Yeast Starter or 2 packs question?

[kh54s10]

OOPS! sorry for the double post. Don't know how that happened.:cross:

 

[OvaTersley]

So you don't even bother to chill your wort down, eh. I'm surprised the yeast survive your technique.

 

[BrewKnurd]

So you don't even bother to chill your wort down, eh. I'm surprised the yeast survive your technique.

I just chuck my yeast in the boil. It culls out the weak. I don't want any yeast that can't stand a little heat.

 

[AnOldUR]

And my Mom gets all my starter supplies out and cleans up after me. She'll even monitors the starter, cold crashes, decants and then scrubs the krausen off the flask after I pitch to my wort. In my house none of that time counts.

 

[dermotstratton]

I think people are missing the point of this thread. The question was if two packs of yeast are as effective as a starter. Time and money were not meant to be factors in the equation . . . only beer quality was.

Every brewer has a different trade off for time and money, but we all have the same requirement for good beer.

 

[OvaTersley]

Dang, just when the thread starts to get interesting, someone has to get it back on topic.

 

[AnOldUR]

I think people are missing the point of this thread. The question was if two packs of yeast are as effective as a starter.

So, you didn't read any of this . . . ?

If you have money to blow and really don't want to spend a half hour making a starter, go for it.

But if you have the money, getting two packs will work just fine.

Multiple packs of fresh viable yeast are fine if not better than a starter made in a home (non-lab) environment.

. . . and then from the OP

Cool! Thanks again for the replies..

Nobody is missing anything.
The rest is just having fun with typical interwebs nonsense.

 

[dermotstratton]

Yeah I read the whole thread as it was of interest to me. I guess I just find it amusing how people spin topics in different directions on these forums.

I just wish there was more substance with regards to the technical question and less bickering about other factors.

For example, it would be nice if someone could help us understand difference in cell count between pitching two packs and making a starter. Or difference in lag time between those two options.

 

[BrewKnurd]

I, for one, am shocked and appalled that a thread would run slightly off topic. Especially on HBT.

To be somewhat on topic, i've heard from a few sources on podcasts that the when it comes to vial/smackpack + starter vs two vials/smackpacks, if you want the best beer the answer is... neither! The claim is that repitched yeast has gotten into its groove and that by the 3rd-4th batch in a series of repitched yeast, it really hits its stride. Of course, if you don't plan on brewing multiple beers in a row with the same strain, this advice is less helpful.

 

[BrewKnurd]

For example, it would be nice if someone could help us understand difference in cell count between pitching two packs and making a starter. Or difference in lag time between those two options.

Well, no one asked those specific questions, so that's why they weren't answered.

Difference in cell count:
Depends entirely on the viable cell count in your initial packs and the size of the starter, otherwise there's no way to answer. No reason you can't make a starter of appropriate size to very closely match the number of cells you would have in the two packs.

You are quite possibly pitching more non-viable cells with pitching two packs. For instance, say you have two packs of yeast with 20 billion nonviable cells and 80 billion viable cells. If you pitch them both, you would have 200 billion cells, of which 40 billion are nonviable cells just laying at the bottom of your fermenter, being all dead and rotting away. If you make a starter, you could have 200 billion cells, of which 180 are viable, and only the initial 20 are dead.

Lag time:
Depends on how long you let your starter sit. If you pitch an active starter, i would expect a shorter lag time with a starter vs a fresh yeast pitch, even one that has been smack and woken up that way, although the difference probably isn't a lot.

On the topic of lag times, a very short lag time isn't always optimal. It may be a sign of nutrient/O2 deficient wort.

 

[dermotstratton]

Thanks! I suppose I hijacked this thread, but I hope those answers are also what the original poster was looking for.

I'm debating whether to make starters or not. I rarely brew beers greater than 1.050 OG. In the grand scheme of things I don't think it is necessary or going to make a discern able difference in the final beer, but I am curious to find out I I can discern the difference between 1st generation and 2nd generation yeast.

Like everything else in home brew, though, it's tough to tell if your beer is better b/c of an intentional change to your process or just the result of unintentional improvement I other steps of your brewing process.

Thanks for the helpful advice. I look forward to testing out these theories through actual experience.

 

[AnOldUR]

Mostly agree with BrewKnurd, but a couple of points.

First, from what I’ve read those non-viable cells aren’t “dead and rotting away.” They are actually beneficial as a nutrient during the growth phase.

Second, cell growth in a starter is proportional to the amount of viable yeast you started with. Without a scope to count cells before and after you make a starter, it’s all a guessing game. Going to Mr Malty and punching in best guess numbers might make you feel good, but the computer saying, “garbage in / garbage out” holds true here. The assumption that the pack has 90 billion viable cells can be used just as well to determine how many packs you need as it is in deciding how large of a starter you need to reach your cell count goal. One is not more accurate than the other.

For first generation pitches, I’d rather pick up two packs of fresh yeast from a store that I trust, assume 100 billion cells and direct pitch into the appropriate amount of wort. From there, it’s up to me to take good care of the harvested yeast to maintain viability for later batches. From then on, pitch based on the weight and age of slurry needed for the volume and gravity of new wort. Still a guess without a scope, but one that I have more control over.

 

[BrewKnurd]

Mostly agree with BrewKnurd, but a couple of points.

First, from what I’ve read those non-viable cells aren’t “dead and rotting away.” They are actually beneficial as a nutrient during the growth phase.

My understanding is that to an extent this is true. Some of the nutrients present in those cells can be absorbed by the living yeast. But I would be quite surprised if the majority of the cell mass was consumed as nutrient. Not that I know for sure.

 

[AnOldUR]

Also not sure of this, but thought that I read somewhere that you could use old packs of dried yeast as a nutrient in the last 10 minutes or so of the boil. Never tried it. Anyone?

 

[BrewKnurd]

Also not sure of this, but thought that I read somewhere that you could use old packs of dried yeast as a nutrient in the last 10 minutes or so of the boil. Never tried it. Anyone?

Yeah, I imagine you get some benefit from that. Some yeast nutrients contain yeast hulls.

Honestly, the amount of non-viable cells based on pitching a couple packs vs one with a starter is probably a complete non-issue in almost all cases.

 

[OvaTersley]

For first generation pitches, I’d rather pick up two packs of fresh yeast from a store that I trust, assume 100 billion cells and direct pitch into the appropriate amount of wort. From there, it’s up to me to take good care of the harvested yeast to maintain viability for later batches. From then on, pitch based on the weight and age of slurry needed for the volume and gravity of new wort. Still a guess without a scope, but one that I have more control over.

There is another attribute, with respect to the health of the yeast, that is often overlooked; that is vitality. Yeast vitality: refers to the activity or metabolism of the cell. Yeast vitality has been linked to fermentation performance. The yeast propagated from a fresh starter will have much more vitality than yeast straight out of a vial or smackpack.

 

[AnOldUR]

The yeast propagated from a fresh starter will have much more vitality than yeast straight out of a vial or smackpack.

Chris White stating that, "When pitching a fresh, laboratory culture grown with aeration and good nutrition, a brewer can use up to a 50 percent lower pitch rate."

A starter is essentially a small batch of beer, brewed outside of the original lab environment. For the homebrewer that’s probably your kitchen, which is far from the sterile, controlled original process. For all practical purposes, when pitching a starter, you are using the second generation of the fresh lab culture you hope to get with a new vial or pack that has been handled properly.

If using a starter for the first generation of the yeast means I have to pitch up to twice the cell count, I don’t see too much advantage over using the method I described above.

 

[GrizBrew]

Apart from the issues I am having with lager yeast described in this thread I have never had any issues whatsoever just pitching one Wyeast pack. Generally, if it is not super fresh or if it's a bigger beer, I might smack it the day before but that is all that I do differently. I let big beers stay in Primary longer as well I suppose.

Now, if I was making a barley wine, or something that I was pushing past the 9% ABV point, I would be asking these questions but I have had all the luck in the world getting beers to the 7-9% point with this single smack pack method.

Am I missing out on something by not making starters or doubling my pitch? Is this just a lager or huge beer dilemma?

 

[OvaTersley]

Here we go.:cross:

 

[BrewKnurd]

Chris White stating that, "When pitching a fresh, laboratory culture grown with aeration and good nutrition, a brewer can use up to a 50 percent lower pitch rate."

For the sake of understanding, what is he comparing to? 50% lower than if you used... what? Leftover yeast from another batch that's been sitting under beer for 3 weeks? Stuff that was sitting in a fridge for a month? Without knowing what he's comparing to, its hard to assess the meaning of this statement.

The other thing is that unless you picked the yeast up at the lab, you don't really have fresh, laboratory grown yeast.

 

[AnOldUR]

For the sake of understanding, what is he comparing to? 50% lower than if you used... what?

In the piece he consistently uses "brewer" referring to professionals and "homebrewer" when referring to us. So when he say," Keep in mind that these suggested rates are for repitching harvested yeast, because that is what brewers are doing most of the time." I took that to mean a fresh slurry drawn from a conical once fermentation had stopped. Probably a few days to a week old.

Oh, and I've often gotten yeast dated less than a week old. And I've heard that Wyeast goes to great lengths to be sure the yeast gets to there suppliers fresh and healthy.

Leftover yeast from another batch that's been sitting under beer for 3 weeks.

And while I’m at bucking self proclaimed HBT wisdom, this is exactly why I transfer most of my beers in less than two weeks, just a few days after fermentation has stopped. Plenty of time for the yeast to clean up while maintaining their health and vitality for the next few batches.

 

[BrewKnurd]

In the piece he consistently uses "brewer" referring to professionals and "homebrewer" when referring to us. So when he say," Keep in mind that these suggested rates are for repitching harvested yeast, because that is what brewers are doing most of the time." I took that to mean a fresh slurry drawn from a conical once fermentation had stopped. Probably a few days to a week old.

Gotcha. Well, I would argue that the conditions of a starter probably more closely match lab propagation conditions than they do brewery fermentation conditions, so the fact that fresh yeast can be pitched at half the rate of re-pitched slurry does not necessarily mean the same is true when comparing fresh yeast to yeast fresh out of a starter. But I surely don't know for sure, and its honestly probably purely academic at this point. I'm ok with accepting that we may not agree on this specific detail.

Oh, and I've often gotten yeast dated less than a week old. And I've heard that Wyeast goes to great lengths to be sure the yeast gets to there suppliers fresh and healthy.

I was mostly just giving you a hard time on that one. But, in seriousness, it is possible to get yeast which is in close to "lab fresh" conditions. But the honest reality is that you have no way whatsoever to ensure that you have that, regardless of the date on the package. You really know nothing about what happened to that yeast after it left the lab. That said, I will fgladly grant you that there are much bigger things to worry about in homebrewing.

 

[AnOldUR]

Yeah. A lot of this is a vague and open to interpretation. I’m signed up for a seminar with Owen Lingley from Wyeast in a few weeks. Hope to be able to pick his brain and get answers to some of these questions.

It’s been interesting talking it through with you. This gives me more fuel for what to ask at the seminar.

 

[BrewKnurd]

Yeah. A lot of this is a vague and open to interpretation. I’m signed up for a seminar with Owen Lingley from Wyeast in a few weeks. Hope to be able to pick his brain and get answers to some of these questions.

Sweet.

It’s been interesting talking it through with you. This gives me more fuel for what to ask at the seminar.

Its amazing what interesting conversations can be had when no one gets all preachy. Not that that ever happens here. :cross:

 

[OvaTersley]

Awww

 

[GrizBrew]

Awww

Hahhahaha, frickin hilarious!! I am so stealing that for future use

 

[AnOldUR]

Hahhahaha, frickin hilarious!! I am so stealing that for future use

That's the same thing Ovary said when he saw someone else post that picture.

Too bad he couldn't wait until it actually made sense.




But what the heck, any excuse to look at oily man ass is worth it. Right?

 

[OvaTersley]

Just having a little fun, man. No reason to get all butt hurt about it.

 

[benko]

I feel a little guilty because I'm so lazy that I'll pay for four wyeast packs for my lagers just because I don't want to mess with making a starter.

 

[Rake_Rocko]

Just had a question for everyone.... I've had my starter on the stir plate for 12 hours now and there really hasn't been much krausen at all in the flask. I was just wondering if this was normal? Here's a picture of it..






..I'm assuming it's actually done fermenting. I plan to chill and decant before pitching. What do you think?