Why do people chill their yeast starters?

[Elysium]

The biggest disadvantage I can see is if you don't let it completely ferment out, you won't have achieved the cell count you were after. Make sense?

Hey Demus,

Thanks for the reply. The cellcount will depend on how much yeast I put in the starter and how big my starter is. Is that what you are trying to refer to?

I actually dont understand the line I quoted from your previous post. Can you explain that to me in details? Thanks.

 

[Elysium]

For the second goal you want the yeast to have fermented out the starter and built up some glycogen reserves. which likely will not have happened if you pitch a fermenting starter.

Hey. Very interesting thoughts. Can you give me more information on the line I quoted from you?

When exactly does this stage set in? I mean when exactly does the yeast ferment out the starter and build up those glycogen reserves?

I am actually making 1.030 starters of 1 UK pint using MO malt.

 

[unionrdr]

When it starts to settle out & no more swirling,etc kind of activity is seen i would think. That's basically what I go by. but then again,I don't have a stir plate.

 

[Denny]

http://www.wyeastlab.com/com-yeast-storage.cfm <--- I have just found this info on glycogen.

I understand what you mean.....that in a small amount of wort the yeast wont be able to revive and have a healthy starting point for its life-cycle.

By the way....I am making 1 uk pint starters....if I said 1/2 pint before in any of my messages...then I am sorry, it was a mistake.

There is also this from mrmalty.com...

"Q: I've heard that too small or too large a starter can be bad for the yeast. How is that possible?

(Neva) Parker (from White Labs) says putting a fresh vial of yeast into 500 ml of wort and letting such a small starter go to completion can actually leave the yeast less ready to ferment a batch of beer. The yeast do not rebuild their reserves and have very little increase in cell mass.

The minimum starter size for significant yeast growth from a vial or pack of yeast is 1 liter. One vial or pack into 1 liter results in approximately a 50% increase in cell mass. "

 

[unionrdr]

Good quote. So my 1L (1000mL) flask is the right size to git-r-done for the average ale then.

 

[ShootsNRoots]

Cold Pitching works well for me.

http://www.brewboard.com/index.php?showtopic=26969

http://forum.northernbrewer.com/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=70971
http://forum.northernbrewer.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=652

 

[Denny]

Good quote. So my 1L (1000mL) flask is the right size to git-r-done for the average ale then.

I'd say you need a flask bigger than 1L to make a 1L starter. I use a gal. glass jug.

 

[unionrdr]

1000Ml does come up close to the neck. I'll try it anyway,since it's all I have to make starters for my washed yeasts. Might need a mini blow off though...

 

[Demus]

Hey Demus,

Thanks for the reply. The cellcount will depend on how much yeast I put in the starter and how big my starter is. Is that what you are trying to refer to?

I actually dont understand the line I quoted from your previous post. Can you explain that to me in details? Thanks.

No sweat. Maybe the word starter is misleading. It makes it sound like the purpose is to "wake up" the yeast. There's no requirement or benefit that I know of (under normal conditions) to pitching actively fermenting yeast. It will still stop, absorb oxygen and have a lag phase. The purpose is to propagate the yeast sample up to the recommended cell count for your batch. By interrupting your starter, you are not allowing it to get to that cell count. Of course it still works, because yeast are very resilient and adaptable organisms. But the flavor could be less than ideal, as the impact of under pitching is pretty well documented.
All that said, for a stalled ferment or a huge alcohol beer pitching yeast at high kruesen can be an effective technique to get those last stubborn points of attenuation...

 

[zacster]

Well,2L equaling .528 gallons,don't you think that's a bit much to pitch into 5 gallons? Are you accounting for the greater added volume? 1/2 gallon plus is a lot of extra starter liquid to be adding to a recipe volume imo.

I start boiling my starter with 2 liters, by the time it's done it's more like 1600ml. And still, the primary brew recipe remains the same, same hop schedule, same grain bill, and that's the critical part. Adding another 1/3 gallon to it won't change the character as you are adding wort, not water or anything else.

Let's say I wanted to match the brew with the starter (something I used to do by default as I would use the LME from my kits, but then decant). If I used 5 oz of hops, a large amount, I would need to add another 1/3 oz? That's a small handful of pellets. I don't measure anything in those increments anyway.

One thing I've always said on the forums: No matter what you do, you will always end up with beer. It may not be the exact taste you were looking for, but it will be beer. In my recent cases, it was better than anything I've ever expected. Even the LHBS guys were impressed.

 

[unionrdr]

I prefer to get the beer's recipe volume as dead on as possible. Using beersmith2 to adjust amounts of ingrdients to the 1st decimal place,since my scale only goes to tenths. But that's me,I like to be as exact as I'm able to with much of a recipe. so the part that's in the grey area will fit in nicely,if that makes any sense. I'm startin to feel a lil fried after doin this all day.

 

[jtratcliff]

I've been using a variant of the no-chill method for my batches. A lot of folks call for a modified hop schedule to account for a longer time spent at higher temps... Usually this means shifting bittering and flavor hop additions by 20 minutes (i.e. the 60 minute addition goes in at 40 mins., the 30 at 10m, etc.)

This allows me to boil for 20 mins. and get a good hot break. I then pull a 1/2 gallon of wort before the 1st hop addition to use as my Real Wort Starter (RWS). Once cooled, it goes onto the stirplate. I usually let it go 12-18 hours until my "no-chilled" wort is down to pitching temps.

I pitch the entire half gallon of RWS off the stir plate into the fermentor, as it's was originally part of the "correct volume" to begin with. And since its the same wort (minus hops and another 30 minutes of boiling), there's no DME/LME starter beer to decant off anyway.

I have wondered if this is too short of a ferment time for the starters but I generally have little lag, fairly active fermentation, and tasty final products. I don't know if I'm pitching at the optimal rate though.

 

[chickens4life]

Hey. Very interesting thoughts. Can you give me more information on the line I quoted from you?

When exactly does this stage set in? I mean when exactly does the yeast ferment out the starter and build up those glycogen reserves?

I am actually making 1.030 starters of 1 UK pint using MO malt.

Glycogen is produced in response to reduced nutrients, so for us, during the later stages of fermentation. They are probably at their highest right as the yeast flocculate and settle out.
The glycogen is actually used up in the early stages of fermentation in order to produce lipids for membrane synthesis. so I would avoid pitching at high krausen if healthy yeast is you primary concern.

Here is an excerpt about glycogen from a fairly recent brewing book.
http://books.google.com/books?id=TIYbNdrIsPEC&pg=PA312&lpg=PA312&dq=yeast+glycogen+production&source=bl&ots=7f2IYsGLSe&sig=Su68lu3MjXErix3CsG6bY1geTDE&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Pw7uUfGTMuWwygHl9YHoCQ&ved=0CHUQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=yeast%20glycogen%20production&f=false

Glycogen will be consumed by the yeast over time especially when they are induced to become more metabolically active (higher temps, oxygen, trub etc.) so the ideal situation would be to use the starter very soon after fermentation is completed

 

[bovineblitz]

Exactly. That's what everyone seems to be doing...but if it is a 1/2 pint starter, the liquid wont really affect the overall taste of the final beer and you can pitch yeast cells that are actively eating sugar away. Why would anyone want them go dormant in the fridge? This is what puzzles me.

By the way....thanks for the reply.

My starters are 1.5-2.5 liters, not half a pint.

 

[zacster]

My clue that fermentation is completed is the vortex the stir plate creates. When a batch is first turned on, it will produce a distinct vortex, and I can hear the vortex hit the bottom. As fermentation progresses, the CO2 produced interferes with the vortex and all I get is foam at the top. When that becomes a weak vortex again I know that fermentation has finished.

 

[brewguyver]

1000Ml does come up close to the neck. I'll try it anyway,since it's all I have to make starters for my washed yeasts. Might need a mini blow off though...

I recently decanted a starter after 2 weeks in the fridge and put it in a 2 liter flask to wake it up - whoops. Mount St. Yeast exploded all over and down my counter (so much for the new cells) - definitely use the blow off!

On the brew strong Q/A a few months ago (listened to it last night) they seemed to be 50/50 on decanting vs straight pitching, as long as the liquid volume was < 5% of the total batch (1l - 5gal). The negative flavors from the oxidized wort are balanced by the positive impact of pitching at Krausen.

I've done both (don't usually have time to let a starter sit in the fridge for 3 days), and don't remember a difference. Both tend to be volcanic in the carboy - blowoff tube needed.

 

[kombat]

Good quote. So my 1L (1000mL) flask is the right size to git-r-done for the average ale then.

Only if you like blowouts! Fermenting 1L of wort in a 1L flask leaves zero headspace for krausen.

I have 3 flasks: a 250 mL (for the first steps when culturing up from a yeast slant), a 2L (for ale starters), and a 5L (for lagers and high-gravity ales).

 

[m3n00b]

Only if you like blowouts! Fermenting 1L of wort in a 1L flask leaves zero headspace for krausen.

I have 3 flasks: a 250 mL (for the first steps when culturing up from a yeast slant), a 2L (for ale starters), and a 5L (for lagers and high-gravity ales).

Or use fermcap=no krausen.

 

[unionrdr]

Good things to keep in mind going forward. Thanks y'all. gotta get to the lhbs for a plug & some more tubing...

 

[Demus]

I've been using a variant of the no-chill method for my batches. A lot of folks call for a modified hop schedule to account for a longer time spent at higher temps... Usually this means shifting bittering and flavor hop additions by 20 minutes (i.e. the 60 minute addition goes in at 40 mins., the 30 at 10m, etc.)

This allows me to boil for 20 mins. and get a good hot break. I then pull a 1/2 gallon of wort before the 1st hop addition to use as my Real Wort Starter (RWS). Once cooled, it goes onto the stirplate. I usually let it go 12-18 hours until my "no-chilled" wort is down to pitching temps.

I pitch the entire half gallon of RWS off the stir plate into the fermentor, as it's was originally part of the "correct volume" to begin with. And since its the same wort (minus hops and another 30 minutes of boiling), there's no DME/LME starter beer to decant off anyway.

I have wondered if this is too short of a ferment time for the starters but I generally have little lag, fairly active fermentation, and tasty final products. I don't know if I'm pitching at the optimal rate though.

You are basically doing a very complicated version of direct pitch. You're essentially not making a starter. Your recipe wort is NOT the best starter wort. Read anything on starters and it will recommend simple, low gravity wort with a little yeast nutrient. This is not just to "start" the yeast but to propogate enough healthy yeast for pitching into wort, which is a more harsh environment than the starter. I'm all for experimenting and thinking outside the box, but don't reinvent the wheel. Your practice "works" because you end up with beer. But your "starter" fails to accomplish what a starter is intended to achieve...

 

[Elysium]

You are basically doing a very complicated version of direct pitch. You're essentially not making a starter. Your recipe wort is NOT the best starter wort. Read anything on starters and it will recommend simple, low gravity wort with a little yeast nutrient. This is not just to "start" the yeast but to propogate enough healthy yeast for pitching into wort, which is a more harsh environment than the starter. I'm all for experimenting and thinking outside the box, but don't reinvent the wheel. Your practice "works" because you end up with beer. But your "starter" fails to accomplish what a starter is intended to achieve...

What would you say is the best practice for yeast starters?

Would your list include: low gravity wort, yeast nutrients, 10000 ml size, 24 hours to wait and pitch the whole thing without cooling?

 

[jtratcliff]

You are basically doing a very complicated version of direct pitch. You're essentially not making a starter. Your recipe wort is NOT the best starter wort. Read anything on starters and it will recommend simple, low gravity wort with a little yeast nutrient. This is not just to "start" the yeast but to propogate enough healthy yeast for pitching into wort, which is a more harsh environment than the starter. I'm all for experimenting and thinking outside the box, but don't reinvent the wheel. Your practice "works" because you end up with beer. But your "starter" fails to accomplish what a starter is intended to achieve...

I don't think I agree with you here.

I'm not reinventing anything, I'm eliminating an unnecessary step (boiling up some DME) in favor of using 1.040ish unhopped wort I just happen to have on hand. There's nothing magical about DME that makes it better for starters. If the wort I pull is too high in gravity, I can always add water to bring it down.

The yeast has 12-18 hours to build up cell count in moderately low gravity wort (1.040ish) with no hops and all the nutrients one finds in real wort. How is this not accomplishing what a starter is meant to to accomplish?

Even Palmer mentions pitching a starter at high Krausen with a wort similar to the final product:

http://www.howtobrew.com/section1/chapter6-6.html

And there's plenty of discussion of RWS on this very board:

http://www.google.com/search?q=real...omebrewtalk.com&safe=off&client=safari&rls=en

I'm pretty sure I must've gotten the idea from the no-chill threads here on HBT.

I would contend that a RWS is in fact a starter and does indeed accomplish what is intended. Of course, YMMV.

 

[Demus]

Missed the 1.040 part, sorry. I thought you were just using a liter of wort directly from your batch. If you did that, how would it be different than just direct pitching? That's what I was getting at...
As everything in home brewing, there's many ways to skin the cat...

 

[jtratcliff]

Missed the 1.040 part

Yeah, if pulled 2 liters at the end of the boil with some 1.050+ish hopped wort then I might as well just direct pitch, as you said.

I don't think I mentioned gravity of the RWS initially, but preboil gravity of a "normal" beer should be in a decent starter range. And anything over can diluted to your desired level.

Pulling prior to hopping yet after the hot break yields a decent medium for a starter as you haven't increased your gravity much in just 15-20 minutes of boiling. And since it's almost the same wort as the full batch, the negative consequences of not cold-crashing and decanting are lessened, I would think.

Of course it only works this way if you no-chill and adjust your hop schedule. You can't prepare your starter in advance.

You can still do RWS by pulling some 3rd or 4th runnings to boil and then pressure-canning for storage until time to prepare a starter for you next brew day. But I'm too lazy for that.

 

[Demus]

And there's plenty of discussion of RWS on this very board:

The fact that something is discussed on here is FAR from evidence that it's the best practice. I've been brewing for a number of years and loitered around these forum a fair amount and haven't heard of or experienced off flavors from a pitched starter. I'm sure this RWS method works, I'm just not sure it has any positive impact. Kinda seems like a witch hunt to me...

 

[jtratcliff]

The fact that something is discussed on here is FAR from evidence that it's the best practice.

I heard that!

But in this case, it's also discussed on a number of other brewing boards and folks generally seem to be having good experience with it.

Anecdotal evidence and such

I'm sure this RWS method works, I'm just not sure it has any positive impact.

I've only ever done RWS and only with the no-chill method (well, overnight chill, really). So I don't know if it's any better or worse than a DME-based starter. But I do know that I don't have to buy DME and boil up a separate starter, so that's a positive for me. And since the wort is almost the same, I don't have any 2nd thoughts about pitching the entire starter.

Since I BiaB and also no-chill... Best practices aren't exactly my #1 priority. Why should my starter get special treatment?

It works for me and my process and produces beer I enjoy. That's good enough for me for now.

Once I stop no-chilling and start try to chill rapidly, I'll have to do something else about my starters.

 

[Demus]

Indeed