New approach to starters
- Thread starter Mark Farrall
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2018
- Messages
- 2,715
- Reaction score
- 5,061
- Points
- 113
Yeah...and that's with a pale dme. We'll see later today... Glad you like the plate....it's a computer fan, a light dimmer, a couple of magnets from a hard drive and a repurposed dish washer detergent container.
Pretty much same as mine except instead of dimmer I went a motor speed controller pretty much the same thing but with a transistor thrown in.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2017
- Messages
- 1,817
- Reaction score
- 2,379
- Points
- 113
Fermentation is starting to slow down on mine. Embarrassingly I'm not completely sure which is which. I think the first one is the low sugar, high nitrogen starter. I'll confirm once I get the tilts out of the beer. I'm actually surprised they're so similar as I didn't get to add much oxygen to the starters. I'm thinking a stir plate is a requirement for this approach, or maybe a fish tank pump with a hepa filter that I think HighVoltageMan suggested.
So the top one is finishing a few points higher which is a bit of a difference.
Yeah I think the stir bar method gets a good exchange of co2 and o2 through the vortex created from the bar more sanitary too since you can boil the bar and the flask and foil all in the starter medium prep.
I made the same mistake not labelling my Pilsner comparrison before hand
.I guess another comparrison for this Low C:N starter would be to do two starters at two plato give one 5g of nutrient and the other none and read the resulting gravity or better yet do a mini fermentation like you've done...
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2018
- Messages
- 2,715
- Reaction score
- 5,061
- Points
- 113
Well into the wort it went! Long brew day...but we got a 1065 albany ale and then I partigyled another high gravity brown with the first mash
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2015
- Messages
- 1,642
- Reaction score
- 2,578
- Points
- 113
Mark,
Did you ever figure out which is which? It looks like one attenuated more than the other. That's one one of the effects of this method, higher attenuation.
I hope to try this method out this weekend. I'm kind of excited about it, but then again, I'm boring as $h1+.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2017
- Messages
- 1,817
- Reaction score
- 2,379
- Points
- 113
It's definitely the one with lower and slower attenuation that used the low sugar option. Though I believe the limited number of times I was able to shake the starter has to count against my results. I was only shaking in the evening of the 48 hours it was active. So they both would have hit problems with lower oxygen and higher CO2 levels, which probably would have hit the low sugar starter harder.
I found the idea exciting and I'll now be looking at building my own stir plate and probably getting a pump to increase the oxygen, so I've got to be as boring as you.
Current fermentation profiles are:
I'm about to bottle one bottle of each and then combine them and add some Brett. and let it bulk age and turn it into the actual beer I'm trying to make. So this will be the last fermentation data for this batch. I'll post the triangle test results later.
Did you measure any in hydrometer Mark?
Pretty cool there is a difference in attenuation lines up with the expectations except the slower finish time...
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2017
- Messages
- 1,817
- Reaction score
- 2,379
- Points
- 113
Starting gravity was confirmed via hydrometer. I'll do another sample when I take a bottle for the comparison.
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2015
- Messages
- 1,642
- Reaction score
- 2,578
- Points
- 113
This looks interesting. It's a small scale Carlsberg propagation vessel. The vessel was tested, but with a higher gravity wort, so the yeast never went into aerobic metabolism.
https://braukaiser.com/wiki/index.php/Yeast_Propagator
I was also listen to another podcast (can't remember which one) where Chris White was being interviewed. He was a little coy and vague about how they propagate yeast at White Labs, but he did say that they use brewers wort. He said the yeast grow better at lower gravities, but he didn't elaborate.
https://braukaiser.com/wiki/index.php/Yeast_Propagator
I was also listen to another podcast (can't remember which one) where Chris White was being interviewed. He was a little coy and vague about how they propagate yeast at White Labs, but he did say that they use brewers wort. He said the yeast grow better at lower gravities, but he didn't elaborate.
similar to what you were thinking initially?
Now couple this with Low sugar to nitrogen and the growth should be even greater.
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2015
- Messages
- 1,642
- Reaction score
- 2,578
- Points
- 113
Yeah. Every great idea I have has been done already. Sigh.
I think this setup with high FAN and low gravity has some promise.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2017
- Messages
- 1,817
- Reaction score
- 2,379
- Points
- 113
FG around 2 points difference. With the normal starter finishing the lower.
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2015
- Messages
- 1,642
- Reaction score
- 2,578
- Points
- 113
I spun up some WLP007 last week for a brew on Friday. Unfortunately, I discovered a misunderstanding I had with this method (the podcast didn't help with that; it was insinuated that it would produce the same amount or more). A 2.5 liter starter at 1.008-1.012 gravity does not produce the same amount of yeast as a 2.5 liter starter with a gravity of 1.036. So I had a massive under pitch. Luckily, I had some Diamond yeast and made an IPL instead.
I haven't given up on it. I looked into a little more and think the key to this is the large amount of FAN available to the yeast. If the yeast is propagated at lower gravities and higher levels of FAN, the yeast is healthier and better able to handle the stresses of fermentation.
So I'm having another go at it. I spun up some Wyeast 2124 in a two liter starter at @ 1.019 and added 10 grams of Fermaid O per liter. Normally, I would make a 1 liter 1.039 starter followed by a 4 liter 1.039 starter to build up enough yeast. I'm still going to do the 4 liter starter after the 2 liter 1.019 starter, but I'm going to add 8 grams or so per liter of Fermaid O to help with yeast health. This yeast typically has an apparent attenuation of 77-78%, so If I see it bump up to 80% or so, it would be a good indication that it is an improvement.
Key take away. A four liter 1.008-1.012 with high levels of FAN starter grows about the same amount of yeast as a 1-1.5 liter starter of 1.036 wort. But, the yeast from the lower gravity starter is healthier due to the high levels of FAN and the introduction of oxygen in the beginning of the starter. At least I hope so.
I haven't given up on it. I looked into a little more and think the key to this is the large amount of FAN available to the yeast. If the yeast is propagated at lower gravities and higher levels of FAN, the yeast is healthier and better able to handle the stresses of fermentation.
So I'm having another go at it. I spun up some Wyeast 2124 in a two liter starter at @ 1.019 and added 10 grams of Fermaid O per liter. Normally, I would make a 1 liter 1.039 starter followed by a 4 liter 1.039 starter to build up enough yeast. I'm still going to do the 4 liter starter after the 2 liter 1.019 starter, but I'm going to add 8 grams or so per liter of Fermaid O to help with yeast health. This yeast typically has an apparent attenuation of 77-78%, so If I see it bump up to 80% or so, it would be a good indication that it is an improvement.
Key take away. A four liter 1.008-1.012 with high levels of FAN starter grows about the same amount of yeast as a 1-1.5 liter starter of 1.036 wort. But, the yeast from the lower gravity starter is healthier due to the high levels of FAN and the introduction of oxygen in the beginning of the starter. At least I hope so.
I've been thinking of having a go at installing a oxygen stone on the end of a stainless rod inserted through a rubber stopper bent so I rests against the edge of the Flask and using that heppa filter to pump air directly into the wort whilst stiring.
I've got the Stone I've got the stainless bulkhead probe I've got the Heppa filter and the air pump I just gotta get a rubber stopper and make the required holes.
Maybe this continuous oxygenation ontop of the stiring might help grow more yeast.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2017
- Messages
- 1,817
- Reaction score
- 2,379
- Points
- 113
I'd expect you'd have healthy yeast, but they'd have grown largely through fermentation with a bit of respiration. It's what I'll be doing until I can get more oxygen into my starters.
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2015
- Messages
- 1,642
- Reaction score
- 2,578
- Points
- 113
I made a German Pils with some ideas from this study. The yeast had to be built up to get the right pitch. So as mentioned in the previous post, I made a 2 liter 1.018 starter with 8-10 grams of Fermaid O. I used a defusion stone and aerated with pure oxygen for 90-120 seconds. I let it spin for 12-14 hours and then stop the stir plate and let the yeast stay at room temperature for another 10-12 hours. After 24 hours total, it was crashed cooled for another 24 hours.
I then decanted the yeast from the first starter and pitched it into another 4 liter starter. I used the same method as above, the only difference was this next step was at 1.036. I then crashed cooled it and waited 2 days for brew day.
The yeast I built up was @ 2 months old, so I wasn't sure what to expect. I pitched it at 48F (8.9C) and let it free rise to 52F (11.1C). The lag time was one of the shortest I have ever had at that temperature, @15 hours. Typically from that yeast (Wyeast 2124) I would expect 18 -22 hours. The fermentation started before the beer could come up to 52F. The other thing I noticed was that there was little or no sulfur during the entire fermentation, typically I would get this foul odor @ 2-3 days into the fermentation.
The beer hit terminal gravity about 1-2 days earlier than previous batches and the AA was just above 80%. I would normally see 78-79%, so not a big difference, but still an improvement. The beer itself is very good, very clean and well attenuated, delicious actually. I hope to get it into a competition in late January to see how well it does. So far I can see where this is an improvement over my past beers.
I brewed another beer using this same starter technique this weekend. I used fresh 2124 this time and brewed a Helles. The lag time was incredibly short, 10 hours at 47-48F (8.5C). This one is presently churning away at 51F (10.5C), and is producing some sulfur, but still less than what I normally see.
I think the addition of FAN in the form of Fermaid-O is producing healthy yeast in higher yeast counts that have excellent vitality. I don't believe that it is practical or necessary to get the yeast into a aerobic state to produce very healthy yeast. To me the main take away is to get the yeast the proper nutrients for growth (FAN) and build up their sterol/lipids reserves (oxygen) to able to thrive in a less than ideal environment of fermenting beer. Now I want to know if I can reduce the amount of yeast extract and still see the same results.
Thanks again Mark for bringing this to the forum, it's been a great lesson in yeast health and biology.
I then decanted the yeast from the first starter and pitched it into another 4 liter starter. I used the same method as above, the only difference was this next step was at 1.036. I then crashed cooled it and waited 2 days for brew day.
The yeast I built up was @ 2 months old, so I wasn't sure what to expect. I pitched it at 48F (8.9C) and let it free rise to 52F (11.1C). The lag time was one of the shortest I have ever had at that temperature, @15 hours. Typically from that yeast (Wyeast 2124) I would expect 18 -22 hours. The fermentation started before the beer could come up to 52F. The other thing I noticed was that there was little or no sulfur during the entire fermentation, typically I would get this foul odor @ 2-3 days into the fermentation.
The beer hit terminal gravity about 1-2 days earlier than previous batches and the AA was just above 80%. I would normally see 78-79%, so not a big difference, but still an improvement. The beer itself is very good, very clean and well attenuated, delicious actually. I hope to get it into a competition in late January to see how well it does. So far I can see where this is an improvement over my past beers.
I brewed another beer using this same starter technique this weekend. I used fresh 2124 this time and brewed a Helles. The lag time was incredibly short, 10 hours at 47-48F (8.5C). This one is presently churning away at 51F (10.5C), and is producing some sulfur, but still less than what I normally see.
I think the addition of FAN in the form of Fermaid-O is producing healthy yeast in higher yeast counts that have excellent vitality. I don't believe that it is practical or necessary to get the yeast into a aerobic state to produce very healthy yeast. To me the main take away is to get the yeast the proper nutrients for growth (FAN) and build up their sterol/lipids reserves (oxygen) to able to thrive in a less than ideal environment of fermenting beer. Now I want to know if I can reduce the amount of yeast extract and still see the same results.
Thanks again Mark for bringing this to the forum, it's been a great lesson in yeast health and biology.
What, you didn't count the yeast?
1,2,3... damn, lost count. Ok: 1,2,....
Seriously, thank you for this. It has made me really think about the starter process, and rather than head towards an exotic (to me) anaerobic starter I will try adding nutrient instead. I mean, it is unlikely it will end worse than the 'usual' process.
