Homebrewers Association | AHA Forum

General Category => Yeast and Fermentation => Topic started by: Descardeci on September 11, 2019, 12:32:59 PM

Title: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: Descardeci on September 11, 2019, 12:32:59 PM
Hey folks, how you guys are?
What you been brewing?
So folks, I’m doing my first big beer, only 2,5 gallon each, next week, a Belgian dark strong ale and a clone from Midas touch with some changes, with 1,091 and 1,088, but I’m think doing a starter with a abbey 256 fermentis, a starter of 1,5 L (0.4 gallon), then pour 1l (0.26 gallon) in one and give the another 0,5 L (0.16 gallon)  then propagation to 1 L (0.26 gallon) then pour in the other batch. I’m study about and I Know some people prefer buy 2 pack of the same yeast, but I’m curious about doing the propagation. Anyone try this already?
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: Bob357 on September 11, 2019, 02:26:04 PM
Overbuilding starters has been a well used technique for several years now. Making starters with dry yeast isn't all that popular, but I've been doing it for some time with great results.

I don't assume 200B cells per packet, but instead figure 10B per gram. This is the number I enter into the starter tool.  Although it may not be necessary, I always rehydrate first. After rehydrating I treat the yeast just as I would liquid yeast. 
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: Kevin on September 11, 2019, 03:17:36 PM
My best starters for big beers are a smaller beer. Make a smaller OG beer around 1.040 - 1.045 (maybe up to 1.050) and the day you are ready to rack or bottle this one, brew your big beer and put it right on top of the small beers yeast cake.
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: Todd H. on September 11, 2019, 03:52:10 PM
I don't assume 200B cells per packet, but instead figure 10B per gram. This is the number I enter into the starter tool.  Although it may not be necessary, I always rehydrate first. After rehydrating I treat the yeast just as I would liquid yeast.

Last year I counted S-23 and 34/70 out of curiosity.  S-23 came in at 24b/gram and 34/70 at 21b/gram.  Obviously that's those packets of those strains, but it's possible yours might have more than 10b/gram.  Still, if making a starter makes good beer and you don't mind doing it, who cares what your initial cell count is.
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: denny on September 11, 2019, 04:23:56 PM
I have come to the point where I don't care nearly as much about cell count as yeast health.
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: ynotbrusum on September 11, 2019, 07:30:07 PM
I have come to the point where I don't care nearly as much about cell count as yeast health.

Yes.  The nuclear bomb analogy by Mark V. comes to mind... if it’s vital and active, the cell numbers shouldn’t mean much.  So no need to pitch huge starters, just use highly active ones.
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: denny on September 11, 2019, 08:42:59 PM
I have come to the point where I don't care nearly as much about cell count as yeast health.

Yes.  The nuclear bomb analogy by Mark V. comes to mind... if it’s vital and active, the cell numbers shouldn’t mean much.  So no need to pitch huge starters, just use highly active ones.

Which is exactly what I've been doing the last few years.  AAMOF, when I described the method to Chris White, he said "that's great!  Homebrewers are too hung up on numbers"
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: Descardeci on September 12, 2019, 02:34:59 PM
I have come to the point where I don't care nearly as much about cell count as yeast health.

Yes.  The nuclear bomb analogy by Mark V. comes to mind... if it’s vital and active, the cell numbers shouldn’t mean much.  So no need to pitch huge starters, just use highly active ones.

First of all thanks all for the answers, and now which size of starter would recommend to those bier? I’m think 0,26 to 0,4 gallon, but this will reduce my OG of the beer?
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: Kevin on September 12, 2019, 03:10:17 PM
I have come to the point where I don't care nearly as much about cell count as yeast health.

Yes.  The nuclear bomb analogy by Mark V. comes to mind... if it’s vital and active, the cell numbers shouldn’t mean much.  So no need to pitch huge starters, just use highly active ones.

First of all thanks all for the answers, and now which size of starter would recommend to those bier? I’m think 0,26 to 0,4 gallon, but this will reduce my OG of the beer?

Well, what Denny is talking about is the Shaken Not Stirred method which is typically one quart of starter medium in a one gallon container. I would be curious to hear from Denny his thoughts on the size of a SNS starter when making a high gravity beer... 1.080 and up.
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: denny on September 12, 2019, 03:49:52 PM
I have come to the point where I don't care nearly as much about cell count as yeast health.

Yes.  The nuclear bomb analogy by Mark V. comes to mind... if it’s vital and active, the cell numbers shouldn’t mean much.  So no need to pitch huge starters, just use highly active ones.

First of all thanks all for the answers, and now which size of starter would recommend to those bier? I’m think 0,26 to 0,4 gallon, but this will reduce my OG of the beer?

Well, what Denny is talking about is the Shaken Not Stirred method which is typically one quart of starter medium in a one gallon container. I would be curious to hear from Denny his thoughts on the size of a SNS starter when making a high gravity beer... 1.080 and up.

In that case, I make a lower gravity beer first and then use the slurry.  But for a small 5 gal.batch, I think the usual SNS method would work.
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: Steve Ruch on September 12, 2019, 06:12:31 PM
I have come to the point where I don't care nearly as much about cell count as yeast health.

Yes.  The nuclear bomb analogy by Mark V. comes to mind... if it’s vital and active, the cell numbers shouldn’t mean much.  So no need to pitch huge starters, just use highly active ones.

First of all thanks all for the answers, and now which size of starter would recommend to those bier? I’m think 0,26 to 0,4 gallon, but this will reduce my OG of the beer?

Well, what Denny is talking about is the Shaken Not Stirred method which is typically one quart of starter medium in a one gallon container. I would be curious to hear from Denny his thoughts on the size of a SNS starter when making a high gravity beer... 1.080 and up.

In that case, I make a lower gravity beer first and then use the slurry.  But for a small 5 gal.batch, I think the usual SNS method would work.
How about for a 2.5-3 gallon batch of 1.080-1.100? Or higher?
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: denny on September 12, 2019, 06:42:15 PM
I have come to the point where I don't care nearly as much about cell count as yeast health.

Yes.  The nuclear bomb analogy by Mark V. comes to mind... if it’s vital and active, the cell numbers shouldn’t mean much.  So no need to pitch huge starters, just use highly active ones.

First of all thanks all for the answers, and now which size of starter would recommend to those bier? I’m think 0,26 to 0,4 gallon, but this will reduce my OG of the beer?

Well, what Denny is talking about is the Shaken Not Stirred method which is typically one quart of starter medium in a one gallon container. I would be curious to hear from Denny his thoughts on the size of a SNS starter when making a high gravity beer... 1.080 and up.

In that case, I make a lower gravity beer first and then use the slurry.  But for a small 5 gal.batch, I think the usual SNS method would work.
How about for a 2.5-3 gallon batch of 1.080-1.100? Or higher?

I think I'd go for the standard SNS.  Higher than 1.100...who knows.  I don't think I'd do that without slurry.
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: BrewnWKopperKat on September 12, 2019, 11:03:10 PM
Making starters with dry yeast isn't all that popular, but I've been doing it for some time with great results.

Do you make starters with dry yeast for all your batches or just for "special situations" (for example, high gravity wort)? 
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: smkranz on September 13, 2019, 12:29:18 AM
No starter is necessary.  Just rehydrate, or direct pitch.  I attended a Fermentis presentation at our LHBS and came away with this presentation.  Check out page 24 for a comparison of pitching into various media, including rehydrating in water or wort.  My results by direct pitching into big beers have been great.  Hope the link works:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yYtrJABYxZ2XvKEnMj_OfShpl8OyPNHM/view?usp=sharing
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: BrewnWKopperKat on September 13, 2019, 10:19:30 AM
No starter is necessary.  Just rehydrate, or direct pitch.  I attended a Fermentis presentation at our LHBS and came away with this presentation.  Check out page 24 for a comparison of pitching into various media, including rehydrating in water or wort.  My results by direct pitching into big beers have been great.  Hope the link works:

Link works, thanks for sharing.  Looks like this presentation is changing slightly over time (some new to me information in the presentation you provided).  Wish Fermentis would put this at their web site so it would be easier for everyone to share a common base of knowledge. 

When I started brewing (much earlier in this decade), the kits I used recommended pitching dry.  I got good results so I kept pitching dry. I would try rehydrating occasionally, but never noticed a difference.  So it's good to see the data matches my results.  About a year ago, the "way back machine / internet archives" had US-56 and S-04 product information sheets from around 2012.  Looks like there was a sound basis for kits suggesting pitching dry. 

So I remain curious about why and when people choose to make starters with dry yeast.  Sometimes it's a cost factor.   Sometimes it's shipping (dry yeast appears to be much less sensitive to heat/cold during shipping).  There have been various discussions around flavor differences in the 0th (dry) generation of the yeast when compared to the later generations.   A recent (June 2019) HomeBrewTalk discussion ("Can we address the dry yeast yeast starter concept again?") may also be an interesting read.

I'm looking at brewing a couple of big beers (small batches) side by side this fall.  So I'm definitely interested in any insights that people have when using starters with dry yeast. 
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: brian_welch on September 13, 2019, 12:47:37 PM
There is a three page "sponsored content"/scientific article from Fermentis about the new Easy to Use/E2U dry yeast in the September 2019 issue Brew Your Own magazine.

They don't really talk about starters, but rather pitching directly vs. rehydrating the yeast in water vs. rehydrating the yeast in wort (which could be a starter, I guess).  If you do make a starter, I wouldn't follow the shaken not stirred method, based on this warning (emphasis theirs):

"there is no need to oxygenate the wort when using E2U yeast by Fermentis (due to our production process) and DO NOT shake the flask extremely vigorously when you are rehydrating the yeasts."
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: smkranz on September 13, 2019, 02:06:42 PM
If you do make a starter, I wouldn't follow the shaken not stirred method, based on this warning (emphasis theirs):

"there is no need to oxygenate the wort when using E2U yeast by Fermentis (due to our production process) and DO NOT shake the flask extremely vigorously when you are rehydrating the yeasts."

Yup, this is consistent with what we were told by the Fermentis rep, the reason being that vigorous shaking or aeration during rehydration causes physical damage to the yeast cells, reducing overall viability of the pitch.
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: denny on September 13, 2019, 02:34:56 PM
Both Fermentis and Lallemand now say no starter, no rehydration.
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: Robert on September 13, 2019, 04:37:01 PM
Both Fermentis and Lallemand now say no starter, no rehydration.
I've seen elsewhere that Lallemand is now again recommending in presentations not to do starters, but to rehydrate.  Yet papers from 20+ years ago contradicted this.  Very confusing.
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: BrewBama on September 13, 2019, 04:42:51 PM
From the Fermentis app I installed yesterday:

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190913/6eebc4612b6df7b4f9da533a621de6be.jpg)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: denny on September 13, 2019, 05:29:22 PM
Both Fermentis and Lallemand now say no starter, no rehydration.
I've seen elsewhere that Lallemand is now again recommending in presentations not to do starters, but to rehydrate.  Yet papers from 20+ years ago contradicted this.  Very confusing.

I spoke wituu a biologist at Lallemand a few weeks ago. He said he didn't know why they ever told people to rehydrate.  I spent some time with Lallemand's North American sales mgr. about a week ago and he said the same thing.
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: Robert on September 13, 2019, 06:11:49 PM
Screenshot of a posting elsewhere of a slide from a very recent ASBC/MBAA presentation.  In case it's illegible, it says best practice is rehydration in either sterile, salt-adjusted brewing water or diluted (2°-5°P) wort to avoid cytolytic shock.   Sounds like ancient history, doesn't it?

Meanwhile, studies have long shown that no matter how you pitch, the fermentation ends up at the same goal at the same time.  Wonder if it's not the same principle as vitality starters.  Sure you kill some yeast, but what's left is so dang healthy, who cares?  I've always worried that rehydration  could be counterproductive, because the delay involved could allow the dry yeast to consume all those wonderful reserves the production process endows them with before they get into the wort, disrupting their metabolism.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190913/0e38b9404ab49108eae1a345236d8e1f.jpg)
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: denny on September 13, 2019, 06:30:04 PM
That's always been my theory about rehydrating dry yeast...so what if some dies since you have so much to sort with.  It's never failed me.
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: Descardeci on September 17, 2019, 05:48:21 PM
No starter is necessary.  Just rehydrate, or direct pitch.  I attended a Fermentis presentation at our LHBS and came away with this presentation.  Check out page 24 for a comparison of pitching into various media, including rehydrating in water or wort.  My results by direct pitching into big beers have been great.  Hope the link works:

Link works, thanks for sharing.  Looks like this presentation is changing slightly over time (some new to me information in the presentation you provided).  Wish Fermentis would put this at their web site so it would be easier for everyone to share a common base of knowledge. 

When I started brewing (much earlier in this decade), the kits I used recommended pitching dry.  I got good results so I kept pitching dry. I would try rehydrating occasionally, but never noticed a difference.  So it's good to see the data matches my results.  About a year ago, the "way back machine / internet archives" had US-56 and S-04 product information sheets from around 2012.  Looks like there was a sound basis for kits suggesting pitching dry. 

So I remain curious about why and when people choose to make starters with dry yeast.  Sometimes it's a cost factor.   Sometimes it's shipping (dry yeast appears to be much less sensitive to heat/cold during shipping).  There have been various discussions around flavor differences in the 0th (dry) generation of the yeast when compared to the later generations.   A recent (June 2019) HomeBrewTalk discussion ("Can we address the dry yeast yeast starter concept again?") may also be an interesting read.

I'm looking at brewing a couple of big beers (small batches) side by side this fall.  So I'm definitely interested in any insights that people have when using starters with dry yeast.

I never had a problem with pitching dry, but have in mind that i need did a big beer, 1060 or higher OG, and also that when pitching dry we gonna lose some yeast, I didnt build a starter, and here why, those big beer is a small batches, so put 1 liter or 1.5 liter starter would get a lot of my production, that is 2.5 gallon, so just spent a little more on 2 dry yeast, and I rehydrated the yeast, fermentation already took off, after complete gonna lagering those 2 for 1 month.
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: Descardeci on September 17, 2019, 05:51:07 PM
That's always been my theory about rehydrating dry yeast...so what if some dies since you have so much to sort with.  It's never failed me.

Denny I agree with you, for me this always work, but what happen when you are build a big beer? I rehydrated the BE 256, 1 package either for 2,5 gallons, for those 2 big beers I brew, but just a thing like better safe than sorry, but would make a difference?
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: denny on September 17, 2019, 06:05:56 PM
That's always been my theory about rehydrating dry yeast...so what if some dies since you have so much to sort with.  It's never failed me.

Denny I agree with you, for me this always work, but what happen when you are build a big beer? I rehydrated the BE 256, 1 package either for 2,5 gallons, for those 2 big beers I brew, but just a thing like better safe than sorry, but would make a difference?

I frequently pitch a sin gel pack without rehydrating in beers up to 1.075.  Might be able to go a bit higher OG, but I haven't tried.
Title: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: BrewBama on October 12, 2019, 12:42:39 PM
From the Fermentis app I installed yesterday:

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190913/6eebc4612b6df7b4f9da533a621de6be.jpg)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In a way, given the illustration above, Fermentis is directing rehydration regardless of method used. Either sprinkle the yeast in wort or water, wait 15 minutes (aka rehydrate), and add more wort to stir or stir yourself and pitch.

I frequently pitch a sin gel pack without rehydrating in beers up to 1.075.  Might be able to go a bit higher OG, but I haven't tried.

In a presentation at NHC, Fermentis recommended 1g per 1L wort.  I don’t recall the OG but I think it was much more pedestrian.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: Robert on October 12, 2019, 01:46:29 PM
From the Fermentis app I installed yesterday:

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190913/6eebc4612b6df7b4f9da533a621de6be.jpg)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In a way, given the illustration above, Fermentis is directing rehydration regardless of method used. Either sprinkle the yeast in wort or water, wait 15 minutes (aka rehydrate), and add more wort to stir or stir yourself and pitch.

I frequently pitch a sin gel pack without rehydrating in beers up to 1.075.  Might be able to go a bit higher OG, but I haven't tried.

In a presentation at NHC, Fermentis recommended 1g per 1L wort.  I don’t recall the OG but I think it was much more pedestrian.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Those recommendations are specifically for pitching bricks into a commercial fermentation.  I think it is to ensure that the yeast gets evenly distributed in the wort.  (Elsewhere they even suggest aeration from the bottom of the cone as a means to ensure even mixing, although they are clear that aeration per se is unnecessary.)  I think that's maybe less of a problem on the homebrew scale, where it's easy to sprinkle the yeast evenly over the whole surface and let it sink on its own.  They really don't recommend an actual hydration step in the traditional sense, as they say they add a surfactant coating (sorbitan monostearate) before drying, which limits the rate at which liquid is admitted to the cell, preventing osmotic shock.  So they say.  Neither of the processes described in that illustration matches the lengthy old process of rehydration in warm water and gradual attemperation with aliquots of wort.
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: denny on October 12, 2019, 02:54:51 PM
You guys are repeating old information.  Fermentis no longer recommends rehydrating for homebrewers.  Same for Lallemand.
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: BrewBama on October 12, 2019, 03:15:18 PM
Maybe ...but as of this AM on their app under ‘how to pitch E2U’ I get that graphic. Maybe there’s a lag in the web guys vs the tech guys.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: denny on October 12, 2019, 04:22:04 PM
Maybe ...but as of this AM on their app under ‘how to pitch E2U’ I get that graphic. Maybe there’s a lag in the web guys vs the tech guys.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There definitely is a lag. Fermentis has been saying no rehydration or starter in talks at xonfer3nces for a couple years.  I got the same info directly from a microbiologist at Lallemand a month or so ago.
Title: Re: Dry yeast split, a starter would work?
Post by: Robert on October 12, 2019, 04:37:51 PM
And then there's that picture I posted above of a slide unequivocally stressing  the need for rehydration,  from a presentation by Lallemand just a month or so ago. 

Denny, I think you hit it on the head when you said they don't recommend rehydration *for homebrewers. *   There may be good reasons for professionals to do it.  But on the homebrew scale,  taking into account the atom bomb/hand grenade analogy, the risks (contamination, damage through improper procedure,  etc.) probably outweigh the benefits.  However much good yeast ends up in the wort, it will, like a vitality starter, take off quickly and be sufficient.  I don't think it is merely trying not to intimidate homebrewers with elaborate procedures, but that their requirements really are different.