Under pitching by 47 billion cells

[gotbags-10]

Last min day off so starting a batch but no time for a starter. Mr. Malty calls for 247 billion cell count. I have two packs of 1056 so that would give me 200 bill. If I use yeast nutrients and hit it with a min of pure 02 would I be ok?

 

[philipCT]

Last min day off so starting a batch but no time for a starter. Mr. Malty calls for 247 billion cell count. I have two packs of 1056 so that would give me 200 bill. If I use yeast nutrients and hit it with a min of pure 02 would I be ok?

So, you're short of your pitch target by 25%. Generally not optimal, which of course you know - that's why you're asking. No doubt it will be beer but, could develop some off-flavors from yeast stress, and/or it might not attenuate fully.

One option that I've done often when I get caught behind the 8 ball like that: brew today and prep your starter at the same time. Leave the wort in the fermenter overnight and pitch tomorrow when your starter is ready.

Hope that helps!

 

[CoreyG]

I would say pitching 200 for a batch that calls for 250 is fine. You are slightly under but it's really not far off. I don't think you will get any noticeable off flavours (maybe if its a very light beer) but that's my own opinion

 

[cjones]

So I would start by Saying - that with the yeast metabolizing aerobically at first is helpful for two key reasons:

Yeast will grow in size and mass by storing fatty acids. These fatty acids store oxygen within the cell that may be used later. These make the yeast better at fermenting and increase alcohol tolerance.
Yeast will reproduce faster to create a higher density population.
Once all the oxygen has been consumed from the wort, you will have a lot of hearty yeast, but little alcohol. However, with the oxygen gone, the yeast will begin using anaerobic metabolism, which produces more alcohol.

So I would chalk it up to an experiment and have fun with it. - make the beer, o2 the heck out of it and pitch what you have... see if you get desired results... or if you notice off flavors... depending on yeast could be green apple to butter or any other of the many they can create.

 

[erick0619]

Too bad i just saw this but there is the vitality starter method from the brulosphy blog . You basically make a starter let it spin for 4 hours and pitch and you are good to go.

 

[secondbase]

You'll be fine. RDWHAHB

 

[pricelessbrewing]

Last min day off so starting a batch but no time for a starter. Mr. Malty calls for 247 billion cell count. I have two packs of 1056 so that would give me 200 bill. If I use yeast nutrients and hit it with a min of pure 02 would I be ok?

Should be fine, I would rather do a starter on it personally and harvest some yeast for future use, but everyone has different preferences for cost effectiveness.

For what it's worth, I much prefer brewuniteds yeast calculator which is based on the data by Kai Troeser aka Brauksaiser, and sadly I trust his info more then Mr. Malty. Not sure why, just seems more reliable, and many others have the same feelings.

 

[g-star]

Check the production dates of your smackl packs. Unless they came from the factory yesterday, you cannot assume 100% viability.

 

[Skep18]

100% fine. Link below is an experiment performed comparing "starter vs. 1 vial" fermentation.

http://brulosophy.com/2015/04/20/yeast-pitch-rate-single-vial-vs-yeast-starter-exbeeriment-results/

TLDR - Tasting panel did not yield a strong result suggesting making a starter made a significant difference in resulting beer. The experiment conductor found very little differences as well (even failing the taste test himself once) and concluded while he will continue to make starters for many reasons it is his belief it may not be such a big deal.

 

[gotbags-10]

Awesome! Yeah I went with out the starter. Hit it with nutrients and a ton of o2. It's a stout anyways so even if I had minor off flavors I'm thinking the beer should mask it.

 

[g-star]

100% fine. Link below is an experiment performed comparing "starter vs. 1 vial" fermentation.

http://brulosophy.com/2015/04/20/yeast-pitch-rate-single-vial-vs-yeast-starter-exbeeriment-results/

TLDR - Tasting panel did not yield a strong result suggesting making a starter made a significant difference in resulting beer. The experiment conductor found very little differences as well (even failing the taste test himself once) and concluded while he will continue to make starters for many reasons it is his belief it may not be such a big deal.

Amazing to me how so many people can be conviced by the results of one experiment from a random guy with a blog, while turning a blind eye to mountains of peer-reviewed science from degreed professionals who study these things for a living.

 

[AnOldUR]

Amazing to me how so many people can be conviced by the results of one experiment from a random guy with a blog, while turning a blind eye to mountains of peer-reviewed science from degreed professionals who study these things for a living.

Your point is well taken and I agree, but here's a blog I trust.

If those two packs are fresh and properly handled, all a started will do is feed your OCD.

 

[philosofool]

Amazing to me how so many people can be conviced by the results of one experiment from a random guy with a blog, while turning a blind eye to mountains of peer-reviewed science from degreed professionals who study these things for a living.

Controlled experimentation does not require authority. That's the point.

Can you please point me to the peer reviewed science in which blind triangle tests have resulted in significant effects on the topic of pitch rates with fresh packs of commercial yeast from White Labs or Wyeast? Can you point me to one peer reviewed article on brewing five gallon batches in a garage, kitchen or closet?

 

[oogaboogachiefwalkingdeer]

DME sellers will assure you a giant starter is needed.

 

[Skep18]

Amazing to me how so many people can be conviced by the results of one experiment from a random guy with a blog, while turning a blind eye to mountains of peer-reviewed science from degreed professionals who study these things for a living.

Says the guy with no supporting evidence just illusive, "everyone knows, duh."

I just don't understand why some people continue to think this is such a complicated process and anyone who doesn't follow the hobbyist mindset of "spend all the time and money on it" must be making terrible beer.

But you're right, since he didn't follow Mr. Malty 100% he should dump his batch.

 

[joshesmusica]

I would go with the vitality starter personally, and depending on the OG, I would only use one pack.

The biggest takeaway from that brulosophy experiment for me, isn't that they both produced the same beer, but the lag time on the non-starter batch. Even with impeccable sanitation practices, that's just asking for trouble on the one day that you aren't on top of your game. I prefer my beers bubbling away within 12 hours post-pitch!

Another thing, though, to always remember when discussing the brulosophy experiments: these guys are (at least Marshall, anyways) top level homebrewers. Their techniques and processes are very down pat. So really what they've proven so far is that when you're at that level, if you change up one factor of the process that goes against what we've been taught, then the outcome isn't likely to be a big perceivable difference. But start compounding mistakes on top of each other, and you're likely to produce, at best, average beer.

 

[Skep18]

I would go with the vitality starter personally, and depending on the OG, I would only use one pack.

The biggest takeaway from that brulosophy experiment for me, isn't that they both produced the same beer, but the lag time on the non-starter batch. Even with impeccable sanitation practices, that's just asking for trouble on the one day that you aren't on top of your game. I prefer my beers bubbling away within 12 hours post-pitch!

Another thing, though, to always remember when discussing the brulosophy experiments: these guys are (at least Marshall, anyways) top level homebrewers. Their techniques and processes are very down pat. So really what they've proven so far is that when you're at that level, if you change up one factor of the process that goes against what we've been taught, then the outcome isn't likely to be a big perceivable difference. But start compounding mistakes on top of each other, and you're likely to produce, at best, average beer.

I agree with this notion above. Faster ferment, ensure viability, cell count, etc. Even the experimenter concluded starters are a good thing. However my main point here is just RAHAHB.

If homebrewers are lying awake at night worrying about getting the calculated pitch rate 100% spot on every time, (IMO) you're doing it wrong.

All that said, to each their own. If no one ever tried different things and just blindly believed the internet how would they ever experience the differences and learn? And as a preemptive retort to the trolls inc, reading that "X causes Y" on the internet is not learning, at least not to homebrewing details which may require other human senses.

 

[g-star]

Can you please point me to the peer reviewed science in which blind triangle tests have resulted in significant effects on the topic of pitch rates with fresh packs of commercial yeast from White Labs or Wyeast? Can you point me to one peer reviewed article on brewing five gallon batches in a garage, kitchen or closet?

Start searching articles on the topic here

The point is that these pitch rates and growth curves have been studied and established over the years in a controlled and scientific way. General consensus has been reached. One guy doing one experiment in his basement doesn't negate that. So please don't point to that blog as evidence that poor brewing practice is OK.

 

[g-star]

Says the guy with no supporting evidence just illusive, "everyone knows, duh."

I just don't understand why some people continue to think this is such a complicated process and anyone who doesn't follow the hobbyist mindset of "spend all the time and money on it" must be making terrible beer.

But you're right, since he didn't follow Mr. Malty 100% he should dump his batch.

See the link I provided above for some education.

No one said to dump his batch. I just find it amusing that some homebrewers will sieze on on any shred of flimsy evidence because it reinforces their lazy/poor practices.

 

[joshesmusica]

See the link I provided above for some education.



No one said to dump his batch. I just find it amusing that some homebrewers will sieze on on any shred of flimsy evidence because it reinforces their lazy/poor practices.

And yet there are also those who vehemently oppose anything that goes against what they've always known. The way it is in homebrewing; the way it is in all aspects of life. The art of both is trying things out for oneself, and finding a balance.

 

[philosofool]

Start searching articles on the topic here

The point is that these pitch rates and growth curves have been studied and established over the years in a controlled and scientific way. General consensus has been reached. One guy doing one experiment in his basement doesn't negate that. So please don't point to that blog as evidence that poor brewing practice is OK.

Is it really scientific consensus that you can't direct pitch a white labs vial into five gallons for good beer? Or is that your interpretation of a consnsus about something somewhat different? In any event, the consensus is designed around the assumption that one is brewing in a commercial setting and that marginal gains of 1% in any cost area are worth it. Since neither of those applies to me then the counter evidence, not flimsy, BTW, that is generated in a brewhouse like mine should be taken seriously.

 

[philosofool]

Start searching articles on the topic here

The point is that these pitch rates and growth curves have been studied and established over the years in a controlled and scientific way. General consensus has been reached. One guy doing one experiment in his basement doesn't negate that. So please don't point to that blog as evidence that poor brewing practice is OK.

Also, what you are talking about looks like the standard homebrew fallacy: science says A about yeast/hops/cabonation/variable x, so, you have to do Y to make good beer. Obviously, not every scientific discovery about variable x matters in the end product (because let's face it, the science of yeast is really about understanding yeast, and not every aspect of that matters to beer) so that's a fallacy.

 

[xpops]

Too bad i just saw this but there is the vitality starter method from the brulosphy blog . You basically make a starter let it spin for 4 hours and pitch and you are good to go.

was going to suggest the same until i realized it was a 3 day old thread.

 

[Pappers_]

Hi HBTers. This thread is a good example of what's so great about this forum. Someone comes in with a practical question, knowledgeable and experienced brewers come in to answer, a discussion ensues, and the topic is explored. Fantastic.

What is not so good is addressing other members directly and negatively, rather than the issue. You can make exactly the same point but without denigrating or putting-down the other member. Please do so.

 

[ncbrewer]

Your point is well taken and I agree, but here's a blog I trust.

If those two packs are fresh and properly handled, all a started will do is feed your OCD.

Good blog - thanks for the link.

 

[wmcc75]

Hi HBTers. This thread is a good example of what's so great about this forum. Someone comes in with a practical question, knowledgeable and experienced brewers come in to answer, a discussion ensues, and the topic is explored. Fantastic.

What is not so good is addressing other members directly and negatively, rather than the issue. You can make exactly the same point but without denigrating or putting-down the other member. Please do so.

Thank you for saying that. I was going through this thread thinking the same thing. You beat me to saying something, but I will second your statement.

 

[gotbags-10]

5 days in and gravity is at 1.015 from 1.065 with 80% viability from 2 smack packs