WLP001

[Shawnstve]

So I used this yeast for the first time. Actually my first time using liquid yeast. Before this I used safale-05. Anyway, I’m used to having the fermentation to last 2-3 days. Well the vigorous part of it at least. It will bubble and make a big krausen, then subside about 2-3 days later with the safale. However with this liquid yeast, it bubbled and did it’s thing, looked great, and then subsided only 32 hours after pitch. It seemed to have a slightly later start also. Took about 6-7 hours for the airlock to bubble. The safale stuff seemed to start bubbling around 3-4 hours. Anyway, is this just a faster working yeast? Like why would this do what it did? Is it normal to be done at 1.5 days? My beer came out at 1.064 OG. I can give other info if it helps also. This is my 5th brew so I’m not like super knowledgeable, maybe it’s quite normal to finish that quick

 

[Bassman2003]

Have you measured the final gravity? 1.5 days seems very quick for a 1.064 beer to be really "done". Speed of fermentation has a lot of factors, but two large ones would be amount and freshness of the yeast used.

 

[Shawnstve]

No, I haven’t I plan on letting it sit for another 2 weeks. But it’s not bubbling. It’s not “done” I’m sure. Just the airlock isn’t doing much. A bubble every few minutes. Usually with safale 05 it will continue making a bubble every few seconds for a few days.
Sorry I explained this wrong. So it’s not “done” just not actively fermenting like it was. Only active fermentation for 1.5 days. Now it’s still fermenting I’m sure, but not very actively. The safale does this, but not so suddenly. It will take usually 2-3 days for this beer to stop the super active fermentation, and then drop to what this one is doing now and continue to slowly ferment for a few days/week after. I never measure my final gravity because I do 1 gallon batches. I just let it sit for 3 weeks to insure it is done.

 

[VikeMan]

Every batch is a little different, and there are lots of variables beyond yeast strain... temperature, healthy cell count, oxygenation (or not), state of yeast (e.g. sterol "readiness") at pitching, wort fermentability, etc.

And, bubble counts/rates aren't really much good as quantitative indicators of anything.

Without a gravity reading, there's really no way to tell how far your beer has to go. But I bet if you wait your standard one-gallon-batch-so-no-gravity-sample time, it will be fine.

 

[Shawnstve]

Ok thanks, so would this indicate to you that this yeast Was more active and better than the dry yeast I was using? I did add yeast nutrient this time and had not before. Another thing I added this time was Irish moss and I hadn’t before. I know all are different, but such a drastic difference is crazy to me... gotta be something in there that changed this no?
I will admit, I don’t keep the temps perfect. My attempt at lowering the temperature is putting the beer in a water bath and once in a while drop an ice cube in the bath. So that probably varies a lot. However I’ve got a temp gage that I watch during primary and it seems to stay right Between 64-68 degrees. I always add a healthy amount of oxygen at pitch, the wort was identical to last batch. Well I say that, I brew in a bag on stovetop. So, it was actually 1.065 last time for the OG.
Ok well thanks for all the help.

 

[Bassman2003]

I would say find a way to measure the gravity through the process and to check if the beer is finished. Not only will you learn about the process, the FG is the only thing that matters, not activity. If the FG is showing the beer is complete, then you do not need to let the beer sit so long after. The "two week" thing is more about convenience than best practice. If the FG is reached then a day or two longer is all that is needed in the fermentation vessel. Then move it along to the next phase.

Choosing not to measure anything is fine if that is how you want to run your hobby. Have fun and enjoy the beer. But, conversely, one can not ask questions about processes and learn about why things happen without measurements. So kind of a double edged sword.

 

[Shawnstve]

Yes I agree. I plan on checking all that soon. I started out with minimal stuff and a 1 gallon brew setup to keep things cheap and see if I like the hobby before upgrading. I plan on getting an Anvil brew system and their fermenter also, with a chiller. I also want to get the tilt, which is a digital hydrometer to drop in the fermenter and test continuously. Just this all costs money. I feel taking 250ML out of my 1 gallon batch at the end just sucks. Haha! Actually it ends up being more like .8 gallons in reality because I can’t overfill the fermentation vessel and so I brew it a bit smaller. Anyway, as soon as I upgrade and all I’ll be testing throughout the process.

 

[Bassman2003]

I agree, hydrometers take a larger toll as the batch size goes down. Refractometers only take a drop but you have to convert the readings after your fermentation starts. Can easily be done, so it is probably a better approach for small batch brewing.

It is a hobby and folks gain enjoyment out of many different aspects from learning to just getting drunk. It is all good and a lot of fun. I enjoy my Anvil Foundry and think it is a great system for people to enter the hobby and also expand as they brew more.

 

[VikeMan]

Ok thanks, so would this indicate to you that this yeast Was more active and better than the dry yeast I was using?

Nah, I'm saying that there are lots of variables and that "measuring" success by counting bubble rates (even if somehow faster is considered always better) is a crapshoot.

 

[VikeMan]

Refractometers only take a drop but you have to convert the readings after your fermentation starts.

The pre-fermentation reading should be corrected also, and the (good) refractometer calculators do this. The reason the pre-fermentation reading needs to be (slightly) corrected (even though they don't contain alcohol) is that the refractometers we use are designed to measure sucrose solutions, which wort mostly isn't.