times when I’m okay without a starter, but not on any five gallon batch approaching anything near a normal starting gravity. I made a holiday ale on Sunday and pitched an 18 hour starter in it that evening, by the next morning I already had krausen in the fermenter. Once you see a beer take off like that a few times you begin to see the benefit of a yeast starter.

 

[Wilsons]

I had this very same question here a couple months back, with white labs yeast, theres so much disinformation out there, and so many differing opinions i figured i would go to the source, IE the experts and see what they had to say about it.

I spent a good 30 minutes talking to a specialist at white labs, and he stated there is absolutly NO REASON to make a starter below 1.060 OG, now he also said your not hurting anything by making a starter, but he reiterated by no means is it neccesary.

So basically, theres a million opinions either way, but the experts who create the product you are using, say theres no reason to, i went with their advice and have not had any problems

 

[Shooter]

I had this very same question here a couple months back, with white labs yeast, theres so much disinformation out there, and so many differing opinions i figured i would go to the source, IE the experts and see what they had to say about it.

I spent a good 30 minutes talking to a specialist at white labs, and he stated there is absolutly NO REASON to make a starter below 1.060 OG, now he also said your not hurting anything by making a starter, but he reiterated by no means is it neccesary.

So basically, theres a million opinions either way, but the experts who create the product you are using, say theres no reason to, i went with their advice and have not had any problems

Hmm, it will be interesting to compare this to the information in Chris White and Jamil's upcoming yeast book. I'm going out on a limb here and guessing they'll say to make a starter. I'm guessing this has to do with the difference between what's necessary and what's best practice.

 

[businesstime]

I spent a good 30 minutes talking to a specialist at white labs, and he stated there is absolutly NO REASON to make a starter below 1.060 OG, now he also said your not hurting anything by making a starter, but he reiterated by no means is it neccesary.

So basically, theres a million opinions either way, but the experts who create the product you are using, say theres no reason to, i went with their advice and have not had any problems

Clearly, Revy stated one very good reason to: peace of mind.

Experts definitely disagree from time to time, but it's very evident that there's a collective trend with all homebrewers to use starters and it hasn't always been the case. I can tell from my batches that the switch to starters has improved the quality of my beer.

 

[kevmoron]

*groan*

It's really a good idea to make starters when using ANY liguid yeast for all beers above 1.020 OG...

The biggest reason I suggest folks make a starter is if you make one you'll have peace of mind.

And you won't be starting an "is my yeast dead" thread in a couple of days. (Which then one of us will answer with...."Had you made a starter..."

Making a starter first insures that your yeast is still alive and viable before you dump it in your beer. You will be less likely to start one of those "is my yeast dead?" threads that are on here every day.

You will also ensure that you have enough yeast usually the tubes and smack packs are a lot less yeast that you really should use for healthy fermentation.

Making a starter also usually means your beer will take off sooner, because the first thing that the little buggers do in the presence of wort (whether in a flask or in a fermenter) is have an orgy to reproduce enough cells to do the job...So it won't take such a long time in the fermenter since they started doing it in the flask.

Additionally it is better for the yeast to consume and reproduce incrementally rather than just dumping them into the fermenter...The yeast will be less stressed out than if you just dump them in.

Stressed out yeast can lead to a lot of off flavors...maybe even (though rare) the dreaded autolysis....Or the curse of 1.030....getting a stuck fermentation because the yeast have bit the dust.

So making a starter proves your yeast is still healthy, allows you to grow enough yeast to do the job, cuts down on lag time, and ensures that you will not get off flavors or stuck ferementations from stressed out yeast.

Also has to do with the actual pitch rates of the smack packs and tubes, and has to do with the data that Jamil Z has on his mr malty website.

I'll quote some of it, but really you should look at the stuff there;

http://www.mrmalty.com/pitching.php




But to make it easier he has a great pitch rate calculator http://www.mrmalty.com/calc/calc.html

And according to his numbers on his calculator, really any beer above 1.020, you should be making a starter for.

Me personally when I use liquid yeast I just make a starter. I may not be as anal as some brewers and makes sure that I have the exact cellcount for whatever gravity beer I am making, but I do make one for the above reasons I mentioned, namely peace of mid, and a reduction in lag time.

Seriously, that's one way to insure you have clean tasting beer, not to stress out or underpitch your yeast. You may find the "bothering" to make a starter will make even the less than best kit beer come out tasting great.

I agree with all of the above. Yeast health is critical for a healthy fermentation, which is absolutely essential for making good beer. A starter is ALWAYS a good idea. The only exception I would ever make would be using a smack pack for a very small beer, or pitching a known quantity of dry yeast after proofing it and verifying its health.

see, Revvy - I don't disagree with everything you say

 

[RallyintheValley]

No actually I think the way to be a really good brewer is to do it right the first time. And making a starter with liquid yeast IS the right way to do it. Why risk off flavors or stuck fermentations, or needless worry, when making a starter WILL guarantee that that won't happen?

Your "logic" makes no sense to me, it's not like we're talking about the choice between using a long primary or a secondary, or glass over plastic, the DATA on mr malty is right there to see, PLUS it gaurentees everything is going to work from the get go.

But hey, it's your beer.....

Again, I appreciate your response.


If White Labs said to make a starter from the get go... I would. They don't for 1.045.
Next time, I will try it with a starter, then I can record the difference in taste, fermentation time, etc. myself. The data is indeed there, but I'm willing to bet mr.malty didn't get there by just running numbers... he probably also tasted the beer.
If you are someone who just goes for what you believe to be the best option in brewing for every situation, that's great. Me, I want to taste the difference for myself so I have a deeper understanding. We aren't talking about sanitizing or not sanitizing, we are talking about two options that both work.

 

[CortexBomb]

You can definitely get away without one on a more normal gravity beer like that.

I think the reason why many of the brewers on here (myself included) do make them for all our beers is because:

a) They're dead simple (and can actually become a bit of a habit)
b) They completely insure that the yeast are alive (important in Summer if you get stuff shipped obviously)
c) They result in faster initial fermentation (as they've already started reproducing).

Mr. Malty is a wonderful program for a lot of things, but its starter calculations are flat out ridiculous, it calls for 3 L starters for beers that are in the 1.080 range, which is absolutely not necessary. Ideal? Perhaps, but definitely not necessary to make perfectly tasty brews.