Year old yeast... an experiment

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Chuck_Swillery

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2009
Messages
324
Reaction score
0
Location
Traverse City, MI
I had a packet of Wyeast 1272, American Ale II that had been in the fridge for a year, maybe 16 months. I had decided to brew up a pseudo-Magic Hat #9 clone, all grain, and use that yeast. I popped the smack-pack about 8 hours before I suspected I needed it, no starter. It was a gamble and I knew it. The packet slowly swelled to, ultimately, about 50% what you'd expect from a fresh pack. The brew session went very well but the cooling process, due to a errant thermometer probe, took the wort down to 57 degrees. I was in a rush at this point to get somewhere so I shrugged it off and pitched the yeast. The yeast pack had no off smells that I could detect. I aerated well using a wand, snapped the lid on the bucket and off I went letting the bucket rest in an area that would keep it close to 67 degrees, the middle of that yeast's suggested range.

Two days later I had good gasses from the airlock. Three days after that the krausen had overtaken the airlock and had spilled out onto the top of the bucket. To say the least I was little bit surprised and immediately suspected it was infected. I cleaned it up and gave it all a good look/smell. I could not see nor smell any evidence of infection. Back it went for a total of 16 days in the primary. I should also add that I am pretty anal when it comes to sanitation.

I just finished up bottling it, using apple flavor instead of the apricot Magic Hat #9 uses. The beer is near crystal clear (I use Irish moss during the brewing process) and I suspect it will clear up even more as it bottle conditions. It ended up a golden honey color, mildly hoppy and a nice malt follow up. No infection. No strange outcomes.

So, especially for the beginners, I strongly recommend you use fresh yeast. However, in the end, the adage, RDWHAHB, holds true. I don't want to sound flippant nor cavalier about this, it was just something I decided to try and took the risk. It worked out. Relax, don't worry, work with what you have, you'll end up with beer, even excellent beer sometimes.

Figures: OG: 1.047, FG: 1.010, 16 days in primary, 67 deg. 4.9% abv. Currently bottle conditioning using 5oz corn sugar in three cups water boiled 5 min.
 
Actually this is crappy advice. I agree that yeast can be used regardless of age, but you should always make a starter. You got lucky. Not everyone will. Two day lag times are not ideal.
 
I agree with making a starter for questionable yeast, but KUDOS to Chuck for posting his experiences. Thanks for posting.

I've used old and very old yeast many times (maybe often) with great results. If they have been stored cold, they keep a long time.

BJA: tact is useful, even on these here webz. Your comments will be ignored by many if you start like that.
 
Good job. Not ideal, but it worked. Actually you might get some complimentary fruity off flavors from the under pitch.
 
I too have used yeast packs well beyond their "expiration" date. I always do a starter, whether it's a smack pack or yeast I have washed and saved. I've had a smack pack that was 12 months old take two days to swell, but it did its job and went into the starter and turned out great.

So the only advice I would give is to plan accordingly. If you know the yeast is older and will need time, start your process early enough to make up the difference. It may mean starting your smack pack the weekend before you plan to brew so you get a couple of days for your starter and can then cold crash it so you can decant.

I always have some older packs of yeast in my fridge, mostly the limited editions though.
 
BJA - there was no advice given here EXCEPT I recommend using fresh yeast. Simply observations for my experiment.

You are 110% correct - starters and fresh yeast is the way to go but we all know sometimes we get painted into a corner in the middle of a brew and we have to roll with the punches. I knew going in this was a huge risk. I'd far rather run into this situation on my terms and understand the results from clear headed perspective than in the frustration and "heat of the moment."

So, I stand by RDWHAHB. If things mess up like they sometimes do, roll with it. This time it was on my terms, next time it may not. And, yes, fresh yeast and starters are the way to fly, not the way I did it - the entire point of this experiment. Lucky? Matter of interpretation.

Crappy advice? Sorry man, you obviously missed the entire point of my post.
 
I guess I did, but when someone says that they're performing an experiment, it's usually to prove that something can or cannot be done.

That is a crappy statement. He proved to himself that he could use year old yeast. What about that wasn't an experiment?
 
That is a crappy statement. He proved to himself that he could use year old yeast. What about that wasn't an experiment?

When you publish the results of an experiment, you are suggesting that those results are an acceptable way of performing the task. People read the results and come to the conclusion that it's acceptable to use one year old yeast without making a starter. How often do you think this will turn out well?
 
I just broke out some old washed yeast from about 8-10 months back. I've heard the viability goes down to near nothing after this length of time but I had nice yeast layers (with a noticeable brown thin film on top of dead yeast). Fired up a starter with leftover dregs from another batch and both took right off. I had them stored in my fridge wrapped in foil. Stores yeast seem pretty sensitive to light. Vampires?

Anyway, playing with old yeast is kind of fun. And before my comments are adulterated into , 'see he used a starter', I only had a very small amount of yeast. No smack pack.
 
When you publish the results of an experiment, you are suggesting that those results are an acceptable way of performing the task.

No, when you publish the results of an experiment, you're publishing the results. :drunk:
 
I'm down with aubiecat; This dude set out to prove to himself that in a pinch he could. He knows the proper way to do it, yet wanted to see what happened.

I don't see him advocating it at all nor giving it as advice.

Like everyone else he has a box; he's adjusting the walls of his box or getting "outside the box" as they say. He's not telling anyone else where the walls of their box should be.

To each their own; There's no need to flame him. You have your box, you live in it; and post here what you do. He's just doing the same.

Btw; today, for ****s and giggles, I will pull out a package of Pacman from the fridge that I bet is out of date. I will brew with it this weekend. I will post whether it worked or not. You can hate on me for it, don't really care.
 
As a follow up... I cracked open a bottle. This is going to be a very good beer. More ester-y than would have been if a starter had been uses but, even this young, a very drinkable beer. I'd call a mildly fruity ester. That should mellow out with age.

Conclusion: Nothing replaces the right amount of fresh yeast. However, even a smack-pack of year old yeast can create a decent beer.
 
When you publish the results of an experiment, you are suggesting that those results are an acceptable way of performing the task.

As an experimental physicist, I can justifiably state, that is the above is NOT a true statement. An experiment ends in results which are useful no matter what the outcome. It, in no way suggests a procedure be followed. It provides insight into the system response to controlled conditions.

Besides, the original poster simply pointed out that it's not that hard to use the needed components to produce beer and get beer, As he said, especially for new brewers, this is valuable information, empirically derived from experience.

Good data point for the database.

Thanks to the OP for posting the experience.
 
Back
Top