Author Topic: Shaken not stirred lager starter?  (Read 18807 times)

S. cerevisiae

  • Guest
Re: Shaken not stirred lager starter?
« Reply #15 on: September 28, 2015, 08:39:03 pm »
First and foremost, brewing yeast cells do not need to be stirred to remain in suspension, at least not before high krausen is reached.  Most brewing yeast strains exhibit what is known as NewFlo flocculation (the genes that are responsible for flocculation are known as FLO genes).  NewFlo strains do not flocculate until glucose, mannose, maltose, sucrose, and maltotriose have reached a genetically set level.   

At this point, the only positive that stir plates bring to the table when propagating brewing yeast strains is degassing of the medium.  However, CO2 build up is not much of a problem when a culture is pitched 12 hours after it is inoculated.

To answer your question, is why would one want to use a stir plate when it basically brings little to the table and risks exposing the cells to continuous shear stress (even a slowly stirred culture undergoes turbulent flow)?  Why not just go with an easier and lower cost method that does not unnecessarily waste resources?  If stir plates are the answer, why do we not stir our batches of beer?  It would be easily to do with a continuous duty motor and a sanitized stainless steel paint stirrer.  A batch of beer would more than likely benefit more from continuous stirring than a culture because stirring would keep the cells in suspension long after glucose, mannose, maltose, sucrose, and maltotriose levels have fallen below the levels encoded a yeast strain's genetics.

Offline rcemech

  • 1st Kit
  • *
  • Posts: 17
Re: Shaken not stirred lager starter?
« Reply #16 on: September 28, 2015, 08:56:44 pm »
First and foremost, brewing yeast cells do not need to be stirred to remain in suspension, at least not before high krausen is reached.  Most brewing yeast strains exhibit what is known as NewFlo flocculation (the genes that are responsible for flocculation are known as FLO genes).  NewFlo strains do not flocculate until glucose, mannose, maltose, sucrose, and maltotriose have reached a genetically set level.   

At this point, the only positive that stir plates bring to the table when propagating brewing yeast strains is degassing of the medium.  However, CO2 build up is not much of a problem when a culture is pitched 12 hours after it is inoculated.

To answer your question, is why would one want to use a stir plate when it basically brings little to the table and risks exposing the cells to continuous shear stress (even a slowly stirred culture undergoes turbulent flow)?  Why not just go with an easier and lower cost method that does not unnecessarily waste resources?  If stir plates are the answer, why do we not stir our batches of beer?  It would be easily to do with a continuous duty motor and a sanitized stainless steel paint stirrer.  A batch of beer would more than likely benefit more from continuous stirring than a culture because stirring would keep the cells in suspension long after glucose, mannose, maltose, sucrose, and maltotriose levels have fallen below the levels encoded a yeast strain's genetics.

It might be practical for a 5 gallon batch, but using your 4/1 method could become troublesome for a 10 gallon plus batch.

I really appreciate your posts. The rabbit hole has been drilled much deeper here now and it looks like I'm gonna have to cut the belay line.

S. cerevisiae

  • Guest
Re: Shaken not stirred lager starter?
« Reply #17 on: September 28, 2015, 09:39:12 pm »
It might be practical for a 5 gallon batch, but using your 4/1 method could become troublesome for a 10 gallon plus batch.

I was referring to continuously stirring a 5-gallon batch with a stirrer and a motor.  I know very few people who would be able to shake 5 gallons of wort that vigorously.

Quote
The rabbit hole has been drilled much deeper here now and it looks like I'm gonna have to cut the belay line.

I am not attempting to make anyone's life more difficult.  In fact, I am attempting to remove a barrier to entry and reduce the complexity of moving to liquid yeast cultures.  So many new brewers today believe that a stir plate, a stir bar, and an Erlenmeyer flask are required to produce a healthy liquid culture that many choose to stick with dry yeast.   A one U.S. gallon glass jug can often be acquired as waste that once held juice or vinegar.  Thirty-eight millimeter polyseal reusable caps can usually be had for less than a dollar each.  It does not get much lower cost than a glass jug that would have more than likely found its way into a landfill and less than a dollar for a reusable cap.  That sure beats $70.00 to $150.00 for a stir plate, a couple of dollars for a stir bar, and another $20.00 to $25.00 for a 2L Erlenmeyer flask.  A process does not get much simpler than shaking.  All one needs to do after inoculating and shaking or shaking and inoculating is to loosen to cap enough that the culture can outgas, and then wait for high krausen to appear.
« Last Edit: September 28, 2015, 11:50:37 pm by S. cerevisiae »

Offline Stevie

  • Official Poobah of No Life. (I Got Ban Hammered by Drew)
  • *********
  • Posts: 6858
Re: Shaken not stirred lager starter?
« Reply #18 on: September 28, 2015, 09:53:39 pm »
Mark, I haven't used you method as I have been simply been getting fresh smack packs and brewing sub 1.040 beers that I then repitch at a thick rate of 60-100ml into my later batches. I do plan on trying it but will likely crash at krausen or pitch into 1 quart of the actual beer shaken to foam. That said, have you brought this to HBT or BN Forums yet? Not flaming, just curious if you had and what sort of reaction you received.

Offline hopfenundmalz

  • Global Moderator
  • I must live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 10252
  • Milford, MI
Re: Shaken not stirred lager starter?
« Reply #19 on: September 29, 2015, 12:11:11 am »
I want to say that now that the weather is turning cooler, the brewing will resume. The first beer will use US-05. The next will be some 022 Essex, and I will shake that starter like it owes me some big money. Will do a liter in a 4 liter jug to be more Metric in my process. I am an engineer!
Jeff Rankert
AHA Lifetime Member
BJCP National
Ann Arbor Brewers Guild
Home-brewing, not just a hobby, it is a lifestyle!

S. cerevisiae

  • Guest
Re: Shaken not stirred lager starter?
« Reply #20 on: September 29, 2015, 12:13:20 am »
As far as I am concerned, posting anything on HBT that goes against the narrative is asking for trouble.  I am too old to waste my time fighting with trolls, strawman sockpuppets, and cult of personality fanboys.  The BN is a "for profit" organization.  I post to this forum and a couple of British brewing forums.   

S. cerevisiae

  • Guest
Re: Shaken not stirred lager starter?
« Reply #21 on: September 29, 2015, 12:14:12 am »
Will do a liter in a 4 liter jug to be more Metric in my process. I am an engineer!

It's a curse, isn't it?  :D

S. cerevisiae

  • Guest
Re: Shaken not stirred lager starter?
« Reply #22 on: September 29, 2015, 12:23:08 am »
The next will be some 022 Essex

Where are you getting WLP022 this time of year?  I am going to open ferment next time I use that strain.  The beer that I made was not as fruity as I expected.

RPIScotty

  • Guest
Re: Shaken not stirred lager starter?
« Reply #23 on: September 29, 2015, 12:42:52 am »
Also an engineer and also trying this for my 1 gal batches next time. I've got another baby on the way but we will see when I can brew next! Count me in on the "Shake it like Thorogood from one Bourbon, one Scotch and one Beer is my tenant" method.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline rcemech

  • 1st Kit
  • *
  • Posts: 17
Re: Shaken not stirred lager starter?
« Reply #24 on: September 29, 2015, 01:04:05 am »
It might be practical for a 5 gallon batch, but using your 4/1 method could become troublesome for a 10 gallon plus batch.

I was referring to continuously stirring a 5-gallon batch with a stirrer and a motor.  I know very few people who would be able to shake 5 gallons of wort that vigorously.

Quote
The rabbit hole has been drilled much deeper here now and it looks like I'm gonna have to cut the belay line.

I am not attempting to make anyone's life more difficult.  In fact, I am attempting to remove a barrier to entry and reduce the complexity of moving to liquid yeast cultures.  So many new brewers today believe that a stir plate, a stir bar, and an Erlenmeyer flask are required to produce a healthy liquid culture that many choose to stick with dry yeast.   A one U.S. gallon glass jug can often be acquired as waste that once held juice or vinegar.  Thirty-eight millimeter polyseal reusable caps can usually be had for less than a dollar each.  It does not get much lower cost than a glass jug that would have more than likely found its way into a landfill and less than a dollar for a reusable cap.  That sure beats $70.00 to $150.00 for a stir plate, a couple of dollars for a stir bar, and another $20.00 to $25.00 for a 2L Erlenmeyer flask.  A process does not get much simpler than shaking.  All one needs to do after inoculating and shaking or shaking and inoculating is to loosen to cap enough that the culture can outgas, and then wait for high krausen to appear.

What would your procedure look like for a 15 gallon batch of <1.060 beer?

Also, by going deeper down the rabbit hole" I am praising your knowledge and you've awoken my desire to go back and learn a lot more about yeast/yeast management. It's a good thing!

Offline hopfenundmalz

  • Global Moderator
  • I must live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 10252
  • Milford, MI
Re: Shaken not stirred lager starter?
« Reply #25 on: September 29, 2015, 03:29:00 am »
The next will be some 022 Essex

Where are you getting WLP022 this time of year?  I am going to open ferment next time I use that strain.  The beer that I made was not as fruity as I expected.
A brewpub that under pitches and open ferment s and top crops.
Jeff Rankert
AHA Lifetime Member
BJCP National
Ann Arbor Brewers Guild
Home-brewing, not just a hobby, it is a lifestyle!

Offline riceral

  • Brewer
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
Re: Shaken not stirred lager starter?
« Reply #26 on: September 29, 2015, 02:49:13 pm »
As far as I am concerned, posting anything on HBT that goes against the narrative is asking for trouble.  I am too old to waste my time fighting with trolls, strawman sockpuppets, and cult of personality fanboys.  The BN is a "for profit" organization. I post to this forum and a couple of British brewing forums.

And I am glad you do. I am sometimes lost in your explanations from my limited knowledge, but I am learning and trying things as I go along.

I visit other sites and take things with a healthy dose of sketpticism. I don't post on any other site and only post here a few times.

I think we are benefiting from your thoughts and the thoughts and ideas of others who "goes against the narrative."
Ralph R.

Offline smokeymcb

  • Cellarman
  • **
  • Posts: 39
  • The Cooker of the Foods
Re: Shaken not stirred lager starter?
« Reply #27 on: September 29, 2015, 03:36:11 pm »
As far as I am concerned, posting anything on HBT that goes against the narrative is asking for trouble.  I am too old to waste my time fighting with trolls, strawman sockpuppets, and cult of personality fanboys.  The BN is a "for profit" organization. I post to this forum and a couple of British brewing forums.

And I am glad you do. I am sometimes lost in your explanations from my limited knowledge, but I am learning and trying things as I go along.

I visit other sites and take things with a healthy dose of sketpticism. I don't post on any other site and only post here a few times.

I think we are benefiting from your thoughts and the thoughts and ideas of others who "goes against the narrative."

I agree 100%!  I am a member of a bunch of brewing forums including the big one and I have noticed that any one going against the grain will be ridiculed by everyone until one of the "big name" members agrees.  Then its treated like common knowledge there.

I haven't been a member here long and haven't made many posts but I'd like to throw out a big "thumbs up" to the not only very knowledgeable but also very civil, open minded brewers who populate this place.  I've learned a lot in my short stay and will be learning even more with my attempt at a "underpitched" (as most would tell me) lager.

Again, thanks everyone...
Anyone got a lighter??

Rob C.

Offline 69franx

  • Official Poobah of No Life. (I Got Ban Hammered by Drew)
  • *********
  • Posts: 3205
  • Bloatarian Brewing League
Re: Shaken not stirred lager starter?
« Reply #28 on: September 29, 2015, 03:40:06 pm »
Rob, I think that the more time you spend here, the more you will like it and slowly spend a lot less time elsewhere. I never experienced issues on the other large site that I started with, but it was obvious to me as a newbie that I would learn better, faster, more here with more confidence in what I was hearing. Welcome aboard
Frank L.
Fermenting: Nothing (ugh!)
Conditioning: Nothing (UGH!)
In keg: Nothing (Double UGH!)
In the works:  House IPA, Dark Mild, Ballantine Ale clone(still trying to work this one into the schedule)

S. cerevisiae

  • Guest
Re: Shaken not stirred lager starter?
« Reply #29 on: September 29, 2015, 04:49:16 pm »
I think we are benefiting from your thoughts and the thoughts and ideas of others who "goes against the narrative."

I am a lightweight in that area compared to Denny and Marshall.