Author Topic: New starter procedure trial  (Read 57552 times)

Offline mabrungard

  • I spend way too much time on the AHA forum
  • ********
  • Posts: 2807
  • Water matters!
    • Bru'n Water
Re: New starter procedure trial
« Reply #135 on: October 05, 2015, 07:00:19 pm »
This just in. On the AHA Forum there was a derailment causing injury to the feelings of several so called "newby brewers". Many of them were rushed to the hospital for hugs and warm milk. One gentleman was heard mumbling "Thats not why I bew IPAs. You dont know me, you dont know me"

Yep
Martin B
Carmel, IN

BJCP National
Foam Blowers of Indiana (FBI)

Brewing Water Information at:
https://www.brunwater.com/

Like Bru'n Water on Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/Brun-Water-464551136933908/?ref=bookmarks

Offline pete b

  • Official Poobah of No Life. (I Got Ban Hammered by Drew)
  • *********
  • Posts: 3886
  • Barre, Ma
Re: New starter procedure trial
« Reply #136 on: October 05, 2015, 07:00:24 pm »
All I know is that I have just read two long threads where Denny says nice things about "shaken, not stirred" starters and Mark says nice things about batch sparging.
Denny: "So far, there hasn't been a downside to this technique. The starter was simpler to make and tool less DME, so it was less expensive than my usual starter. Of course, the proof is in the glass. I'll report on the finished beer in a couple weeks or so."
Mark: "The technique that Denny is recommending [batch sparging]is simpler to execute correctly and more lauter tun design agnostic...  Depending on the size of the batch, batch sparging can be a much faster process than continuous sparging."
I think I bumped my head and woke up in an alternate universe.
Don't let the bastards cheer you up.

Offline denny

  • Administrator
  • Retired with too much time on my hands
  • *****
  • Posts: 24774
  • Noti OR [1991.4, 287.6deg] AR
    • Dennybrew
Re: New starter procedure trial
« Reply #137 on: October 05, 2015, 07:40:42 pm »
Mark, you know that I don't really care what the lit says except in the context of giving me something to think about and play with.

Anyway, kegged the beer just now and the results are in....http://www.experimentalbrew.com/blogs/denny/old-dognew-tricksthe-followup
Life begins at 60.....1.060, that is!

www.dennybrew.com

The best, sharpest, funniest, weirdest and most knowledgable minds in home brewing contribute on the AHA forum. - Alewyfe

"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell

Offline Joe Sr.

  • Official Poobah of No Life. (I Got Ban Hammered by Drew)
  • *********
  • Posts: 4459
  • Chicago - NORTH SIDE
Re: New starter procedure trial
« Reply #138 on: October 05, 2015, 07:46:49 pm »
Stan Hieronymus called it flavor masking in highly hopped beers, said it was real, and hides defects that would be an issue in a more subtle style. In noise work, masking refers to a sound at one frequency making another frequency unintelligible. A setting with high amplitude low frequencies, some factories, will make speech recognition a problem.

Again, I'm not saying the flavor masking doesn't exist.  However, I don't think people are making IPAs and IIPAs because they're making bad beer and want to cover it up.  There may actually be flaws in the beer (even taint, though how that could be inadvertent, I don't know) that are covered up by the hops, but the two facts are not necessarily connected.

Denny has a good point about the certainty with which Mark makes some statements.  I think it can be off putting at times, particularly to newer brewers or people who don't spend as much time on here as some of us.
It's all in the reflexes. - Jack Burton

Offline pete b

  • Official Poobah of No Life. (I Got Ban Hammered by Drew)
  • *********
  • Posts: 3886
  • Barre, Ma
Re: New starter procedure trial
« Reply #139 on: October 05, 2015, 08:00:00 pm »
Stan Hieronymus called it flavor masking in highly hopped beers, said it was real, and hides defects that would be an issue in a more subtle style. In noise work, masking refers to a sound at one frequency making another frequency unintelligible. A setting with high amplitude low frequencies, some factories, will make speech recognition a problem.

Again, I'm not saying the flavor masking doesn't exist.  However, I don't think people are making IPAs and IIPAs because they're making bad beer and want to cover it up.  There may actually be flaws in the beer (even taint, though how that could be inadvertent, I don't know) that are covered up by the hops, but the two facts are not necessarily connected.

Denny has a good point about the certainty with which Mark makes some statements.  I think it can be off putting at times, particularly to newer brewers or people who don't spend as much time on here as some of us.

I agree that this effect exists but that it is a side effect. I just don't see people saying "rather than learn how to make good beer I'm going to just add a crazy amount of hops". OTOH I would be willing to bet that many new brewers who make hoppy (or really roasty beers) think they are great brewers until they start making more balanced or subtle styles.
Don't let the bastards cheer you up.

Offline dilluh98

  • Brewmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 575
Re: New starter procedure trial
« Reply #140 on: October 05, 2015, 08:33:00 pm »
Denny's findings, to me, indicate that having 5% of your wort come from that 1 L of ~1.030 DME in the starter really has no impact on the final flavor of the beer. This was one of my concerns when starting down the "shaken not stirred" path to the point where I was nipping off a liter of the main wort to make a native starter. But Denny's data point, among many others including Mark's statement about how good the shaken starter smells at high krausen, has me leaning toward just making the darn DME starter already and RDWHAHB.

rabeb25

  • Guest
Re: New starter procedure trial
« Reply #141 on: October 05, 2015, 08:45:40 pm »
WELL, if you really wanted to do it right.. you would take the first bit of your cooled wort, do this starter method, and pitch that into the beer with the rest of the wort...Kind of a hybrid between this method and Drauflassen. *Puts down the mic, and slowly backs away into the curtain. *

Offline blatz

  • Official Poobah of No Life. (I Got Ban Hammered by Drew)
  • *********
  • Posts: 3511
  • Paul Blatz - Jupiter, FL
Re: New starter procedure trial
« Reply #142 on: October 05, 2015, 08:48:51 pm »
WELL, if you really wanted to do it right.. you would take the first bit of your cooled wort, do this starter method, and pitch that into the beer with the rest of the wort...Kind of a hybrid between this method and Drauflassen. *Puts down the mic, and slowly backs away into the curtain. *

thats my preferred method now - its easier, don't need to mess with DME and it doesn't take that long to hit HK.
The happiest people don’t necessarily have the best of everything; they just make the best of everything they have.

BJCP National: F0281

Offline dilluh98

  • Brewmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 575
Re: New starter procedure trial
« Reply #143 on: October 05, 2015, 08:49:10 pm »
WELL, if you really wanted to do it right.. you would take the first bit of your cooled wort, do this starter method, and pitch that into the beer with the rest of the wort...Kind of a hybrid between this method and Drauflassen. *Puts down the mic, and slowly backs away into the curtain. *

That's what I was doing. But, that got me thinking about the wisdom of pitching an old-ish WLP tube into 1.070 wort as a starter...

Offline dilluh98

  • Brewmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 575
Re: New starter procedure trial
« Reply #144 on: October 05, 2015, 08:52:51 pm »
WELL, if you really wanted to do it right.. you would take the first bit of your cooled wort, do this starter method, and pitch that into the beer with the rest of the wort...Kind of a hybrid between this method and Drauflassen. *Puts down the mic, and slowly backs away into the curtain. *

thats my preferred method now - its easier, don't need to mess with DME and it doesn't take that long to hit HK.

I've noticed this as well. Not sure if it was because I was pitching a 3rd generation of a yeast or that it was starter from an actual beer wort (does this matter, Mark?) but I've hit high krausen in 6 hours using this method on 1.050 OG beers.

rabeb25

  • Guest
Re: New starter procedure trial
« Reply #145 on: October 05, 2015, 08:58:42 pm »
WELL, if you really wanted to do it right.. you would take the first bit of your cooled wort, do this starter method, and pitch that into the beer with the rest of the wort...Kind of a hybrid between this method and Drauflassen. *Puts down the mic, and slowly backs away into the curtain. *

thats my preferred method now - its easier, don't need to mess with DME and it doesn't take that long to hit HK.

I've noticed this as well. Not sure if it was because I was pitching a 3rd generation of a yeast or that it was starter from an actual beer wort (does this matter, Mark?) but I've hit high krausen in 6 hours using this method on 1.050 OG beers.

Correct, which gives you just enough time to crash cool the fermenter, dump the trub, oxygenate, and pitch. ;)

evil_morty

  • Guest
Re: New starter procedure trial
« Reply #146 on: October 05, 2015, 09:26:51 pm »
see - you guys have me worried.  if I start my starter at night the day before the brew I don't to have missed the right time to pitch by the time my wort is chilled and ready to receive the yeast!

Offline dilluh98

  • Brewmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 575
Re: New starter procedure trial
« Reply #147 on: October 05, 2015, 09:48:29 pm »
There's no perfect answer. Best advice is to keep excellent notes so that you can zero in on the timing aspect of it whether you use the native starter method or go with a DME-based starter. Eventually you should be able to get to a point where you can say: here's 'ABC' yeast that's in its Y generation of pitching. It should hit high krausen in 1.0x0 wort in ~Z hours based on past experience.

Offline brewday

  • Brewer
  • ****
  • Posts: 453
  • Chicago
Re: New starter procedure trial
« Reply #148 on: October 05, 2015, 09:53:31 pm »
WELL, if you really wanted to do it right.. you would take the first bit of your cooled wort, do this starter method, and pitch that into the beer with the rest of the wort...Kind of a hybrid between this method and Drauflassen. *Puts down the mic, and slowly backs away into the curtain. *

thats my preferred method now - its easier, don't need to mess with DME and it doesn't take that long to hit HK.

+1
Jon Weaver

Offline brewinhard

  • Official Poobah of No Life. (I Got Ban Hammered by Drew)
  • *********
  • Posts: 3272
Re: New starter procedure trial
« Reply #149 on: October 05, 2015, 10:54:46 pm »
see - you guys have me worried.  if I start my starter at night the day before the brew I don't to have missed the right time to pitch by the time my wort is chilled and ready to receive the yeast!

Yes.  The timing would sure take some getting used to. I feel that if I make a starter at 8 pm the night before brew day (1 quart, shaken) that it would probably reach high krausen prior to 1-2 pm the next afternoon when I want to pitch my yeast.  I could be wrong though.  Guess I have to try it out for myself.